Purpulan

I completely agree with Dope on the (limited) substance of certain definitions, but with some reservations: the ones you mentioned are of a "critical" coinage and are often rejected by the musicians who find themselves "pigeonholed" in them (moreover, they still have yet to pass the "test of time," too fresh to see if they will have a lasting impact). In the realm of "club music," it has to be said that often it is the same producer/DJ (in this case "Switch") who coined a term out of their own pocket to define "their style" (with a more or less profitable operation in terms of "self-esteem"; the only unrelated example that comes to mind is "UK Garage," and in fact at the beginning of the 2000s, no one wanted to be told: "Make that music there!", only to find it later as a historicized and derivative genre nowadays), and if it becomes a common usage recognized by various "epigones," well, there’s nothing left but to surrender to the evidence of facts (or words/pleasantries ;).

Oh, thanks Dope, but I have to give myself a poorly grumbled "input" ; ). I know little about Dilloway, any advice?! Apart from the excellently reviewed work.

Simply say "Fidget"?! Because that's the approach and, no matter how much they might try to sugarcoat it, the substance doesn't really change much, when it comes down to it. And the sound material is quite raw and rough around the edges. "Poorly cut stuff," in short ; ).

I believe it's one of the few recent releases from them (Emeralds) that I've missed. They've totally tripped me out. But it took its time. At first, it seems like the classic rehash of the monolithic "wall of drones," but then you start to listen more closely and notice the nuances, and, strictly under the surface, you realize how rich and multifaceted the work on the layering and intertwining of frequencies truly is. Lately, however, they tend to stretch the inputs, and the sound has become globally more fluid, almost seeking a kind of "skin-like" evocative quality, making the traces of minimal structuring into a "suite" recognizable (and thus, rivers of words have been wasted on the supposed "neo kosmische" drift), I hope they don’t indulge too much in this, as they risk getting stranded in the eddies of calligraphism. It should be listened to at extreme volumes, or (more easily) through headphones.

In the name of Peter... To how many the epithet "that fucking director"... To how few the exclamation "What a fucking director!" (and in this case "director" is a reductive term).

"Sal...vifici", sal-vi-veni, sal-vi-vidi, sal-vi-vici, damn...

Wow, so many nice comments in one fell swoop of (s)pugnetta... Hooray for the "Save the dogs from a hangover after the thaw" of the "High Lands," but I still prefer "Grindofask" (3.5).

...are you upset with me, dear Alè??! @ Appe: I was really asking for some clarification myself; I’m still stuck on the names that caught my eye in an article from Blow Up, and even those (typically presented as "the tip of the iceberg") aren't easy to find, so there’s very little available to hear, the most hyped, following "Emeralds", seems to be the project "Oneohtrix Point Never".

Well, then I'll take the opportunity to see if anyone has shown interest or is currently interested in what seems to be the new "Kosmische" trend of late... The fact that last year's productions by the Emeralds have quite captivated me is evident from the ranking of the works I've consumed the most, but I was eager to find out about other current projects that could be roughly associated with the Cleveland trio (I've also heard our own Be Maledetto Now!, interesting, although not exactly what I'm looking for).

White, sorry.