|
|
Romano-povo
from earth on 2001-06-20 14:31 [#00010467]
|
|
i think that double figure is more accessible than confield. But there is much more complex work on confield which makes it more powerfull...
so definetely, confield
|
|
cheech wizard
from age on 2001-06-22 11:31 [#00010686]
|
|
yep,confield does it for me.
|
|
PostModernVancouver
from Vancouver,Canada on 2001-06-22 14:31 [#00010689]
|
|
No offense, just because its complex doesnt make it any better in my opinion.
I would believe in CONFIELD if it were more listenable, but with the exception of a few its plain dull IMO.
Aphex does the combination of both chaos, complexity and beauty far better then Autechre, thats why Aphex will always be remembered years from now, over AE ( as much as I like them).
Ae goes to ( lately anyways) too much extreme one way and the opposite again.
Aphex goes for the axis which is far harder to do, the often sarcasm, humor, evilness and beauty rolled into one is something in where he stands alone.
But Plaids Double Figure might not be as complex, but IMO a far more enjoyable release to listen to then CONFIELD and complex enough in its own sort of way.
|
|
Earface
from Henglund on 2001-06-22 17:45 [#00010698]
|
|
Confield is a rewarding album. I think that it is fucking amazing; better than Aphex's recent (loose use of the term) stuff. But I shouldn't compare them really.
|
|
nekta killa
from in a bin on 2001-06-22 19:43 [#00010708]
|
|
double fucking figure foo, that rocks like a fat girl on crack!! yehaaaaaa
|
|
ohin
on 2001-06-22 20:40 [#00010717]
|
|
For some reason it took me some time to get into confield as opposed to double figure, but now that I have, I definitely prefer confield. There's just so many layers on top of each of other; one of the most complex electronic I've heard. Then again, complexity is not necessarily a good thing; it just depends what you're trying to convey.
|
|
Messageboard index
|