Back soon
I’m going to take a break from posting for a little while, as is necessary now and again. I’ve been bereft of inspiration lately, though not through a lack of good music.
I suppose I’m just sick of the small pool of ideas we’re all circling over the last year or two. For example how do you write about the music you love without things descending into the same old debates about authenticity, “real house music”, “timelessness” etc?
For instance how on earth does Johnny D’s first ever interview on RA instantly become a discussion about how Patrice Scott and Moodymann are more worthy than him? I mean, what are the actual similarities between his music and theirs? Things are just so partisan. No matter who Johnny D was, what he said, how he seemed, or how well written the piece was, the comments would be probably be the same. It’s bleak.
Can anyone honestly care about who is “right” or “wrong” in dance music in November 2008, after about 18 months of the same musical battle? It’s not even a new musical battle! “This is authentic, that is soulless marketed nonsense”. This is what we’re reduced to. At least during the height of minimal people had to think of new reasons why they thought it was shit along with the usual “evil marketing man with a trendy haircut” rubbish.
I never thought I’d say this but “come back ‘it sounds like an insect walking across a microphone!’” Truly you were the Ulysses of that brief period of critical discourse!
I genuinely am asking if anyone can honestly care about dance music criticism right now. Can you? If so please tell me about it! Why are you writing? What value are you getting from it? Again, genuine questions. I just feel more radical people are needed to build new ideas and new battles (possibly from the music making end too) and at the moment I don’t think I am any such person.
When this personal malaise happens it’s easy to write (even more) baggy pensive posts or lash out (even more), but rather than take out my crutches and wave them around (even more) angrily I’m going to hold off for a bit. I could continue sourcing and giving away mixes to mask the fact that I have only made a few valuable posts in the last few months but that would be a cheap shot. I think it’s good for me as a writer come clean like this too.
I’m not sure how long this break will last but I wouldn’t think too long. I just want to think through some new ideas about music writing and my writing in general. I have toyed with starting a new site with a much wider format, changing the style and design of this one, or even the unthinkable horror of letting someone else write here.
Anyway you’ll know the break is over when I’m back. Let’s say a couple of weeks! The reason I’m posting this is so I don’t just leave you all hanging. (Plus that giant Akufen thing is assaulting everyone’s eyes by now!)
JF wrote:
Ronan you’ve scribed a very interesting article here. I would generally say that forums/comments sections that are open to a large volume of people i.e. Youtube or RA just do not elicit sensible discussion, nor will they ever do. Sites like yours can because the size of the pool of people is a lot smaller and we mainly share the same musical interests as yourself. It’s only when certain known individuals (we know who they are) use this blog to vent heir feelings about how good detroit was/is/will be and how bad this minimal house bandwagon is yada yada yawn yawn.
Just on the point of RA also I would say that it’s comments section is amongst the worst I have come across recently. I mean just look at how quickly people react to have a bad night (their bad night!) at certain parties. Literally I have seen comments posts linked to events and the times of the comments have been 02:45am that night before the event has even finished!?.
In summary, keep it going HERE because your readers here are Savvy, with a capital ‘S’.
Posted 05 Nov 2008 at 5:47 pm ¶
Ciaran wrote:
Agree on some of the points, some of the forums are non stop at picking the life out of a track that someone done in their room as a part of their experience clubbing etc and then it’s scrutinised severely. I just think it’s the bubble bursting a little since the great music explosion of the past 3 years.
Posted 05 Nov 2008 at 7:21 pm ¶
G3RTY wrote:
I’ve always admired the honesty of your blogs, however if your getting bored by them, then maybe a break will refresh your perspective. p.s Your Mix The Old Country has taken me through many boring work days of late, great mix :- enjoy your break.
