Reynolds hardcore continuum event

[whatever]

not because i care but b/c there is basic principle of argumentation here -

nomadologist first says:

Did you watch the presentation or read Kpunk's FACT article? Because I did, and both CLEARLY and EMPHATICALLY state that ALL INNOVATION IN ELECTRONIC MUSIC for the PAST 20 YEARS is thanks only to JUNGLE and the HARDCORE CONTINUUM.

That's (a) "both" K-Punk and SR who (b) "CLEARLY and EMPHATICALY state" that (c) "ALL INNOVATION IN ELECTRONIC MUSIC" for (d) "the PAST 20 YEARS" is (e) "thanks only to JUNGLE and the HARDCORE CONTINUUM."

The supprt 4 which supposdly comes from:

There is perhaps an element of generational resentment too: a generation younger than Reynolds is frustrated that it has yet to produce a music which can’t be comfortably fitted inside a theoretical framework generated nearly two decades ago. It’s a measure of the robustness of the hardcore continuum (and its theorization) that it should still be holding on after twenty years. Yet it’s also a sign of the slowing of the rate of innovation in popular music, with British dance music, once so furiously inventive, now falling prey to the conditions of entropy which have long prevailed elsewhere. If only there could be a shattering break that would definitively relegate the hardcore continuum to the past…

The quote says not one single thing (a, b, c, d, or e) that you attribute to it.

Honstly I am beginning to theink that u r out of your fking mind.

 

[nomadthethird]

What about someone (KPUNK) saying that an entire generation is "bitter" because it hasn't yet been able to make music that doesn't fall squarely under the banner of hardcore continuum's innovations in 20 years doesn't mean exactly what I said, namely, that there haven't been any new innovations outside the HCC continuum in the past 20 years?

In fact, let's graph this out:

(A)This article is by Kpunk

There is perhaps an element of generational resentment too: a generation younger than Reynolds is frustrated that C(it has yet to produce a music )C which can’t be comfortably D&E(fitted inside a theoretical framework generated nearly two decades ago)D&E. It’s a measure of the robustness of E(the hardcore continuum (and its theorization) that it should still be holding on after twenty yearsE. Yet it’s also a sign of the slowing of the rate of innovation in popular music, with British dance music, once so furiously inventive, now falling prey to the conditions of entropy which have long prevailed elsewhere. If only there could be a shattering break that would definitively relegate the hardcore continuum to the past…

Have you watched the presentation by Simon Reynolds for FACT TV? This point is made even more emphatically there.

 

[nomadthethird]

And your "points" about who is "out of their mind" would make a little more sense if you could actually type, spell, and make a coherent point of any kind yourself.

You've been doing nothing here but making stupid troll posts for two months now, with nary a substantial post here.

If that's not what Kpunk is saying there, what is he saying dear? In fact, that's exactly what he is saying.

 

[Tentative Andy]

FWIW, I had no idea who/what he was trying to get at with the Deleuze thing either. Not relevant as a criticism I think.

Edit: in response to nomad on last page. I really need to be more consistent with quoting.

 

[nomadthethird]

If you'd actually read the thread before jumping in, Whatever, you may have noticed that I am basing my assessment of Simon Reynold's opinions based on a 1 hour and 45 minute lecture that is on the FACT TV website. (That and several articles I've read by him over the years, but those are secondary, really.)

You may want to watch this before commenting further.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

accusing someone of being "emotional" or whatever is just aconvenient way to attempt to invalidate any actual points they made without having to, you know, answer them.

This one is very simple. I will have to sit down with it to write it out, and find some blank sheet music, but it is not at all difficult or complicated. Anyone with a year of formal training could write a song like this in 10 minutes.

so what?

I'm very interested in a non-technical perspective on music, but the danger in it is that enthusiasm of the observer can sometimes tend to overstatement of just these sorts of "innovative" elements.

the "danger" of what, exactly? & again you admittedly know next to nothing about ardkore or jungle or 2step. listening to 5 tunes on YouTubes don't cut it either.

