when did IDM become to dance what undie is to hip hop?

IDM is dance music that clods like *me* can enjoy. So that must make it bad, right?

Basically the whole attitude is contrary to the spirt of house music anyway. I don't generally want to read interviews with dance music types or most musicians really because they're so predictable, but I'd prefer predictable in a "we rock the party way" to "Oh that song is so 86, I was loving that sound in 87 when me and luke solomon found each others erogenous zones while listening to mingus".

Another reason is that, especially with the appearance of BoC et al, IDM became a recognisable genre in itself around the same time speed garage and the like took off... still, IDM people have tried the garage thing from time to time - look at My Red Hot Car (or is that the exception that proves the rule?)

this is a great question, but i don't think you can set up this 'IDM was always part of the same scene, undie-hop wasn't' dichotomy. a lot of undie is made by people who have always been inside hip hop, just not disposed (hataz would say not talented enough) to go through the normal channels. i think the more important distinction is, as you say, in the audience. both undie and IDM appeal to people who will happily ignore the mainstream flipside, whilst revelling in the cultural signifiers of being 'a person who listens to hip hop,' or, 'a person who listens to techno.'

I don't think the Reynolds dialectic has held up since the advent of trance in the late 90s, as that music seems to have become the (white-bread) "avent-lumpen" movement that broke the hardcore-as-avant thesis a bit... is there maybe less inter-scene competitiona and more intra-scene competition now?

as for IDM, i think the moniker was always a bit loaded, though i didn't really get the reference myself when I was young, as I was aware of FSOL but not the "cheesy" rave scene that was being reacted to.

I really don't think that undie:rap::IDM:dance is exactly true; whereas both undie and rap still function in similar ways, as club musics, albeit for different audiences, whereas the counterpart of 'avin it dance would be more self-concious dance scenes (my own experience is that undie hiphoppers will also dig Naked Music-style deep house, but maybe not IDM)

as for trance yes, i agree, i think reynolds got trance wrong myself, and didnt pay it enough attention. i'd say that it broke in 93 rather than late 90s though. i think its interesting that idm artists (post97) have been reticent to actually take on trance though, and have usually leeched off rave-jungle-garage

i think gareth pretty well nails it, in terms of the progression, that break in 96/97. in way, this is the last time that idm could really be called "idm", the last time it was signifigantly "engaging" (or stealing from, whatever you take) dance music (or, to be more blunt "urban music", cf. autechre & electro.) the changing of the guards from autechre to b.o.c. as the paradigm-setter, the model, the light, the way was a BIG thing, i think, in retrospect. it totally freed "idm" from its presupposed need to funk or groove or do anything remotely related to rhythm. (telling that there are a few songs on b.o.c.'s earliest ep's which go for that sort of autechre "rhythmic athletics" sort of sound, with the heavily chopped drum tracks, but once music has a right... came out they WERE the forefront, and its hard to imagine them doing anything similar now.) so, in a post-b.o.c. landscape, you get people like the early manitoba tracks where he reinvents "garage" as a venue for b.o.c.-style color and tone wash experiments. the rhythms are totally perfunctory now, which also explains the rise in glitch/abstract/whatever (cf. confield, which is probably why i like it so much more than their other stuff, oddly.) in a way, the drill'n'bass guys - squarepusher for sure - are becoming footnotes, as indietronica moves further away from dance music and therefore much easier to be accepted by, y'know, indie rockers.

this goes back to the whole class/race thing tho. i mean, if we can assume that IDM now = educated white kids from the suburbs, then what would be the use of borrowing from music that is the choice of their less hip (economic/geographical/racial/etc) neighbors? it would be like if yo la tengo borrowed from creed. if the whole point is seperation, why would one want to be mistaken for the other, especially since, in the case of the fans, that seperatism is intrinsic to their identity?

coughkompaktcough

(okay, they're not exactly idm, but they're not digweed either.)

i see kompakt, though, as continuing a german tradition of trance, whereas i think trance in the last gew years has been dominated by sasha/digweed/progressice trance, which is very different from the german stuff, as it is so deoderized and wishy-washy and i don't even know if there is anything for anyone to borrow from it as it is really just dance music minus any sort of conflict, friction, movement, or anything else. it is the real minimal music because at least minimal techno had the freshness of the conviction behind it when it came out, even if the motivations are suspect.

