I think Four Tet sucks.

I like Holdens DJ-Kicks.

Mostly replying to thread to flag it for reading. Popcornworthy, but not because Matt has written in it.

___________________

Klangkarussell - Sternenkinder

quote:

SYSTEM-J

People have this fucking stupid idea that deliberately including minor imperfections in electronic music somehow gives it more "soul". It's the same idiot logic that declares using DAWs makes production too easy or that laptop DJing sucks because there's no performance in someone staring at a screen. Get some perspective, you twats.
[/quote]

I think its fine if the errors in the production are by accident. It's been said in interviews of early 90's producers a lot of things that were a hit came by accident because of messing around with knobs and such. But if someone deliberately puts errors in the production to simulate an experimental vibe, thats lame. I can understand sloppiness in djing too, it can sound good or bad. It sounds good when the dj makes the best of it and keeps that "flow" going, that imo is where the "soul" comes in with djing. You get a sense that its a human mixing music the best he can, you can sense his effort and intentions, its the dj's expressiveness. I guess thats where Theo comes in, one of those guys that make mistakes like that and get away with it, not so much because of history but because he can make it work and keep that energy going and make it sound good.

Theres djs that mix clean, and you can feel their soul in it, and theres djs that mix clean and it sounds flat and sterile. There's djs that mix sloppy, and you can feel their soul in it, and theres djs that mix sloppy and it just sounds bad. The technique or even style of music is secondary to the artistic expressiveness of djing imo.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Electronic music began with a disregard of ideas of technical virtuosity, performance or fetishism of humanity. It began with a DIY approach, a de-emphasis on live performance and an entire philosophy that rigid machine music could be just as beautiful and affecting as anything played by human hand. That is the entire ideal of electronic music. Hearing people echo the trad-musician arguments against electronic music but retuned with absurdist relativism makes me cringe.

What makes me cringe is this idea you have that amounts to 'all electronic music should be as perfect sounding as the technology that created it will allow'.

That's absurd. It's art - the beauty of the technology is not just that it allows a DIY approach, but it allows anyone to make anything they imagine. And speaking of someone like Theo Parrish - even though his music is often lilting and jaunty, it sure as hell doesn't sound like anything that could be played by 'trad-musicians'.

One of the most interesting things about electronic music and computer music is the discourse that arises naturally between the artist's human hand and the logic and cold mathematical rigor of the machine. It wouldn't be much of a discourse if everyone simply opted to go with the machine all the time. Your purist 'rigid machine music could be just as beautiful and affecting as anything played by human hand' is merely one part of this discourse, and it's been part of it for decades, when it was more relevant. Today there is less of a distinction between trad and electronic music (at least in the mainstream), and certainly less of a fear of technology.

"Soul" comes from the music and not from the mixing. That being said, even the most soulful tracks somehow lose what makes them special when mixed together in a shoddy manner

IMO the whole point of mixing is to blur the meeting point of where one song ends and the next begins. Recklessly slamming one track into another isn't "soulful mixing" it's lazy. Almost as if he's saying "I'm Theo Parrish so I don't have to give a fuck, people will like it anyways."

I would imagine Theo Parrish doesn't get many new fans for that reason. The people who like him have liked him for a long time. I really doubt many new listeners tune in and say "Oh wow, I really love fader slams. Did he just not beatmatch at all? BRILLIANT!"

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by OrangestO This isn't about physics, this is about waves.

I'd suggest if anyone doubts that soulful music can be mixed in a technically skilled manner, I suggest listening to this.

Luciano Essential Mix 10/01/11

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by OrangestO This isn't about physics, this is about waves.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Electronic music began with a disregard of ideas of technical virtuosity, performance or fetishism of humanity. It began with a DIY approach, a de-emphasis on live performance and an entire philosophy that rigid machine music could be just as beautiful and affecting as anything played by human hand. That is the entire ideal of electronic music. Hearing people echo the trad-musician arguments against electronic music but retuned with absurdist relativism makes me cringe.

Thanks. I'll have to save this quote and pull it out everytime someone argues about 'musicianship' in electronic music.

___________________
June 2018 mix

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 "Soul" comes from the music and not from the mixing. That being said, even the most soulful tracks somehow lose what makes them special when mixed together in a shoddy manner IMO the whole point of mixing is to blur the meeting point of where one song ends and the next begins. Recklessly slamming one track into another isn't "soulful mixing" it's lazy. Almost as if he's saying "I'm Theo Parrish so I don't have to give a fuck, people will like it anyways." I would imagine Theo Parrish doesn't get many new fans for that reason. The people who like him have liked him for a long time. I really doubt many new listeners tune in and say "Oh wow, I really love fader slams. Did he just not beatmatch at all? BRILLIANT!"

so smooth beatmatching is the only way music should transition from song to the next? a dj should never fader slam from one track to another, ever? sounds like a very narrow viewpoint of how djing should be. some of the best mixing is when a dj can slam from one track to the next without you even knowing it, or if you do know it, you dont care because sonically and flow-wise it just makes sense. it takes skill and talent to have an ear for finding two tracks that you abruptly jump from one to the next, to know when the right moment in the song you can switch over, the right moment of the next track to switch into. and its really nice when djs use a variety of transition types, not just the smooth beatmatch. beat juggling for example is awesome.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J People have this fucking stupid idea that deliberately including minor imperfections in electronic music somehow gives it more "soul".

