I LOVE DRUKQS+

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
which artists do you insist make progress from one work to another? all of them? any of them? also define 'progress' (verb or noun) in an artistic sense, and give examples of bands you think have done so. is music a giant football field that artists are trying to gain yards on? please talk about drukqs as well, i adore it.

ethan, Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Wilco. Jeff Tweedy's songwriting is so good that I want him to make it work in every conceivable genre. He's trying. Compare No Depression to Yankee Hotel Foxtrot... pretty remarkable.

Yancey, Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

i haven't heard the new one but summerteeth is one of my favorite pop- rock albums ever (that i don't even own heh) and doesn't deserve to be slandered as alt-country but i would hardly call it progressive!

ethan, Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

I just wanted to say that I LOVE VESPERTINE AND CONSIDER IT BJORK'S BEST ACHIEVEMENT TO DATE before mel sees this thread.

matthew m., Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

King Crimson? They progressed from Talkin Heads-lite to unlistenable Avant-Rock.

john-paul, Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Low, Flaming Lips, and Mercury Rev all seem to be getting better with each new album.

A Nairn, Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

I've always felt that every new Depeche album is the best they've ever done, though I am not believed in some corners. ;-) The Walkabouts pretty much can't do any wrong at this point -- they're not where they were when they started and they've covered so much along the way.

Ned Raggett, Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Well, obviously "21st Century Schizoid Man" is a watered-down version of "Psycho Killer," as performed by a band which would emerge ten years later. Duh.

matthew m., Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

none of you are answering any of my questions but i just want to say NED YOU ARE INSANE.

ethan, Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Jandek. Even if he did actually record his entire oeuvre in a single 36-hour period. Definite "progress" there. Just incremental progress.

We used to get his records at my old radio station every eight months or so, and somebody would always note "He's making real progress on this one!"

Douglas, Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

But I revel in it!

Ned Raggett, Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Speaking of Jandek, I've been thinking of doing bootleg remixes of his stuff.. I haven't decided whether or not to couple it with Mogwai or Whitehouse..

electric sound of jim, Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

i think flaming lips and mercury rev are turing into eachother with every album.

chaki, Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

I think Low is sounding more Christian with each album.

Curt, Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

talking about summerteeth, i think its a HUGE progression as far as songwriting goes. If you look at Being There, its a solid alt- country album. Summerteeth delved into Beach Boy harmonies and more instrumentation. Yahnkee Hotel Foxtrot takes leaps and bounds from Summerteeth lyrically(how can that be? summer teeth had great lyrics!) and musically as well. I am in love with Wilco.

Brock K., Monday, 11 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Usher. 8701 is lightyears ahead of any of his other stuff (at least what I've heard). Ludacris. Cave In.

adam, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Progress is just a movement beyond an artists' previous work; changes made while conscious of past product? So progress can be good or bad. In fact, I think if a musical career lasts long enough, "bad progress" is almost inevitable, in that there's almost nowhere left to go (while retaining identity).

Dan Irons, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Ethan, I think artists who stake their reputation on being ahead of the pack necessarily cop some criticism when they start to fall behind. Part of the actual enjoyment of Aphex Twin's work has been the sense in which when his records come out they sound like nothing else around. Of course I still love Selected Ambient Works 85-92, indeed probably the most of all his albums, but I nonetheless consider people criticising Drukqs for not doing anything new to be legitimate in doing so. NB: I have not heard Drukqs, so I can only assume the consensus is well-founded.

Of course with IDM it's a bit distorted because when Aphex Twin started he was competing with maybe ten others, and now he's competing with hundreds, thousands of bedroom tinkerers, so the possibility of recognisable innovation shrinks dramatically.

In comparison people aren't likely to criticise Bob Dylan for not pushing boundaries (although I get the impression that Love & Theft evidences *personal* artistic progression) because the critical model that surrounds evaluation of Dylan - and traditional songwriting generally - usually adheres to a fall-from- paradise model rather than a race-to-the-finish-line model.

