A couple quotes from AE | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
Now online (2)
Hyperflake
recycle
...and 490 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614187
Today 32
Topics 127546
  
 
Messageboard index
A couple quotes from AE
 

offline cataLYST from Waldorf (United States) on 2005-02-09 00:17 [#01492418]
Points: 622 Status: Lurker



We’re really cranked up and in a totally different gear
at the moment’. Sean Booth discloses, in reference to the
new album. ‘It feels like we’re working in a quite
radically different way now; not so much in terms of the
final output - I’ll let others judge that - but we’re
getting ideas down a lot quicker now, trying to make the
most of what time we’ve got’.

This sounds to me like a Ultravisitor version of Ae..
hopefully the mastering doesn't suck.


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2005-02-09 01:08 [#01492424]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker



An ultravisitor version of Ae? I don't get the reference. I
think they are talking in respect to the tools used. They
seem to have stopped using kyma, and opted for a more
hardware base. Or maybe the opposite. We could prolly expect
to hear an album that aims towards interesting developements
and less about the sounds they design.

I would love to hear an album by ae that has progressions
that make more sense. As much as I love their music, I am
kinda getting tired of beautifull songs that break into
noise at the 2:37 point.


 

offline CS2x from London (United Kingdom) on 2005-02-09 01:14 [#01492426]
Points: 5079 Status: Lurker



I'm worried that they're "getting ideas down a lot quicker"
now. And why do they have to make the most out of what time
they have? It's been 2 years since Draft. Sorry, I'm just
worried it'll have that vague "half-finished" feel that can
occasionally feature in their music-where they appear to be
fucking about with sounds and not really spending much time
on thinking about where things are going or how things all
fit together.


 

offline cygnus from nowhere and everyplace on 2005-02-09 01:28 [#01492432]
Points: 11920 Status: Regular



they may be getting ideas down quicker now but that doesn't
mean they are spending less time making songs.


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 01:31 [#01492436]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker



I think it could be a good thing. Sometimes if you mull
over too long, you get rigor mortis.

Also ideas quicker could easily mean a higher density of
ideas!

And most importantly.. if there IS a change.. less boredom
for the listener--something to explore, whether or not its
quality!

great!



 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 01:35 [#01492438]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker



BTW I feel that a track like piezo has 100x more ideas
than.. well let's say dael for instance. I won't say rae or
anything from lp5 because that's the most idea-sparse album
ever.


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 01:37 [#01492439]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker



seems like no one ever wants to argue with me over certain
AE releases; they just think 'troll' and don't respond. I
really think they had a shaky period starting after amber
and lasting until confield durin which they tried to reset
their sound somewhat and couldn't really get it locked in.
I don't think it's the smooth transition from incunabula
(stop saying it's bad!) to draft everyone claims it is.


 

offline cygnus from nowhere and everyplace on 2005-02-09 01:43 [#01492442]
Points: 11920 Status: Regular



hahaha, nice respectable man with a suit and tie...

still not going to argue with you!!!


 

offline pachi from yo momma (United States) on 2005-02-09 01:44 [#01492443]
Points: 8984 Status: Lurker



Intriguing disclosure, but I'm not jumping to any
conclusions regarding the "Untilted" album until after I've
purchased it and listened to it the entire way through.


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 01:44 [#01492444]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to cygnus: #01492442



the picture is some elitist schmuck I'm making fun of.

well at least AGREE with something; we have something
potentially interesting to look forward to.


 

offline Matvey from Kiev (Ukraine) on 2005-02-09 01:53 [#01492448]
Points: 6851 Status: Regular



everything will be fine.


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 01:58 [#01492449]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker



jesus you fucking pushovers; no one wants to argue, they
just want to state their opinions and get accolades. I spit
on you all.


 

offline nacmat on 2005-02-09 02:27 [#01492452]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker



lets wait and see


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2005-02-09 02:29 [#01492453]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to sneakattack: #01492449



heh... i would argue with you if u ever actually said
anything worth arguing over.


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 02:30 [#01492454]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to Taxidermist: #01492453



point proven. you just want to make imperious, elitist
statements.

and as if someone else is saying something provocative.


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2005-02-09 02:31 [#01492455]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to sneakattack: #01492449



Heh... its funny. You seem to be chalking yourself up for
troll with the intent of being a troll, but most of your
trolling is of the lowest quality. Bet better at being a
troll, or get bent. Its as simple as that.


