Yeah I know, poor bastard. It was around for 20 years before anyone picked up on the similarity, which Greg played as an improv during the recording session.Jay wrote:
That's really sad
Great song
scrounging through used record stores for a gem among trash, buying bootleg tapes, and word of mouth were how you found out about non-MTV rotated music here. The best were cool radio stations, all gone now. Napster changed the music scene so much it's almost unrecognizable now.Dilbert_X wrote:
I didn't ask for a history lesson, just for you to explain what you meant by 'the warp sound' which is apparently so unique.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
i like how this has changed from you dismissing out of hand something you know nothing about as "derivative" to you asking for a history lesson.
So far it sounds like late 80s chillout lounge muzak.Back then music which wasn't played live, on the radio or in clubs had a very narrow audience limited to industry insiders and hardcore audiophiles. Your playlist would be a lot shorter if you didn't have itunes, last.fm, youtube and torrenting to pick stuff up from but relied on swapping with friends and buying LPs on spec from reviews in NME.furthermore, that's all besides the point. IDM isn't 'club music'. it isn't even 'rave' music. it's pretty un-danceable. the warp stuff that defined a generation of british artists and electronic production to this day is definitely armchair/bedroom music. i don't think many people would really dance to aphex twin in a club. 160bpm polyrhythmic drill'n'bass is hardly jackin' 4/4 house music.
You can't beat latin music though:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yt-KMPvg … eature=fvw
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
why would you judge a producer on his live DJ sets? it isn't drum n bass. every song he makes isn't some boring 'DJ tool', meant to be deployed in the club. aphex twin's music is music to be sat back and listened to, as full album-length pieces. live sets are not representative of an electronic producers work, typically. in fact, 'performance' has always been an area fraught with difficulties and problems, because most electronic music - i.e. composition/production - doesn't translate well to live performance, in the same way a traditional band would. using analogue electronic equipment live on stage is extremely difficult - just think of syncing it all together, with one individual - and the alternative, digital, is pretty boring live. a dude with a laptop on stage. ok gj. aphex twin has been known to play live-sets using a food blender. 'live sets' are a different beast. they are not what he is about. you are understanding it coming from the relatively simple and predictable DnB background, where every new record put out is mostly comprised of 'belters' to be played by other DJ's to rooms full of gurning people. IDM, especially, is not dancefloor orientated. it's aimed at the bedroom environment more than the dancefloor/live-set. so, basically, just go check out some of his albums. every one is very different, and extremely accomplished in its own way.PrivateVendetta wrote:
So since we're linking to stuff, i need an expert to link me to a good Aphex twin set.
Then I can judge properly.
inb4youneedotseeitlive
although aphex twin is known for putting on some of the best live shows of any electronic musician, i really would just recommend his albums. they are intended to be listened to that way, not as 'woah! here's the drop!' live-crowd tools. he mostly does extremely avant-garde/experimental classical compositions now, using a remote live orchestra, or just face-bending visual shows, with some of the world's top visual artists. for e.g.
again, dilberp, i never knew you had this talent for musicology... have you considered becoming an avant-garde critic?So far it sounds like late 80s chillout lounge muzak.
very chillout.
there are many descriptive labels i'd give to IDM. it is an extremely varied and complex genre. 'chillout lounge muzak' are not three of them.
no it wouldn't. know why? because i'm not an idle passive consumer of music like you are. i go to record stores. i buy music. i join mailing lists. many of my friends are involved in the actual music scene - production, promoting, working in record stores, dj'ing professionally, (national) music journalism. i wouldn't be relying on the NME weekly top10 chart for my music taste. not everyone is as apathetic as you. even today in this hyper-digitized, super-convenient age, i'd still say roughly 30% of my musical acquisition and exploration occurs in the flesh, person to person. i support record stores. i much prefer the experience of "digging in crates", as jay talks about as if it's an antiquarian and victorian pursuit, more than i do surfing the latest specialist torrent archive. music is still a living thing to many people. just because modern ease is there, doesn't mean everyone is automatically relegated to the super-passivity of itunes and spotify. i don't even use half of these digital services. last.fm is the only one i use, because it appeals to the audio geek in me. you are condescending in the extreme about this - and all for the simple and foolish reason, deriving from a puerile psychology, that someone can't possibly be into something or be more knowledgeable about something than you. you try to relegate and diminish other people's interest in something you (quite evidently) know nothing about, so as to minimize the damage caused by your openly displayed idiocy. not cricket.Your playlist would be a lot shorter if you didn't have itunes, last.fm, youtube and torrenting to pick stuff up from but relied on swapping with friends and buying LPs on spec from reviews in NME
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-02-21 08:20:04)
I've never looked into it, just been told, so could be wrong. Wasn't Squarepusher Aphex's protégé back in the day?
