Rotating cube/room thing. Only lines up from one angle.
The Flippers know what I’m on about.
Filed under: Ooh Lovely | Leave a comment »
Rotating cube/room thing. Only lines up from one angle.
The Flippers know what I’m on about.
Filed under: Ooh Lovely | Leave a comment »
Rick Harmony is a friend of ours who’s done us a remix of one of our forthcoming tracks, Leaving. He’s a dance music producer who’s had a US house #1, and is currently working on tunes for Ministry of Sound and a name DJ – who we can’t mention!
He’s also going to be hosting a brand new internet radio show on a station called Big Hits Radio on Friday’s 6pm-9pm, so if you’re at your computer and need a blast of electro / electrohouse, this is the place to be.
There may well be some guests on Rick’s show next Friday whose initials begin with ‘L’ and ‘O’, but it must remain a secret till then…
Filed under: Ooh Lovely | Tagged: Big Hits Radio, Rick Harmony | Leave a comment »
We are not currently at liberty to divulge. (We will for money, though.)
Filed under: Ooh Lovely | Tagged: Mystery, Shape 37 | Leave a comment »
Our intrepid bassist Des is on a mission to visit every road in the world that has the word ‘Cassette’ in it.
Last weekend he was in Paris:
It is here:
Next weekend: St Petersburg.
(All contributions from our international network of spies also welcome)
Filed under: Ooh Lovely | Tagged: Rue Cassette | Leave a comment »
I was given this book last week for my birthday, and a very interesting read it is too.
It’s published by the University of Indiana, and is the PHD of the author, and does something rather unusual: it takes Techno seriously as a style of music and subjects it to the sort of academic analysis that traditional western art music, such as Mozart and Boulez is subjected to.
There a good deal of talk of ‘metrical dissonance’ and ‘hypermetre’ and ‘mutimeasure patterning’, and all sorts of other wild theorising that I’m sure Jeff Mills didn’t think about when writing the track ‘Jerical’ – which is one of the tracks subjected to detailed analysis.
And at first I was thinking that the whole idea of analysing dance music in this way was ridiculous. After all, it’s not made to be ‘art music’, it’s made for people to dance their arses off to. Especially as all the producers care about is: will this make people dance?
But as I read more, I thought: why on earth shouldn’t techno be studied – which is to say, to be taken seriously as a musical art form. It’s been around for 20 years, it’s reached a high level of sophistication and the best of it is as good as any music can be.
So, on that basis it’s actually very interesting to read about how (in the author’s opinion) techno maintains musical interest despite an apparently limited range of beats and textures. One of the most convincing sections discusses how an instrumental part of 1 bar length is often broken into asymmetrically lengthed phrases: either 3+3+2 quavers or 3+3+3+3+4 semi-quavers. His contention is that the first set of 3’s set up the expectation of a continual series of 3 notes, but is confounded on the last set which is either shorter than expected (the 2 quavers) or longer (the 4 semi-quavers). And of course the stronger emphasis on the first of each group is going to be syncopated against a 4 to the floor pulse. Both these effects keep the interest in what initially might seem a straightforward loop.
That famous riff of Cubik by 808 State uses the 3+3+3+3+4 pattern exactly:
So, yeah, all very interesting -but whether acceptance into ‘the establishment’ is necessarily good for something that was once defiantly underground music is another whole interesting discussion to have…
Filed under: Music Reviews | Tagged: Music Books, Techno, Unlocking the Groove | Leave a comment »