Latest Topics in this forum
|
 | | Resident Advisor Posts / 8521 RA Since / Aug 2001 | #0 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 16:59 (Edited: 24 Jun 08 21:02)
|
| |
 |
Viewing 1 - 40 of 130 replies
| |
Posts / 37 RA Since / Feb 2006 Location / California | #1 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 17:34 I am a bit confused. A few weeks ago this CD was reviewed by  (I don't remember who the reviewer was), and it got a bad rating. That review was removed and now there is a more favorable one. What gives?
|
| |
|
Posts / 256 RA Since / Aug 2004 Location / Skopje | #2 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 17:48 Hey i like delicious cake just as much as anybody, but this one is just... tasteless
|
| Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
~ Antoine de Saint-Exupery |
|
Posts / 60 RA Since / May 2008 Location / Brighton | #3 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 18:07 (Edited: 24 Jun 08 20:41)
|
| |
|
Posts / 28 RA Since / Dec 2004 Location / nsw | #4 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 18:33 really like it
awesome!!!!!!!
|
| |
|
Posts / 20 RA Since / Jan 2007 Location / Fort Collins, Colorado | #5 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 18:39 The day I picked up this disk, I did not have to stick to the tradition of listening to it a few times. I loved it on the first try. This man has a lot of intense energy that throws you off into a dark dimension!
|
| |
|
Posts / 68 RA Since / May 2008 | #6 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 19:37 Trickery!
|
| |
|
| #7 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 20:26 is it just me or wasn't a negative review of this album posted a couple weeks ago and then taken down?
anyone in charge care to clarify what exactly happened and why?...just curious
|
| |
|
| #8 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 20:58 someone's spelled transitions wrong 
|
| |
|
New user Posts / 8 RA Since / Jul 2007 Location / Oregon | #9 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 21:07 C'mon now, Renaissance didn't get after you guys, did they? Or perhaps an infight b/w the staff?
|
| Find it, Keep it, Work it, Share it. |
|
Posts / 160 RA Since / Aug 2007 | #10 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 22:15 yeah, what gives? i read the old review. went on about how throughout this mix, digweed made all the tracks sound very digweedian. it got a 2.5, or 3, or 3.5. something quite marginal compared to this new resounding endorsement. care to explain RA?
|
| |
|
| #11 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 22:41 money matters?...
|
| |
|
Resident Advisor Posts / 8521 RA Since / Aug 2001 | #12 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 23:31 It's a tricky one. While we recognise a good review needs to be critical, there are times when this can go over the top. A reviewers' opinion is nothing more than that. However, a review should also not be entirely dependent on tastes or leanings, but a balanced assessment of the album, single, party or DJ in question. So, to demonstrate that no dark hand of censorship is looming over RA towers, we're publishing the original review here: quote:
Meet the new super-producers of prog: Kabale und Liebe, Jörg Burger and Claude VonStroke. I reckon there are two types of DJs in the world: those like the Wighnomy Brothers, who change their sound depending on their mood, or how drunk they are (aren’t they playing deep house these days?), and those like Diggers, who somehow manage to make every record they purchase sound exactly the same. The Wighnomys are inclined to take an unusual record off the decks, hold it up to the dancers, and ask everyone to give its producer a round of applause. Digweed, on the other hand, seems to only select records that sound Digweedian; he’s not too fussed about the names on the tins (I once heard him spin an Avus track on his radio show and then ask callers to email him if they knew who it was by.) In the end, I suspect this is the difference between journeymen DJs and stars: with the former, you clap the records, with the latter, you clap the DJ himself. Like Richie Hawtin, Sasha and other stars, the signature sound comes first. And it doesn’t matter if the tracks themselves are mediocre—and there are plenty of mediocre tracks on Transitions 4—because after you’ve put them through the Maven or your Allen & Heath and layered them over the top of each other and such like, they’re often unrecognisable anyway. On Transitions 4, Kabale und Liebe, Burger and VonStroke don’t sound like themselves; they sound like Digweed.