PS: always been a favourite of mine. Very talented bassist to boot.
There's one track I found on the talkbass.com forums a few years ago and cannot find it for the life of me. Kinda gutted; I go on a search for it every six months or so to no avail.
There's one track I found on the talkbass.com forums a few years ago and cannot find it for the life of me. Kinda gutted; I go on a search for it every six months or so to no avail.
uzi, between my brother and I, we probably owned well over 1000 CD's at one point. I literally took days out of my life to burn all of them into mp3 format right around the time napster came out and those vestigial mp3s now make up probably 20% of my mp3 collection. You really don't have any idea how much easier it is to find music now. I can go to a website, input my likes and dislikes and come away with ten new bands to explore. Could I have done that in the 90s? No.
This really is one of those times where you have no point of reference because the world changed while you still thought girls were icky in a very, very drastic manner. Do you even remember a time when you had to listen to each CD (or cassette) individually? Not by choice, but because you had to?
This really is one of those times where you have no point of reference because the world changed while you still thought girls were icky in a very, very drastic manner. Do you even remember a time when you had to listen to each CD (or cassette) individually? Not by choice, but because you had to?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
jay stop being so fucking condescending. i didn't get a broadband-equipped computer or DSL support in my area until like 2004. i was born in 1989. i have 100+Cd's from my teenage years alone, pre downloading, even before early and terrible P2P and MSN file sharing caught on. now i have hundreds of vinyl records. OMG antiques! you don't even know what you're talking about. stop talking like you know it all. MANY people still buy real music. many people still collect, organize, and take pride in music collections. again, you're committing this self-fancied fallacy of dilbert's: cause you're old, you're wizened, and all the new kids, oh man, they don't even KNOW what effort is. i've probably spent 15 hours minimum, per week, since i was about 14, just solely focussed on exploring new music and digging it out. i go record shopping at least once a fortnight. purely listening to music, arranging/planning events, talking with my music industry friends etc. takes at least a solid hour of my day. every day. so please get down off the patronizing stool. your weight is making the legs bulge.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-02-21 08:23:22)
>2013
>Paying for music
Buying albums I've never heard before is a money waster because of how often new albums I listen to tend to disappoint me. I rather research the album and download/stream it somewhere and save my time and money if it sucks.
>Paying for music
Buying albums I've never heard before is a money waster because of how often new albums I listen to tend to disappoint me. I rather research the album and download/stream it somewhere and save my time and money if it sucks.
no that's complete 'omg IDM geniuses!' myth-bullshit. squarepusher however has a younger brother, who releases acid music under the alias ceephax acid crew. there were many rumours that aphex and squarepusher have collaborated over the years. rephlex released a record under an unknown alias called Steinvord a year or so back, which is basically (definitely) aphex twin. the rumour mill claimed it was a mythical unearthed aphex-squarepusher collab. again, for some reason the introspective nerds behind this incredibly complex music carry around a lot of 'genius' myths.Jaekus wrote:
I've never looked into it, just been told, so could be wrong. Wasn't Squarepusher Aphex's protégé back in the day?
You suck, so what does it matter?Roc18 wrote:
>2013
>Paying for music
Buying albums I've never heard before is a money waster because of how often new albums I listen to tend to disappoint me. I rather research the album and download/stream it somewhere and save my time and money if it sucks.
