i don't think anyone is debating the quality of juan's music. obviously, if you are on this list, i think its safe to assume that you're more than likely to throw a Model 500 record on the turntable.
what *i* am debating is the sentiment that juan somehow deserves to be thrown tons of money and have leigons of adoring fans today. despite the fact that he has done a minimal amount progression since those early days. if at first you don't suceed, keep on trying. i don't think he is, musically at least. and i think when people like laura start crying racism because sasha and digweed get more money than juan atkins, without consiering the fact they are putting out music constantly and working it hard, that just seems dumb. i'd be far more sympathetic if people were lamenting the fact that paul oakenfold makes millions while titonton duvante struggles because titonton is still doing really good, really interesting music. and i think that my felix the housecat example proves that its not about who's the youngest or hippest. nor is it about who did what 'back-in-the-day' its about sticking to it until you get it right. and lets also not forget that this is the entertainment business. there has to be a fair degree of luck involved. right place at the right time. and that's something that no one seems to consider. why are sasha and digweed huge? they happened to be there right when the wave of uk trance began. and that wave swelled bigger than the detroit techno wave. On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, Fred Heutte wrote: > The problem is obvious. > > How many people who revere the early Model 500 tracks in retrospect > would have even given them a moment's notice in 1987? No, they were > self-released by a young guy from a no-name Detroit suburb, a bunch > of things ranting on and on about UFOs and stuff over clattery noise > box sounds. I mean, let's be real, you can just imagine the disdain > *even if they heard those tracks then to begin with.* Which they > didn't outside of urban Detroit and Chicago. We certainly didn't > hear any of this on the west coast unless it was a pure fluke > until years later. > > Fast forward to 1992, 1997, 2002. How many people actually *listen* > to what Juan Atkins (or name your producer) has put out, before making > their judgment? See? That hasn't changed at all. The only thing > that's changed is that now there are cover photos and hype stories in the > slick magazines to do our thinking for us. (More than average > appreciation at this moment to the people who *do* write honestly, > like BMG, Tamara Palmer, Tom Magic Feet, John O and the gang over > at XLR8R.) > > It's not like I am wildly enthusiastic about everything he's done. > I left off a few I don't care for in my list. But I'll stack Juan's > discography, all of it, against anyone else in electronic music -- > even Paul Oakenfold -- and he'll come out very well indeed. > > But I've made my point on this matter and will shut up now. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