Now whether that is a good or bad thing depends entirely on your perspective. To fans, Digweed’s sound is the epitome of prog virtues: drawn out, dramatic, heads down, with a slight undercurrent of menace which occasionally wells up into whooshing, filtered peaks designed quite blatantly to trigger your E-moment. And when it works, it works, but the problem, of course, is that like ecstasy, the prog formula is never quite as good as it was the first time around. Even today, message boards are filled with fanboys obsessing over the genre’s undiluted moments from the late nineties, while simultaneously dismissing any non-prog move their heroes make today. It’s a rigidly codified formula, and a rigidly codified culture, and in the end you’ve got to feel sorry for Digweed, because when he does experiment with different stuff, such as spinning Kompakt on Fabric 20 (two related flavours which blended nicely), or electro house on Transitions Vol. 1 (bad move, electro house was always too zany for prog), the Digweed faithful are disappointed. For fans, the proggier it is, the better it is.
Which is why I suspect that, for fans, Transitions Vol. 4 will be manna from heaven. It’s heavy, it’s swooshy, and it peaks and troughs in all the right places. This time there are no concessions to other genres, be they electro house (Vol. 1) or Vath-flavoured ravey techno (Vol. 3) – this is definitely Digweed’s proggiest Transitions yet. If you like progressive, and you like Digweed’s take on it, I’m sure this will press your buttons. Unbelieving heathens, however (and I include myself in this group), should save their cash. Personally, I’m more in the Wighnomy camp myself; I care not for the “zone” or the “journey”, but more for the sound of the records themselves. And out of the twenty-one tracks here, I’m sad to say that there is only one worth holding up to the dancers and applauding: Sian’s atmopheric sci-fi droner ‘Wear Your Scars Like Medals’.
- Jeremy Armitage
Let us know what you think.
|
| |
|
has skills Posts / 2575 RA Since / Mar 2003 Location / London | #13 / Tue, 24 Jun 08 23:38 I agreed with the sentiments of the original review. I also think its a bit harsh and antagonistic.
We got the same kind of comments in the RA.100 Richie Hawtin thread - sometime people love seamless mixes where all the tracks fall into one - others don't.
An active forum is brilliant too. No one view prevails. The requirements for a forum where everyone can share their point of view is a little different to a review.
|
| |
|
Posts / 256 RA Since / Aug 2004 Location / Skopje | #14 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 00:47 Just read both reviews again, and while both are fairly well written i have to side in with the older one.
Just for the sake of it being more review-esque, i don't really like reading more than a paragraph's worth of text that tries to explain the record instead of reviewing it (as the new one does)
PS. The Sian track is definitely the brightest moment on the disc.
|
| Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
~ Antoine de Saint-Exupery |
|
Posts / 60 RA Since / May 2008 Location / Brighton | #15 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 00:52 A review should be as objective as possible, obviously very difficult as we are all subjective beings, but if a review is so obviously biased (either positively or negatively) then you might as well just drag someone in off the street to write them as they'll carry just as much weight.
Well done for listening and addressing issues that have become all too apparent in several recent reviews - less emotional hyperbole and more structured considered opinion please.
|
| |
|
Posts / 93 RA Since / Feb 2008 Location / Portland OR | #16 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 03:30 galmond: the reviewer sits down, listens to a recording, and starts writing. they describe the recording so the listener has some context, and then they gives their opinions/criticisms/praise of the recording.
nothing in that process is "objective". a reviewer is not quantifying or measuring anything or ascribing universally communicable ideas, he's giving his impressions. which is highly subjective.
i do agree though, the original review was overtly negative and antagonistic.
|
| |
|
| #17 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 05:33 (Edited: 25 Jun 08 05:40) all reviews are inherently subjective; in a way that's the definition of a review: a particular individual's judgment of or opinion on a certain piece of art.
the notion that a review should be objective as possible is not only impossible (how can one "summarize" an album? even declarations of melodies, track changes, or what's going on at any given time depend upon the way the listener perceives the music, an experience that is unique for each individual) but also undesirable from a purely aesthetic perspective. take, for instance, the realm of film in which the reader has the option of perusing a plot synopsis or a subjective review. as a general rule a particular individual's judgment of a movie (whether or not the reader agrees with it) provides the reader with a unique insight and understanding of the film that one cannot find in any kind of traditional, "objective" summary.
