Eneathedevil

Uhm, I would define Ash Ra's work more as "mantra" than "psychedelic rock": hallucinogenic journeys that carry with them an undefined touch of spiritualism (see "Suche & Liebe" by Schwingungen) in the manner of Popol Vuh (more like those of In Der Garten than those of Hosianna Mantra). Gottsching prefers arpeggios to heavy guitar riffs on more than one occasion. However, I miss the works with Schulze, who did not collaborate on Schwingungen. Unfortunately, the issue with the year that appears in the freedb link is not correctable: I searched through all possible links on the site, and in the best case, the year of reissue appears.

Miserable avenger that you are! What does it matter, yours was a 4, mine was a 5! And then you mangled the name of the divine, huh!

Ohhhh, Zaios, how unrefined you are... it's too much unz unz dance! 7 out of 10! ;D

Hey, I'm not that Manichean, sometimes just naive. :) The point I already made is: who ensures that certain people aren't pulling our leg? Who can qualify the goodness of the experimentation? Eh, it's a complex issue. Moreover, I don’t think there are inevitably good authors and sneaky ones: notice the subtlety of the phrase "yes to Schulze who uses keyboards to produce series of notes with a logical succession, no to the croaking of "Eskimo" by the Residents."... I was talking specifically about the Residents' work, not the authors themselves. Maybe the latter redeem themselves in something else that I don't know. In short, my stance is harsh towards those who want us to accept the crap they propose as good, and you yourself said there's plenty of it around. Maybe you have less trouble recognizing what's crap and what's not in the realm of experimentation; I have quite a bit, so I follow rules that I impose on myself and believe to be legitimate, those very same rules that lead me to assert that the noise applied to Tone Float makes sense, while that applied to Kesto does not.

Hehe, I knew you wouldn’t be able to resist. :) Anyway, we’ve discussed this matter, and it seems there’s no valid compromise: our points of view are too distant. You know mine: I don’t recognize the dignity of music in mostly atonal or noise-based works for utilitarian reasons; if we were to acknowledge music in much of the output you consider, we would be forced to say that every sound is music, which I don’t feel comfortable recognizing. Your absolutely sacred yet misguided opinion (:DD) is well-founded and doesn't budge an inch, just like mine, which I think is fair. However, I criticize you harshly on one thing: it’s not correct for you to say that Eskimo can be appreciated through the videos as well, because the artwork is complete—each Picasso painting has its own autonomy. So, if the packaging of "Eskimo" includes the listening of specific pieces, it’s clear that the authors conceived the CD as a finished product, and the videos are something else: perhaps preparatory, but they are another thing. Unless you tell me that the packaging of the CD indissolubly included the viewing of the video (like, I don't know, if they are included in all editions of the DivX related to the pieces): that can be discussed if so, otherwise I struggle to find coherence in the argument.

My tastes are naive.

Come on, I defined quality based on those parameters. I didn’t imply anything. No way. Instead, you’re the one being subjective when you talk about "pleasure": some find pleasure in Robbie Williams, while others in Debussy.

(...) Recognizability must obviously be tied to quality: a recognizable work cannot be just a cacophony, it must speak of music that is listenable. Personally, I ban the Babel-like cacophony of Captain Beefheart or certain extreme underground experimentations. Therefore, tied to quality is the listenability that is neither low-profile easy-listening nor a trite melody: it is simply the ability to convey music in the harmonious and genuine sense of the word; yes to Schulze, who uses keyboards to produce series of notes with a logical succession, no to the croaking of "Eskimo" by the Residents. Let’s call them experimental essays, sound seminars, but not music. Of course, we must not forget about content, which, for the reasons already mentioned, is indeed inferior to form, but enjoys an importance that certainly enhances a product. For example, between two great works by Brian Eno like "Another Green World" and "Before and After Science", musically similar, I would favor the latter for its content. Then there may be other parameters such as technique, culture, orchestration. Obviously, without any abuse of all this: the musical technique of the composer should not be restrictive, but an album played with more verve can be better than another, all else being equal, and similarly regarding orchestration and various elements. Dylan's early albums were too sparse. The ones from the '70s are better.

Well, in my opinion, the most important parameter is related to the recognizability of an artist/band. The ability to convey something unique, personal, capable of making the listener assert: "Hey, this is definitely Pinco Pallino!", the one-to-one correspondence between author and product. This can coincide with the novelty or renewal of a genre/musical style: the Cocteau invented dream-pop and are therefore unmistakable, the Sigur, among others, renewed it with their own characteristics and are equally unmistakable. You listen to Clock Dva and there is no mistaking them, the same goes for Pere Ubu, the Velvet Underground, and so many more. Recognizability must also pertain to the individual work in the context of an entire body of work: coupled with recognizability is originality. You can't make 1000 identical records, even in the direction of a recognizable style. You mentioned Autechre's Draft 7.30, if I'm not mistaken. I think it's a bit of a disaster. Have you listened to their others? Excellent and innovative Incunabula, good Amber, still recognizable Chiastic Slide and Tri Repetae, but after that, they all sound the same and monotonous. They are no longer breaking new ground; they are now limited by industrial speculation. "Untilted" sounds like "Draft," there is no more genre innovation. Often, those who renew a style can even surpass the reference point; there is no correspondence between the value scale and chronology. (...)

I am sharing below an excerpt from a letter exchange with my friend from Catania about the principles of good music (long live the violation of privacy... well, I hadn't written anything compromising anyway! :D)