Tim, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Well what you/I call progress, others will call more of the same. It all depends on how you look at it. How willing are you to accept change? Personally I am easily let down. Which means I am not a completic. I usually give up after a few records. (Ned, you're NOT gonna say you like the last record???? It is a bit wishy washy to say the least. Or maybe the American version is uh.. different? hah!)

Progress also implies they are moving towards a goal, right? Positive change? This is of course subjective (to the listener).

nathalie, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Completic? Completist who can schpell roit.

Nathalie, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

MATT, YOU ARE WRONG. VESPERTINE IS BJÖRK'S WORST WORK TO DATE. And Ethan, you know how I feel about Drukqs. Blegh.

Melissa W, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

In fairness, like them or hate them, I'm somewhere in between, Radiohead have made massive progress. Every rock band talked about "going electronic" but none of them had the balls to do it, I mean this happened all through the 90s.

Ronan, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Dylan is an interesting example Tim because he very much helped to define the artists-must-progress paradigm (acoustic Dylan to electric Dylan to sneering superstar Dylan) and his career and reputation got fucked up thanks to the expectation that he'd keep making revelatory records. The records he did actually make are the sweetest and most un-Dylanish of his career

- and hey, maybe Drukqs makes more sense if you try and put it into a Dylan template! It's Aphex's New Morning or Self-Portrait - sprawling but also cosy, perverse and domestic at the same time (all those gentle interludes, the phone call from his parents, the general resting-on-laurels-having-fun ambience that pisses progressive Aphex fans off...). I like it, anyway.

Tom, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Answer to ethan's first qn: all the ones I really care about (and there aren't many of those). At same time, however, there is also the fear that the "new direction" will be something I hate. Example: Stereolab. I see their career as one big progression and so far, they haven't let me down. But I know plenty of former fans who bailed circa Dots and Loops because they were no longer getting what they wanted from the groop. (Contrarily: people who have never much liked them think they have been ploughing the same, dusty furrow their whole career. But those people are mentalists obv.) Point is, progression is always in the beholder's eye, and that perception is at least partly down to the degree of your initial involvement.

As for Drukqs, what I like about it is the sequencing of the record. It's the one album of 2001 (and I use that term instead of my customary 'LP' deliberately) that only makes sense if you play it all the way through in the prescribed order. Not that I've had the inclination to do that very often! We probably won't know unless and until RDJ deigns to release any of his more recent noodlings if this is just a self-indulgent nod to the influence of 'classical' composers (Delius, Stockhausen, etc.) and drum and bass, or if it's the direction he really wants to go in now. Personally, while I'll always be hoping he can repeat the Windowlicker trick, I'd be equally happy with more stuff along the lines of Gwarek2.

Jeff W, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

yeah i'm into drukqs but dont see the need for the second disc. kniow why that is? cos i havent listened to it basically. but the first one is well good. i fucking love the 7th track on the 1st cd, but its on 2.30 long! fuck that, its so lush!

oh well. that always happens to me. AND it bloody fades out, so is pretty hard to mix with.

ambrose, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

i wonder if druckqs will be one of those albums that gradually gets the kudos and props that weren't there initially, until, one day, it is described as a classic (probably around the time of the next release, when people will say "man this, shit is just druckqs redux, now that was a cool lp"???

me? well, thanks for asking, i'm flattered. i thought it was, mm, ok, on release, but i've warmed to it gradually. i like it, theres a lot of it, you know, it probably takes a while to navigate your path (not discubumerate ya technique okay???). so, yeh, i'm lost now, sorry bout that. look, i'm just trying to say its a Geogaddi cousin, thats all

gareth, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Ned, you're NOT gonna say you like the last record????

Not this again. ;-) Both Dan and I think it is very wonderful, thank you. Yay us!

Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Yeah, drukqs is great! Not enough progress? Baloney. Just one example: the prepared-piano tracks are more of a departure than most artists attempt on a new album.

o. nate, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Drukqs is overlong, no doubt, but I do think there's a pretty fair amount of progression in it. Basically, he doesn't let beats speed off into space like on Richard D. James, sort of forcing himself to wrap all those warp-speed breaks back into the rhythm.