the unique role and importance of the critic should also be taken into account in regard to galmond's claim that unless a review is "objective" editors "might as well just drag someone in off the street." what distinguishes the art critic from the common person or fan is not only that he or she is highly educated with regards to a particular artistic sphere or style but also that he or she both understands and is able to discern the the given cultural, historical, and social circumstances in which a given piece of art is produced. reviewers thus differentiate themselves from "someone in off the street" by their ability to adequately and eloquently (at least in well-written reviews) place an album within these aforementioned contexts while simultaneously providing the reader with an insightful and personal analysis of the piece of art itself.
seems to me that this whole debacle was just kind of an editing mistake in which an allegedly unfairly harsh review was published, deemed excessively harsh and then subsequently retracted. the question then becomes two-fold 1) why was the article published in the first place and 2) why was it replaced by a review that is nearly opposite in content? in other words, why this particular review to replace it and not just a slightly less disparaging one?
this last part to me raises important questions about the nature of reviews and criticism and perhaps the interesting possibility/experiment of having multiple reviewers (with distinct and differing tastes) critique the same album. if we are provided with two contrasting perspectives as opposed to a singular analysis, how would this change our role as readers of reviews? in a way it seems to invite engagement and participation on behalf of the reader.
sorry for the length of this post, i just think that this particular incident (also miniscule in reality) raises a lot of important questions about the role of the critic, the editor, and the reader him or herself.
|
| |
|
Posts / 450 RA Since / Aug 2007 Location / The Hague, Netherlands | #18 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 08:51 @ nedsonnenschein: I second that! Both reviews should've been published together and I think I could even find myself in both of them: I only have to look back at (oh yes, here it comes again) Hawtin's podcast. Sometimes I enjoy being surprised, or to hear a track being allowed it's full development, instead of everything being mashed into a kind of monotonous substance (I'm reminded of babyfood here). However, at other times, that 'monotony' with its subtle changes in melody & bassline will be exactly what I'm looking for...be it whilst partying OR chilling. If I had to review these types of mixes my reviews would probably turned out very different each time, it just depends on the mood I'm in.
|
| |
|
Shocker Posts / 5297 RA Since / Aug 2004 Location / EC1V, London | #19 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 10:07 quote:
Posted by RA
It's a tricky one. While we recognise a good review needs to be critical, there are times when this can go over the top. A reviewers' opinion is nothing more than that. However, a review should also not be entirely dependent on tastes or leanings, but a balanced assessment of the album, single, party or DJ in question.
So, to demonstrate that no dark hand of censorship is looming over towers, we're publishing the original review here:
quote:
Meet the new super-producers of prog: Kabale und Liebe, Jörg Burger and Claude VonStroke.
I'm sure if this had happened a couple of years ago the first review would just have been yanked, all discussion of that fact in the forums deleted and threads locked - since that was a time when "the dark hand of censorship loomed over Towers". It was one of the reasons I stopped posting here. In that context the decision to show both reviews, albeit with the second as RA's "official" one is progress. I'm also wondering whether the decisoin to show the first review at all was only due to who the author was. Anyway, well done to for starting to editorially "grow up". Debate can be a good thing. In fact whereas I would normally ignore Digweed comps, I will probably now snag this for a listen - although given the first reviewer is Jeremy and the second Robbie - I'm pretty sure I'll find myself agreeing with the first review. Ona side-note, if you're reading J - I did chuckle at the "new super-producers of prog" comment. @ the mods: I think you should merge the 2 discussion threads, as well as showing both reviews together.
|
| |
|
Posts / 231 RA Since / Apr 2005 Location / P'berg | #20 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 10:35 To answer people's questions, the decision to replace this review has been taken not by the editors of but by Nick Sabine and Paul Clement, the founders of the site who commented above. The decision was based on the fact that Renaissance is a longterm advertising client of and the sales department felt that the review would cost them their advertising contract. As a result of this decision taken without the consent of the editors, both myself (Tami Fenwick, ed-in-chief) and Jeremy Armitage (managing-ed), have resigned. A sad day for all concerned, indeed.
|
| |
|
Posts / 60 RA Since / May 2008 Location / Brighton | #21 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 10:43 (Edited: 25 Jun 08 11:13) quote:
Posted by tokyoshockgrrl
To answer people's questions, the decision to replace this review has been taken not by the editors of but by Nick Sabine and Paul Clement, the founders of the site who commented above.