Electronic music has really kind of stabbed itself in the kidneys by oversubgenrification if you ask me. I like it when you could buy a compilation called "Trance Europe Express" or whatever and everything on it was a big hodgepodge from all over the place. Now I go in the shops and it's racks and racks of monorhythms and things I just don't care to drop $15 on anymore. To top it off I think I've really heard everything Afx, µ-Ziq, BoC & Ae etc. have to offer - it's not as if any of them has come up with a new trick since about 1998.

IDM as with 'regula' dance music is treated quite differently in the states I expect. Nobody's putting on a Planet µ single at ten in the morning over here, at least nowhere I've ever been.

the tepid movement into into indietronica is one thing, but what about the electronic/hiphop connection that is becoming increasingly visible, not so much in "urban" Autechre but in a clashing mix of sides.. RJD2 remixing Prefuse 73, Chocolate Industries, Antipop Consortium, Lex records, and so on (although indietronica also means more room for Anticon guest spots and the Morr dudes seem to love undie hip hop). i mean, this is basically "shockah!" but what is this, the underground reaction to Timbaland ripping rave synths, but maybe more like some 2-become-one mutual swapping of "i am hip hop!" and "the future!". so what a delusional double bind as a logical endpoint dusty+parasitic DEATH for everybody?

I don't think the process is nearly as mono-directional as that. There's always miniature big bangs and big crunches happening all the time eg. "Modulations & Transformations 4" was terrifically varied --> "Clicks + Cuts" very focused ---> "Clicks & Cuts 3" much more varied again. And likewise check the sense of expansion from "Hypercity" to "Digital Disco", from "Total 1" to "Total 4". There's multiple processes of division, specialisation, hybridisation, repatriation, infection etc. etc. happening at any given moment.

"When a genre starts to think of itself as 'intelligent,' this is usually a warning sign that it's on the verge of losing its edge, or at least its sense of fun. Usually, this progressivist discourse marks a class-based or generational struggle to seize control of a music's direction; look at the schism between prog rock and heavy metal, between the post-punk vanguard and Oi!, between bohemian art-rap and gangsta, between intelligent techno and 'ardkore. The 'maturity' and 'intelligence' often reside less in the music itself than in the way it's used (for reverent, sedentary consumption as opposed to sweaty, boisterous physicality)."

I like this vision because I imagine the engines of popular production -- dance, hip-hop, etc. churning and transforming and these "intellegent" genres flying off them like sparks, burning bright and then out as they arc away. There never was just one IDM, but a variety of "intelligent" turns made from every dancefloor genre (sometimes multiple ones from each). "Refined" Detroit Techno, Ambient, Drill & Bass, the "respectible" Drum and Bass turn, broken beats, tempa-style garage, MJ-cole style garage, etc.

Microhouse perhaps stands apart because the connection to the dancefloor is more viable and toyed with, and so hence the whole genre feels more viable, still chained to everything happening around it for the moment, and unlike other "intelligent" turns not a flight from the body but a turn more deeply into it.

Also I think the Undie comparison is way off for precisely these reasons -- sure you have your way-out-abstract etc. but undie is a current rather than simply a label for a certain set of sounds, and its dynamic is much more varied with a broader range of dialogue and history. J5 are like detroit revivalism on one hand, then you have pharoh monach who is the jeff mills of hip-hop and mos def which is tempa and EL-P who is a wannabe aphex and Northern State who are, what, the streets?

Having worked in the belly of the beast, quite a lot of these people feel that they are still turning out dance music, its just moved on a bit from farley jackmaster funk. They're doing it because people want to dance to it, and its a terrible shame if their so stuck up their own arses that they can't appreciate at least some of the stuff that sounds more like farley jackmaster funk.

As jess said further up, BOC, the Morr lot, a lot on leaf etc.aren't making dance music, sometimes people dance to it. They are making music informed by dance music and informed by dance music production technique, but its not limited to those influences. If you listen to Boards' early stuff you can see that they are very disco influenced and might have become daft punk, but that's an aside.

At the end of the day its possible to become too reductivist, if you want to genre define call it electronica, its far less loaded but I understand how that might be misinterpreted in the states. At the end of the day there are only two kinds of music. Music you like and music you don't and I find in my little worl those categories are prett fluid.

Having worked in the belly of the beast, quite a lot of these people feel that they are still turning out dance music, its just moved on a bit from farley jackmaster funk. They're doing it because people want to dance to it, and its a terrible shame if their so stuck up their own arses that they can't appreciate at least some of the stuff that sounds more like farley jackmaster funk.