Posted 06 Nov 2008 at 12:33 am ¶
mhlt wrote:
This has been pretty much all on the money, I can’t blame you one bit. But, for what it’s worth, when it came time for me to delete all the techno blogs I used to frequent daily from my bookmarks folder (for so many of the reasons listed here), I didn’t stop checking this blog because this is one of the very few places on the internet I find that 1) I agree with pretty much all across the board, and more importantly, 2) can actually make me feel good/stimulated about dance music; a sort of fine point between contrarians for contrary’s sake, and the mindless ‘new! hot-shit’ what’s playing in Berghain-ery. In spite of all the bullshit - the moribund state of techno/house (which I’d probably describe as ‘bi-polar’) (this is obviously excepting actually listening to records, and a good night out here and there) - I think you must still be doing something right. For one, you’re actually aware and receptive to these issues.
Posted 06 Nov 2008 at 3:52 am ¶
Ronan wrote:
Appreciate the support, it’s definitely not a permanent pause, just I know last time I took a break like this my enthusiasm returned.
It really is bi-polar isn’t it? I look around at other writers I respect and I don’t see them producing the big pieces you want to read either, and I just wonder if it’s possible in the current climate.
What big issue is there for people to talk through or think about?
Maybe a new website or a new approach altogether is the answer, really seems like the same old people posting in the same old places too often right now.
Posted 06 Nov 2008 at 9:43 am ¶
Kenny wrote:
You seem to be irritated by how other criticism is going, fights about what is authentic or not? What difference does it matter what others say. Just talk about music you like, music you think should be given some props. There really should be no other factors.
Posted 06 Nov 2008 at 1:48 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
Well you’re right really, but I guess I’m explaining why I haven’t been writing as much either. I don’t think other than pointing out stuff I like there is a lot to say.
When I started this blog that’s pretty much all I did and it was fine. But I’ve been doing it for a few years now and I feel most of the things I believe have been expanded on in that time, it can feel a bit of a roundabout.
There’s always new music but I don’t want to just recycle the same ideas or points.
Posted 06 Nov 2008 at 5:02 pm ¶
Steve wrote:
For me, music criticism has always been about helping others find new music that’s worth listening to and (in some cases) pointing out stuff that’s not as worth listeners’ time. I read other blogs about dance music because I like finding and reading about music I haven’t come across or getting another person’s perspective on something I have heard.
I’m curious what sort of “big pieces” you’re craving. When was it that someone wrote something game-changing and utterly profound every month? Has there been a point in your tenor as a music critic when a constant stream of startling and new music required such exposes?
Posted 06 Nov 2008 at 5:14 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
How about something game changing or even a little bit profound in the last year? Name me 5 great pieces? Name me 2 or 3?
I’m not asking for the wheel to be reinvented, I just think if there was a fresher discourse then reading/writing might be more enjoyable.
The reason I don’t think this is happening is because there hasn’t really been a new populist form of house/techno for people to engage with or react against or even hate since minimal.
I’ve no problem with people slating and berating stuff but techno/house has contracted hugely in the last year or so, what is there for people to talk about?
And if the answer is “not many ideas but lots of great records” then why are the records great? What language are we using to prove that they are great or to tell people we think they are worth listening to?
Is saying “this is a great record” or “this is the real underground shit” or “this is completely minimal” or “this is deep” supposed to suffice, still?
If so why would someone want to read one blog over another? Simply cos they prefer the choices of records?
In which case why write anything at all?
If not then who is transcending these simple descriptions? What writers?
The “reasons” for praising records are stagnating and so the language used to praise them is stagnating. I mean, dance criticism is insanely difficult to make interesting at the best of times but it’s particularly troublesome right now.
I accept it’s not the end of the world but why not demand more? In any case, I’m mainly pointing out that I don’t feel I can match my own personal standard in this regard hence the need to take some time out. I’d like to be doing something like Month to Month again at RA and the door has always been open for me to do it but in the current climate the ideas just aren’t there for me. Maybe in time that will change.
Anyway if all this gets others thinking then great.
Posted 06 Nov 2008 at 5:35 pm ¶
Steve wrote:
“How about something game changing or even a little bit profound in the last year? Name me 5 great pieces? Name me 2 or 3?”
To pat myself on the back a bit, I think my piece examining the morals of dance music mp3 blogging had some effect on both other bloggers and readers. I know that Random Circuits, for one, stopped offering mp3s as a result. I don’t know if it’s profound by any means, but it created a good discussion.