The decision was based on the fact that Renaissance is a longterm advertising client of and the sales department felt that the review would cost them their advertising contract.
As a result of this decision taken without the consent of the editors, both myself (Tami Fenwick, ed-in-chief) and Jeremy Armitage (managing-ed), have resigned. A sad day for all concerned, indeed.
Certainly makes you wonder about the other reviews, all dressed-up nonsense for a few bucks.
|
| |
|
Tripping the light fantastic. Posts / 1667 RA Since / Aug 2006 Location / london Next @ Club Club pres. Sasha | #22 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 11:09 quote:
Posted by tokyoshockgrrl
To answer people's questions, the decision to replace this review has been taken not by the editors of but by Nick Sabine and Paul Clement, the founders of the site who commented above.
The decision was based on the fact that Renaissance is a longterm advertising client of and the sales department felt that the review would cost them their advertising contract.
As a result of this decision taken without the consent of the editors, both myself (Tami Fenwick, ed-in-chief) and Jeremy Armitage (managing-ed), have resigned. A sad day for all concerned, indeed.
Oh dear this isn't good at all.
|
| 'Here I am. I have had the most terrible journey and greatly retarded the development of my soul.' |
|
Posts / 259 RA Since / Apr 2005 | #23 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 11:13 Holy shit
|
| |
|
Basketball Guy Posts / 549 RA Since / May 2007 Location / London Next @ Hard Wax XX | #24 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 11:21 this is bad news.
|
| |
|
| #25 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 11:35 stunned...
|
| |
|
Posts / 256 RA Since / Aug 2004 Location / Skopje | #26 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 11:40 /jawdrop
so.. what now?
|
| Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
~ Antoine de Saint-Exupery |
|
Posts / 172 RA Since / Mar 2007 Location / bandung Next @ Discotec | #27 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 12:20 damn. i don't know if I can trust ra's reviews anymore!!
|
| |
|
Posts / 60 RA Since / May 2008 Location / Brighton | #28 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 12:31 thread locking in 3, 2, 1...
|
| |
|
| #29 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 12:41 (Edited: 25 Jun 08 13:01) quote:
Posted by tokyoshockgrrl
To answer people's questions, the decision to replace this review has been taken not by the editors of but by Nick Sabine and Paul Clement, the founders of the site who commented above.
The decision was based on the fact that Renaissance is a longterm advertising client of and the sales department felt that the review would cost them their advertising contract.
Not wishing to air dirty laundry in public, but this is just factually incorrect. The sales team has NO say in editorial, never has, and never will. Renaissance, over the years, have had both good & bad reviews, and never questioned RA's writers opinions. This review is no different. It was pulled on content, not on score. You only need to browse the review section to realise that the reviews are 100% subjective, and based on merit, and nothing else. Look at Renaissance's previous 5 reviews and the range of scores for example: Seaman Masters Disc - 2.5/5 Lawler - Viva London - 2/5 Ibiza - Sound of Ren - 3/5 Falcon - The Dig - 3/5 Solaris Heights - No Trace - 3.5/5 Our writing team are based all over the world, and have no visibility as to who is, and isn't, advertising - nor do they care - so to suggest it has anything to do with that is nonsense.
|
| |
|
Posts / 60 RA Since / May 2008 Location / Brighton | #30 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 12:49 (Edited: 25 Jun 08 13:06) quote:
Posted by red
quote:
Posted by tokyoshockgrrl
To answer people's questions, the decision to replace this review has been taken not by the editors of but by Nick Sabine and Paul Clement, the founders of the site who commented above.
The decision was based on the fact that Renaissance is a longterm advertising client of and the sales department felt that the review would cost them their advertising contract.
Not wishing to air dirty laundry in public, but this is just factually incorrect.
The sales team has NO say in editorial, never has, and never will. Renaissance, over the years, have had both good & bad reviews, and never questioned RA's writers opinions. This review is no different. It was pulled on content, not on score.
You only need to browse the review section to realise that the reviews are 100% objective, based on merit, and nothing else.