As jess said further up, BOC, the Morr lot, a lot on leaf etc.aren't making dance music, sometimes people dance to it. They are making music informed by dance music and informed by dance music production technique, but its not limited to those influences. If you listen to Boards' early stuff you can see that they are very disco influenced and might have become daft punk, but that's an aside.

At the end of the day its possible to become too reductivist, if you want to genre define call it electronica, its far less loaded but I understand how that might be misinterpreted in the states. At the end of the day there are only two kinds of music. Music you like and music you don't and I find in my little worl those categories are pretty fluid.

but this isnt true! i mean, even if you think that in your own mind, the minute you step out into the real world, when the vacuum is gone, and theres like social context and stuff, you know that isnt right. whether genres are *real* or not doesnt matter, if they are perceived as real by the public, then they exist.

i think perhaps something i missed off my original point is something to do with inclusivity. hip hop does not allow entrance to the undie people, there is the constant self-questioning of "how do i become this", the great problem of desiring authenticity, so it becomes like a parallel movement. it is important for undie people to be seen as hip hop. whereas for dance music, entrance is not a problem, there are no social barriers, go to a house/trance/techno club, make a house/trance/techno track, you are house/trance/techno, so if inclusion/entrance isnt a problem, then separation from the host scene has to be self-defined, the distance self-inflicted.

garage is interesting though, especially the gutter-garage/garage rap or whatever, because the barriers that are inherent in US hip hop are, for the first time, appearing in a home grown UK dance scene. garage as part of the london hardcore continuum (rave-jungle-speed garage-2 step) is now being fractured, it is still part of that continuum, but also now a break from rave, the continuum is distorted, perhaps over?

The most interesting thing to come out of this is that electronica comes out of the fundamentally inclusive post '88 canon. Its seems to be mainly certain sets of fans that are the snobs, not the artists themselves. Which I guess does lend it so degree of apartness and can make it somewhat shitty for newcomers.

I'd never heard the term undie before this thread, but if it is what I think it is then I am suprised by how much you see it as standing apart, at least musically. The recent Mr Lif album, and Antipop consortium album seem very much informed by the techniques propegated by Timbaland and Missy Elliot. But I want to know more of what this 'undie' is before I comment further.

OTM. I thought the whole point of IDM was to keep things interesting and unpredictable but now you have glitch, glitch-hop, microhouse, drill'n'bass etc etc. All these sub-genres are too niche-lead and i hate these idm record labels that only release one particular style of idm - i mean how fucking retarded is that?

the roots (having backed jay-z on his unplugged album, supported em at the emmys) certainly occupy a somewhat liminal (limited too) position in the hiphop continuum, but this is maybe the first time i've heard one of the mainstream hip-hoppers acknowledge the perceived creative gulf between what they're doing and what this other hiphop is doing. jay's made some similar comments before, in "renegade", in "blueprint 2" (the song) - stuff to the effect of "the bling songs are there to move stock, but there's also deep shit for the genuine fan that showcases the real me", but there he wasn't locating any kind of artistic authenticity outside of himself.

isn't there meant to be an rdj2 (r2dj?) remix of "in da club" floating around?

RJD2. And I hope so; "In Da Club"'s big main huge problem is that it sounds instrumentally like it's supposed to score a huge epic cathedral swordfight but the lyrics are all "gimme a hug happy love in the club" or whatever and they just don't fit, maaaan.

also,you're all ignoring the fact that you're complaining about idm in terms that would be far far more appropriate to complain about microhouse,if you do indeed care about how scenes perceive themselves,which seems like only part of the point to me anyway...
the "refined detroit" snobbery/idealism sterling is talking about is (or the idea of idm)is even more evident with microhouse,but a blind eye seems to be turned to this because everyone likes microhouse....
i mean i like all the types of music mentioned above to various degrees,but the ways you are thinking about them are largely an illusion

I'm not saying they're bang on similar but house got away without "relating" to garage because there are already some similarites there surely.

Even the way IDM is consumed makes it difficult to be a part of dance, the album format being so strong in it surely alienates some people. That in itself may be a problem with the dance scene and you have to wonder is any amount of rationalisation enough for the fact that there are seldom any good house/techno albums.

But that would be rockist eh?