There were people writing in 6/4, 9/2, all sorts of weird time signatures waaaayyyy before jungle came around. There were people sampling vocals before jungle. There were people using purely digital mastering before jungle. There were people decontextualizing samples and letting them essentially "float" over the top of edgy urban dystopic "beats" before jungle (by about 15 years)...

the large majority of jungle is actually 4/4. also I think you materialized that claim that jungle was the first music to be digitially mastered out of thin air (unless you have something to point to)? either way you're still entirely missing the point - ppl have said 100000 times that jungle comes from other musics just as any music does - the point isn't that no one had ever chopped up a breakbeat or sampled vocals - it's how it was done, what elements it was done with & how they played off each other...

& for the 3rd time I'd love to hear this music that was being made, by your account, roughly in 1977-78 (15 yrs before jungle) where dudes were chopping up breakbeats & timestretching vocals & such. I mean really, what are you talking about? don't be vague. name something.

I just don't think jungle is the origin of all electronic innovation. That sort of thinking to my mind ignores too much important work from the 1950s onward. Maybe even some earlier stuff that's very important too.

nor does anyone else. for crissakes these same ppl, the same ones you're attacking, go on endlessly about all manner of Delia Derbyshire & Iannis Xenakis & Stockhausen & whatever else. and Sun Ra & P-Funk & Herbie Hancock. & Lee Perry & Prince Jammy & Jah Shaka. NO ONE HAS EVER SAID JUNGLE WAS THE ORIGIN OF ALL ELECTRONIC INNOVATION. IIT IS A STRAWMAN. I THINK THE CONVERSATION IS BETTER WITH GRATUITOUS CAPITALS.

I do sometimes like that sort of fast breaky beat , but more on IDM than on anything that's supposed to be "danceable.

what a shock.

 

[whatever]

If you'd actually read the thread before jumping in, Whatever, you may have noticed that I am basing my assessment of Simon Reynold's opinions based on a 1 hour and 45 minute lecture that is on the FACT TV website.That and several articles I've read by him over the years, but those are secondary, really.)

You may want to watch this before commenting further.

i prezent 2 u my kwote frum p23 , post #338 , in our very same thred woo hoo:

i enjoyed his presentation, who could deny that there is a 'hardcore' continuum/tradition/stylistic continuity there ?. it seems right on, and i'm glad that he has written about it for years .

( echoing monadthesecond i did find the repeated assertion of "facts" a litttttle hamfisted tho, tsk tsk NOT VERY THEORETICALLY ORTHODOX THERE , sir, most english department grad students will slap yr hand if u talk about bare facts !!! )

he also said exactly what i said above : there is nothing especially 'theoretical' at all about the basic outline of genre-development he skteched from hardcore to ( fill in blank here with your genre of choice ) . it's description, not theory .

why peeple keep calling him a 'theorist' , thoughh ,has never, ever made sense to me

guess i wtched teh prezentation, hmmmm . ?

 

[whatever]

You've been doing nothing here but making stupid troll posts for two months now, with nary a substantial post here.

ouch my feelies r hwoited nowz

 

[nomadthethird]

accusing someone of being "emotional" or whatever is just aconvenient way to attempt to invalidate any actual points they made without having to, you know, answer them.



so what?



the "danger" of what, exactly? & again you admittedly know next to nothing about ardkore or jungle or 2step. listening to 5 tunes on YouTubes don't cut it either.



the large majority of jungle is actually 4/4. also I think you materialized that claim that jungle was the first music to be digitially mastered out of thin air (unless you have something to point to)? either way you're still entirely missing the point - ppl have said 100000 times that jungle comes from other musics just as any music does - the point isn't that no one had ever chopped up a breakbeat or sampled vocals - it's how it was done, what elements it was done with & how they played off each other...

