why do hipsters think its cool to use shit equiptment?

best thread title award

logical people keep saying you can make good music on anything - how about one guy on kazoo, another taps on baked beans tin and the third geezer farts himself silly? you think a kazoo can make good music? ok whatever mates. to each his own. chunky thinks differently. chunky wants ELECTRONIC MUSIC with some razzle dazzle synthesizers and some FUNKY beats and the weird feelings that make you go OH OH OH what the heck is this on my speakers right now. you cant do that on a kazoo, so equipment does matter to a certain extent. equipment isn't the only parameter but it is one parameter and it can affect everything. a 303 or any other synth is just like a samurai sword, it's only as strong as the person using it. theres no 'case closed' in music, the reason music+audio arguments never end is because the arguments help people think their own philosophy over. squiggle-boppa-be-do-be-do-be-do

i suppose it's worth noting that i dearly love synths and drum machines and mixers and fx and MIDI and all that. if i didn't, i'd use a piano and sing or some shit !

my perspective is colored by a love of machines

This thread needs to die. I wish I could kill it.

  On 8/1/2011 at 9:14 PM, theSun said:

  On 8/1/2011 at 8:04 AM, hahathhat said:

  On 7/31/2011 at 3:16 AM, oscillik said:

  On 7/31/2011 at 1:38 AM, schlucharski said:

  On 7/31/2011 at 1:20 AM, hahathhat said:

it's worth noting that this is a watmm thread -- you're looking at it too linearly. watmm is a fractal algorithm where everything is torn apart and recursively derided as limp-dicked crap.

 

I partly agree, because you do. But watmm is not detached from everything. Its like an abstracted silicon chip of whats out there.

no, WATMM is WATMM.

 

hahathhat is spot on

it just hit me:

 

at some point, the watmm algorithm will attempt to contemplate itself. it will find itself woefully uncool, and self-destruct.

 

the dynamics of the algorithm vary such that no watmm can comprehend at any given time.

WATMM attempts to observe itself at time T0 in state W0. But, the process of observation moves it to state W1 by T1. Consequently, it never sees itself as it actually is, just as it was during the last trendy phase.

  On 9/3/2011 at 12:56 AM, hahathhat said:

  On 8/1/2011 at 9:14 PM, theSun said:

  On 8/1/2011 at 8:04 AM, hahathhat said:

  On 7/31/2011 at 3:16 AM, oscillik said:

  On 7/31/2011 at 1:38 AM, schlucharski said:

  On 7/31/2011 at 1:20 AM, hahathhat said:

it's worth noting that this is a watmm thread -- you're looking at it too linearly. watmm is a fractal algorithm where everything is torn apart and recursively derided as limp-dicked crap.

 

I partly agree, because you do. But watmm is not detached from everything. Its like an abstracted silicon chip of whats out there.

no, WATMM is WATMM.

 

hahathhat is spot on

it just hit me:

 

at some point, the watmm algorithm will attempt to contemplate itself. it will find itself woefully uncool, and self-destruct.

 

the dynamics of the algorithm vary such that no watmm can comprehend at any given time.

 

WATMM attempts to observe itself at time T0 in state W0. But, the process of observation moves it to state W1 by T1. Consequently, it never sees itself as it actually is, just as it was during the last trendy phase.

brb Planck Institute

  On 9/3/2011 at 12:56 AM, hahathhat said:

  On 8/1/2011 at 9:14 PM, theSun said:

  On 8/1/2011 at 8:04 AM, hahathhat said:

  On 7/31/2011 at 3:16 AM, oscillik said:

  On 7/31/2011 at 1:38 AM, schlucharski said:

  On 7/31/2011 at 1:20 AM, hahathhat said:

it's worth noting that this is a watmm thread -- you're looking at it too linearly. watmm is a fractal algorithm where everything is torn apart and recursively derided as limp-dicked crap.

 

I partly agree, because you do. But watmm is not detached from everything. Its like an abstracted silicon chip of whats out there.

no, WATMM is WATMM.

 

hahathhat is spot on

it just hit me:

 

at some point, the watmm algorithm will attempt to contemplate itself. it will find itself woefully uncool, and self-destruct.

 

the dynamics of the algorithm vary such that no watmm can comprehend at any given time.

 

WATMM attempts to observe itself at time T0 in state W0. But, the process of observation moves it to state W1 by T1. Consequently, it never sees itself as it actually is, just as it was during the last trendy phase.

probably one of the most astute things ever said on this board. ever.

next to "Tom Cruise does yoyo tricks too close to Craig Anderson's face"

(that's a compliment btw)

AT the edn of the day Its results that matter. Some of my favourite local acts are circuit bent bands, such as toy death and faber castell or fag panic. Great original groups and very good at what they do. A shit band will be a shit band no mater how good there gear is, take metallica for example.

I hear some people with injuries like to use shitters with hip equipment

Elevated seats etc

  On 9/13/2011 at 2:33 AM, noitnemretsim said:

A shit band will be a shit band no mater how good there gear is, take metallica for example.

Poop on things.

  On 9/13/2011 at 5:37 AM, usagi said:

  On 9/3/2011 at 12:56 AM, hahathhat said:

WATMM attempts to observe itself at time T0 in state W0. But, the process of observation moves it to state W1 by T1. Consequently, it never sees itself as it actually is, just as it was during the last trendy phase.

 

dude.

Pictured: WATMM/Hipster relations

flol @ cryptowens comic

lol

Zole, Cryptowen wins thread.

word, I think he should change the hipster to add glasses, and then beard + glasses before the final noooo

  On 9/10/2011 at 4:38 AM, oscillik said:

 

  On 9/3/2011 at 12:56 AM, hahathhat said:

 

  On 8/1/2011 at 9:14 PM, theSun said:

 

  On 8/1/2011 at 8:04 AM, hahathhat said:

 

  On 7/31/2011 at 3:16 AM, oscillik said:

 

  On 7/31/2011 at 1:38 AM, schlucharski said:

 

  On 7/31/2011 at 1:20 AM, hahathhat said:

 

  On 9/10/2011 at 4:38 AM, oscillik said:

 

  On 9/3/2011 at 12:56 AM, hahathhat said:

 

  On 8/1/2011 at 9:14 PM, theSun said:

 

  On 8/1/2011 at 8:04 AM, hahathhat said:

 

  On 7/31/2011 at 3:16 AM, oscillik said:

 

  On 7/31/2011 at 1:38 AM, schlucharski said:

 

  On 7/31/2011 at 1:20 AM, hahathhat said:

 

it's worth noting that this is a watmm thread -- you're looking at it too linearly. watmm is a fractal algorithm where everything is torn apart and recursively derided as limp-dicked crap.

 

 

I partly agree, because you do. But watmm is not detached from everything. Its like an abstracted silicon chip of whats out there.

 

 

no, WATMM is WATMM.

 

hahathhat is spot on

 

 

it just hit me:

 

at some point, the watmm algorithm will attempt to contemplate itself. it will find itself woefully uncool, and self-destruct.

 

 

the dynamics of the algorithm vary such that no watmm can comprehend at any given time.

 

 

WATMM attempts to observe itself at time T0 in state W0. But, the process of observation moves it to state W1 by T1. Consequently, it never sees itself as it actually is, just as it was during the last trendy phase.

 

 

probably one of the most astute things ever said on this board. ever.

 

next to "Tom Cruise does yoyo tricks too close to Craig Anderson's face"

 

(that's a compliment btw)