quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J It isn't pointless. Listen to a dub track on laptop speakers with no bass. Listen to a love song when you're in a turbulent break-up. Context is hugely important to music, and that includes the equipment you listen to it on. Hell, context is a key part of being a good DJ. Dismissing the argument out of hand is wrong, because there must be a good reason why context doesn't matter, which you haven't yet stated.

Context matters in the sense that a DJ has to find tracks that work in a club at that specific time. It doesn't make the tracks good.

Many a time I've heard something I thought was amazing in a club, then get home and get that track only to find it's awful. And/or hear it again in a club on a different night and it just doesn't sound good at all. If a track only works in a certain context it's not a very good track.

I'm only speaking generally here, btw, I can't remember hearing any of Dubfire's solo works.

___________________
Latest releases:
Endless Cycles [Capital Heaven]
The Charlatan [Morphosis]

True, but I think the argument here is directed towards those who would be dismissive of context in general. Although listening to music is never really independent of context, a certain context can contribute greatly to a sense of appreciation and meaning, as well as make the listening experience less enjoyable.

But this conversation is extending too far into the issue of 'context,' as it originally just concerned the differences between listening to a track on a club system as opposed to in a bedroom or car.

Last edited by Paradox Lost on Nov-15-2007 at 10:39

quote:

If a track only works in a certain context it's not a very good track.

Not sure if I agree with that. I think people make music with an idea about context.

So according to you, how many contexts does a track need to have to be "good".

I propose the following system:

----------------------------------------------------
GOODNESS OF TRACK BASED ON CONTEXT IN WHICH IT WORKS
----------------------------------------------------

0 - Shit
ONLY IN A CERTAIN CONTEXT - Not A Very Good Track
2 - not a good track
3 - acceptable level of track
4 - a good track
5 - a very good track
6 - quite a good track
7 - a rather good track
8 - a noteworthy track
9 - a great track
10 - a sick track
11 - a classic track
12 - a Mr.Mystery track
14 - the body of christ

quote:

Originally posted by Paradox Lost True, but I think the argument here is directed towards those who would be dismissive of context in general. I suppose in theory, music is never independent of context (though that is a discussion for a different time and a different forum), but a certain context can contribute greatly to a sense of appreciation and meaning, as well as make the listening experience less enjoyable. But this conversation is extending too far into the issue of 'context,' as it originally just concerned the differences between listening to a track on a club system as opposed to in a bedroom or car.

Agreed, maybe we should just leave it at that.

___________________
Latest releases:
Endless Cycles [Capital Heaven]
The Charlatan [Morphosis]

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec Not sure if I agree with that. I think people make music with an idea about context. So according to you, how many contexts does a track need to have to be "good". I propose the following system: 0 - Shit ONLY IN A CERTAIN CONTEXT - Not A Very Good Track 2 - not a good track 3 - acceptable level of track 4 - a good track 5 - a very good track 6 - quite a good track 7 - a rather good track 8 - a noteworthy track 9 - a great track 10 - a sick track 11 - a classic track 12 - a Mr.Mystery track 14 - the body of christ

Er... right. At least you got the point.

___________________
Latest releases:
Endless Cycles [Capital Heaven]
The Charlatan [Morphosis]

From the recent Month In Techno column at Pitchfork (written by Philip Sherburne):

quote:

...But 2007 felt less like a year of innovations, of bold leaps and technological alchemy, than a year of tweaks to the form, of honing in on what I've long called the "boom-tick template." To illustrate the latter, you need look no further than Dubfire's "Ribcage". One of the year's biggest singles, it's also one of the most contentious. When the dance-music website Resident Advisor rated it only 1.5 on a scale of 5, their pan felt like a provocation, and that's just how many participants on the RA forums took it. In many ways, it's a fine track; when mixed well for the dancefloor, its shifting layers of ping-ponging bleeps and white noise create long, tension-loaded layers. Dubbing it a "tool," as RA's review did, seems a bit unfair; techno-- at least the more streamlined versions of it-- needs its tools. But something about "Ribcage" also feels oddly calculated, as though it were trying too hard to be epic, from its length (12:25) to its almost cautious sense of restraint. On the one hand it feels like an attempt at something I'd call "stadium minimal," which isn't necessarily a bad thing-- you could say the same of tracks by Carl Craig, Radio Slave, and Ricardo Villalobos. But without indulging in the risk-taking that makes those producers' best work so compelling, "Ribcage" ends up doing little more than stewing in its own juices. Some critics have attacked the tune for being opportunistic, given that Dubfire is best known as a member of the superstar progressive-house outfit Deep Dish, and it's certainly possible to read the record as an attempt to gain some underground credibility: from its sound to its one-sided pressing, duly adorned with a sticker that makes it look more like a bootleg, the record certainly aspires to a measure of underground cachet. I don't mean to single out "Ribcage" as an act of bad faith, and I'm certainly not bothered that progressive house's mainstays are migrating towards other styles. (In any case, that's hardly a new development; DJs like John Digweed were charting Kompakt records a few years back, and the rise of German minimalists in the proving grounds of Ibiza have led to a lot of mingling between the Anglo-American old guard and the Continental upstarts.) But the degree to which "Ribcage" comes off as an exercise in textbook minimal is a reminder of how depressingly conservative the genre can be. It's the same problem facing indie rock: from home recording to DIY distribution, it's easier than ever to put a record out. (Mind you, I think this is a good thing: I made a record this year myself, recorded at home and released on a small label, so I'd be a hypocrite if I argued for higher barriers to entry.) But the sheer quantity of soundalike boompty-boompty is mind-numbing. I've always loved techno precisely for its streamlined seamlessness, but with so much material out there that sounds almost as if it's trying to be anonymous, indistinguishable, one begins to wonder if techno's long, asymptotal slope towards its ideal type isn't beginning to split subatomic hairs...

___________________
"All revolutions are the sheerest fantasies until they happen; then they become historical inevitabilities."

quote:

Originally posted by lolsauce The only thing funnier than Rjt seemingly thinking I'm ANF is the fact that for a so called music connasisseur many of the Dj's he named in this thread don't actually Dj at all. You don't get out much do you.

It was Clovis who made the assertion you were Jason - and regardless, how sad of an individual do you have to be to hide behind an alt?



Honestly, it really doesn't matter who you are because the rest of us clearly see what you are.



Oh, and again, wonderful to see all that you can do is nitpick. Small victories for small people, I guess.

___________________
last minute disco dot net

Good stuff. Now not only am I elated to find out you are the official TA representative, but find it even funnier that you accuse anyone of nit picking. What if i told you i'm not an alt (have them do an ip scan) and just someone who reads this board alot and has made the observation that you seem to enjoy shitting on everyones opinions while thinking yours are superior. Its ok for you to call out people for example who vote producers in the dj list, but you cry and call nitpick when someone calls you on the same mistakes? Music is a beautiful thing that encompasses more than one persons opinion. I don't care what you think chump, because a poser "elitist" opinions of me mean nothing. Keep judging Dj's you've never seen (and listing those that don't spin as favourites) and thinking your the best. I see you for what you are, transparent and hollow. You are just as special as Dubfire.

Last edited by lolsauce on Nov-15-2007 at 16:28

Again, context, reading comprehension, relevance, etc.

You'd do well to learn about them all.

And you still registered for a forum for no reason other than to talk shit, previously banned or not.

___________________
last minute disco dot net

ye, this thread is going places

___________________
facebook | blog | scrobbler | setarchive | 20160316
"I believe that's referred to as intelligent drum & bass, which obviously means there's a genre of stupid drum & bass out there" (John Peel)