>"Techno-purists" are into minimal repetition for a reason, the reason being
>that repetition and minimalism is appealing and more so, comforting, in
that
>there is very little information to interpret. In other words, I think
that
>the "techno-purist" tends to be introverted (very sensitive to environment
>and stimulation), thus gravitating towards to rawest art, in this case
>techno...
>Moby and people like good 'ol Oakie have a tendency to attract the
opposite,
>extroverts (not so sensitive to stimulation), people who need even more
>input then techno has, they need more than a raw emotion spooned out, >they
>need defined emotion to fell truly satisfied...
have to disagree with you. while some people may fit the descriptions above
i don't think you can generalize a whole group of people in this manner.
this dimension is far too complicated for that, there are just too many
variables.
<the music needs the listener to be complete, repetition is
<merely a blue-print in which frames the listeners emotions in a
stable
<platform- without real listeners, repetition is merely that,
repetition i do agree though, with minimal music much of what is
heard seems to be projection.
-----Original Message-----
> From: darw_n [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 4:05 PM
> To: Jongsma, K.J.; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [313] Let's Talk Techno
>
> >For the 'techno-purists' amongst us Moby will never be real.
> > For others who aren't so purist-like really don't care that much.
> >
>
>
> I was simply waiting for that to be stated, and I apologize now for the
> length, this field is a passion of mine, and I enjoy testing new theories
> in
> debate...
>
> Anyways, I got into this on the Axis site during the drum talk. I truly
> feel that there is not a measurable difference between the quality of say
> Moby vs.. Paul Mac, both are pretty much on the same plain as far as over
> all skill is concerned. But I insist, we all _must_ realize the seeds of
> argument in which has been circulating for the entire existence of our
> musics; that we all must realize that there are stark, and rarely
> recognized
> differences amongst the listener...
>
> "Techno-purists" are into minimal repetition for a reason, the reason
> being
> that repetition and minimalism is appealing and more so, comforting, in
> that
> there is very little information to interpret. In other words, I think
> that
> the "techno-purist" tends to be introverted (very sensitive to environment
> and stimulation), thus gravitating towards to rawest art, in this case
> techno...
>
> Moby and people like good 'ol Oakie have a tendency to attract the
> opposite,
> extroverts (not so sensitive to stimulation), people who need even more
> input then techno has, they need more than a raw emotion spooned out, they
> need defined emotion to fell truly satisfied...
>
> Ever notice a techno freak listening to a Van Dyke record? The result is
> often anxiety. Same with a out going socialite listening to Oliver Ho
> playing locked grooves, their anxious because they're waiting for some
> defining moment to occur...
>
> The magic that techno-purists feel however is something very unique,
> albeit,
> not in any way "better". Because of the repetition and raw emotion of
> techno (as opposed to the defined emotion of say "epic-trance"), the
> listener/dancer has his/her emotional autonomy _returned_ to them, a first
> in modern music BTW (as far as I can tell, aside from tribal, correct me
> if
> I am wrong), the music needs the listener to be complete, repetition is
> merely a blue-print in which frames the listeners emotions in a stable
> platform- without real listeners, repetition is merely that, repetition.
> The is starkly different from pop music or epic trance in which the
> listener
> is fully controlled and told what to feel, it would be difficult to feel
> real anger during Binary Finary, but no one can truly describe any single
> set of emotions behind any Rob Hood record because it is unique from
> listener to listener...
>
> I call this music/listener relationship in techno "toneshifting" in that
> the
> tendency to a person locked into a groove with techno is to project
> outwards
> melody which isn't there, they shift the tone of the track in their head.
> This again shows the beauty of techno in that each person listening may
> very
> well be hearing something entirely different than the person standing next
> to you...
>
> I also propose that this is the fuel behind the earlier experiments of
> modern art, cubism, abstraction, ect., the artists (who funny enough, tend
> to be super introverts!!) were trying to return the autonomy back to the
> viewer, a single block of yellow painted on canvas is pure and undefined,
> it
> is raw emotion, nothing else. It is the job of the viewer to project out
> onto the painting and add the emotional definition, thus making the
> painting
> totally unique from one person to the next. This is why it's silly to go
> to
> openings like many that I do, and try to "figure out the artists pain" in
> a
> picture that simply is a couple of simple shapes, man, its _your_ job to
> put
> _your_ "pain" or happiness onto the picture, forget the artist...
>
> I drift.
>
> To finalize, the debate between Moby and Hood or whatever will never be
> solved in that they are two entirely different forms of art, despite the
> use
> of the same medium. One is entertainment (Moby) one is guidance (techno),
> and it's your personality type the determines which art you need most for
> emotional gratification...
>
> And last but certainly not least, techno can never be defined because it
> would require a definition of every Toneshift in every mind and in every
> ear...
>
> sorry about the length,
>
> darw_n
>
> "create, demonstrate, toneshift..."
> http://www.mp3.com/darw_n
> http://www.sphereproductions.com/topic/Darwin.html
> http://www.mannequinodd.com
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
