iio - rapture
 

what a tune!! its been out for a few months now, i really recommend getting your hands on it. i'm sure some of u already heard it. those who haven't, 'ave a listen :D

interesting, another computer generated dance track, reminds me of how much i dislike drum machines.

but on the up side the singer has a sweet voice.

ok now its back to Rolling Stones - Shake Your Hip Thang

I put it as track 1 on a cd I made a month or 2 ago, before it was played even once on radio. I heard it once and absolutly loved it. The Riva remix is great. Radio edit is completly screwed as usual.

Great tune! :tu:
First time i listened to Rapture was the Riva mix in
DJ Tiesto live at Dance Deparment 27-10-01 ( Great live set! )
I agreed with Kristof radio edit = no good!

theflaco

well..... the majority of audio productions today are done on computers. from aging groups like the rolling stones to today's disgusting pop music, everyone use computers to arrange, master, and even fix vocal discrepencies

i agree, the radio edit is shit. thank goodness for all the remixes :D

indeed schmook, i dont disagree with you, its just that there are masters like Brian Eno, then there are the rest.

Well Greedy, I think as an Eno fan you should realize that technology is simply a tool, and in the abstract there is no difference between a drum machine and, say, a violin. We think of the latter as requiring great technical skill, but it would seem, particularly in Eno's philosophy as evidenced in his own Oblique Strategy--"use unqualified people"--that one doesn't have to have consumate skill to tease something interesting out of an instrument. This extreme seems to illustrate that we can't really judge whether music is good or bad by the tools used to create it, and while perhaps how the tools are used is a good subject for dialog, ultimately it's a bit ridiculous to use such criteria as a substitute for discerning with our ears whether or not a music is interesting.

It's an old argument, as old as the analog sequencers and drum machines with which I made my first music. "Oh, anyone can push buttons to make music." Well, first of all, that's not literally true, but more importantly, even to the extent that we could concede that it is true, there is still an art to pushing buttons in such a way to create good or interesting music. I used to hand my sequencer over to people taking this stance and say, "well, here you go then, you make something interesting with it." This usually ended the argument.

If we are going to imply "automation bad, organic good," then a lot of Eno's own work is going to fall into the "bad" bin, for example: Wrong Way Up, with John Cale, which features drum machines on nearly every track, or Discreet Music, which is exclusively manipulated tape loops. The last example, while fully "automated," is one of the most beautiful and "organic sounding" pieces of music ever created as far as I'm concerned, and also beautifully points up that it isn't the automation element which is important, it is the choices made by the artist manipulating the machine. And as far as Eno's "mastery" is concerned, he himself credits a lot of his music's "interestingness" to his own "ineptness."

People make music with machines, always have, always will. Whether the machine in question is a Stradivarius and the choice is how much vibrato and portamento to apply, or it's a Korg drum machine and the choice is which quantized 32nd note to light up with a snare sample, human values, human discernment, human intentions are all that really matter. In the end, you have patterns of sound, and you either like them or you don't.

While it seems almost improbable that things could evolve beyond the present state of the art of automation, chances are machines will continue to become more and more important in the production of sound, but humans will be there every step of the way, giving direction and substance and saying "here's the music."

A tool is a tool is a tool. (sorry for the tirade)

On the iio piece, I liked it. Interestingly, a friend in the midst of a musical fit with it turned me on to it just a couple of days before this thread was posted. As he said, the lyrics are "a bit Donna Summer," but the vocalist has a lot of personality.

fair enough romona, and i dont disagree with what you have said. but, forgive my tastes, to me it is just another dance track, that screams it was done on a computer. while i did like the singer a lot, the rest... perhaps i should have been more clear. i hate drum machines when they sound like cheesy drum machines. and while Eno has said such things about unqualified people, he has most of the time, or on the many Eno cds i own, surrounded himself by very talented people. to each his own, he asked for opinions, i gave mine. so its not the same as everyone elses. farm out.


be irie dance track people

Hehe. I'm not much for that sort of thing myself, but I hadda make the point. (Possibly because I make music on a computer) Some things "scream 'done on a computer'" and I hate it, while other things scream the same thing, (Kraftwerk or Art of Noise, say) and I love them, seemingly for the same reason...

Go figger.

:J:

its not terribly hard to see the differance when you listen to the art of noise, kraftwerk or Eno. i guess one thing that carries them for me, is originality. something i see as lacking in the generic dance track indurtry of late. to me its that ole hit formula, again and again, cept its not brittney spears. same thing though.


oh yea, forgot to mention old ELO. or ELP. theres so many...

nowadays, dance music is different in parts of the world. for example, in north america, "dance" is considered r&b, teenie pop, britney, backstreet boys, puff daddy, that sort of stuff. it_used_to_be eurodance, euro-trance, a few years ago (mid 90s). then... teenie pop and r&b invaded the radio (and the charts) and it all went downhill from there. nowadays you find radio stations play britney at least 5 times every day. this is quite pathetic, you just can't get away from all that crappy pop music. i read a few days ago that george lucas even casted n'sync to play on screen in the upcoming star wars movie

the originality of dance music however remains strong in europe. "dance" is still regarded as techno, trance, progressive, etc. 2001 in particular was a big year for progressive trance. true, there is a lot of crap produced every year, with groups like aqua, fragma, and sash, ruining everything from time to time :MAD: but... there's also a lot of good stuff. u just have to know where to look. my advice is: if you really want quality dance music, get away from the mainstream acts, and you'll find loads of excellent records

just one quick announcement: i uploaded the CD rip of the full Riva remix, as well as the john creamer and stephane k remix to myplay (encoded with audioactive, 256kbits hq). it's in the locker right now...u know where to go :D

Re: iio - rapture
 

yup. This song is kewl. But the remix is better than the radio edit... as usual :cool:

:PUK:

:eke:
NOOOOOO

Over here, in the last years there has been a large increase in mainstream dance groups. Sylver, Milk Inc, La Luna, Zippora, Astroline, Ian Van Dahl, ... Most don't last very long. They're all the same. A DJ that usually makes better stuff but who needs money, a good looking girl that can dance. Being able to sing isn't necessary since it's all cleaned up and enhanced with a computer. (The only girl that can actually sing is Sylvie from Sylver.) A fairly lame beat and melody with meaningless, repetitive vocals. The best ones are gone or make crap now. I loved Absolom. They were one of the first groups using this format when it was still new.
The last year their has been a large increase in remaking old songs and it's slowly going mainstream. For example, The Logical Song jump remake, did very good in mainstream. Next week a jump remake of Hard To Say I'm Sorry will be released and soon a 2002 remake of Maniac.