Oneohtrix Point Never - R Plus Seven

[spptrl alt del]

I've always taken that term with a grain of salt, "Musique concrete".

 

Isn't that just a euphemism for sounds in loosely rhythmic or melodic format that someone tries to pass off as music or art?

 

(please don't take offense at that, not my intention... it's just a loaded term, where I come from)

by definition it's any 'everyday' sound or series of sounds that are recorded, manipulated, and arranged in any way, like pitching it up or down, reversing it, cutting it up etc. there's no requirement for melody or rhythm. it can be anything, the only criteria being that it's of the everyday world and that it's affected somehow.

[Hugh Mughnus]

 

I've always taken that term with a grain of salt, "Musique concrete".

 

Isn't that just a euphemism for sounds in loosely rhythmic or melodic format that someone tries to pass off as music or art?

 

(please don't take offense at that, not my intention... it's just a loaded term, where I come from)

by definition it's any 'everyday' sound or series of sounds that are recorded, manipulated, and arranged in any way, like pitching it up or down, reversing it, cutting it up etc. there's no requirement for melody or rhythm. it can be anything, the only criteria being that it's of the everyday world and that it's affected somehow.

 

 

That's a good way of putting it.

[Alcofribas]

 

 

I've always taken that term with a grain of salt, "Musique concrete".

 

Isn't that just a euphemism for sounds in loosely rhythmic or melodic format that someone tries to pass off as music or art?

 

(please don't take offense at that, not my intention... it's just a loaded term, where I come from)

 

by definition it's any 'everyday' sound or series of sounds that are recorded, manipulated, and arranged in any way, like pitching it up or down, reversing it, cutting it up etc. there's no requirement for melody or rhythm. it can be anything, the only criteria being that it's of the everyday world and that it's affected somehow.

That's a good way of putting it.

I think the idea is that you are composing with the concrete sounds/recordings themselves, manipulating the recorded media, but there is no requirement that the source material is "everyday sounds."

[pattern recognition]

 

 

 

I've always taken that term with a grain of salt, "Musique concrete".

 

Isn't that just a euphemism for sounds in loosely rhythmic or melodic format that someone tries to pass off as music or art?

 

(please don't take offense at that, not my intention... it's just a loaded term, where I come from)

by definition it's any 'everyday' sound or series of sounds that are recorded, manipulated, and arranged in any way, like pitching it up or down, reversing it, cutting it up etc. there's no requirement for melody or rhythm. it can be anything, the only criteria being that it's of the everyday world and that it's affected somehow.

That's a good way of putting it.

I think the idea is that you are composing with the concrete sounds/recordings themselves, manipulating the recorded media, but there is no requirement that the source material is "everyday sounds."

 

That's a good way of putting it.

[Hugh Mughnus]

 

 

 

 

I've always taken that term with a grain of salt, "Musique concrete".

 

Isn't that just a euphemism for sounds in loosely rhythmic or melodic format that someone tries to pass off as music or art?

 

(please don't take offense at that, not my intention... it's just a loaded term, where I come from)

by definition it's any 'everyday' sound or series of sounds that are recorded, manipulated, and arranged in any way, like pitching it up or down, reversing it, cutting it up etc. there's no requirement for melody or rhythm. it can be anything, the only criteria being that it's of the everyday world and that it's affected somehow.

That's a good way of putting it.

I think the idea is that you are composing with the concrete sounds/recordings themselves, manipulating the recorded media, but there is no requirement that the source material is "everyday sounds."

 

That's a good way of putting it.

 

That's a good way of putting it.

[Guest Ron Manager]

i know it was the 'single' in a way, but i just can't get over how good Still Life is. the best track on the album for me. the last minute is one of the most beautiful things i've heard in a long time.

 

even better, when it ends, Chrome Country comes on, which is probably my second favourite on there...

[Cryptowen]

i just can't get over how good Still Life is.

I can't make up my mind whether I prefer the vocal or instrumental version. The former is certainly more striking in conjunction with the video, but the latter flows better with the overall patchwork of the album

 

Problem Areas has grown on me a lot. First time I heard it I really wasn't feeling it - felt like an oldskool basic arpeggio OPN track, without any of the lush effects. But it has an anthemic quality to it, that really makes it stand out next to the subtler ambience all around it

[Guest Ron Manager]

 

i just can't get over how good Still Life is.

I can't make up my mind whether I prefer the vocal or instrumental version. The former is certainly more striking in conjunction with the video, but the latter flows better with the overall patchwork of the album

 

 

when i first saw the video, i thought it was pretty egregious, but i'm a bit more open-minded about it now and can see how it fits the music really well - disturbed, haunting, incredibly eery. the vocals are perfect, but i think you're right - excellent for the video, but would have been strange on the album.