Not everyone has the same idealistic views as you or what you claim to be the ideal of electronic music. That may have been the general consensus in its beginning, I don't know, but progress results from other means. Electronic dance music has evolved way beyond your black and white view that it is all about "disregarding of ideas of technical virtuosity." There are other means of recording and producing music other than pushing a perfect quantization of lego-shaped loops next to each other into a sequencer. Hardware exists and creativity has been appreciated for a long time. Thankfully people who don't think of it as radically as you also have a say in what comes out.

It's not deliberate, playing a synthesizer can be a lot like playing the drums or the guitar if you allow it to be.

___________________
201

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec What makes me cringe is this idea you have that amounts to 'all electronic music should be as perfect sounding as the technology that created it will allow'. ...Your purist 'rigid machine music could be just as beautiful and affecting as anything played by human hand' is merely one part of this discourse, and it's been part of it for decades, when it was more relevant.

You're either missing the point or deliberately misrepresenting me. Neither would be a surprise. My whole point is that it's been the bedrock of electronic music philosophy since its inception, and anyone who's into electronic music has heard and loved hundreds of tracks built around that philosophy. I'm not saying tracks should be as perfect as possible, but that it's bizarre to complain when they are, and to fetishise almost imperceptible imperfections, as if they were what made early electronic music interesting.

I love Burial's music, for example, and that's about as hand-made as computer music can be. But some people seem to think Burial's music has more soul because it isn't properly quantized, as if hand-placing samples in Soundforge for eye-reddening hours is a somehow "soulful" way of making music, but using a sequencer isn't. I've got no problem with imperfect electronic music, and I haven't got a problem with Theo Parrish's music being loose (I don't find it very interesting either way). It's more the surrounding discourse that says modern electronic music is "too perfect", "too tight" or "too easy". Exactly the same shit the pioneers had to deal with when they made their music, except now the difference between "too tight" and "soulfully tight" is ridiculously small.

quote:

Originally posted by wotyzoid Electronic dance music has evolved way beyond your black and white view that it is all about "disregarding of ideas of technical virtuosity."

Do you think Theo Parrish has any technical virtuosity whatsoever?

quote:

Originally posted by stevö some of the best mixing is when a dj can slam from one track to the next without you even knowing it, or if you do know it, you dont care because sonically and flow-wise it just makes sense.

Exactly. I don't want to reignite the "What is good mixing?" debate from the other TP thread, but people don't seem to realise that fader-slamming is actually a skill itself. There are good fader slams and bad fader slams, and it's all about finding the right moment to go in and out of the respective tracks and how well they follow on from each other. There are rare moments in a set where you want to break the flow for effect, but generally a transition should keep the flow going. Everyone was so busy constructing their fanboy strawman that I didn't like TP's mixing because I only appreciate long melodic blends that they missed this detail: I didn't say TP sucked at the WHP because of fader slams, but because of jarring fader slams.

___________________
Mixes:
> Maximum Elevation [Progressive House]
> DI.FM 26th Anniversary Guest Mix [Progressive House]
> Live @ Dance:Love:Hub London, 11.10.2025
> Higher Peaks [Progressive House]
> Dance:Love:Hub Afterparty (The Return) 23.11.24

Like these sets? Come see me play live at Kibosh in Manchester: https://www.instagram.com/kibosh.mcr/

Last edited by SYSTEM-J on Oct-13-2011 at 17:32

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 "Soul" comes from the music and not from the mixing.

I'd dispute that.

A great DJ can turn shit to gold, can take a record you listen to a sample of and say "boring drivel", and make you rave your tits off, and there's no right or wrong way to do it.

I often think truly great DJ's, many of whom will never, ever get the recognition they deserve for their craft, eclipse the sum of the tracks they play. I am not saying this happens often, but this notion that a DJ is just a guy playing other people's music seems to have been the growing rallying cry as the craft of mixing has slowly been devalued, and I hate it.

Aside from that, my "unpopular opinion on electronica" is that I don't always want to "support the scene" to go out and get gigs, because I largely hate the scene. Which is a shame because I love so many in it.

I'm certain that will somehow be taken the wrong way. Great thread.

Theo Parrish moves like a drunk brontosaurus-groundhog hybrid from outerspace

Last edited by on Oct-13-2011 at 18:20