> 1. Judge the results, not the technique. Totally true, why it's so important what is used if the result is good/right and deserves the title of 'art' or offers the music to go further. If an artist records good music using a pure hardware analog modular and another one NI Reaktor (for example). Does the one using Reaktor is less interesting ?
> 2. The theoretical 'futurism' of techno would almost demand embracing of new technology. Definitely agree, it's the way this music was created at first and now, some would ask to stay close to the old and almost dead 'way to do' ? Artists have today so much tools in hands and half of them just try to copy what was done near (more?...) 20 years ago. > 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. On a personal opinion, it's why there is so much bad copies of the D sound actually. Guys buying gear because 'names' use it and do all and nothing with it claiming they do 'the sound inspired' by Detroit. And it's not limited to Detroit, Chicago sound ... New York sound ... > 4. Why give people points for making virtue of a necessity, if the results don't measure up? Again, In My Opinion, because too much hypocrisy. Some peoples say an artist is f*****g good just because he use gear they can't afford. Look at Buchla synths owners, except a few, lot of those who own it records boring noises that can be done on a old Atari or with any VST freeware. Just a few know how to use it and program it really since it is a very complex synthesizer. But, do some 'google' search and you'll find lot of peoples loving these noises just because the man behind own one of these rare synths. Ok, ok, I take the door and go out with my dog :-) PEACE -- Dimitri Pike http://wildtek.free.fr http://www.myspace.com/wildtek