& for the 3rd time I'd love to hear this music that was being made, by your account, roughly in 1977-78 (15 yrs before jungle) where dudes were chopping up breakbeats & timestretching vocals & such. I mean really, what are you talking about? don't be vague. name something.



nor does anyone else. for crissakes these same ppl, the same ones you're attacking, go on endlessly about all manner of Delia Derbyshire & Iannis Xenakis & Stockhausen & whatever else. and Sun Ra & P-Funk & Herbie Hancock. & Lee Perry & Prince Jammy & Jah Shaka. NO ONE HAS EVER SAID JUNGLE WAS THE ORIGIN OF ALL ELECTRONIC INNOVATION. IIT IS A STRAWMAN. I THINK THE CONVERSATION IS BETTER WITH GRATUITOUS CAPITALS.



what a shock.

No, I did answer you. I don't think that innovation can be claimed about any old thing you want to claim it about. I think innovations are formally new inventions in music. Full stop.

And I'll say this for the last time: the talk about "digital" mastering being part of hardcore's innovation is FROM THE FACT TV PRESENTATION.

Did you watch it?

Do you know what a continuum is in physics? It is not something that draws energy from other things, the way jungle drew formally from music before it, like r&b, or techno, or even disco, and hip-hop, and dub/reggae/dancehall. That is my objection to the concept. Continua are entirely continuous phenomenon, no breaks in continuity, no new "branches" nothing of the sort. Just changes in state from one to another with no breaks.

I do not object to people liking jungle. That is fine with me. I don't care what people like. That is a personal taste issue. What I objected to were specific claims about what Simon Reynolds called "Deleuzians" in America and their objections to his HCC theory.

I ALREADY SAID THAT THE BEAT WAS PROBABLY THE MOST INNOVATIVE part of jungle. I just don't think it's that awesome. I have a right not to like it.

 

[nomadthethird]

what a shock.

Yeah, shocking how a bunch of people with no rhythm usually love dancing to music that sounds like it'd be the perfect soundtrack for having a seizure.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

I don't see any problems with people saying, "in the UK this is probably the most seminal music" or whatever, fine, a little boring, but fine. The problem is when you drag in strawmen and imaginary enemies who are trying to take away your write to theorize continua who live in America, where most people haven't even heard of jungle and definitely are not writing their own music in response to jungle's innovations. And where most people are epically clueless about post-structuralism (they'd probably think it was what happens when you get done with a couch from Ikea) let alone Deleuze.

yes I know it's all very boring. if only all the producers could have received classical training so they could be truly innovative instead of just unknowingly stealing from Kabalevsky.

you're the one dragging in strawmen, a whole massive army of them. when has anyone attacked "imaginary enemies" in America who are trying take away their "write [sic] to theorize continua"? aside from one random dig about ppl who read Deleuze which has already been put in context as not actually attacking ppl who read Deleuze?

why do you care so much about winning (or trying to at least) an argument about a music that you don't like & know nothing about?

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

Yeah, shocking how a bunch of people with no rhythm usually love dancing to music that sounds like it'd be the perfect soundtrack for having a seizure.

is that meant to be clever?

did you not know that a large part of jungle's original audience was black (you know, the ppl that can dance, not like us nerdy uncoordinated unrhythmic white nerds)? have you ever been to a jungle rave, or a club that played a jungle tune, or a house party where someone put on a jungle record, anywhere were people actually danced to ardkore or jungle or 2step records? perhaps you could just go to YouTube & watch clips of raves from 1993. maybe you could break down the "technical" side of the choreography for us.

 

[nomadthethird]

Music made in the 1970s and early 1980s using samples and drum-machines:

(I don't think that breakbeats are that innovative, since screwed up time-signatures and/or breaky drum patterns were used in CLASSICAL music in the early 20th century, hence making them not very new in the late 20th century)

Kool Herc
Melle Mel
Grand Wizard Theodore
Grandmaster Flash
Kurtis Blow
Sugar Hill Gang
Afrika Bambataa
Herbie Hancock
The Fat Boys
Stetasonic


And that's just in the more obvious genre of hip-hop.

