Not Playing The Field (not more than once anyway)
Checked out the Field’s album at last, and I have to say I am really disappointed with it, but possibly because I’m just not feeling Kompakt much these days. At this stage I sometimes wonder if I will ever like a dance full length LP again, I just can’t listen to them. As regards the Field record, I think it’s ok but the singles they released already are the best tracks on it, the rest just drifted by me. It sounds exactly as I expected it to sound. After one listen I had no real desire to listen to it again. Isn’t Superpitcher’s remix of the MFA from a few years back the sort of endpoint for this MBV/Trance sound? It seems that way to me. Also after one listen all I could think was “this is going to be the next big internet album”.
Is anyone else really burnt out on all these crossover records? I know I am, I think because I’m sick of the actual process by which they break, it’s so predictable. By the time big records come out now, the hyped discourse about them has killed any enthusiasm I had for them in the first place, which usually is very little, as I generally just don’t like the sort of techno that becomes popular. You listen to the Field record and think “everything is in place for this to be the big smash this year, it’s on Kompakt, Pitchfork like it, it can be reviewed as sublime glorious and transcendental”.
This is why I’m always blogging about singles, I just can’t muster the enthusiasm to care about 5 or 6 more tracks from an act whose impact for me came when they released their first 12 on Kompakt in 2005 or whenever it was. And when I can see consensus forming about a record I just want to turn and run. I know others have different listening habits, maybe I seem jaded, but I’ve actually tried really hard to listen to a couple of big dance full length records in recent weeks and I just can’t. I know why these acts make albums, to reach a wider audience, but I’m not that wider audience and I just don’t care. Feeling seriously burnt out on writing about music and writing in general right now as a result.
Edit: Interesting discussion on this record, and my feelings on it as expressed in this blog post (complete with friendly incomprehensible banter)in this thread over on I Love Music.
NBS wrote:
you just wrote word-for-word the post i was going to write today
Posted 26 Mar 2007 at 5:32 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
it makes me feel really good that somebody has said that! thanks!
Posted 26 Mar 2007 at 6:17 pm ¶
CJO wrote:
I been tired (too). Feeling you. Summings gotta give. Or not.
Posted 26 Mar 2007 at 6:39 pm ¶
Omar wrote:
Yep, i know that feeling. The Gui Boratto album (and everybody racing to proclaim the second coming) did it for me. But in general dance producers fuck up what actually made them great when they try to reach for a wider audience (bless Dominik Eulberg then for releasing an old-fashioned compilation with some bird sounds.)
Posted 26 Mar 2007 at 7:07 pm ¶
Steve wrote:
I’ve been completely befuddled by the coverage this album has received. Since when is sampling something minute, flattening it and then looping it for six, seven minutes at a time (nearly 11 on one track) exciting enough to gush like this?
I try to be careful how much I participate in the blog/hype circuit so that I can make up my own mind about an album. Being connected as we are, it’s not easy, but it might save some sanity.
Posted 26 Mar 2007 at 9:27 pm ¶
reuben t. wrote:
But then, what do Pitchfork know about dance music? Even Sherburne seems a bit out of it these days.
Posted 26 Mar 2007 at 9:34 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
He was right about those “The Kids Want Techno” t-shirts! My gf got me one for my birthday.
Actually I should clarify, the Field review forthcoming on Pitchfork, which I know will be a positive one, is by my longtime buddy and one of the original members of this blog when it was a group effort:Jess Harvell. Looking forward to reading his review even if I don’t like the record much, and I don’t think it’s by any means knee jerk praise in that case.
Plus you know, I almost forget I am a Pitchfork writer, at least a fledgling one!