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 02:34 [#01492457]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to Taxidermist: #01492455



Are you retarded? Read your post carefully and realize that
you are saying nothing.


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2005-02-09 02:38 [#01492458]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to sneakattack: #01492457



Slick.


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 02:43 [#01492460]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to Taxidermist: #01492458



Furthermore you realize of course how lame it is to say
'that argument isnt worth going into', correct? If it was
really broken, it would be _easy_ to compose a refutation.
Your reticence proves your stupidity.


 

offline nacmat on 2005-02-09 02:51 [#01492463]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker | Followup to sneakattack: #01492457



I think taxidermist is saying a lot

I also think you did say something interesting in those
posts...
I dont agree with you about:

_________________________________________________
"I really think they had a shaky period starting after
amber
and lasting until confield durin which they tried to reset
their sound somewhat and couldn't really get it locked in.
I don't think it's the smooth transition from incunabula
(stop saying it's bad!) to draft everyone claims it is. "
__________________________________________________

I think the sequence: amber-garbage-anvil vapre-envane-
chiastic slide-lp5-confield

is pretty logical

tri repetae is an extrange release for me, but it also fits
there


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 02:54 [#01492466]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to nacmat: #01492463



sure it's logical, they fit a progression, but it's a weak
set for me. The tracks sound ridiculously simplistic to my
ears; small loops, little differentiation, etc. and lp5 I
really can't understand the appreciation of. half the tracks
have about two things going on, and those two don't blend.


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 02:55 [#01492467]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to nacmat: #01492463



I just checked my post to be sure; I didn't say the
progression wasn't logical (it was too logical! boring!); I
said it wasn't smooth. What I mean by that is, well, there
were some dips in quality.


 

offline nacmat on 2005-02-09 03:08 [#01492472]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker | Followup to sneakattack: #01492467



well... I disagree with that... why?

remember music is a matter of taste, so talking about low
quality is like saying you dont like it

I disagree cos some of those releases are my favs:

amber: great album
garbage: perfect ep
anvil vapre: love it
amber: love it even more
chiastic slide: love love love it
lp5 one of my favs

so... the progression seems logical to me, and also I love
them all... its normal I disagree with you

how can we discuss if this is just a matter of taste?

lets reorient the discussion:

why do you find them weak?:
________________________________________________

"The tracks sound ridiculously simplistic to my
ears;"
_________________________________________________

well, simplicity is something one can like or dislike, but
doesnt imply lack of quality. and apart, I dont find it
simple at all. I wouldnt say autechre is minimal at all
_________________________________________________
""small loops, little differentiation"
_________________________________________________

here I cant argue, I dont make music, and I cant read music
but I do think tracks are very different from eachother,
above all from one release to another
and even in same release: are tracks 1 and 4 from garbage
any similar? and still thjey work perfect in same ep
are tracks 1 and 3 or 10 similar in lp5?
_________________________________________________
"and lp5 I
really can't understand the appreciation of. half the tracks

have about two things going on, and those two don't blend"
__________________________________________________

for me this album is gold, I would be parcial discussing
about it


 

offline George_Kaplan on 2005-02-09 03:14 [#01492474]
Points: 838 Status: Regular



this thread is ridiculous


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 03:17 [#01492476]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to nacmat: #01492472



Well of course our personality is what in the end causes us
to like/dislike something, but a discussion can and needs to
be founded upon provable fact; it irks me a great deal when
people get into opinion pissing contests and can't justify
anything.

I'm not saying that the tracks from those discs are all
similar sounding; for instance maphive depends on a drum
sample I don't think they use anywhere else. I mean similar
structrure.

and simplicity can be great (flim..), but that's why I said
something about not blending--if your shit is very minimal,
then those components need to have a beautiful
interrelation.

autechre loops far too much, I feel. If I listen to
something in draft, for instance, I see the pattern, and
then it continues forever. Now that isn't bad--for instance
flim, which I mentioned above, is one pattern for the entire
time--but if that pattern isn't inherently incredible (and
often theirs can be just some cute rhythmic play or
whatever), then the shit falls apart.


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 03:18 [#01492477]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to George_Kaplan: #01492474



thanks for your insightful comment. I love the internet
(meaning you)


 

offline George_Kaplan on 2005-02-09 03:20 [#01492478]
Points: 838 Status: Regular



Well of course our personality is what in the end causes us

to like/dislike something, but a discussion can and needs to

be founded upon provable fact;

why?

it irks me a great deal when
people get into opinion pissing contests and can't justify
anything.

why?