Phil’s piece on manifestos was good and thought-provoking. I think the latest Poptimist column (while not about house/techno, specifically) is very thought-provoking about the (shrinking) role of music criticism today. There are a couple of others that escape me presently.
“The reason I don’t think this is happening is because there hasn’t really been a new populist form of house/techno for people to engage with or react against since minimal.”
I will say that no one has managed to really capture the spirit of dubstepno (or whatever other silly names it’s called). It’s not a huge and popular form, but it’s new and waiting for its close up.
“And if the answer is “not much but lots of great records” then why are the records great? What language should we use to describe them?”
You’re simplifying and generalizing. I’m really proud of the criticism on LWE, which goes well beyond the list of phrases you selected. RA has some good stuff, too. Perhaps it doesn’t live up to your standards, but I don’t think it’s dismal at all.
“The “reasons” for praising records are stagnating and so the language is stagnating.”
What other reasons are you expecting to emerge besides the record resonating with a writer because of its production/sounds/melodic choices/uniqueness/how it fits into the puzzle/general quality? What kind of revelations are you expecting? Does a record need to make bubbles spring from our ears? I just don’t understand.
“I’m mainly pointing out that I don’t feel I can match my own personal standard in this regard hence the need to take some time out.”
And that’s fine. But if you’re going to keep really high standards you’re going to be disappointed more of the time, there’s not much way around that. After all, if you can’t match your own standards, maybe that’s a bigger statement on your standards than on everyone else.
Could we all afford to step up our game and try to avoid the easy pitfalls of criticism? Of course. Is everything shit because some writers don’t or can’t? I certainly hope not.
Posted 06 Nov 2008 at 6:01 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
If you’re happy with what you’re doing then you don’t need my input.
Posted 06 Nov 2008 at 6:23 pm ¶
gmos wrote:
hmmm, I don’t know if I really want more music journalists trying to write “profound” criticisms. The more profound you try to be the more I smell bullshit, the more I feel music is being dressed up as more than it is and it almost becomes a distraction. I guess it goes back to that famous quote “Writing about music is like dancing about architecture - it’s a really stupid thing to want to do.”
Not that I’d go that far but I just like the criticism to be simple and then I go check it out myself and make up my mind with my ears. I think that type of approach only really works on older music when you can fully appreciate it’s impact and how well it’s aged.
Out of interest I wouldn’t mind being pointed to some examples of what people think are great/profound pieces on new music.
Posted 07 Nov 2008 at 9:59 am ¶
Ronan wrote:
I didn’t use the word “profound” at any point in anything I’ve said here. Though obviously complaining about a lack of ideas around the place equates to wanting more shit writing just with bigger words and bigger word counts. Cos that’s what profound means doesn’t it: BAG O’ WANK.
Posted 07 Nov 2008 at 10:04 am ¶
gmos wrote:
I was referring to…
“How about something game changing or even a little bit profound in the last year? ”
my point is merely that writers can tend to overdo their analysis of music in an effort to be profound and that often turns me off, I prefer a simple tip or recommendation that you then check out yourself, but that’s just me. the more profound critiques can be done well when looking back as there’s more evidence to work with, you can talk about impact, timelessness, etc, with much more authority in that case.
Posted 07 Nov 2008 at 10:17 am ¶
Ronan wrote:
If you find writing bad it’s bad. If you find it profound it’s profound. If you find something bad it obviously didn’t succeed at whatever it was trying to do, for you personally.
Posted 07 Nov 2008 at 10:20 am ¶
Scott Ferguson wrote:
Reviewing records is a tough game to play, I feel for the reviewers. It must be difficult to weekly or monthly try and use different lingo or vocabulary to basically say the same things over and over. (I do not mean this in a smug way) For me I don’t read record reviews unless its about my own (what a bastard I am
but this is more less curiosity. What I really enjoy is good interviews with artists that tell a great story about their own music or experiences with music. Even if its an artist i don’t know or don’t really listen to. I really appreciate good questions. I’m so tired of the “is your music better then his” and “is black music better then white music”, “do you have soul or don’t you.” Boring. All music is good for someone. In reality I don’t give a shit who says what’s good or bad. It reminds me of my youth when the first Daft Punk album came out. Up and down and sideways everyone I knew (people who have similar taste) went on and on about how outstanding it was. I went to Record Time, bought it without listening, went home, listened, took it back to Record Time the next day. Guess what, to me it was ok but not outstanding. For me the reviews were wrong. My point is you still need to feel it and like it for yourself.
