kent williams a écrit :
This seems to come up a lot -- people complaining about laptop
performers, software-based production, etc. This is where the dub vs
mnml thread seemed to be going.
I don't want to start another debate, or another repetition of the
same people launching the same mortars over the wall at each other,
but I want to say this (perhaps again): 1. Judge the results, not the
technique. 2. The theoretical 'futurism' of techno would almost demand
embracing of new technology. 3. You can make crappy dance music with a
909, 808, 303, SH101 and a MPC60 too. You're just out $10k more on
hardware than you would be with your laptop and cracked copy of fruity
loops. 4. Why give people points for making virtue of a necessity, if
the results don't measure up?
The so called "futurism" of techno is debatable. I just wish for good
and ambitious music whether it is futuristic or not.
My main problem right now is the flood of crappy music generated by the
fact the barrier of entry to make music is lower
than in the hardware era. Random Joe makes a loop, add random sounds,
and voila: instant track that goes knowhere that might find a label since
it's so easy to release digitally. Listening sequentially to listings of
beatport or juno is a painful experience
My other concern is that a lot of those new producers follow a formula,
wheter it's mnml, house, etc where the composition
of their track is soooo predictable. It's boring too tears. Even some
tracks considered super good by most of the people of this
list can enter the "predictable", and "does not bring anything new to
the table even if a little" category.
These days I prefer music that push things forward a bit, whether it's
from Digitonal, Jacen Solo or Matt Chester (hi Matt!) for example.
After all those years, I have less and less patience for music that just
replicates a formula, as well produced as it is.
