I disagree. <His attempt at making emotional music has worked, his music is being used in commercials around the world, because it moves you.
Speak for yourself. It may move you but not I. It is used by huge mnc ad agencies and their respective clients because it is accesible ie. mass distributed, recognisable, and the publishers are slutty enough to have it prostituted to sell feminine hygiene products or whatever. It is used because people know it, and people will also know the associated video clip, the snow dome and the t-shirt and the whole host of merchandise that accompanies most mass distributed regressive music these days. I believe that your are equating musical success with financial succes, something which in reality are unfortunately not that closely correlated. your letting yourself get to wrapped up in the inner workings of the people behind the music instead of enjoying it for what it is (MUSIC). I think your getting yourself wrapped up in the inner workings of what constitutes commercial music success (ie $$$$$$$) rather than the music itself. D who gives a F@@k about the money and the attitude I'm pretty sure you do!! Just my small opinion Peace, R -----Original Message----- From: M. Todd Smith [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 19 September 2000 17:05 To: FRED MCMURRY Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [313] Let's Talk Techno Your all missing the point, who gives a F@@k about the money and the attitude we're (or so I thought) talking about music) not about your last interview with so and so, or how blah blah blah never shook your hand after the show, or whether or not a whole show is improvised (christ even iggy pop rehearses his shows now). His attempt at making emotional music has worked, his music is being used in commercials around the world, because it moves you. You think its a pretty blatent ripoff, well to the trained ear maybe, but then again I could go on how about how Pepe Braddock ripped off Tribe who ripped off the NY Philharmonic, and that's way more obvious. BTW In your three paragraphs of writing you spent all but two sentences talking about music, your letting yourself get to wrapped up in the inner workings of the people behind the music instead of enjoying it for what it is (MUSIC). Morrisey rocks! todd ----- Original Message ----- From: "FRED MCMURRY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 2:07 PM Subject: Re: [313] Let's Talk Techno > I must agree with Cyclone on this one. Moby is the pop poster boy of techno. > He's insanely jealous of the Detroit artists (it was evident when I talked > to him about it) and that whole punk rock record he made was a complete > mistake. His agent told him to get back into dance music because it was what > people liked so he did it otherwise he might still be trying to be punk. > He even said at one time, though he won't admit it (and I tried to get him > to come clean about it), that he _left_ dance music because it was boring > and all the "wrong people" were getting attention (at the time it was Aphex > Twin) and that "intelligent techno" was getting all the attention and he > thought it didn't deserve it. > His attempt at making emotional music is pretty blatent minor key classical > rip-offs. "Go" was interesting but not ground-breaking. The one track with, > what was it, 1000 bpms? Wow, really stretching it there (sarcasim). The > music sounds nice at times but I really think he follows what will put him > in the spotlight and then wrapping himslef in a cloak of mystery and "the > little loser" act to get sympathy (like that other wanker Morrisey). > Which he isn't, he's one rich mutherf*cker. To compare his work to St. > Germain is an insult to St. Germain and music with guts. I've seen him live > several times and had the chance to see him rehearse his act before the > actual live show. I saw and heard absolutely no improvisation or real heart > and soul displayed...very choreographed. Even his "jams" on the bongos were > worked out before hand. > After talking with him and doing extensive background research on him I > really do feel that he would be doing something else if dance music wasn't > paying his bills. > > Fred > > > >From: "Cyclone Wehner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: 313 Detroit <[email protected]> > >Subject: Re: [313] Let's Talk Techno > >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 06:24:38 +1000 > > > > > > >I also agree with Gwendal, Moby's last album Play is very enlightening, > >not > > >unlike Garnier's last one, it plays with a whole range of electronic > >styles, > > >and reminds me of some early St. Germain. > > > >I just don't get the Moby is a pioneer argument myself. > > > >You know the story of that album, don't you? Moby went out to his local > >chain store bought two CDs of old blues/gospel samples and thought aha and > >viola. > > > >You could do it. Even Puffy is more original as at least he devised an > >aesthetic (hip-hop soul) and didn't just sample. > > > >And as for Moby's live shows, well..... > > > >Now Garnier, there IS a genius. > > > > > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