About the mp3 download blogs, I actually thought they were great. You just listen and decide for yourself. Its a very keen idea.
Posted 07 Nov 2008 at 11:02 am ¶
clom wrote:
gmos, where does writing about dancing to music fit into the notion writing/music/dancing/architecture?
some of the pieces I’ve enjoyed reading most this year have focused more on space/music/crowd/memory than the nuts and bolts of specific releases.
trying to get across what a night is like is quite a big challenge. and one that is a lot more rewarding than seeing a 1 minute youtube of a crowd going off to the tune du jour. it can also be a lot more fun as it’s possibly less about understanding the mechanics rather than the psychology of a record.
the “feeling” of house, for me, inhabits a personal space rather than an empirical and objective standard. all the brouhaha about authenticity and the like stems from the feeling that you must conform to this notional standard.
a good example of this in miniature was on your end of year rundown where you mentioned the Flow/Trombone 12″ where you said it was one you returned to again and again during a difficult time in your life. it was a beautiful, brief encapsulation of how house IS a feeling, something that holds you, heals you and makes the world seem a more bearable place. sappy, yes, but worth saying nonetheless.
is it possible that writing about a personal musical evolution is something that’s hampered by the notion that there’s a correct way of going about understanding music?
Posted 07 Nov 2008 at 1:57 pm ¶
john osborn wrote:
fuck bloging, lets dance!
Posted 07 Nov 2008 at 3:35 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
haha
Posted 07 Nov 2008 at 3:36 pm ¶
Isbjorn wrote:
The fundamental problem is that with the advent of Web 2.0 and user generated content we all feel this incredible need to ‘contribute’ (criticize, discuss, analyze) to the field.
It has come to the point where ‘writing about music’ has become so disengaged from ‘music’ itself that one comes to see the world of music writing as an end itself.
Analogy: as a ‘DJ’ sometimes when I listen to a record on a store/on Beatport all I care about is how it would fit into my set/mix. I stop perceiving the piece of music as an piece of music in itself. I try to conceptualize, put it in context. This is harmful, unhelpful, unintelligent.
The same problem seems to emerge with writing about music. Do we not get too carried away with how we want to put our ideas across (as important as it is) only to forget what the root of our endavours is? That root is music itself. Listening to it. Feeling it. Relating to it.
It is exactly because it is so abstract, so beyond words that it captivates us. We are doing a disservice to this music and to ourselves when we strain and struggle within our conceptual, egoic minds to try to think/write about it an original/new/profound way.
Music is an end in itself. Writing about it isn’t.
Let’s start to relate.
Posted 07 Nov 2008 at 3:43 pm ¶
gmos wrote:
“gmos, where does writing about dancing to music fit into the notion writing/music/dancing/architecture? ”
I don’t understand that sentence, sorry :/
I used a famous quote that illustrates how difficult it is to write about music, that’s all
@ Isbjorn, excellent post, I couldn’t agree more
Posted 07 Nov 2008 at 5:12 pm ¶
clom wrote:
gmos, that sentence doesn’t make much sense does it!
my point is that the quote is used too frequently for my liking, largely because (and I am at pains to point out that this is not referring to you AT ALL.) in my experience it’s frequently trotted out by people who know NOTHING about music.
i just think it tends to shut down a debate.
you could say that writing about any form of art is like (doing something inappropriate) about (something else). with the possible exception of writing naturally.
aaanyway, i think Isbjorn is really spot on with this. although I would say that writing, for me at least, is an end in itself.
Posted 07 Nov 2008 at 6:27 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
The quote is basically about the futility of using one artform to describe another.
Sure it’s futile to write about music but many things are futile.
I do think writing is an end in itself, or it should be. When it ceases to be that’s what frustrates me.
If writing isn’t an end in itself then why bother writing anything beyond “I like this” or “I don’t like this”?