Disputed... I think Aphex and to a far lesser extent Paradinas and Squarepusher are the exceptions here. I mean, no one gives a flying shit about Boards of Canada or Autechre or Manitoba as people in the same way they do about Oasis, Jay-Z or Justin Timberlake, do they? This is another reason why I think the 'indie' comparison is a red-herring, the whole 'personality' thing could be applied to pretty much any genre EXCEPT dance - it's not unique to indie or rock.

This is going to go back to that old Massive Attack/DJ Shadow chesnut, I can see it, but this is like saying that In Sides or Sheet One can't be considered part of 'dance' because they are consumed primarily in album format in people's living rooms as opposed to in clubs. To me, and I suspect to loads of other people making this distinction, 'dance music' is music that is primarily based round beats and bleeps... so you don't really need to actually be able to actually DANCE to anything that fits into the broad dance music church, any more than rock music needs to actually ROCK in this day and age (which of course, a lot of it doesn't).

But don't you see the value of aesthetics in this? I mean I don't care about the label "dance music" greatly, but I do care about the aesthetics I believe in being totally ignored. Particularly if the stuff doing it is getting high critical acclaim, it's essentially a get out clause, like thank god those dance types have finally given up on that dancing nonsense and we can give them some respect.

This is a red herring in the context of this discussion though Matt, perhaps, I'm also fairly sure I'm one of the only people willing to argue this point, though not perhaps for any other reason than my feeling of involvement.

I feel like Mike Taylor a bit here, I'm not saying there's not a place for electronic music you don't dance to, I just feel its place isn't under the umbrella of dance music, how can you ever expect to break down barriers when you forfeit what you wanted to break them down with in the first place, or for in the first place.

The distinction is more complicated than that I think.

Disputed again - partly because once again I think Aphex here is the exception, and partly because I *do* think that this happens in other genres. Possibly Eminem is a better example here, or indeed any other tokenistic figure adopted by the NME et al (of which Aphex is certainly one), I just don't agree with this "cult of personality" thing as a signifier of 'indieness'.

Likewise, if you're getting defensive about a perceived bias in the music press in favour of "IDM" and against "proper dance music" its probably worth pointing out that (until recently when the rock press got to prematurely declare dance music 'over'), it was the more conventional electronic/dance acts or DJs who were getting the column inches and the fawning praise ahead of the IDM laptop bods (once again, I think Aphex is the exception here).

I don't really hold with the undie comparison, mostly because the difference between underground and mainstream hip-hop is primarily lyrical whereas with IDM/the rest of dance its largely sonical. But still, with hip-hop there's still the small factor of the actual RAPPING which is a far bigger unifying factor than anything that exists in the myriad strands of dance music.

Obviously there's a lot of overdetermination at work. But I think it's uncontroversial to say that "indie" electronic music is that electronic music which, say, Pitchfork covers in a largely non-disparaging manner (just so you don't think I mean Basement Jaxx or Fischerspooner), and that the writers of Pitchfork probably like this stuff for the reasons cited above among others - and they're not inherently bad reasons, though if you love dance music for other reasons they might appear to be quite wrongheaded or myopic (just as an outright distaste for albums would seem to everyone else). But what's interesting is that all of these traits recreate themselves when you look at all the refined versions of other dance genres - they apply to MJ Cole-in-refinement-mode as much as they do to Boards of Canada. And you can't boil it down by saying that these sorts of values make bad music, or that an adherence to "dance" values makes good music (when obviously a lot of "real" dance music is utter crap as well), but I think it's pretty clear that this tension has a huge effect on a style's development, and how it's received.

To pick up on Sterling's point about microhouse being a sorta-exception, what I think is notable is how it plays with this opposition - there's an emphasis on product as much as artistry, conformity as much as personal innovation, tracks as much albums. Other dance genres do this too obviously, but I think microhouse as a whole has a deliberate playfulness to it that is sort of distinct e.g. it's not as stylistically blinkered as prog, and doesn't have the fall-of-Eden mythology of Detroit Techno or the devotion to absolute reductionism of minimal techno to keep it on the musical straight and narrow.

"I don't really hold with the undie comparison, mostly because the difference between underground and mainstream hip-hop is primarily lyrical whereas with IDM/the rest of dance its largely sonical."

I disagree. The rapping/music relationship within hip hop is always a contested, dynamic and dialectical one; the shift in the nature of rapping in undie vs "generic" rap necessitates an equally strong shift in the nature of production --> my suspicion that there's a deliberate stylistic rigidity to much undie hip hop in sonic terms which incongruously creates the conditions of existence for self-consciously experimental rapping styles. The exception to this is the avant-fringe of Def Jux, Anticon etc - but all of these take their avant cues from IDM as much as hip hop itself, SURPRISE SURPRISE.