Andy, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

"I think if a musical career lasts long enough, "bad progress" is almost inevitable" ---- What about David Bowie, super long career with all good progress.

A Nairn, Tuesday, 12 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

i really wish Mogwai would progress from being one of those bands with skips full of potential to a band capable of greatness.

and, no, they do not nessecitate the same thing.

Wyndham Earl, Wednesday, 13 March 2002 01:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

four years pass...
I still love drukqs too.

Jordan (Jordan), Thursday, 8 February 2007 17:23 (ten years ago) Permalink

i've obviously jumped on the ilm bandwagon about 4 years late. wilco used to be revered here!

and yeah, i like drukqs too

was actually my favourite until i was told i should be liking the 'ambient' stuff more.

Charlie Howard (the sphinx), Thursday, 8 February 2007 17:30 (ten years ago) Permalink

Me too, I love it.

KeefW (kmw), Thursday, 8 February 2007 17:49 (ten years ago) Permalink

Drukqs is kinda shitty.

jimn (jimnaseum), Thursday, 8 February 2007 17:55 (ten years ago) Permalink

And you should be liking the "ambient" shit more.

jimn (jimnaseum), Thursday, 8 February 2007 17:56 (ten years ago) Permalink

It suffered from not having a coherent direction. I did dig the piano jams tho, the other stuff not so much...

Disco Nihilist (mjt), Thursday, 8 February 2007 18:17 (ten years ago) Permalink

I wonder if people's reaction to Drukqs depends on how much of an Aphex fanboy they were when they first heard it? i.e. those who were waiting with bated breath were more likely to be disappointed.

For me, it's got plenty of good things but it's the least interesting of the "proper" studio albums, no doubt.

It's Tough to Beat Illious (noodle vague), Thursday, 8 February 2007 18:23 (ten years ago) Permalink

I started liking it after some review pointed out that there is something coherent in there, piano things, typically followed by more typical Aphex things (or at least stuff a bit like RDJ), followed by thing that sound a bit like Japanese temple sort of stuff, like Nanou 2, for example. This isn't exact, but it did make me like it more, for whatever reason.

I pretty much thought it was shite when it came out.

KeefW (kmw), Thursday, 8 February 2007 18:33 (ten years ago) Permalink

It's pretty exact! Noisy beats followed by short prepared piano piece and repeat. It works for me.

Jordan (Jordan), Thursday, 8 February 2007 18:42 (ten years ago) Permalink

yeah this cd is good it goes in headphone rotation probly every 3-4 months for the past 5 years

and what (ooo), Thursday, 8 February 2007 19:11 (ten years ago) Permalink

i havent heard summer teeth since i was in h.s. but it soundtracked alot of good times with friends, im sure its still pretty good

and what (ooo), Thursday, 8 February 2007 19:15 (ten years ago) Permalink

luff dis album (drukqs). prefer the tonality of the prprd. disklavier pieces to the prepared piano pieces of cage.

held tony (held tony), Thursday, 8 February 2007 19:59 (ten years ago) Permalink

there is a good cohesion in the sequence of tracks, but unsure that it's not just a result of being familiar w/the album. it has a natural flow

held tony (held tony), Thursday, 8 February 2007 20:03 (ten years ago) Permalink

I actually just put the ambient/treated piano tracks on my ipod when I ripped it. To me that's a fantastic album and the one he should have really released. If it'd been like some of the Analord stuff I'd have had more patience but it would've still added little to what would've been a very coherent album for him.

Treblekicker (treblekicker), Thursday, 8 February 2007 21:19 (ten years ago) Permalink

"I wonder if people's reaction to Drukqs depends on how much of an Aphex fanboy they were when they first heard it? i.e. those who were waiting with bated breath were more likely to be disappointed."

I got into Aphex Twin way late and sorta heard everything all at once. Drukqs struck me as the best. It's still my favorite.