[mcbpete]

I can't not visualise the video when hearing the track. Agreed, the voice fits the video one perfectly though definitely would sound out of place on the album

[Guest jasondonervan]

[Lianne]

i think it's cool that nowadays you don't have to be good at synthesis, you can just use general midi. and instead of composition chops you can just do like this: fast, unimaginative arpeggio here, followed by wacky chopped up late 90s vox here, followed by more general midi nooding, and have everything tied together with generic sustained synth vox chords. perhaps a few new age samples sprinkled in for good measure. need a video? just smoke a joint and spend your night gathering random bullshit from youtube. guess what? now you're a fucking genius.

 

I wanted to come back to this quote.

 

This quote seems pretty obviously true to me. Fair enough if people just like how this music sounds. But I don't at all, and your description petty much accurately sums up the sonics of it. I find the sonics and melodics of this album a total bore. There is hardly anything that is structurally or texturally exciting. The album is neither refined or excellent compositionally, not extreme enough to be interesting in the noisy/offensive direction. The sample manipulation here sounds utterly clumsy and simplistic to me.

 

I am so bored of this huge, general move towards irony, nostalgia and quoting in electronic music. Everybody is doing it and is using these sounds. Whether they are being ironic or genuine, I don't care. Is it too much to ask for some finesse, some skill or at least some daring in electronic music?

[taphead]

But cant people just use adjectives to say the opposite thing too?

[taphead]

But yeah I mean for me stuff like Inside World feels really fresh and doesn't remind me of anything, and the structure of it or Americans and the whole way so much of the album has a pulse and momentum and isn't ambient, but avoids usin any beats for the most part... Like that shit's a lot of adjectives to me. Like the really good ones. But if it doesn't float your boat that's cool. Except for all the dead sailors.

[Lianne]

But cant people just use adjectives to say the opposite thing too?

 

Yeah...I tried to edit my post to clarify but the time ran out! :) Like I said, fair enough if people enjoy this music. I wish I did, because I like enjoying new music. Perhaps some of the adjectives could just be switched, but I do genuinely think there is something approaching objectivity about what Alcofribas said, and even maybe in what I said. For example, many of the sounds are old keyboard presets. Many times sampled sequences just pitch up and down in unision, and the cut-ups don't seem to be particularly detailed or involved. I have heard similarly-manipulated vocal samples in other new music, which also seems to draw from similar sample sources. There are many basic major key arpeggios on preset-ish sounding synth sounds, and sections do suddenly pop in and out. There doesn't appear, texturally speaking, to be much in the way of gradual, subtle control, but perhaps there are exceptions here. All of the harmonies and melodics are not particularly challenging or unusual - they would be at home in your average pop or new age record - even if there are 'sudden' bursts of sound or changes in direction, which I guess does make it 'seem' experimental or unpredictable. There isn't much detailed synthesis in most of the sounds. I have heard this similar old sounds being quoted in many other new electronic records also, and I know some of those are deliberately veering towards irony and nostalgia. I am being boring, I know - but to me, discussing music DOES bear some resemblance to the MUSIC being discussed! Much discussion this music, however, seem to be praising it without actually dealing with the sonics, but the story 'about' it. (But I guess that goes for much journalism anyway.)

 

Like I said, if you happen to like these sonics, then great! But I don't see how what Alcofribas said has no merit (as some implied). It clearly bears some resemblance to the music.

[taphead]

What are the presets on Still Life, cause I want those.

[spptrl alt del]

 

i think it's cool that nowadays you don't have to be good at synthesis, you can just use general midi. and instead of composition chops you can just do like this: fast, unimaginative arpeggio here, followed by wacky chopped up late 90s vox here, followed by more general midi nooding, and have everything tied together with generic sustained synth vox chords. perhaps a few new age samples sprinkled in for good measure. need a video? just smoke a joint and spend your night gathering random bullshit from youtube. guess what? now you're a fucking genius.

 

I wanted to come back to this quote.

 

This quote seems pretty obviously true to me. Fair enough if people just like how this music sounds. But I don't at all, and your description petty much accurately sums up the sonics of it. I find the sonics and melodics of this album a total bore. There is hardly anything that is structurally or texturally exciting. The album is neither refined or excellent compositionally, not extreme enough to be interesting in the noisy/offensive direction. The sample manipulation here sounds utterly clumsy and simplistic to me.

 

I am so bored of this huge, general move towards irony, nostalgia and quoting in electronic music. Everybody is doing it and is using these sounds. Whether they are being ironic or genuine, I don't care. Is it too much to ask for some finesse, some skill or at least some daring in electronic music?

 

the album sounds well-refined to me, even to excess, and the dynamic range of sound is very large, which keeps it interesting for me. i don't play it a lot, and i'm pretty much on board with the notion that it's not all that texturally interesting, but it's extremely easy to listen to, like in an ADD sense. the album seems to pass by effortlessly, which is not a typical characteristic of things i search out/listen to.

 

it might work better as a passive listen, in the background, rather than trying to engage w/it actively. as there's no immediate 'depth' to it. what is ironic about this music?