Ok, cool. Like I say, could be wrong and just something I heard back in the mid 00's.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
no that's complete 'omg IDM geniuses!' myth-bullshit. squarepusher however has a younger brother, who releases acid music under the alias ceephax acid crew. there were many rumours that aphex and squarepusher have collaborated over the years. rephlex released a record under an unknown alias called Steinvord a year or so back, which is basically (definitely) aphex twin. the rumour mill claimed it was a mythical unearthed aphex-squarepusher collab. again, for some reason the introspective nerds behind this incredibly complex music carry around a lot of 'genius' myths.Jaekus wrote:
I've never looked into it, just been told, so could be wrong. Wasn't Squarepusher Aphex's protégé back in the day?
there are 10000 reasons to buy an album in a physical format beyond owning a pirated digital copy. not that it's a debate/soliloquy i want to get into now (bottomline: 90% of the digital music you listen to will be trash, in terms of quality/format). the vinyl market has been booming for the last 4 years. last year more vinyl records were sold than CD's. the CD is a dying format because all it does, technically, is contain an encoded digital file (albeit with a much higher headroom than any mp3). i.e. the CD is now redundant. but there are plenty of reasons to still buy vinyl. ESPECIALLY vinyl albums. the artwork and overall experience of unfolding a properly-presented record is a huge part of it. albums are meant to be listened to in long-sittings, with attention. the experience of taking out a gatefold album and putting it on the platter to listen to it, getting up to change sides, is FAR more immersive than having it on your ipod shuffle as you bus to school. the album format is at risk from modern technology. vinyl makes complete sense. again, not that this is something you know anything about.Roc18 wrote:
>2013
>Paying for music
Buying albums I've never heard before is a money waster because of how often new albums I listen to tend to disappoint me. I rather research the album and download/stream it somewhere and save my time and money if it sucks.
(i'm detecting a theme in this thread).
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-02-21 08:29:02)
I've had this discussion a few times with other musicians. These days there is no point releasing an album unless you have a song/track of particular note. EP all the way because a) the average listener these days has a shorter attention span; and b) you can better concentrate your material to be "less filler, more killer", for want of a better sound byte.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
the album format is at risk from modern technology.
Yeah I know people may want a physical copy for whatever reason but I'm being realistic about how people usually get new music, most people I know torrent/stream/download albums. If a vinyl of great/classic album ive listened to was available at a reasonable price then that would be a reason to spend money on an album to me.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
there are 10000 reasons to buy an album in a physical format beyond owning a pirated digital copy. now that it's a debate/soliloquy i want to get into now. the vinyl market has been booming for the last 4 years. last year more vinyl records were sold than CD's. the CD is a dying format because all it does, technically, is contain an encoded digital file (albeit with a much higher headroom than any mp3). i.e. the CD is now redundant. but there are plenty of reasons to still buy vinyl. ESPECIALLY vinyl albums. the artwork and overall experience of unfolding a properly-presented record is a huge part of it. albums are meant to be listened to in long-sittings, with attention. the experience of taking out a gatefold album and putting it on the platter to listen to it, getting up to change sides, is FAR more immersive than having it on your ipod shuffle as you bus to school. the album format is at risk from modern technology. vinyl makes complete sense. again, not that this is something you know anything about.Roc18 wrote:
>2013
>Paying for music
Buying albums I've never heard before is a money waster because of how often new albums I listen to tend to disappoint me. I rather research the album and download/stream it somewhere and save my time and money if it sucks.
(i'm detecting a theme in this thread).
i don't know. you speak for your own group. in my group, people buy music. people go out to see live shows. people go to clubs. money reaches the artist. you rapidly grow out of that teenage "cool! everything should be free!" phase. sure, most people only ever youtube-rip the single anyway. not that they ever mattered. they were radio's core audience 5 years ago.
I torrent a lot of flac, can't deny. I will make every effort to attend gigs/shows. Partly why I can never get ahead with my credit card. The artist gets a much larger share of that compared to buying a CD. I know that's moving the ethical goal posts a bit, but it's true. I do intend on collecting vinyl when I'm in a position to afford it (ie. have a job again) and can actually set up my player.
it's just a lifestyle choice. not many of my friends are super-wealthy manager-class professionals. young 20-somethings, getting on their feet. i don't know. you buy a few records a week instead of following the rest of the student crowd to the sticky-floors of the union bar, to listen to rihanna. it's not an impossible luxury. one album is about 3-4 beers. i'd rather buy records than piss things away on sweatshop clothes, for instance.