Posted 26 Mar 2007 at 9:38 pm ¶
Michael wrote:
haha
from here we go sublime
inflated and imploded in less than a week.
that’s funny
Posted 27 Mar 2007 at 8:49 am ¶
Ronan wrote:
“BRING IN THE NEXT LP…*BURP* UGH THAT GUDRUN GUT HAS FAILED TO DIGEST”
Posted 27 Mar 2007 at 8:54 am ¶
Cahony wrote:
*lol*, oh-oh, that’s two “The Kids Want Techno” T-Shirts in Dublin now at least
Ronan, I think you’ve answered your own question. I can completely understand from the eye of the techno consumption hurricane how something as bloated and cumbersome as a full length LP can easily get spun out of the vortex and land smashed on the wasteland. Plus there’s the fact as you say that you’ll already know some of the material by the time it sees an album release, no more than My My last year.
I do listen to quite a bit of single/ep releases when it comes to the electronic music world but it wouldn’t be the majority format that I’d consume the genre in. There’s a lot of people out there who have a passing interest (it could be a quite passionate one in a way) but they’ll only ever glance off the surface of the way the music gets released by listening to mix albums/full length artist albums/live bootlegs and club nights in their relationship with it.
You’ve got to admit it takes quite a bit of effort for the reward of first of all knowing about which single/ep releases are worth checking out, and then to get them on a consistent basis. I think it’s natural that someone who does this won’t really look twice at a full length player. I think the format can have a whole lot to offer people who sit in a different musical consumption context though…
Posted 27 Mar 2007 at 11:10 am ¶
Ronan wrote:
It’s not that much effort. I mean, there are so many free mixes around plus you can own most releases by going to Beatport/Kompakt, or illegally downloading them, unlike in the past where you might have needed decks. The human brain can remember a lot of artist names!
I think the thing is that many people like other styles of music as well and so they’re always going to gravitate towards the LPs. Doesn’t mean these LPs are the best thing around though.
Also I guess it’s just easier to talk about albums, how can people build hype about disparate techno 12s even if that scene is strong at a given time? There’s no “snowball” effect with techno in general if it’s good, unlike when an act starts getting hyped, except perhaps you hear more people saying they like “minimal house” or something.
I guess I veered towards a discussion about the effects of “hype” above, but what I think people really mean when they say “hype” is info overload, there are so many opinions now and people spend leisure time on messageboards and stuff, that you can be stuck in a microworld where it seems like you are being bombarded with hype for an album by some Scandinavian dude on a Cologne techno label that wouldn’t even sell 0.0001% of what U2’s average single sells.
Also you know, I was speaking to a friend last night and thinking when I said “yeah basically I’m just depressed cos I can’t think how I can make money when I don’t like any crossover albums” that I was alone in this, but turns out him, and another writer he was speaking to felt exactly the same….very real problem for anyone writing about music who veers out of the usual circuit…
Posted 27 Mar 2007 at 11:34 am ¶
CJO wrote:
I don’t know though Ronan because Pitchfork were, at first, giving a lot of coverage to 12″s, which was a short-lived glimmer of hope. They often give up on ideas/columns/genres that don’t make the numbers, or that exist in channels most of their audience is not going to bother with.
Pitchfork is a decidedly digital audience, and a band’s lucky if their buzz crosses over to the generation above, who have the disposable income to buy CDs and for whom doing so is actually a time savings. 12″s and white labels and all that, you know the whole scene - this particular strain we’re talking about - is pacifist and inclusive *if you reach out to it*. I think there’s a strong element of insularity, control, and a rejection of consumerism that makes the whole sugar rush novelty culture Pitchfork’s aggregating an uncomfortable presence.
Posted 28 Mar 2007 at 10:58 am ¶
Ronan wrote:
Do you mean this rejection of consumerism, insularity, and control is an element of the techno scene?
I guess I agree, if so. One thing which strikes me in a big way is that with so many platforms for discussion around, having heard and expressed an opinion on a record first is actually treated like something to be proud of! Maybe I’m guilty of this myself too, but it seems a little amusing.
Increasingly I’ve been thinking that people actually like communication tools like blogger/myspace/internet forums JUST AS MUCH as music itself, hence the way technology seems to be a bigger driving force behind youth culture than music nowadays. I mean…when was the last “new thing” in music…the net seems to have totally replaced it in terms of buzz and innovation…(might be worth a discussion in itself, or an article, tho I tried yesterday, a blog post might be best!)
