Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music

music.ishkur.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 74 posts

Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music

#41

Post by ethbro »

bigiain wrote: post #7

Some of these genre descriptions are _awesome!_ - th9s is from the LiquidFunk subgenre of Drum n Bass: "Just before the turn of the millenium is when a sufficient number of white people were attending Jungle parties to the point where music writers and magazines stopped calling it Jungle and rebranded it Drum n Bass, although the partykids retained the label "junglists" and they're still called that today (probably b…

"There are subgenres of Deep House that get even deeper, jazzier, and more soulful. One of my favorites is something I like to call "Dad House", because its liberal employment of walking basslines and saxophone solos evoke images of your dad walking around the house in his bathrobe on a Sunday morning before settling into his favorite chesterfield chair to smoke a pipe and read the newspaper in front of a roaring fire. Well, mine anyway."

Provided link: http://ishkur.com/oldmixtapes/Jeffro%20-%20Five%20In%20Da%20...

I know what I'm doing this Sunday morning.

Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music

#42

Post by RobertKerans »

easymodex wrote: post #32

From the comments I was expecting a really cool site with a lot of knowledge, but so far all I've seen is genre bashing. Since this is supposedly a general guide on all electronic music, it's really unfortunate they need to convey their negative opinions on everything that isn't their genre of choice. Either Ishkur is getting old and resentful or we live on completely opposite sites of music taste.

I mean, he has clear deep love for dance music and the history of the genre which shines through in everything he writes and the examples he picks. And that's chimed with people for the last 20 years, it's a bible of a site. Maybe you just have crap taste ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music

#44

Post by RobertKerans »

noelwelsh wrote: post #30

Does the author actually like any music? So far every description I've read tells me that the music is either pretentious or a sell-out. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Although this looks like a lot of work, a more positive guide would be vastly more useful. Help me find the best of a genre, rather than telling me it all devolved in trash. My metric so far is that if it's labelled pretentious I'll probably like it.

All music genres burn out, they all devolve into trash or repetition, so inevitably every almost genre description is going to bookended with when/why/how that happened else it wouldn't really be an accurate history. There's no need for the hyperbolic "Does the author actually like any music?" when about half the descriptions are him talking about great music

> The peak period for any popular genre is 3-5 years, and then everyone wants to move on to the big thing

Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music

#45

Post by RobertKerans »

haunter wrote: post #25
wyclif wrote: post #8

The Brostep entry alone is worth visiting the site to read.

Not really. Bashing someone because they like a style of music is one of the lowest of low. inb4 it's just a banter

Yeah, but Skrillex! He's bashing the music, saying it's garbage isn't exactly controversial, it's ripe for skewering. And it's supposed to be his opinion; if you like Skrillex the site might not be for you

Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music

#46

Post by noelwelsh »

RobertKerans wrote: post #44
noelwelsh wrote: post #30

Does the author actually like any music? So far every description I've read tells me that the music is either pretentious or a sell-out. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Although this looks like a lot of work, a more positive guide would be vastly more useful. Help me find the best of a genre, rather than telling me it all devolved in trash. My metric so far is that if it's labelled pretentious I'll probably like it.

All music genres burn out, they all devolve into trash or repetition, so inevitably every almost genre description is going to bookended with when/why/how that happened else it wouldn't really be an accurate history. There's no need for the hyperbolic "Does the author actually like any music?" when about half the descriptions are him talking about great music > The peak period for any popular genre is 3-5 years, and…

I agree, but read, say, the entry for Drill'n'Bass. This happens to be a genre I like (Girl/Boy Song by Aphex Twin and and u-ziq's Lunatic Harness being some favourites of mine). However, according to Ishkur "the result [is] not complex ... it [is] just busy and schizophrenic". So there we go. No redeeming features here.

Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music

#47

Post by RobertKerans »

noelwelsh wrote: post #46
RobertKerans wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All music genres burn out, they all devolve into trash or repetition, so inevitably every almost genre description is going to bookended with when/why/how that happened else it wouldn't really be an accurate history. There's no need for the hyperbolic "Does the author actually like any music?" when about half the descriptions are him talking about great music > The peak period for any popular genre is 3-5 years, and…

I agree, but read, say, the entry for Drill'n'Bass. This happens to be a genre I like (Girl/Boy Song by Aphex Twin and and u-ziq's Lunatic Harness being some favourites of mine). However, according to Ishkur "the result [is] not complex ... it [is] just busy and schizophrenic". So there we go. No redeeming features here.

But it _is_, as a rule, both busy and schizophrenic. It's neither complex nor danceable; I like Aphex Twin a lot, but his contributions there, with exceptions, tend to veer toward the "quite possibly just taking the piss" part of his back catalogue -- notably none of the artists he mentions really produced anything like their best work under that banner

Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music

#48

Post by Gatsky »

easymodex wrote: post #32

From the comments I was expecting a really cool site with a lot of knowledge, but so far all I've seen is genre bashing. Since this is supposedly a general guide on all electronic music, it's really unfortunate they need to convey their negative opinions on everything that isn't their genre of choice. Either Ishkur is getting old and resentful or we live on completely opposite sites of music taste.

I think this is unfair. Only someone with a deep love of music would put in this colossal and ongoing effort. A mere curmudgeon would have quit years ago. And in any case, the music itself is provided, so you can just listen for yourself.

Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music

#50

Post by tomxor »

noelwelsh wrote: post #30

Does the author actually like any music? So far every description I've read tells me that the music is either pretentious or a sell-out. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Although this looks like a lot of work, a more positive guide would be vastly more useful. Help me find the best of a genre, rather than telling me it all devolved in trash. My metric so far is that if it's labelled pretentious I'll probably like it.

I've looked through about 6 so far, and pretty sure he likes jungle... I feel like if you know enough about the origins of anything (think tech), you can be predisposed to have a negative opinion against newer incarnations.
Post reply on HN