I'm not saying that the tracks from those discs are all
similar sounding; for instance maphive depends on a drum
sample I don't think they use anywhere else. I mean similar

structrure.

what are you on about?

and simplicity can be great (flim..), but that's why I said

something about not blending--if your shit is very minimal,

then those components need to have a beautiful
interrelation.

why?

autechre loops far too much, I feel. If I listen to
something in draft, for instance, I see the pattern, and
then it continues forever. Now that isn't bad--for instance

flim, which I mentioned above, is one pattern for the entire

time--but if that pattern isn't inherently incredible (and
often theirs can be just some cute rhythmic play or
whatever), then the shit falls apart.

oh. can you give me an example of something that is
inherently incredible?



 

offline nacmat on 2005-02-09 03:22 [#01492479]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker | Followup to sneakattack: #01492476



iyo

what must I say if I know nothing about music, but I know I
love those albums and tracks?


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 03:24 [#01492480]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to George_Kaplan: #01492478



debate is a dialectic process. if the synthesis is to have
any value, it needs to be founded on things which, well, can
actually support something! hence facts. I can tell you
that something took more skill to create than another thing,
and furthermore APPRECIATE the lesser skilled object more,
and not have that influence my discourse.

as far as the simple structure. I mean shit dude just listen
to acroyear or rae.

well flim was my example of something simple which works;
there are other ones, like BoC's forest moon.. nannou maybe?


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 03:26 [#01492481]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to nacmat: #01492479



you don't need to 'understand music'; there's no magical
trick to that. Just like any other domain, it depends on
mental analytical capacity and experience. You're a good
dude, so I bet you could go into depth regarding things you
appreciate in those tracks, and its possible I couldn't
refute many of them.

I'm just saying, I hate things like 'autechre is just
better. you dont understand', 'youre not worth arguing
with', etc.


 

offline George_Kaplan on 2005-02-09 03:27 [#01492484]
Points: 838 Status: Regular



i don't see what skill has to do with good music.

by that logic all bands must always improve over time, since
their experience and skill would always improve. (it doesnt
get any harder)



 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 03:28 [#01492486]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to George_Kaplan: #01492484



I very carefully separated a talk from ability and a
discussion of how much I like the music. Skill is something
you can actually analyze and discuss. If we just keep
shouting 'I LOVE XYZ! PQR SUCKS', we're just a bunch of
morons playing bumper cars.


 

offline George_Kaplan on 2005-02-09 03:32 [#01492489]
Points: 838 Status: Regular | Followup to sneakattack: #01492486



you did say "furthermore APPRECIATE the lesser skilled
object more,"


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 03:33 [#01492490]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to George_Kaplan: #01492489



and that's precisely my point; I can argue that something is
more skilled and simultaneously like MORE the object which I
am superficially denigrated.


 

offline George_Kaplan on 2005-02-09 03:34 [#01492491]
Points: 838 Status: Regular | Followup to sneakattack: #01492490



sorry i don't understamd the last 2 words
what do you mean?


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 03:36 [#01492493]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to George_Kaplan: #01492491



sorry; I mean I can like something more and argue
against it. For instance if we got in a 'most
skilled track' argument', I would NEVER say rhubarb, though
sometimes I put it on and am in bliss.


 

offline George_Kaplan on 2005-02-09 03:38 [#01492495]
Points: 838 Status: Regular | Followup to sneakattack: #01492493



what if the artists intention was to make you feel bliss on
only those days? would they be skilled then?


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 03:40 [#01492497]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to George_Kaplan: #01492495



Yes, and in an argument about the track you could tell me
that I'm an idiot, the purpose of the track was bliss, etc
etc =)


 

offline George_Kaplan on 2005-02-09 03:42 [#01492500]
Points: 838 Status: Regular | Followup to sneakattack: #01492497



i have to ask you; how do you know what any artists
intention is?


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 03:45 [#01492504]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to George_Kaplan: #01492500



well look that argument can be applied recursively and you
can say you really never know anything. Everything
is based on inference. For instance you may find a
blissful, simple track in the middle of a bunch of busy
tracks, and argue it was placed there for relax or
something; if it was a whole CD of peaceful stuff it'd be
much harder to argue there was a really brilliant point in
the style of that track specifically, etc balllalhhhhh


 

offline nacmat on 2005-02-09 03:49 [#01492506]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker | Followup to sneakattack: #01492481



all the analysis you are making is shadowned by the most
important thing, your taste, you dont like it, thats what
makes you dont like the structure, loops or whatever.

