Techno Counterpoint

I couldn't see this posted on here but it is from 2002

http://www.somasa.qub.ac.uk/~elyon/LyonPapers/aphextwin/

There are some nice tidbits about his musical structures.

Nice. Thanks for this.

this is great.

I would love to find more structural critique like this

a ha! it is you, guidewire, here as well! i didn't realize i was talking to the same person across both threads.

And yeah, I agree I'd love to see more of this kind of stuff. We all appreciate AFX production work, but I've always thought his composition was great as well. I don't have the tools to describe why it's great though, so this sort of stuff is very helpful when proselytizing.

I also think the main point here, that AFX loves counterpoint is an interesting one because it sort of gives him an appeal-ceiling. I think there a lot of folks who simply don't like music without a strong main (pop) melody.

Personally, i find the need to write down techno musics into academic context depressing. On why it's depressing there is an old Stockhausen story on african patterns and sugar melodies. This specific paper is decent, but i recall that guy Adam Harper who did scores for the so called post-dubstep tracks and compared them to microtonality of Ligeti and the likes in terms of complexity, which was just laughable, like fucking Zomby steals synth demo sample and suddenly he's continuing Ligeti legacy.

great read..but I am experiencing problems with the example samples...they won't load properly ...its like while the site loads they flash up for a sec and then when the site is loaded a blank space (not even clickable) takes its place

  On 10/24/2013 at 1:05 AM, guidewire said:

I would love to find more structural critique like this

http://howisya.tripod.com/saw2vsreich.html

Not so much structural critique but covers a few techniques. Compares SAW2 to Steve Reich’s Music for 18 Musicians, written in 2001.

nice.

also had to lol to this:

  Quote

 

 

Aphex Twin's work is based on loops

  On 10/26/2013 at 10:21 AM, goDel said:

 

nice.

 

also had to lol to this:

  Quote

 

 

Aphex Twin's work is based on loops

 

Sounds funny at a glance but it's the truth. In his earlier stuff especially, which is what's analyzed

yeah...and that's exactly why it's funny. it sort of contradicts the validity of the entire paper. while analyses like this tend to be done on pieces which develop over time:

  Quote

 

 

while Bach and Perotin employ melodies that change over time. Both Bach and Perotin were working on paper and conceiving music for voice where the musical lines are designed to support an evolving text.

and the conclusion of the paper is

  Quote

 

 

Aphex Twin creates highly sophisticated musical results through the agency of tracking.

it is sort of a wtf!?

sure, loops can be highly sophisticated. But when i think of highly sophisticated loops, i tend to think about those bach goldberg variations. not those post-african rhythms of mr james.

sorry to be a dick and all.

a less academic discussion of SAW 2

http://blog.dubspot.com/electronic-music-history-aphex-twin-selected-ambient-works-volume-ii/

  On 10/24/2013 at 6:17 PM, Amen Lare said:

Personally, i find the need to write down techno musics into academic context depressing. On why it's depressing there is an old Stockhausen story on african patterns and sugar melodies. This specific paper is decent, but i recall that guy Adam Harper who did scores for the so called post-dubstep tracks and compared them to microtonality of Ligeti and the likes in terms of complexity, which was just laughable, like fucking Zomby steals synth demo sample and suddenly he's continuing Ligeti legacy.

For me, it's about enriching something I already like. When it's the other way around, it's torture.

  On 11/11/2013 at 9:58 AM, kevinMcCallister said:

 

  On 10/24/2013 at 6:17 PM, Amen Lare said:

Personally, i find the need to write down techno musics into academic context depressing. On why it's depressing there is an old Stockhausen story on african patterns and sugar melodies. This specific paper is decent, but i recall that guy Adam Harper who did scores for the so called post-dubstep tracks and compared them to microtonality of Ligeti and the likes in terms of complexity, which was just laughable, like fucking Zomby steals synth demo sample and suddenly he's continuing Ligeti legacy.

 

For me, it's about enriching something I already like. When it's the other way around, it's torture.

 

So it's always enriching and never impoverishing? I'd say it's the second in most cases, just because contexts don't give proper tools for digesting each other. Would it be normal to analyze punk music in the same way? These types of music were created in protest against academic language of music. There is nothing of additional value.

anyone save the link in the OP? trying to re-read it but its down now apparently.

The original post is down. You can find it here > http://disis.music.vt.edu/eric/LyonPapers/AphexTwin/

i was always wondering why only few people analyze electronic music like this. after reading that paper for a bit i started to understand. after all "talking about music is like dancing about architecture"