Heh... I was actually think thinking of Def Jux and Anticon in particular when I made that comment, so perhaps we might be talking at cross-purposes here. Likewise the recent appearance of hip-hop acts on the Warp roster is worthy of a mention here.

Indie's relationship with IDM is to do with the Aphex-cult-of-star thing Ronan talks about, but not solely determined by it. There's other forces at work: a fear of or distaste for or boredom with actual bodily groove; a desire for the artist to be musically distinct from other artists, to be 'progressing' in isolation to some extent; a focus on albums vs tracks; an appreciation of nice, thoughtful artwork; a sense that there is a theoretical framework behind the music's creation that goes beyond "it's bangin', innit?" etc. etc.

Now, at risk of labouring a point to much... THIS IS NOT UNIQUE TO INDIE! Now, I'm wary that this is on the verge of teetering into a tedious rockism debate, but with regard to the above quote, I pretty much disagree with almost all of that. Bear in mind that Gareth really wasn't referring to the first wave of what has now been conveniently lumped together as IDM regardless of stylistic differences, ie a lot of the stuff that sprung up in the early to mid 90s - we're talking about what actually followed it.

I think my basic problem with IDM is that nowadays it isn't doing the stuff you talk about ENOUGH - a lot of the artists namechecked above are perfectly happy to fanny around in the broad cultural furrows ploughed by that first wave - and in many ways that does reflect it's abdication of the responsibility of doing new and exciting things with music or indeed relating with what's going on elsewhere in electronic/dance music. If, indeed, you agree it has that responsiblity in the first place.

What I just don't get here, is the attitude that that actually seems to fear or distrust electronic album music, as if it's some sort of a betrayal that these guys are making music for sitting down and just listening to. I don't buy this "a fear of or distaste for or boredom with actual bodily groove" because it a - implies that everyone has the same perception of what they want to groove to, and b - that Autechre or Capitol K don't like a nice thick slice of beefy no-nonense techno when they hear it. It's just they don't particularly want to actually MAKE it, any more than Perry Farrell wants to make drill'n'bass whenever he namedrops Richard D James.

"It's just they don't particularly want to actually MAKE it"

I was talking about what the audience look for in the artists, not the artists themselves. And I think one can appreciate all of the things I mentioned while AT THE SAME TIME appreciating regular bangin' dance music.

"THIS IS NOT UNIQUE TO INDIE!"

Of course not - MJ Cole suffers the same traits as IDM but appeals to a very different audience on the whole - but I don't think it's controversial to say that there is an audience overlap b/w indie and IDM that's much stronger than any other audience overlap IDM enjoys apart from the dance audience itself. You don't tend to get nu-metal or country or hip hop or hard rock magazines covering Autechre on a regular basis. To talk about the relationship between IDM and indie, and to talk about the reasons behind this relationship, is not to say that these reasons represent something specifically "wrong" with indie or IDM that doesn't exist elsewhere (or, the short version: don't read so much into my comments).

if we're talking about 2nd gen artists like venetian snares who don't really seem connected to dance as ronan describes it, then saying that IDM does not belong under the 'dance umbrella' makes sense. this is why i don't find 2nd gen artists very interesting, though, because without an idiom to relate to, i think they become quite boring. garage, on the other hand, is pretty clearly derived from house/techno/etc, which i think explains why unlike IDM, garage doesn't see itself as anti-dance.

I think that was very true to begin with, but I'm not so sure about now. Helltime & Producer are, to some extent, IDM; they might be IDM at the point where the definition becomes meaningless, but clearly the emphasis on musical sophistication has become augmented by other, less clear cut distinctions that one can make between, say, H&P and gabba. Actually, with stuff happening like The Mover putting out an album on Tresor it's becoming harder and harder to make any of these sorts of distinctions except in a very vague macro-sense.

"garage, on the other hand, is pretty clearly derived from house/techno/etc, which i think explains why unlike IDM, garage doesn't see itself as anti-dance."

I think garage will increasingly see itself as separate from "Dance Music"; the twist is that the music it's drifting towards (US hip hop, dancehall) is just as much dance music as Dance Music is.