If you claim not to want to read anything profound then what’s the acceptable midpoint between “I like this” and profundity…
Posted 07 Nov 2008 at 7:22 pm ¶
Karl wrote:
I think there’s a wide middleground between “I like this” and some “profound” pseudo overwrought pitchforkian bullshit. Where people draw the line is up to them off course.
As a relative newcomer to music criticism I sometimes find my writing to be just simple description along with a comment about how the tunes make me feel. For simple single reviews tho, sometimes that’s all that’s needed.
That quote (from Elvis Costello right?) has been done to death, and like someone mentioned previously is often brought up by people who don’t know to much about music (or artists who don’t like bad reviews of their stuff). I think that po-mo has strongly ingrained relativism in everybody, i.e. “my opinion is just as good as yours” but the thing is that an well argued and reasoned opinion supported by a knowledge of the field in question has got to be worth more than a simple “I like this so I like it”.
I think Ronans original post is right, too much of the discourse right now is trapped in the authentic vs. copycat trenches and/or trying to define the minimal “backlash”. Fresh ideas and angles would be welcome.
Anyways, I still feel like I stumble on interesting stuff every now and then. The manifesto pice by Sherburne was good, Richard Brophy’s bootleg feature on RA is good, so are some of their interviews and the “playing favourites” collumns. And on the blogs there are still good posts being made and some interresting discussion in the comments.
Posted 08 Nov 2008 at 3:43 pm ¶
chaircrusher wrote:
I have been writing music reviews for a number of venues for years, and it’s an inherently difficult job. I’ve had about 5 original ideas about music in the past 10 years, and I’ve written 500 reviews, so those 5 ideas are completely used up.
Every time I sit down with a record I have a blank slate to push up the mountain, to mix a metaphor. And still I do it, even though my primary outlet at this point doesn’t pay, and I sometimes BUY (gasp!) CDs to review.
“Why even bother?” seems to be your argument, and it’s a good question. But as someone who has been poring over record reviews since Rolling Stone came it came as a fat folded over wad of newsprint (well before you were born no doubt), I think it’s worth writing because readers find it worth reading.
I’m reminded of what John Berryman wrote: “…my mother told me as a boy (repeatedly)
Ever to confess you’re bored means you have no inner
Resources. I conclude now
I have no inner resources, because I am heavy bored.”
Which is to say, man up, and dig deeper. If a record touches you, if it comes to mind when you’re walking to the corner for milk, if you want to start it again when it finishes … If you can’t come up with 300 words that describe what it sounds like and why it’s great, well then you’re not much of a critic.
Posted 09 Nov 2008 at 9:42 pm ¶
Scott Ferguson wrote:
“Which is to say, man up, and dig deeper. If a record touches you, if it comes to mind when you’re walking to the corner for milk, if you want to start it again when it finishes … If you can’t come up with 300 words that describe what it sounds like and why it’s great, well then you’re not much of a critic.”
Very well said chaircrusher you’ve made me think differently.
Posted 10 Nov 2008 at 12:13 pm ¶
todd wrote:
i think this was more about how every argument about whether something is good or not seems to come down to some comparison of the “real soulful shit” all the time, fuck does everything have to be a 24-7 soul session checklist comparison ? maybe people should have as high a standard as they claim to have in music as when they’re writing comments in forums, or how about we limit everybody on ra to one comment a month !
Posted 10 Nov 2008 at 9:27 pm ¶
bigbernardo wrote:
“does everything have to be a 24-7 soul session checklist comparison ? ”
Hahahah nice quote. I agree with you to some extent. This is getting ridiculous!
Its like everyone is desperate for that ’soulful street cred’!
Its like we’ve gone from how abstract and mnml records can be to how ‘deep and real’ they can be…All in all its getting kind of silly.
Would really like to see more producers like who basically say F@CK IT and do something really original and out there yet still really sick…For some reason Clark, Pepe Bradock, Hercules & LA and Recloose all come to mind when I think about this.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 1:25 am ¶
petepete wrote:
soul is overrated.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 9:44 pm ¶
Joe H wrote:
Its like everyone is desperate for that ’soulful street cred’!
