Re: (idm) Fat Cat (Was RE: Andrea Parker)

From daniel
Sent Thu, Aug 26th 1999, 20:43

xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx wrote:

> i think i like the idea behind fatcat more than the music that they put
>out.  every so often i'll buy something from them which i'll like
>but i don't really care for most of their other acts (at least from what
> i've heard on 'across uneven terrain'.)  too much british post rock,
> which i think is even more painful to listen to than american post rock
> (which is already quite a pain for all i'm concerned, but let's not
> start _that_ thread).  they're a label where you're usually better off
> recent s^jn side of a split 12" & the various artists 12"s come to mind)
> listening first, then buying.  
> 

I agree.  Conceptually I think that fat cat is one of the best labels out
there.  In some ways I have modeled mmr after them. IE the desire not to
be easily classified (which I hope came across on the ETM comp).  However,
Fat Cat is more extreme in their process.  Which leads to the try before
you buy it premise.  With some labels I buy on sight but I have never been
able to do that with fat cat.  You never know what you are going to get.
But that is a strong attraction for me.  


> however, the music is always quality stuff, & i appreciate the fact that
> they're one of the few 'outsider' labels in the idm world, which, as
> daniel mentioned, don't stick to a certain genre & beat it to death but
> instead take chances on unknown acts which produce leftfield music.  i
> don't like it doesn't mean it's not good.  :)
> 


agreed.  Even the items I did not like were done very well.  Their noise
releases have always left me cold but I am told by those into noise they
are quite good.   

One thing I read recently was that the split series was going to be slowed
down and concentration was going to be placed upon releasing 1 CD a month
until December.  I know that there is a forthcoming grain CD as well.


-daniel