Whereas, whether it's danceable or not, I can't think of any IDM or IDM-related musics that haven't involved an at least partial shift away from the dancefloor compared to their mainstream dance equivalents. Gareth and Tom have told me that some drill'n'bass nights get a lot of people dancing really hard, which is at odds with what I've seen (mind you, none of the venues I've been to which play that stuff had much in the way of a dancefloor).

In general I think the common equation of 'progression' with a reduction in dancefloor energy has been a really limiting one, not in terms of the music which has been made using the equation (a good deal of which is awesome) but because of the music that hasn't been made. Conscious attempts to be innovative in the area of dance-focused groove construction always seem so fleeting, and the moment that they do become conscious of their own innovation the focus on groove itself seems to lessen, as if there's something inherent in the concept of "progress" that neccessitates a certain amount of missing-the-point. But if I was going to construct an IDM canon based on the name alone (intelligent *dance* music)it would include Frankie Knuckles, LFO, Phuture, Sven Vath, 2 Bad Mice, DJ Hype, Marc Acardipane, Dem 2, Timbaland, Mannie Fresh, The Neptunes, Wiley Kat, Lenky, Luomo, Thomas Fehlmann - people who have actually changed or are changing the operation of the groove itself on the body, changing the way we as physical beings react to dance music. Obviously then this music has been made, but only at radical junctures between one musical moment and the next where a gap has been opened... why aren't more musicians aspiring to do as these artists have done?

I'm surprised no one's mentioned sonic texture, which fits into the idea of indie, undie, IDM et al as we seem to be discussing it. Grainy, lo-fi, homemade, hand-tooled--these adjectives are all frequently used when describing these things (think of what gets praised about BoC, Yankee Hotel Foxtrot, Antipop), and they seem to unify the topics at hand more than anything else, even (haha) audience members' skin color. Or is that (texture, haha) a red herring? (This is a real question)

possbily slighly exaggerated,and im repeating myself,but stuff about "sophistication" is like judging mingus on who listens to him now,saying mingus/coltrane/whoever is music solely for wealthy white people to play at dinner parties,while completely ignoring the facts about how the music was actually produced/consumed by the majority of its enthusiasts

i mean loads of people here listen to jazz,myself included,and the fact that a lot of us are white,middle class people living in 2003 doesn't mean that jazz is only music for white middle class people from 2003

and while i know you can dance to it,i think microhouse is a clear move in dance music towards "sophistication" and nondancing,which,for all the dance purists,is surely far more worrying-i mean,idm was never meant to be danced to,it was music to put on,as i say,when everyone sitting around the next morning and no one is arsed mixing,or on a tuesday evening when you're not on for banging techno-thus it is no threat to dance music,it coexists peacefully-each has a time and place
but microhouse is moving dance music away from being all about dancing
(traitors!etcetc)

i am kind of playing devils advocate here,in that i like a lot of the music being discussed on this thread,including idm,"straight up" dance music,and microhouse,bu i think assumptions are being made that should be questioned

i wasnt wanting to say that it was for beardy indie heads or whatever, but that somehow there has been a decoupling from dance music as a whole, and when/how did this happen?

the mingus thing is a good point, but what that really means then is that if lfo/afx are mingus, but what does that make dntel/manitoba?

at one time there seemed to be no schism between idm and dance music. they were the same thing.

now there seems to me to be a gap between the 2. is this true? and if so why? and when?

he got into dub through doing drugs, maybe he thought it was like a combination of wu-tang clan and spacemen 3

it's funny listening to autechre these days, it sounds so "old school", the dance beat - kick, snare - is so audible, the genre hadn't moved into its "anything can be percussion" click-cutty phase yet

i'm thinkin, gareth

I mean I have to say after reading about it here for so long I was expecting microhouse to be like the way Robin puts it, without deciding whether I thought I'd like it or not, I did expect it to be quite difficult.

Now admittedly I've only heard Immer and Digital Disco, so feel free to say I've not heard enough, but I don't find enjoying it and liking it difficult in anyway, in fact it's quite effortless, and also I don't see it as a move away from dancing like Robin says. I was expecting something maybe radically different, and I guess I was pleased to find that all that was different is the groove, and the way you might react to it. In fact along with the likes of Metro Area (not microhouse maybe but anyway) it's made me realise just how danceable lighter house music can be. And the vibe is still totally house to me.

I think it's interesting. I'm not one of the main kompaktevangelist types, not heard a huge amount of the stuff, and so I was surprised to enjoy what I have heard of microhouse so much. Maybe I expected the "house" tag at the end of it to not be justified, and well I was wrong.