 

[nomadthethird]

is that meant to be clever?

did you not know that a large part of jungle's original audience was black (you know, the ppl that can dance, not like us nerdy uncoordinated unrhythmic white nerds)? have you ever been to a jungle rave, or a club that played a jungle tune, or a house party where someone put on a jungle record, anywhere were people actually danced to ardkore or jungle or 2step records? perhaps you could just go to YouTube & watch clips of raves from 1993. maybe you could break down the "technical" side of the choreography for us.

race has nothing to do with it

 

[whatever]

Yeah, shocking how a bunch of people with no rhythm usually love dancing to music that sounds like it'd be the perfect soundtrack for having a seizure.

ouch all british people in general r havin hwoited feelies nowz ! !

how is dat jungle transcription comin along btw ?

This one is very simple. I will have to sit down with it to write it out, and find some blank sheet music, but it is not at all difficult or complicated. Anyone with a year of formal training could write a song like this in 10 minutes. (Believe it or not Kabalevsky's got them beat on the stop-n-start "defy all time-signatures" thang by about three-quarters of a century)

any1 wif a year of formal muisical training cld write a song like this in 10 minutes? i know me a lot of music students wif 1 year of training, they donut make music like dis ! ( nor do they know the 1st thing about sampling arts )

could u link me to a Kabalevksy choon ? ( btw u spelt 'thang' jus like i wld , AHEM )

 

[nomadthethird]

yes I know it's all very boring. if only all the producers could have received classical training so they could be truly innovative instead of just unknowingly stealing from Kabalevsky.

you're the one dragging in strawmen, a whole massive army of them. when has anyone attacked "imaginary enemies" in America who are trying take away their "write [sic] to theorize continua"? aside from one random dig about ppl who read Deleuze which has already been put in context as not actually attacking ppl who read Deleuze?

why do you care so much about winning (or trying to at least) an argument about a music that you don't like & know nothing about?

There were SEVERAL digs at the "Deleuzian" strawman, both in the Fact article by Kpunk, and in the Fact presentation by Simon Reynolds, and in several of their recent blog posts.

What does this have to do with "winning"? I'm just openly questioning the claims someone made in public fora. If you don't want someone to criticize your opinions, don't make them in public.

 

[whatever]

breaky drum patterns were used in CLASSICAL music in the early 20th century

'breaky' as in rhythm 'drum patterns' = sampled funk drum breaks ? in clasical music ? breaky drum patterns in -early- 2oth Ctry CLASSICAL music ? rlly ? cld u steer me in that direction of one ... ? thanks !

 

[nomadthethird]

ouch all british people in general r havin hwoited feelies nowz ! !

how is dat jungle transcription comin along btw ?


any1 wif a year of formal muisical training cld write a song like this in 10 minutes? i know me a lot of music students wif 1 year of training, they donut make music like dis ! ( nor do they know the 1st thing about sampling arts )

could u link me to a Kabalevksy choon ? ( btw u spelt 'thang' jus like i wld , AHEM )

I don't have one year of formal training, I have many more than that.

The formal training business doesn't even really matter, it was only brought up to point out that there's nothing that mind-blowingly new about anything in jungle, from a formal standpoint. If you want to love it, that's your business. But don't expect people not to question whether you're right when you say the HCC is the only source of musical innovation in Europe even 20 years later, for Christ's sake.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

I think innovations are formally new inventions in music. Full stop.

we'll just have to agree to disagree here.

Do you know what a continuum is in physics?

no & frankly I don't care. we're not talking about physics.

[QUOTE[What I objected to were specific claims about what Simon Reynolds called "Deleuzians" in America and their objections to his HCC theory.[/QUOTE]

there was one offhanded, flip remark, probably referring to DJ/rupture (one of the only Americans who is well-versed in Deleuze). you make it sound as if SR & Kpunk have embarked on some kind of murderous campaign to destroy all the "Deleuzians".

 

[whatever]

But don't expect people not to question whether you're right when you say the HCC is the only source of musical innovation in Europe even 20 years later, for Christ's sake.

oh we r talkin' about Europe now , i see