Its like we’ve gone from how abstract and mnml records can be to how ‘deep and real’ they can be…All in all its getting kind of silly
Music changes as do peoples opinions on music, if it didn’t it would be rather dull and boring would it not ? We would still be listening to the first recordings of music if it never evolved. Its like people hate change & cant cope with it. Get over it house and techno moves faster than most genres with something like 10, 000+ new records a month coming out if all those sounded the same it would be a very sad state of affairs indeed.
The mnml boom of 2005 - 2007 saw vast amounts of people jumping on the bandwagon, myself included. I’ll admit I went to DC1O looking for the tech house music I’d heard about, & in 2005 it was good, not many people making the music and the quality was OK. Then 2006 saw the quality start to go down hill & 2007 was a total washout. I’d bet most of the people commenting on here went out and bought mnml/ tech house music, I’d say the only people who never jumped on the mnml wagon(from what I can gather) were the SSGS & ISM.
For me now what we class as minimal & tech house is dead and burried, there were no new ideas and too many samey producers. So much so that we have had to look back on music, which isnt a bad thing but it certainly says something about the current climate in electronic music (mainly house and techno)
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 2:14 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
Yeah Joe, or maybe you just liked the music and didn’t jump on any bandwagon. For someone who can think for yourself you sound way too apologetic for your taste and too ready to indulge in the sort of hyper-piety that clogs the scene at the moment.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 2:25 pm ¶
Joe H wrote:
…. & when I say look back I mean look back to the Kerri Chandler, Moodymann, style house music everyone looking for the basic groove or the soulfilled vocals. Again this isn’t a bad thing as were only looking back at when house was at its best, You wouldn’t play shit music in the club you play your best or what you think to be the best.(its the same in wrinting negative reviews I mean ffs so much music out there would it not be easier to review something you enjoy instead of something you dont). In 10 years can you honestly say you will be looking back on mnml and thinking yeah i’ll dig that out to play tonight, well maybe a handful of records but nowhere near the volume thats being brought out week in week out, I’d say 97% is shite.
House has come back big not that I’d went far away but it sat on the backfoot for a while, house is out there and has young producers (who would of been making mnml) but instead are recreating the older styles of house, take the likes of Baaz, Anton Zap,Danilo Plessow etc their sound isn’t new but its good and reminds us of when house was a feeling. I hope people, DJS , producers continue to be “deep & real” & continue looking for that “soulful” street cred.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 2:32 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
Joe if this was a zombie film this’d be the part where your eyes suddenly glow red and your wife shoots your head off with a shotgun…:)
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 2:38 pm ¶
Joe H wrote:
I’m not apolgetic for my taste, far from it.
I’ll admit I jumped on the wagon and was close to the front, but I still enjoyed lots of other music. I bought soulful house, deep house, techno. I enjoyed mnml in the seeing through shadows stage, tracks like borrowed gear, jacuzzi games,love dose,Magma. when I first heard these i was like Wow & wanted to hear more but sadly so did everyone else thus making “producers” from every part of the globe come crawling out of the woodwork with their slap dash attempts at recreating this mnml/ tech sound.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 2:39 pm ¶
Joe H wrote:
Joe if this was a zombie film this’d be the part where your eyes suddenly glow red and your wife shoots your head off with a shotgun…:)
haha
I’ve said my piece now 
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 2:40 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
I just don’t think you need to say “jumped on the bandwagon” when it sounds like you just made the decision you liked a type of music…like any sensible human being.
It’s interesting you mention thinking “wow” around 2006 or so.
While there’s tons of great music coming out right now I’m not sure that that excitement is there.
I can only speak for myself, and based on what I see, but it seems house and techno is settling down lately after that “wow” stage…
To take one example on the main music board I post on, the rolling dance thread was updated practically everyday at one point, enthusiastically.
Now it’s barely revived once a week. Again that’s highly personal but since I respect the people posting on that board (ILM) I think it says something. Now of course for people who listen to dance music almost exclusively, myself included, there’ll always be good releases, but I still think it’s worth questioning the enthusiasm in the scene at the moment. I know from speaking to friends that others feel this way too.