I guess I just find it too convenient to download music these days, when years ago I had to save up for weeks.
Bit of an old favourite. Opening track to The Director's Cut.
Bit of an old favourite. Opening track to The Director's Cut.
don't get me wrong, i love the ease of modern technology. i have like a terabyte of music. i've done my fair share of downloading. but jay making out in a tut-tutting condescending way that "i dont understand the effort" is just bullshit. i am more musical and more into music than him. the fact i am 23 rather than his 33 doesn't mean shit in this debate. the fact i spent my teen years with a relatively hassle-free sony walkman, rather than a fucking reel-to-reel machine, or whatever it is they used back in poorsville, NY, in the 1970's, is irrelevant. it's disingenuous. just another specious way of trying to put the fact i know more than him about a topic into a manageable and comfortable little ignorant compartment.
I'm just saying it took a lot more effort to find obscure music back in the day. Today you can be like 'hey check out this youtube video of this great artist I found that no one has ever heard of' and you can go to their wikipedia page and look up the biographical information of the band in question. The only way you could do that back in the day was to read Spin or Rolling Stone or one of the million fanzines out there. I'm not disparaging the effort you put in, but you can't browbeat someone from the generation that predates your own for not being as into music or music history as you are without looking like a retard, frankly. You do have it much easier than we did.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
don't get me wrong, i love the ease of modern technology. i have like a terabyte of music. i've done my fair share of downloading. but jay making out in a tut-tutting condescending way that "i dont understand the effort" is just bullshit. i am more musical and more into music than him. the fact i am 23 rather than his 33 doesn't mean shit in this debate. the fact i spent my teen years with a relatively hassle-free sony walkman, rather than a fucking reel-to-reel machine, or whatever it is they used back in poorsville, NY, in the 1970's, is irrelevant. it's disingenuous. just another specious way of trying to put the fact i know more than him about a topic into a manageable and comfortable little ignorant compartment.
I cared about music tremendously when I was a teenager up through when I was about your age, then it tapered off. Probably not nearly as much as you do, but it was kind of my thing, and I took immense childish pleasure when I could rattle off a list of bands that I listened to and no one around me had the foggiest idea who they were. As for that last bit, you eventually realize that that sort of thing just makes you look like a pretentious idiot and that people really don't want to sit there listening to your really obscure music that they've never heard of. They'd rather listen to the Dave Matthews Band shit that they already know and love. So be it.
I used to go to a lot of shows too, but you just come to a point when you realize that the crowd around you is either really fucking young, or really fucking old, and decide that hanging out in bars is probably a better bet for entertainment. You don't walk out drenched in other peoples sweat, reeking of someone elses skunk weed, and concussed from when that guy next to you decided to jump up in the air the same time you did and you smash heads (happened to me at a Deftones concert once, that sucked).
I know you're going to somehow take this post as a criticism uzi, but it's not, I'm just saying that you're trying to compare apples and oranges. The world changed more than you can possibly ever know inside of a decade, so going on a rant because Dilbert has never heard of some seminal electronic music group (that predates your birth) that you can look up and read about with a few taps at a keyboard, is pretty silly honestly.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
except i heard about all of my favourite music/bands socially, and i get all of my obscure music from record stores and networks of actual people -- you know, things that existed and promulgated before the internet. the internet's convenience has mostly served to help Harlem Shake and justin bieber famous. there was nothing stopping dilbert from hearing about this music in the 'olden times' - it wasn't a closed masonic network. also: warp records are one of the biggest british electronic labels of all time. it's not "obscure music". dilbert is just deficient in knowledge. this isn't highly specialized, kept-under-lock-and-key stuff. this is a context that is "more than you can possibly ever know", because me and dilbert are british, i.e. immersed in british music and culture, and you are an american, who was more busy moshing to mascara'd men playing nu-metal during the 90's and 00's. "so be it".
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-02-22 08:25:01)
Fall seven times. Stand up eight.
>Hating on KISSUzique The Lesser wrote:
and you are an american, who was more busy moshing to mascara'd men playing nu-metal during the 90's and 00's. "so be it".
KISS are nu-metal?