Look at Renaissance's previous 5 reviews and the range of scores for example:
Seaman Masters Disc - 2.5/5
Lawler - Viva London - 2/5
Ibiza - Sound of Ren - 3/5
Falcon - The Dig - 3/5
Solaris Heights - No Trace - 3.5/5
Our writing team are based all over the world, and have no visibility as to who is, and isn't, advertising - nor do they care - so to suggest it has anything to do with that is nonsense.
Well at least the reviews are objective  Still doesn't explain the resignations.
|
| |
|
| #31 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 12:51 quote:
Posted by red
The sales team has NO say in editorial, never has, and never will. Renaissance, over the years, have had both good & bad reviews, and never questioned RA's writers opinions. This review is no different. It was pulled on content, not on score.
You only need to browse the review section to realise that the reviews are 100% objective, based on merit, and nothing else.
Look at Renaissance's previous 5 reviews and the range of scores for example:
Seaman Masters Disc - 2.5/5
Lawler - Viva London - 2/5
Ibiza - Sound of Ren - 3/5
Falcon - The Dig - 3/5
Solaris Heights - No Trace - 3.5/5
Our writing team are based all over the world, and have no visibility as to who is, and isn't, advertising - nor do they care - so to suggest it has anything to do with that is nonsense.
and yet people have resigned over it..? digweed being a slightly bigger name for renaissance than any of the above... *casual speculation*
|
| |
|
Posts / 21 RA Since / May 2008 | #32 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 13:16 I've often seen banners on for releases, and then read the reviews to see what they are like, only for them to suggest the release isn't all that.
|
| |
|
| #33 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 13:27 quote:
Posted by Murry_Walker
I've often seen banners on for releases, and then read the reviews to see what they are like, only for them to suggest the release isn't all that.
exactly right. and let me add that this review for renaissance is the only reviews out of the last 8 reviews to receive a 4 or above. so that pretty much dismisses this ridiculous 'theory'. one more thing, i fully support the decision to take the original review down. some of the generalisations in the review are patronising, and not what i expect from someone like jeremy. robbie y
|
| |
|
| #34 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 13:28 soooooo yeeeah what does everyone else think about transitions vol. 4  robbie y
|
| |
|
Posts / 256 RA Since / Aug 2004 Location / Skopje | #35 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 13:40 quote:
Posted by robbie y
soooooo yeeeah what does everyone else think about transitions vol. 4
robbie y
Said it before really, it's a cake, but tastes much like those generic cakes in the supermarket freezer.. sweet but somehow lacking come to think of it, that's exactly what the problem with prog always was anyway (damnit! i was trying to avoid patronising generalisations. honest!  )
|
| Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
~ Antoine de Saint-Exupery |
|
Posts / 450 RA Since / Aug 2007 Location / The Hague, Netherlands | #36 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 13:51 @ uber_user: come on, his GU LA mix was great! And every genre is suffering from the 'problem' of generic mixes. I mean, how many of the minimal, deep house, techno, etc cd's are really worth buying?
|
| |
|
Posts / 24 RA Since / Oct 2007 Location / Skopje, Macedonia | #37 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 13:52 Today the problem with the progressive is that prog djs dont play prog
|
| |
|
| #38 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 13:53 i don't get it, what makes this album a 'prog' album?? luciano's new fabric has a chymmera tune on it - can i now call him a prog DJ?
i just wish people didn't analyse what genre a dj is playing or what genre an album is, and instead just listened to an album on its merits. it was a point i was trying to get out in my review.
robbie y
|
| |
|
Phlegma Posts / 579 RA Since / Sep 2005 Location / In a nameless city deluged by a continuous rain... | #39 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 14:00 quote:
Posted by RA
It's a tricky one. While we recognise a good review needs to be critical, there are times when this can go over the top. A reviewers' opinion is nothing more than that. However, a review should also not be entirely dependent on tastes or leanings, but a balanced assessment of the album, single, party or DJ in question.