Nigel (Nigel), Thursday, 8 February 2007 22:46 (ten years ago) Permalink

i find drukqs to be his most listenable album.

Christopher Costello (CGC), Thursday, 8 February 2007 23:38 (ten years ago) Permalink

hey yeah i never got all the drukqs hate when it came out. i thought there was a lot more going on in/with the drill tracks on drukqs than on richard d. james, and the prepared stuff is fantastic. i'm kinda meh on aphex in general though--love 'i care because you do,' squelchy early stuff, SAW 85-92, don't care for SAWII or richard d. james. i might pull out drukqs right now; it's probably been five years since i've heard it.

plan b: videodrome (fauxhemian), Friday, 9 February 2007 00:00 (ten years ago) Permalink

i think drukqs suffered from a critical short-circuit

friday on the porch (lfam), Friday, 9 February 2007 03:10 (ten years ago) Permalink

Drukqs is every bit as unlistenable as Metal Machine Music.

Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Friday, 9 February 2007 03:16 (ten years ago) Permalink

im listening to some record called "canaxis 5" by Technical Space Composer's Crew from 1969 and theres a bonus track titled "Cruise"

the intro appears to be what Aphex Twin sampled for the intro of "Afx237 v7" AKA the sound used for when Rubber Johnny opens his mouth and makes a weird noise... although it might just sound like it and not be a sample at all...

billstevejim, Saturday, 1 September 2012 01:07 (four years ago) Permalink

Can someone please tell me what shoegaze choon it is that Jynweythek Ylow so reminds me? It's driving me nuts. Kept thinking it was a Pale Saints song but it wasn't that.

― Using an Aural Exciter in an Orgone Accumulator (Masonic Boom), Sunday, May 30, 2010 4:41 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I have FINALLY worked it out. Not Pale Saints but Boo Radleys.

The melody on Jynnweythek Ilow is a lot like the melody on the verse of this:

my god it's full of straw (White Chocolate Cheesecake), Saturday, 1 September 2012 08:23 (four years ago) Permalink

Ha, I love that Boos track but would never have made the connection. Don't tell Tuomas or he'll start talking litigation! (Actually a pretty good example of how the importance of melody in pop is often overstated, imo.)

ledge, Saturday, 1 September 2012 08:33 (four years ago) Permalink

I think it's just that both AFX and the Boos had a thing for those kind of jaunty, wistful ("Celtic"?) melodies. Melody is pretty much the least important thing in terms of music, it's much more about arrangement, atmosphere, everything else. Because my brain has for years been making the jump between those two songs whenever I hear one, it goes to the other, but the actual tracks really are nothing alike.

my god it's full of straw (White Chocolate Cheesecake), Saturday, 1 September 2012 09:08 (four years ago) Permalink

the first dozen or so posts on this thread are something

thomp, Saturday, 1 September 2012 09:45 (four years ago) Permalink

Haha, I never heard that boos/Aphex connection and they're two of my favourite acts in the history of music!

This Is... The Police (dog latin), Saturday, 1 September 2012 11:12 (four years ago) Permalink

For what it's worth, I'm always tempted to do a 'Richard's Mum' harmony whenever anyone gets sung
'Happy Birthday'.

This Is... The Police (dog latin), Saturday, 1 September 2012 11:15 (four years ago) Permalink

one year passes...

this album rules

fresh (crüt), Wednesday, 16 October 2013 15:22 (three years ago) Permalink

two months pass...

meltphace 6

am0n, Thursday, 19 December 2013 18:05 (three years ago) Permalink

one year passes...

ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ (am0n), Friday, 13 February 2015 17:46 (two years ago) Permalink

two years pass...

Absolute masterpiece. His finest work.

...so music and chicken have become intertwined (Turrican), Friday, 7 April 2017 19:03 (one month ago) Permalink

Vordhosbn is great. The beats scurry and dovetail frantically from the melody in a wonderful way.