As I said, I’m not denying there’s very good house and techno music coming out right now but it’s all becoming very insular and safe…”nods” to the past and “respect” and “roots” etc etc…
Nothing wrong with people taking influence but how long can the current scene sustain itself?
What will be happening in a year? Isn’t it worrying that dance music is in a period of recycling itself so purely that the only thing new producers are being slated for is that they aren’t retro enough!
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 2:56 pm ¶
Joe H wrote:
Yeah I guess but would you not say the mnml fase(as a whole) was a bit of a bandwagon?
I know lots who got into it & went out to the clubs just because of the fashion aspect the fast women, ketamine & the after parties.
The recycling is only happening because nobody is bringing fresh ideas to the table, but tbh what can be done that hasn’t already been done before!!! Which is quite a scary thought in terms of music staying the same or producers looking even further back to get inspirations.
Perhaps next year it will be disco or music like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZyKCuAFciA
Who knows I can’t see house and techno progressing vast amounts or a new sound being born, & even if so what sound are we looking for if we’ve never heard it? Take dubstep most of which is just a slow down version of garage, we havn’t had brand new ideas in house and techno for years & I cant see it changing
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 3:23 pm ¶
petepete wrote:
“Even taking a more conservative, more purely aesthetic position, it didn’t feel like much was being said in house and techno this year, neither in the music nor the discourse around it. I heard some great records, but very few records felt like they really mattered.”
- Taken from Philip Sherburne’s new Month In Techno column.
I recommend reading it, it covers a lot of the same topics being covered here.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 6:33 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
I read Phil’s piece today…similar theme alright though as with the manifesto piece I do disagree on some of the specifics.
That paragraph sums it up pretty well tho. Someone on RA today said that none of this may matter outside the “echo chamber” of the blogosphere which I felt was a fair point too.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 8:22 pm ¶
philip sherburne wrote:
hey ronan - i was pretty sure you’d disagree with my specifics even when writing it. (i seem to remember you being more sympathetic to “trompeta” with me, and i must say, i still don’t think i’ve heard it played out this year. i also don’t mean to slate all the tracks i mentioned as part of a larger trend — only to flesh out how widespread the trending really was, although, to my ears, there wasn’t much “scenius” (pace Reynolds) behind any of it.)
i’m also well aware that my tastes have skewed rather suddenly towards the “avant” in recent months, due to staying in, dealing with life, more red wine and mendocino, etc. — so i’ll admit that my perspective is very particular. but, as ever, sometimes you just gotta get shit off your chest…
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 8:29 pm ¶
philip sherburne wrote:
also, i totally bit that bit about “the discourse” from ronan. thanks ronan.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 8:29 pm ¶
rrauss wrote:
awwhh lads
ronan, i read your blog avidly and im much in agreement with your musical taste in the main(although personally i prefer harder techno. whatever that is!!) i agree with your fellow blogger that ‘writing about music is like dancing about architecture’
very hard to do. keep it up bro
(ill save my opinion til im sober!)
keep writing ronan
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 1:06 am ¶
Manny Z wrote:
Funny that I should only now discover your blog, as you’re considering hanging up your quill. I’m not familiar enough with your perspectives to be able to offer advice, but certainly I feel that lack of inspiration can only be a result of lack of stimulation. Whether that means we blame the music or try harder to find new music is up to us.
I’ll visit back.
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 11:36 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
Hi, thanks for checking out the site. I’ll definitely be back come December or so.
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 11:51 pm ¶
RoK wrote:
I guess there’s a paradox in writing about someting that cannot be rationalized, eg dance music. What makes a record great? Well, it makes me move.. but I have no writing skills, so that would be my description of records I’d review. Hope you’re back soon in form beacause I do enjoy your writing….
Posted 15 Nov 2008 at 7:48 pm ¶
BellaVida wrote:
Opinions are easy to give and even more easy to change. Don’t let anyone kill the music for you cause in the end those details dont matter.
so while your on this planet enjoy yourself.
Peace.
