Wow- I can't say much now except that is the exact opposite of how I
"define" (experience would be a more accurate term) Techno ! (no
offence meant though!)
Jason
On 3 Nov 2005, at 19:40, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm guessing he's not a big John Cage fan.
Seriously, though I have great respect for Larry Heard as a
producer, I
have to disagree. A certain kind of feeling might define a GENRE,
but it
can never define all the possibilities available in the exploration of
music as an art form. These fixed ideas about what is music and
what is
noise prevent innovation and evolution. And to fear evolution is
not very
"techno".
Musically we are living in a period where every form of noise has been
"liberated" - not to express something but rather to be explored
for its
own sake. I don't need music to carry some supposed meaning or
feeling.
There is a place for music with feeling, but there is also a place for
abstract music that explores structured sonic possibilities for
their own
sake.
Techno was ALWAYS about the surface anyway, it never was substantive
compared to, say, Mozart. Techno is a special effect, a slowly
mutating
surface of noise vibrating over extremely repetitive rhythmic
patters. And
that is just fine with me.
np: Autechre - Untilted
~David
but he called it a collection of noises - not music
MEK