Carlotta's Portrait (Ross), Friday, 7 April 2017 19:06 (one month ago) Permalink

It seems less like a random assortment of sounds, and more like a carefully crafted collage of a self portrait.

― The Curve Of Blinding Energy (Masonic Boom)


This is my impression of it, more or less. The busier 'drill + bass' tracks are super-detailed, the process (MIDI control etc.) of making them is beyond my understanding. It's a really impressive feat to my ears, and the sequencing (w/other elements) is icing on the cake. It probably helped that I had no defined expectations, or marked interest in Aphex Twin prior to 2002.

braunld (Lowell N. Behold'n), Saturday, 8 April 2017 07:08 (one month ago) Permalink

Rushup Edge sounds excellent on a nice system, or in the car. I played that thing on repeat 2-3 times over, while driving aimlessly around coastal North Carolina. I live in the desert and don't have a car, but that album surely bangs. There's an unusual pliancy (or playfulness) to it, for a typically rigid and computerized style of music. Not to mention all of the juicy sounds.

braunld (Lowell N. Behold'n), Saturday, 8 April 2017 07:26 (one month ago) Permalink

"Wilco. Jeff Tweedy's songwriting is so good that I want him to make it work in every conceivable genre."

hahahaha

calstars, Saturday, 8 April 2017 10:21 (one month ago) Permalink

definitely a gunner, some might say a "tryhard".. that Tweedy

braunld (Lowell N. Behold'n), Saturday, 8 April 2017 14:11 (one month ago) Permalink

I guess people get different things out of Aphex Twin. Some are more interested in the gimmicks, and that's fine - and for people who are interested in gimmicks above musical content, then I can see why one would be attracted to Aphex Twin's stuff from 1995-1996. This is not to say that that stuff lacks musical content, but for those that are interested in the important stuff: sound design, production, musical content, the compositions themselves and the way the layered parts interact with each other, then Drukqs is his pinnacle, IMO.

...so music and chicken have become intertwined (Turrican), Saturday, 8 April 2017 14:39 (one month ago) Permalink

Lowell, always enjoy your posts

Carlotta's Portrait (Ross), Saturday, 8 April 2017 22:48 (one month ago) Permalink

the thing is, turrican, i like afx for his melodies and for the sound/texture of his early-mid 90s stuff. i don't care about gimmicks and don't see how gimmicks play into his strongest work.

a but (brimstead), Saturday, 8 April 2017 23:20 (one month ago) Permalink

i love acid

clouds, Saturday, 8 April 2017 23:53 (one month ago) Permalink

Turrican's post only makes sense in bizarro world

The Jams Manager (1992, Brickster) (El Tomboto), Sunday, 9 April 2017 00:40 (one month ago) Permalink

xx-post:

Well, you're definitely correct that gimmicks don't play into his strongest work.

...so music and chicken have become intertwined (Turrican), Sunday, 9 April 2017 01:15 (one month ago) Permalink

wtf is musical content?

Lennon, Elvis, Hendrix etc (dog latin), Sunday, 9 April 2017 12:14 (one month ago) Permalink

Drukqs is also my favorite Aphex album. Such a good headphone album.

dance cum rituals (Moka), Sunday, 9 April 2017 12:22 (one month ago) Permalink

wtf is musical content?

― Lennon, Elvis, Hendrix etc (dog latin), Sunday, April 9, 2017 12:14 PM (nine hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

You're fucking kidding me, right? It's actually legitimately blown my mind that someone on these forums (of all forums) has felt the need to actually ask this question.

...so music and chicken have become intertwined (Turrican), Sunday, 9 April 2017 21:29 (one month ago) Permalink

Moka OTM re:Drukqs being a great headphones album, particularly the more frantic beat-driven stuff on the record. I love putting this album on headphones and just paying attention to the way all the parts interact and play off of each other, each part sounding utterly gorgeous in terms of sound design. The acoustic stuff is very well recorded, too.