I guess it’s actually true that with so many voices around having heard something first can distinguish one writer from another, but its a little odd, music as news or something! Means there seems to be even less thoughtful dialogue around (though I am not so deluded as to think I could keep a regularly updated blog with long theoretical and general ruminations on music, I’m just not that good a writer)
Do you still work for P’fork Chris?
I can honestly say in my limited experience they are actually very open to the idea of doing dance 12s, however all track reviews at the moment are required to have streams accompanying the tracks…which is limiting enough in a sort of bureaucratic way as you have to go and ask the labels for this everytime you do a review.
This is why after a couple of reviews in January, it’s taken me so long to do 3 or 4 more techno reviews.
But at no stage has anyone said “hmm this isn’t something we want”, it’s been quite trusting really and really good like that.
However the more “systems” like “we need a stream for every track” are in existence, the more difficult it is to integrate techno 12s into them. It’s not a system that’s quite built for them, eg they want full streams when I reckon most people would be pleased with 2 minute samples…(but then would curious non techno people want the whole track…don’t know, i doubt it)
Sometimes, especially in the last week, I think I should just set up a dance website…I know the people from the labels and I get the promos already, and there are plenty of good writers out there. It’s just…could I make money from it, and if not, wouldn’t have the time!
Posted 28 Mar 2007 at 11:12 am ¶
Tal wrote:
what about www.residentadvisor.net? Don’t they fulfill the same dance website goal?
Posted 29 Mar 2007 at 12:31 pm ¶
martin wrote:
i totally agree on the album thing. can’t remember when i last bought an actual album. donk boy thomas downloaded boratto and i found it boring after his singles. fluttering electronica bits, i dunno, and that coming from me, haha…
on another note i wanna tip you all about the stefan goldmann macro remix on freerange. more info here:
http://www.discogs.com/release/891663
nice one!
off to donk!
Posted 29 Mar 2007 at 1:33 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
speaking of boratto….really like his remix for delon and dalcan’s latest release on confused…
will check that goldmann
as regards Resident Advisor…I don’t really know anyone who reads it, even though the podcast is popular, but maybe I don’t know enough people!
Posted 29 Mar 2007 at 3:35 pm ¶
Jamie R wrote:
I read Resident Advisor but i never take their reviews seriously, most of their writers are gobshites to be honest. I do like the Fields album tho, really feeling it
Posted 29 Mar 2007 at 4:14 pm ¶
Ben wrote:
love or hate RA.com though, it’s providing coverage on all techno, house or whatever your into. Not many places do it. It’s all the stuff places like pitchfork have neglected over the years. They’ve only really started covering techno in the last year or so in any proper manner imo. and even then it’s diluted to acceptable indie-ish acts.
I do agree with alot of things said about the field’s album here. I don’t like the way people have to wait until a groups LP is nicely packaged for them to listen to it.
The Field is rather good though if you put aside all the crap surrounding it.
Posted 29 Mar 2007 at 4:33 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
No it is definitively bad. I checked with God, and Satan too!
Just kidding, a lot of people like this record and think it’s great.
As regards RA, well, I know there are good people working for RA and they’re working hard to ring in changes at the moment, it’d be great if the site itself matched the quality and ambition of the podcasts.
Posted 29 Mar 2007 at 4:40 pm ¶
Jacob wrote:
“having heard and expressed an opinion on a record first is actually treated like something to be proud of! Maybe I’m guilty of this myself too, but it seems a little amusing.”
…well, without wanting to sound like (too much) of an asshole, one might jump to the conclusion that this is exactly the reason you hated the album!
e.g.
“when I can see consensus forming about a record I just want to turn and run”
Although I reckon it has more to living in gloomy-ass dublin. I was listening to the album in Bali at the weekend and it sounded great!
*One ‘kids want techno’ tshirt in Singapore
Posted 30 Mar 2007 at 9:45 am ¶
Ronan wrote:
well I did wonder that, so I listened again, and no, I still thought it was kinda crappy!
Posted 30 Mar 2007 at 1:27 pm ¶