From Kelley Hackett Sent Wed, Sep 15th 1999, 18:01
From Kelley Hackett Sent Wed, Sep 15th 1999, 18:01
I will try and hold my comment to a minimum Jorkens.......For the most part I agree, and perhaps conscious is a better word......... It does seem to stratify or rubrify things....at least the undertone is felt by as such...........but on the general, it should not matter what the classification is.........does the person like it or not is what counts(i.e., it could be called bull-shit techno but if it sounds like Stasis, I couldnt care less what ya call it........I am listening!!!!!!!.) O-!!! > -----Original Message----- > From: xxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx [SMTP:xxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx] > Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 11:28 AM > To: xxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx > Subject: Re: (idm) Intelligent Techno? > > > > >its definitely "intelligent"...... > > > > This might just be a personal thing, but does anyone else get pissed off > by > terms like 'Intelligent techno' and 'Intelligent dance music.' They have a > > really snobbish 'I'm clever, unlike the morons who listen to unintelligent > > techno' sound. I kind of prefer braindance, or possibly home listening > techno > (despite the danger of HLT being misheard as HRT). > Plus it doesn''t really describe the music. Selected Ambient Works is a > benchmark of this sort of music, but without being tremendously complex or > > difficult. > I suppose you could argue that intelligent in this context means > 'conscious' > or thinking' (please no philosophical debate about consciousness here), > but > there has to be a better term. > Dunno what it is though. > > Jorkens