...so music and chicken have become intertwined (Turrican), Sunday, 9 April 2017 21:34 (one month ago) Permalink

agree w dog latin, "musical content" is a meaningless term

the late great, Sunday, 9 April 2017 21:45 (one month ago) Permalink

RDJ album is really vibrant/immediate-sounding, compared to Drukqs.. don't know it inside/out yet, but tracks like Peek (track 3) have a hot signal quality, percussion elements nearly distorted, that liquid synth is gorgeous.. it's HOT. a lot of it pops off with super vibrancy, blatant, snappy elasticity, no doubt. Carn Marth is another beaut.. obv. can't speak on it well, I just can't acknowledge the argument that Drukqs is retreading territory, cuz it's undoubtedly more developed and refined.

https://mikeparadinas.bandcamp.com/album/aberystwyth-marine -- this was released last year, but written/recorded in the late 90s. it def bears similarities to the RDJ album

braunld (Lowell N. Behold'n), Tuesday, 11 April 2017 02:54 (one month ago) Permalink

RDJ Album is so clean-sounding, it nearly borders on clinical but somehow it works. I remember reading a thing years ago where he said something like 'I don't like music where you can't hear all the sounds', and that's stuck with me a lot. To this day when I'm listening to (and making) music, I tend to favour stuff that has a great level of detail but nevertheless sounds uncluttered and non-muddy. That sounds kind of obvious but it's one of the reasons I got fed up with so much US indie stuff by the late-00's - stuff like Grizzly Bear and Deerhunter. Everything was just smooshed in all this reverb with all the sounds blurring into each other. There's a fair bit of bass-driven dance music from the d'n'b and dubstep camps that bothers me in this way too.

Lennon, Elvis, Hendrix etc (dog latin), Tuesday, 11 April 2017 08:27 (one month ago) Permalink

Yeah, but then again I one-time did a mix of our band's latest works-in-progress, and our rhythm guitarist gave me grief because he couldn't hear his guitaring, specifically. I did say "hey, you would definitely notice it if it wasn't there" but that's the thing. I remember Martin Hannett of all people remarking that a demo has all the instruments separated out in the stereo picture, and a 'production' has the sounds combined.

Mark G, Wednesday, 12 April 2017 12:56 (one month ago) Permalink

(he wasn't there in person, I read what he said in an article)

Mark G, Wednesday, 12 April 2017 12:57 (one month ago) Permalink

oh yeah, there's definitely an extreme thing where the sounds don't sit in the mix together very well and just kind of glide over each other. And often you get nice artefacts and interactions between two sounds working together. But I still don't like it as much when things get all watery and indistinct for no reason. Certain aesthetics - e.g. shoegaze - rely heavily on this, and i'll often give music like that a free pass because THAT'S THE IDEA; still even with shoegaze I don't like a big mush like a bunch of Play-Doh ball that've been mixed together.

Lennon, Elvis, Hendrix etc (dog latin), Wednesday, 12 April 2017 13:12 (one month ago) Permalink

imo, interactions between sounds "working together" tend to work much better when the sounds are recorded together, simultaneously, in the same room. that way you're capturing the actual acoustic phenomena that's taking place. sounds placed together in a mix might compliment one other, but they're not actually interacting on a raw, physical level.

braunld (Lowell N. Behold'n), Wednesday, 12 April 2017 18:00 (one month ago) Permalink

In electronic music, different parts can be deliberately composed to interact with each other, through choice of notes or choice of sound.

...so music and chicken have become intertwined (Turrican), Wednesday, 12 April 2017 18:07 (one month ago) Permalink

same with any type of music

braunld (Lowell N. Behold'n), Wednesday, 12 April 2017 18:14 (one month ago) Permalink

or, if you're talking about something like a MIDI-controlled network, where multiple pieces of hardware interacting with each other (running simultaneously, interconnected) on the same 'clock', it becomes very interesting.. is that what you're getting at?

braunld (Lowell N. Behold'n), Wednesday, 12 April 2017 18:23 (one month ago) Permalink

*are interacting with each other

braunld (Lowell N. Behold'n), Wednesday, 12 April 2017 18:25 (one month ago) Permalink

Ah, no... I'm more talking about the way that electronic music can be programmed up note-by-note means that there's more scope to become more intricate with interacting parts in a composition, and this is what I love about RDJ's music, particularly on the more drill'n'bass tracks on Drukqs ... each composition is so intricately put together and thoughtfully worked out.