[Alcofribas]

in the past year I've gotten way more into the works of Claude Larson and I must say any respect I had for "r + 7" has been significantly diminished by this experience. in some respects it seems like lopatin is straight ripping off Larson and in general it just makes his project seem really derivative and annoying. check out larson records like "digital landscape" and "synchrosonic patterns" and tell me this isn't 30 years ahead of lopatin. I think larson's compositions are much richer and more inventive as well.

 

I mean, I get it, lopatin's whole thing is a foray into the past (is there any original artwork for one of his albums?) but tbh I think he walks a fine line between conceptual nostalgia and banal ripoff. I think all of his albums are marred by awkward tracks (the last track on r+7, "grief and repetition," "child soldier," etc) and he relies too heavily on hip nostalgia and faceless appropriation of better music.

 

it's frustrating to me bc there are tracks like "physical memory" that really get me going and seem to reveal this great depth in his abilities but overall I'd say his career has been overwhelmingly full of wank.

[gmanyo]

Compared to most musicians, Oneohtrix is hardly a ripoff of anyone. His music sounds as much like Lansky and Larson as the Arctic Monkeys sound like the Rolling Stones. Yeah, they're definitely the same genre, but it's still relatively unexplored territory. May I accuse DJ Shadow of being a ripoff of Pierre Schaeffer? Or Aphex a ripoff of Eno?

 

I also think that aesthetically, OPN is very different; similarly to how his older music sounded like 80s sic-fi synth work but was much more dystopian in nature. Earlier digital experimental reminds me of looking into a new future of evolving technology, R + 7 sounds like entering a desolate wasteland of unbridled technological consumption. And I don't know where you guys are getting that this record is nostalgic; it sounds purposefully over-futuristic to me, sort of like future bass music.

 

It's also organized much differently - compare the long, evolving patterns of earlier experimental digital music to the fast paced changes of Still Life. In fact, he mixes this in very well with other forms of music, bringing the experimental in with the mainstream fluidly.

 

Yes, it sounds like older music. Everything does. Nobody is denying that people like Larson are geniuses. But I don't see how you can't tell the differences; they aren't even subtle. I don't think it's "faceless appropriation" at all, I think it's a unique work that masterfully combines experimental digital with ambient and pop.

[triachus]

this album is pretty good

 

 

what do you guys think?

[manmower]

brilliant, weird as fuck

like he folded vaporwave inside out

context got obliterated, music just got handed a ton of new parameters

[YangYing]

yeah, what sean said

[Amen Lare]

brilliant, weird as fuck

like he folded vaporwave inside out

context got obliterated, music just got handed a ton of new parameters

 

Lost any respect for Sean's taste after that comment. Same with David Lynch's praising Kanye song last year. At least Lynch was friends with Moby and all these sexy voiced chicks, i learnt to not give a fuck. Sean was almost perfect, paid attention to SND and Dalglish because of Ae tours. Then he praised Oberman Knocks. AFX into Raime. Fuck, i don't have anyone else to look up to.

[KovalainenFanBoy]

Yeah, it sucks when an artist doesn't share your exact same taste in music

[khov]

i love this record, truly cool that the same dude offered us Rifts & R+7

[poblequadrat]

in the past year I've gotten way more into the works of Claude Larson and I must say any respect I had for "r + 7" has been significantly diminished by this experience. in some respects it seems like lopatin is straight ripping off Larson and in general it just makes his project seem really derivative and annoying. check out larson records like "digital landscape" and "synchrosonic patterns" and tell me this isn't 30 years ahead of lopatin. I think larson's compositions are much richer and more inventive as well.

 

I mean, I get it, lopatin's whole thing is a foray into the past (is there any original artwork for one of his albums?) but tbh I think he walks a fine line between conceptual nostalgia and banal ripoff. I think all of his albums are marred by awkward tracks (the last track on r+7, "grief and repetition," "child soldier," etc) and he relies too heavily on hip nostalgia and faceless appropriation of better music.

 

it's frustrating to me bc there are tracks like "physical memory" that really get me going and seem to reveal this great depth in his abilities but overall I'd say his career has been overwhelmingly full of wank.

 

Conceptual nostalgia and banal ripoff are synonymous anyway.

I like OPN, mainly because beyond the 80's revisionism there's an element of facelesness, genericity and anonymity which, to me, sets him apart from the banality of vapourwave. However, genericity and nostalgia are completely at odds with each other, nostalgia being based on identity, and whether genericity has more weight than identity in his work is debatable I guess.

 

 

I suppose the point of revisiting the past is finding whatever genericity it contains, whatever universal possibilities it contains beyond its identity. OPN is very ambiguous here - for example the Games/Ford & Lopatin stuff is full of unnecessary flourishes which serve no purpose other than to give context (late 80's, early 90's) without really doing anything critical with that context. That makes one doubt of the conceptual integrity of what he does. that said, strawberry skies is a classic tune.