Now that the most stressful period of the working day is over, I'll add some too...
I'd add a question about whether or not they've ever been approached to do film soundtrack work, and, if not, if their approach to their music has had a visual aspect to it; to me, each BC release evokes strong visual images, but the sorts of films where that sound would be an appropriate accompaniment probably haven't been made yet. Also, I'd ask whether it was their intention to spawn such a large range of 'copycats' and essentially introduce a new sound into techno and house - even fairly commercial house - which would permeate right to the core, or if the impact of the BC releases was greater than they ever expected it to be. Was the drive to develop the BC sound borne of a frustration with sounds being used in techno at the time, or was it an idea that came from another direction? How long did it take to develop, from the first concept of a truly three-dimensional, heat-haze shimmering, sound, to the first successful execution? And finally, which would they say was the first track on which a proto-Basic Channel sound was deployed? "Ploy"? "Infinition"? "Domina"? Cheers, Brendan > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew MacQueen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 14 June 2002 17:34 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] org [The Music Institute] (E-mail) > Cc: Tom Robbins/Magic Feet > Subject: RE: [313] Basic Channel > > > > I'm interviewing Basic Channel on Monday (!), so does \ > > anyone have any suggestions for pertinent questions? > > Fun! Just off the top of my head, I've always wondered how > did they decide that with the final basic channel record it > was time to retire the label after Phylps Trak II (BC-09), > that it had run it's logical course as "basic channel" ? > What factors contributed to their decision ? > > How did doing Cyrus: Enforcement (001) with the Mills mix > unfold? Did they have the track in mind, and were looking > for a remixer? Were others considered? Or did Mills help > define the sound of 001 early on with them? Was he in the > studio with them at any time or was it all remotely done > swapping DATs? were there other mixes that were done but > never released? > > Did their vision for the label change course during it's run? > Or it was never reeally all that pre-meditated, it just > happened organically? Do they look back and have a favorite release ? > > Do they still own property in Detroit? (did they ever? or was > that a rumour) > > I know that's a lot but, just some of the things I've always > wondered about. Basic Channel is such a great little > mirocosim of everything I love about the Belin/Detroit sound trade. > > Peace, > Matt > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Legal Disclaimer This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message that arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. This message is provided for informational purposes only. our website at: http://www.widelearning.com Wide Learning is a trading name of Wide Multimedia Ltd Registered office: 33-41 Dallington Street, London EC1V 0BB Company number: 3339664 VAT number: 690 8399 83 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