The thing about IDM not existing or being a relevent term is kind of interesting too, I mean sure lots of people don't recognise the term or use it, but that isn't really here nor there, lots of these same people probably never discuss anything at all to do with music, and that's neither here nor there either.

I think (to play a bit of devils advocate tennis with robin) if people aren't arsed with the term IDM or have never even heard of it then there's a good chance some of the stuff they're playing is pre the schism gareth refers to.

I don't think I'm really saying IDM is "white" and I guess I'm willing to drop the "indie" accusation (if it is an accusation heh) aswell. But what is the issue for me is the fear of the enemy within, that enemy being an electronic style which runs contrary to almost all the things I enjoy about the electronic music I like, while at the same time enjoys more critical acclaim and becomes the default option, an easier option for people.

I think alot of people around here, myself included, dislike the way the indie mindset often assumes the best music in a genre is the least popular, at least I suspect I'm not alone in this. Hence the sneaking feeling that if something like undie or IDM didn't exist, some fucker would invent it anyway, and a whole load of people would still buy it, whatever the hell it sounded like. Some genres don't work in terms of what is least popular being good, that's the facts.

It's just this old chestnut of "oh I like all genres, but you have to search hard in country/hiphop/dance to find the really precious metal". It's also one of my biggest problems with the fetishisation of the dilletante position in music fan circles.

I hope that explains my position a bit. phrases like "indie" maybe bog the whole argument down.

my main point: outside of Reynolds and ILM, where else has this view that 'IDM' is fundamentally problematic or in trouble in recent years been documented/suggested? how much is it REALLY a problem at all? really there is not much particularly worthwhile i can say on this thread as i find everything on an equal par at the moment in modern music - nothing seems particularly stronger than anything else. the majority of the recent 'gutter garridge' i've heard hasn't actually done that much for me (i'm talking about the general sub-genre here but obv there are always great examples and many of these seem to have come from Dizzy, Wiley etc. of late but i know there's a lot i havent heard) but its hard to gage how popular that stuff really is outside this ILM-based circle that has become my main source for things in music (possibly a problem) e.g. someone I know who prefers the UK garage that has a stronger US influence reckons a lot of punters have been saying Dizzy Rascal and co. are 'killing garage' - unfortunately i can't strengthen that allegation, but i'd like to know what the likes of MJ Cole, Matt Jam Lamont and even Wookie think about the recent success of the 'gutter' sound in the last 18 months...

as for microhouse, Luomo actually bores even me for the most part (and i actually quite like the first 16B album, go figure) and again i'm not sure how favoured this is outside ILM - certainly i think its closer to the 'Dadhouse' tag, akin to Hybrid and Sasha & Digweed style epic-prog (but still uniformly dance/club music) in terms of its 'safeness', cleanliness and anal retentiveness...Akufen possibly sits right on the line between whatever divide there is but i probably need to hear more...

so Archigram and Space Cowboy are making euphoric FUN club music, but they with the likes of Medicine 8 are actually making tunes that i'm sure Sasha, oakenfold and Ashley Beedle LOVE to play out - but those elder statesmen do not seem as interested/motivated to create tracks quite as powerful as 'Rock Music Pays Off' anymore, and given they're all well in their 30s now thats understandable really (other established acts like Orbital and the Chems have also mellowed, and even stagnated in a way) - Sasha actually stayed at the forefront of dance music sonically for years but his particular craft in the hi-fi end of dance production has acquired this 'dated' and 'boring' feel because the technology has not significantly advanced in the last 5 years, at least not noticeably to the average listener and clubber. in contrast, the lo-fi and minimalist side is what now appeal with its freshness and the thrill of immediacy and novel tricks based more on revivalism and old sounds rather than 'new' - again i am tempted to liken this to the period in the late 50s where glitzy 'art deco' fell out of fashion and taking its place was the functional dynamic modernist style.

sorry for going off on a bit of tangent - how that last bit relates to the plight of 'IDM' is unclear!

Don't know about those figures but the proposition strikes me as correct. However I would go on to say that this "10 per cent" (or however much it actually is) also has a disproportionate influence on the music's perception of itself as well as the opinion of outsiders. It's not some random quirk that Manitoba's new album is being discussed within a context of Mercury Rev and The Flaming Lips; it due to the nature of IDM currently that such connections seem obvious and desirable. Likewise the interlinks between indie hip hop and IDM are as much a result of the possibility of critical and commercial acceptance (ie. the existence of an overlapping fanbase) as they are purely aesthetic motivations. In short, the type of music that is being made is being affected by the shift in fanbase. The same process happened in drum & bass (a shift towards techno) and UK Garage (a shift towards hip hop) - the sonics changed to reflect the general tastes of the changing audience. This is a totally natural and ever-present process within all forms of music.