So, to demonstrate that no dark hand of censorship is looming over towers, we're publishing the original review here:
quote:
Meet the new super-producers of prog: Kabale und Liebe, Jörg Burger and Claude VonStroke. I reckon there are two types of DJs in the world: those like the Wighnomy Brothers, who change their sound depending on their mood, or how drunk they are (aren’t they playing deep house these days?), and those like Diggers, who somehow manage to make every record they purchase sound exactly the same. The Wighnomys are inclined to take an unusual record off the decks, hold it up to the dancers, and ask everyone to give its producer a round of applause. Digweed, on the other hand, seems to only select records that sound Digweedian; he’s not too fussed about the names on the tins (I once heard him spin an Avus track on his radio show and then ask callers to email him if they knew who it was by.) In the end, I suspect this is the difference between journeymen DJs and stars: with the former, you clap the records, with the latter, you clap the DJ himself. Like Richie Hawtin, Sasha and other stars, the signature sound comes first. And it doesn’t matter if the tracks themselves are mediocre—and there are plenty of mediocre tracks on Transitions 4—because after you’ve put them through the Maven or your Allen & Heath and layered them over the top of each other and such like, they’re often unrecognisable anyway. On Transitions 4, Kabale und Liebe, Burger and VonStroke don’t sound like themselves; they sound like Digweed.
Now whether that is a good or bad thing depends entirely on your perspective. To fans, Digweed’s sound is the epitome of prog virtues: drawn out, dramatic, heads down, with a slight undercurrent of menace which occasionally wells up into whooshing, filtered peaks designed quite blatantly to trigger your E-moment. And when it works, it works, but the problem, of course, is that like ecstasy, the prog formula is never quite as good as it was the first time around. Even today, message boards are filled with fanboys obsessing over the genre’s undiluted moments from the late nineties, while simultaneously dismissing any non-prog move their heroes make today. It’s a rigidly codified formula, and a rigidly codified culture, and in the end you’ve got to feel sorry for Digweed, because when he does experiment with different stuff, such as spinning Kompakt on Fabric 20 (two related flavours which blended nicely), or electro house on Transitions Vol. 1 (bad move, electro house was always too zany for prog), the Digweed faithful are disappointed. For fans, the proggier it is, the better it is.
Which is why I suspect that, for fans, Transitions Vol. 4 will be manna from heaven. It’s heavy, it’s swooshy, and it peaks and troughs in all the right places. This time there are no concessions to other genres, be they electro house (Vol. 1) or Vath-flavoured ravey techno (Vol. 3) – this is definitely Digweed’s proggiest Transitions yet. If you like progressive, and you like Digweed’s take on it, I’m sure this will press your buttons. Unbelieving heathens, however (and I include myself in this group), should save their cash. Personally, I’m more in the Wighnomy camp myself; I care not for the “zone” or the “journey”, but more for the sound of the records themselves. And out of the twenty-one tracks here, I’m sad to say that there is only one worth holding up to the dancers and applauding: Sian’s atmopheric sci-fi droner ‘Wear Your Scars Like Medals’.
- Jeremy Armitage
Let us know what you think.
I think the review is fine until the last few lines where he goes of on one about the kind of set he likes, which is ok, but not on a review of a certain mix. The reviewer or critic should try and keep his words as objective as possible, which i think he does well, he is correct on the fact that Digweed has taken tracks and layered them to make them Digweedian (great word)Apart from the rant at the end i think its spot on. I do hope that isnt influenced by big buck labels who decide how good the review is. That wont do any party any good. People will mistrust RA's great reviews and the labels will be able to throw any old rubbish out.
|
| "I goddamn near lost my nose. And I like it. I like breathing through it." |
|
| #40 / Wed, 25 Jun 08 14:15 the things that don't sit right with me on jeremy's review are the generalisations. i mean why is it assumed that fans of john digweed didn't like fabric 20 or transitions vol.1? where are these forums that he states that are filled with "fanboys obsessing over the genre’s undiluted moments from the late nineties". i mean apart from the ridiculous sweeping generalisations, why is this even necessary in the review? but he did get one thing spot on: "I suspect this is the difference between journeymen DJs and stars: with the former, you clap the records, with the latter, you clap the DJ himself" i don't disagree here. if i buy an album by digweed, or any other dj be it luciano, lee burridge, i expect the dj to do the work. i expect the dj to be creative, to make the tracks more then they are, and to make a mix that is more then a 14 or so tracks mixed together. fuck it, if i wanted to clap the records ill buy them my fucking self from beatport, mix it at home and clap them when i put it back in my cd wallet robbie y
|
| |
|
|
|