I do see what you mean though, if you place a bunch of musicians together in a room and have them play a piece, the end result can have a natural spark to it that would be lacking if everything was tracked separately. Programming up parts and working on sound design leads to pieces with a different kind of interaction to them.

...so music and chicken have become intertwined (Turrican), Wednesday, 12 April 2017 18:28 (one month ago) Permalink

by "programming" electronic music, do you mean programming sound events (notes, beats, musical content etc.) to occur or coincide w/each other, so that they have the appearance of cause and effect, "interplay" etc., or something more complex, where sound events are triggering events and actually affecting the quality/frequency/behavior of the other sounds?

braunld (Lowell N. Behold'n), Wednesday, 12 April 2017 21:18 (one month ago) Permalink

Both, although it all depends on the setup.

...so music and chicken have become intertwined (Turrican), Wednesday, 12 April 2017 21:26 (one month ago) Permalink

Turrican, interesting argument but I don't agree. Electronic music production can have the advantage of allowing one to endlessly track in as many patterns/layers as needed, but that's completely viable in other genres if there's enough musicians, particularly with a huge orchestra for example.

It's possible with any music, the resources just need to be there - just much easier for electronic music.

Carlotta's Portrait (Ross), Thursday, 13 April 2017 23:12 (one month ago) Permalink

That doesn't deter for the deft edge Twin has with the tracks on Druqs, it's expert sonic editing.

Carlotta's Portrait (Ross), Thursday, 13 April 2017 23:13 (one month ago) Permalink

Well yes, the resources have to be there, which is kinda what I'm getting at, which is that with electronic music, you have an incredible level of control over the end result and create parts and compositions that no "actual" musician could possibly play.

I'd love to see an orchestra play one of the drill'n'bass tracks from Drukqs, really I would. In fact, I'd love to see a transcription of one.

...so music and chicken have become intertwined (Turrican), Thursday, 13 April 2017 23:48 (one month ago) Permalink

it's not really what equipment you use, it's the way you compose and mix. if you have too many competing sounds or you mix badly then you're going to end with a very claustrophobic track. Twin is great at making complex mixes sound clean and sparse

Lennon, Elvis, Hendrix etc (dog latin), Thursday, 13 April 2017 23:55 (one month ago) Permalink

there's a group, I think they're called Alarm Will Sound.. they've played one or two of the hyper-detailed tracks from Drukqs, it's gotta be on YouTube. (x-post to Turrican)

braunld (Lowell N. Behold'n), Thursday, 13 April 2017 23:57 (one month ago) Permalink

yeah they did a whole album of live Aphex covers. Don't really care for it much myself but it's an interesting listen

Lennon, Elvis, Hendrix etc (dog latin), Friday, 14 April 2017 00:01 (one month ago) Permalink

it's kind of annoying.. I don't know

braunld (Lowell N. Behold'n), Friday, 14 April 2017 00:01 (one month ago) Permalink

xxxpost:

Yeah, now that I do agree with, and it's a huge part of what makes his music such a pleasure to listen to, I don't think I've ever heard a RDJ track that's sounded cluttered, not even his more sonically extreme stuff. Some of his tracks are so intricate and compositionally rich that a cluttered mix would just fuck it all up.

Like yourself, dog latin, I'm not a huge fan of cluttered mixes, particularly with electronic music. What I dislike is when people mistake "cluttered" for "psychedelic", which really gets on my tits.

...so music and chicken have become intertwined (Turrican), Friday, 14 April 2017 00:54 (one month ago) Permalink

Ooh, I've never heard that, I'll have to give that a listen!

...so music and chicken have become intertwined (Turrican), Friday, 14 April 2017 00:58 (one month ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.