BellaVida
Posted 20 Nov 2008 at 12:22 am ¶
Gareth wrote:
like the quasi-myth of piss cycle synchronization between men in pubs i come back to this blog from time to time to find myself in total agreement. you make good recommendations.
who isn’t jaded - all there are now are opinions. i remember when all this here were just fields - tunes were either good or rubbish and every dick didn’t think they had something really interesting to preach (or release as a track) cos the majority never have. Those that do though, should. Or at the very least should after some sort of rest…
Posted 23 Nov 2008 at 2:58 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
cheers gareth…appreciate that
Posted 24 Nov 2008 at 11:14 pm ¶
clom wrote:
“the quasi-myth of piss cycle synchronization between men in pubs”
*swoon!*
Posted 25 Nov 2008 at 4:57 pm ¶
corpsle wrote:
Don’t make the break too long, it’s always nice reading intelligent writing about music no matter how original/unoriginal it is.
I loved the post you did a while ago about listening to ‘untrue’ on the bus… descriptions of personal reactions to music like that really strike a chord with me.
Posted 25 Nov 2008 at 4:59 pm ¶
RoK wrote:
just awake after a brutal radio slave set @ the melkweg, check a record called ‘mes’ and ‘tor’ (white label), what a record!
Posted 30 Nov 2008 at 8:59 am ¶
Agnes wrote:
Dear F.
You’ve always made a great job and that is a passionate job (which nowadays means a money less job).
I’m glad to read your thought about it all and even further i feel you, you’re right, what’s the point. I don’t know.
Maybe the break you want is the one i’m about to take for the safety of my art; a technology break. There is too much information and it takes us too much CPU cycles to digest. I’d rather be in Snowhere with my girl doing the things i do then flooded by the surrounding crap that comes for free.
I hope to read about you soon,
Take care,
Agnès aka Boris
Posted 06 Dec 2008 at 10:41 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
Hi Boris, thanks a lot for that, means a lot. I hope your break goes well and I’ll probably be back in 2009 with something or other…
Posted 07 Dec 2008 at 3:59 pm ¶
todd wrote:
merry christmas ronan, all the best !
Posted 26 Dec 2008 at 3:23 am ¶
dix. wrote:
hi ronan,
i just realized your break - that still goes on.
there is a lot of things said about it already but i juts wanted to share something from my point of view. my english is not as good as i wish but i hope i can express myself in this one general point i want to make.
i am in that scene for about 18 years now and i started to seriously research and read about house in general 16 years ago. reality in all this years was that every writer/critic/journalist that i respected stopped writing about music after 2-3 years. it didnt matter if our music that we love was great at this point or not. it simple came down to the point that none of them was willing to write about the same thing over and over again. some of them now work for the rbma, one of them is the chief editor of a great art magazine now, one of them is a great, great author and one of them is a well respected photographer.
if u are more then a 08/15 music journalist (and for me u seem to be) then u are bored with writing about up-to-date-dance-music at a certain point. and this is more then fully understandable. i hope for u your enthusiasm comes back but as history showed me - there is just a little chance. and maybe that is for good.
i do run a label and we have a claim for every year (read on cause this is not gonna end in a spam message from me) 2007 it was “house, house and more fucking house”. 2008 it was “muting the noize”. after the amsterdam dance event 3 month ago we decided to have for 2009 the claim “words are very unnecessary”.
do u see some similarities?
all the best for 2009 ronan,
dix.
Posted 28 Dec 2008 at 4:48 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
Hey Dix,
Thanks a lot for that post, it’s a really good point you make. I think I will always have a strong interest in house/techno but like you say after a while as a writer you do start thinking about more universal goals or work.
I think you’re right too that it’s often more about the writer than the music. I guess the worst thing would be to plough on writing just for the sake of it.
I think I’ll still be blogging this year but don’t want to rush it. I want to redefine or redesign a blog where I can write about other things as well as techno, but like I say, when I’m ready.
I can feel myself becoming more clearminded about the music and writing again and so let’s hope that continues.
Best of luck with Innervisions this year too…I assume the slogan is taken from Depeche Mode!
Thanks again,
Ronan
Posted 08 Jan 2009 at 5:06 pm ¶