" I was expecting something maybe radically different, and I guess I was pleased to find that all that was different is the groove, and the way you might react to it."

Ha ha Ronan you have summed up in one sentence my entire critical outlook on dance music!

"It's just this old chestnut of "oh I like all genres, but you have to search hard in country/hiphop/dance to find the really precious metal". It's also one of my biggest problems with the fetishisation of the dilletante position in music fan circles."

I dislike that kind of dilettante too though - the one that justifies their limited exposure to an area by pretending they're only listening to the cream of the crop - but there's another type of dilettante that is much less foolish, thankfully.

"incidentally, the only times i have heard or seen the terms 'IDM', 'undie' and 'microhouse' EVER are on this board - for the people who use them, where are these terms occurring elsewhere?"

IDM is taken from the name of the internet mailing list that discusses, um, IDM. Microhouse is from Phillip Sherburne's article in The Wire. Undie is just a compound of underground and indie with humorous connotations.

I don't think people here are necessarily accusing IDM of being in dire straits, but rather the extent to which it and dance music are going their separate ways. Incidentally, I actually think that the two are probably more connected than they were, say, three years ago; the rise of microhouse, electroclash and glitch techno have all created interzones that encourage listeners to accept and appreciate the effects of groove-based musics on the body; possibly someone who doesn't like dance music getting into IDM now (unless they specifically limit themselves to eg. the Manitoba/Four Tet/Prefuse 73 strains) is more likely to end up liking dance music than if they had gotten into the music at any time in the last, oh, seven years.

I think that all the retro rockers and electroclash folx are part of the same dissatisfaction, regressing because the outer limits have been reached, or so we're given to suspect. I myself as I stated upthread have been really disappointed with new music for about two years now, at least in the arena under discussion.

I wonder whether it will all dissolve in favor of some better, purer pop sounds anytime soon. Maybe the long-imagined mishmash of everything from the last century will finally appear and no man will ever go hungry again, who knows. Can't get here soon enough for me, though, I can tell you that.

and I think that Reynolds may have already provided the answer to this problem didnt he? his biggest frustration it seems (when he was more of an evangelist, iguess), was that people were unwilling to accept dance on its own terms... the music itself doesnt really matter as much as whether it is received as "proper music, not dance shite for the proles", ya know? I mean, really, the key to Reynolds and maybe even to all of dance is the quote he put in the intro from Hoskyns (sp?) about losing "knowingness". wasnt the problem with indie always less the music itself, but more how it became so unimportant in the face of snobbery, tribalism, and the search for obscure knowledge for the sake of the egos of the searchers? I mean, superchunk is just a pop-rock band until the rhetoric is added...

my stake in all of this is really similar to what has been mentioned upthread by others... what Ronan said about "an electronic style which runs contrary to almost all the things I enjoy about the electronic music I like, while at the same time enjoys more critical acclaim and becomes the default option, an easier option for people"...
Ronan what do you think of the tapes? ;-)

Aaron I will mail you this afternoon about the tapes.

i dunno,i think that,whatever you think of it,and i love some of it and some of it just wrecks my head,but surely electroclash was dance music dissolving in favour of pure pop?

Can I add that maybe what worries me is that, well, the thing that always got be about rock was, at its worst, bad rock criticism seems to think that any schmuck playing a guitar is automatically more real, intelligent, authentic, etc., than anybody playing anything else (ie worst folk artist better than best rapper), and I worry that IDM/indieelectronic could repeat that scenario, simply replacing the guitar for laptop... and I think a lot of this has to do with being in America, where the scene is small and vulnerable and could easily fall prey... of course, maybe I am just feeling paranoid this morning ;-)

But even Chuck Berry, or the Blackhearts, had a rhetoric, even though maybe it's faded and hard to remember now. Folk singers in the 50s and 60s had one too, among other things in their implicit rejection of the things Chuck Berry could use to make you move. But rhetoric isn't added, like you'd add milk to coffee, it might have been what made them form the band in the first place. I don't see anything wrong with having a rhetoric.

I mean, is art creation or filtration? Does it gain its power from what is made, or from what is left out?