I really don't like the way the expanded info alters my scrolling behavior.
Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music
51–60 of 74 posts
Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music
#52Some 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…
"The word Garage doesn't mean anything pertinent other than its name comes from the legendary Paradise Garage nightclub in New York City where DJ Larry Levan would play anything he damn well pleased."
"Today what most people think is House music is actually Garage. And what most people think is Garage is some dodgy nonsense the British sharted into their trousers. Someone should really try and set the record straight about that. Like make a guide or something."
I love a bit of UK Garage but laughed out loud when I read that line about trousers. This Ishkur guy is a beast.
Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music
#53From 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.
The universal genre bashing is a required element. Nothing good can come from talking about musical genres without constant reminders of not taking yourself too seriously.
Spent so much time browsing an older version, so happy to see it again, so sad that Casiocore apparently did not make it into the current incarnation. "Just push 'samba' on that thing and away you go."
Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music
#54From 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.
The thing is, it's not really genre bashing.
These "genres" mostly fit very comfortably into their parent category. Even to the point that if you treat it as a strict history of the music, the majority of the subgenres are unnecessary.
It's poorly presented in this regard. It doesn't do a good job of delineating the music and the cultural history.
What is being taken as genre bashing is really tribalism and the subcultural awareness of the author. In contrast to it's failings as a strict musical history, it presents extremely well the cultural history around the music.
Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music
#55Does 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.
It's not totally serious though, i mean look at this gem annotating a futuristic world render:
> The future is a hellish dystopia where everyone's needs are taken care of and they all live in the clouds and listen to Progressive Breaks.
[edit]
oh there's more :D
> Progressive Breaks is still around today because being a Breaks version of essentially another scene ensures it indefinite survival, like a domesticated animal that will never go extinct because man depends on it too much as a ready source of food. That's what Progressive Breaks is: The chicken of electronic music.
Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
The point is not whether the music is busy etc. Yeah it is. The point is that the author of the guide is excessively negative about many generes. According to the guide drill n bass is all trash. He doesn't mention any redeeming qualities in the review. Same for UK garage and glitch. The author seems to only like old school USA dance music (not that I have read every entry).
[Hard Normal Daddy is generally considered one of Squarepusher's best albums and it's drill n bass.]
Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music
#57From 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.
The "path of Ishkur" for most people is to arrive at the site, marvel at the artistic layout and amount of info presented, then immediately drill down to one's favorite genre to find... that Ishkur roasts it like an old episode of SNL, mildly offending the casual visitor who feels their taste has been somehow called out.
Later on one discovers that Ishkur roasts all of the genres in similar fashion and that this is part of the appeal. It is in the trashing of each style that Ishkur reveals what makes that type of music unique.
Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music
#58From 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.
> Either Ishkur is getting old and resentful or we live on completely opposite sites of music taste.
Ishkur's guides have always had this tone. It is part of the fun. Even when he is trashing your preferred genres, you are laughing. Or I am.
Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
The point is not whether the music is busy etc. Yeah it is. The point is that the author of the guide is excessively negative about many generes. According to the guide drill n bass is all trash. He doesn't mention any redeeming qualities in the review. Same for UK garage and glitch. The author seems to only like old school USA dance music (not that I have read every entry). [Hard Normal Daddy is generally considered…
Yes, but you're doing exactly the same thing. Why should it have any redeeming features, bar it being a breeding ground for a few acts that went off and did better things, (this is mentioned in passing), and being the punchline for a good joke on Father Ted?
A balanced music review that's good to read is rare. You have things you think are good, and you have things you think are bad, and the meh ones in-between: who cares? Not you. Validation that what you like/dislike - good. Putting into words what you thought all along - good. Part of the reason the site is so loved is because of the kickings doled out to genres (which a vague enough containers disowned by those put in them at the best of times) vs. the things he clearly loves, and, shit, that's what you want from reviewers, not an anodyne history lesson. Music is deeply, deeply tribal, it isn't neutral
Like Squarepusher. "My Red Hot Cock" is really good. But bar that, he's good at playing that stupid six-string bass and making generally-undanceable dance music that people like to stroke their chins to. Saying Hard Normal Daddy is considered one of his best albums -- well that's a pretty shallow pool! Considered by whom? Not by me. Hard Plastic is miles better by dint of the fact it has actual tunes. And the music I like is the best music, and the music I dislike is crap. Weirdly enough the music you like is also the best music and the music you dislike is the worst but anyway, Squarepusher is like one of the jazz acts on The Fast Show, or something John Peel would put on when he was having a mild breakdown. (nb I do actually really like Squarepusher, I'm just arguing against his music because it is frankly unlistenable to most people)
Re: Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music
#60Wow. 20 years in the making. Be sure to check out his 15-hour, 3.5 decade-spanning mix https://mobile.twitter.com/Ishkur23/status/11632947429494456...
Is there a torrent around anywhere? His site is being slammed.