I dont say you dont understand it, its simple, I like iut
and you dont

I mean, not everybody like the same music


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 03:57 [#01492507]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to nacmat: #01492506



But my taste is exactly that--mine! If I'm going to be
talking to someone OTHER than myself, I need to base
language on something understood by us both.

Furthermore I'm one of those people that never wants to have
an unjustified opinion.

LIKE BREASTS. I LIKE THEM BECAUSE I LIKE THEM.


 

offline nacmat on 2005-02-09 04:11 [#01492509]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker | Followup to sneakattack: #01492507



before you said:

"you don't need to 'understand music'"
"Just like any other domain, it depends on
mental analytical capacity and experience. I bet you could
go into depth regarding things you
appreciate in those tracks"

well... I didnt say I dont understand music, I said I know
nothing about music... I have never studied music.

but I do like music

how would I make a proper musical analisys if I never
studied music?

you can say that you like a building, but if you start to
analize it, you will probably say stupid things about it,
cos you are not an architect... I am an architect and I
would think: what a smart ass, trying to analize when he has
no idea... well, the same here

why I like thos tracks? I can tell you, but dont expect a
technical precise analisis, dont expect facts from me, cos I
wont step ina filed I dont know

I hate it when people try to explain me fact about
architecture when they dont know shit, but I respect when
people tell me: I like that building cos its beautiful


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2005-02-09 04:16 [#01492514]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to sneakattack: #01492507



Personality generally doesn't lead people to like or dislike
anything. Personality is how you project yourself towards
other people.

I really don't see the need to quantify how you may see or
feel about something. Sure, when you get down to it, it can
be broken down into chemicals mixing and synapses firing and
what have you, but understanding that won't get you anywhere
yet, because humans have only yet begun to be able to study
things in that minute of detail.

Have you guys ever read zen and the art of motorcycle
maintenance? A lot of that book was bullshit, but it
certainly had a few interesting things to say about
'quality'.

Anyways, really, ae manage to consistenly release
interesting albums. I have a feeling a lot of what sounds
rough is intentional, as everything else in their
compositions are intricate and detailed. I doubt they would
really cut corners anywhere unless they felt it was
necessary. They have endless time (being one of warps
foremost artists, they most likely have the option to take
as long as they need between releases), and warps mastering
artists at their disposal, so I doubt its laziness or bordom
or complacency that gives the unpolished sound in their
music that unpolished sound.

Anyways, I only read the first few posts after my last, so
don't jump on me about being on topic. I am going to go get
laid now. Have a good night.


 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 04:35 [#01492518]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to Taxidermist: #01492514



Understanding how things fit together is awesome because it
gives keys to creation.

annnnnd I think the word 'interesting' should be used with
great care.

I'm going to get showered and get to school, good day to you
all


Attached picture

 

offline CS2x from London (United Kingdom) on 2005-02-09 05:59 [#01492555]
Points: 5079 Status: Lurker



I actually agree with sneakattack.

I've been cussed down before for stating reasons why I don't
like music. If it was just about "feeling it", then there
would be no basis for discussion at all.

Autechre do often get lazy, and LP5 is a great example of
that.


 

offline CS2x from London (United Kingdom) on 2005-02-09 06:01 [#01492558]
Points: 5079 Status: Lurker



....apart from the first track, which is immensely complex
and catchy; the way it morphs is really subtle but also
keeps your interest through the entire thing.


 

offline George_Kaplan on 2005-02-09 07:15 [#01492595]
Points: 838 Status: Regular | Followup to CS2x: #01492558



when u say complex what do you mean exactly? are you
referring to the amount of discrete events you can identify
when listening? or do you mean some other kind of
complexity. i'm not goading you i'm just curious.


 

offline CS2x from London (United Kingdom) on 2005-02-09 07:40 [#01492600]
Points: 5079 Status: Lurker



I reckon it's the insane zipping beats and the way they
morph and develope throughout the track that makes me think
of it as complex. While they are chaotic, they also sound
very structured and they make sense, if you get me.



 

offline sneakattack on 2005-02-09 07:41 [#01492601]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker



yeah acroyear isn't complex at all. Eeeeeeeemmmmm


 


Messageboard index