Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
directly contradicted straight away, then 2 more times in a small interview. he must've been sweating...
It's the second time a P4k journalist has gotten utterly slated for poor knowledge of UK bass, Joker basically gave one word answers to an entire interview a couple of months ago. I have a feeling this Kode9 one was by email though, it seems a little disjointed to be a conversation...
They really just need to get Blackdown doing more stuff on there pronto.
Also, Kode9's three hour set SLAYED Corsica Studios on Saturday.
Pitchfork: You've talked a lot about dread in music, especially in reggae and dub culture. As styles like wonky and funky have grown out of dubstep, do you think that's a reaction to the obsession over dread and bass, the way it made negative a positive (I think in an interview, you mentioned how it was a form of collective exuberance over dread sounds)?
K9: I don't think either of the sub-genres you mention have grown out of dubstep. They came from elsewhere (hip hop, grime, house, garage, funk), in parallel and have just resonated with people, some of whom were also dubstep fans. There is an uninformed myth circulating just now that makes dubstep way too important in the musical universe-- don't believe the hype. Where these other musics have resonated with dubstep fans, I don't think that is in reaction to an over-obsession with bass, but a reaction to a number of things: minimalism, mid-range riffage, boring rhythms, and lack of tone color. Anyway, dubstep didn't invent bass, it just zoned in on it. Bass, to varying depths, is the foundation to most dance musics.
...it pretty much nails what a lot of people have been trying to say and get across for a while.
I also love the way Pitchfork are insisting on using the term 'wonky', even though everyone has distanced themselves from it straight away. As far as I remember Kode hates it as a term as well.
They added it to the title of Blackdown's 'The Year In Dubstep, Grime and Funky' column last month. He said so on his blog, which made me laugh a bit.
esspecialy the casual fans, its hard to get a grasp of otherwise. But thats the thing the loosly connected dubstep worl is in flux right now and wont be pinned down any time soon even people well into the scene cant do it and most dont really want to.
p.s. I still like the name wonky it cracks me up its such a stupid name. I don't really use it though, I also read that saying someones music is Laser Bass in LA's Low End Theory is like being rasist and you soon get destroyed hahah. Same probibly goes for wonky.
under my last comment dunno why its here, maybe my button fingers went spazzy or maybe dis is being strange its to hard to tell.
Before I started getting properly into electronic stuff I used to get really confused as to what exactly constituted each different genre. It was properly hard to tell the difference (and occasionally still is), other than obvious ones like jungle or d'n'b. I guess for people dabbling in UK derived bass music right now the sheer diversity of it all must put your head in a bit of a spin - sometimes I'm not even sure I'm managing to keep track of it very well.
All of this having been said, you don't interview a figurehead like Kode9 without having your head properly screwed on about these things... Well, at least not without looking a tad foolish.
I can't see a name sticking for a while though that neatly sums it up. Its just going to get more confusing its gonna be brilliant!
Blackdown should interview Kode9 really, he's not done it yet in all this time. But I think a lot of what he wants covering was done in that epic wire interview a while ago so we'll prob have to wait a while yet for that.
But so many people I know think of dubstep as wib-wob stuff, so whenever I try to tell someone about an artist they'd like I try to avoid using the word at all costs... Hence 'bass heavy, techno and garage influenced dance music', or somesuch.
That Wire interview was gold, I don't see any need for in depth interviews with him for a while to be honest as they covered so much ground.
Wire tend to do long interviews like that - once an artist has been interviewed there, pretty much everything they say to the press in the following three or four years is a repeat of what was already said.
I'm more than happy just to hear everything called dubstep and let the confusion commence really. I can see dubstep getting a bit of a backlash from general passers by just thinking its jelly on a plate step though but its just the way it goes, most people in the uk think indie is all scouting for girls and oasis, or think all electro is justice or fake blood and stuff like that.
real fiction, eh?
it sounds really interesting.
The man's got a lot to say about a pretty wide range of things.
"K9: Audio virology is not a metaphor."
Yes it it.
He as much as says so within two sentences: "It maps real processes of mutation, transmission, contagion and memory within music culture."
'maps' being the operating word; in metaphor theory 'mapping' is used to refer to how the 'source domain' (virology) and 'target domain' (musical reception) are aligned through the metaphorical 'ground' (in this case, the way in which both fields relate to transmission, hosting and suchlike).
By using signifiers relating to the semantic field of virology, you initiate the metaphor regardless of whether you want it to be taken literally or not. If he wanted it to be taken literally he should have invented his own terms for the processes. However, this would have hindered understanding of the subject, hence why he explained it in metaphorical terms - it makes it easier to follow, even if the fields are not perfectly comparable.
The P4K guy made a couple of errors/had a couple of disagreements that could easily have been smoothed out in post-production to make the writer look a bit better, but weren't.
Personally speaking as somebody interested but not really an aficionado of this type of music, I found it quite an illuminating exchange, not least because it's not just a couple of people agreeing with each other in nerd speak.
'There is an uninformed myth circulating just now that makes dubstep way too important in the musical universe'
Well if it's an uninformed myth, better it be put straight/contradicted than never raised in the first place. Certainly I think that's interesting for the more general reader to see, and I think general readers should have a right to read articles on this world.
And tbh I find this a lot more endearing than when P4K is on notionally firmer ground and just get insufferably pompous on how 'right' they are - see those Beatles review, for starters...
Especially the part from "personally" to "nerd speak." Needed to be said. Also, the arguing over names has gotten out of control. Who the fuck cares? WHAT DOES IT SOUND LIKE? That's all that matters.
thats why it was good and why kode9 is usualy very interesting, it was just cool to see a pitchfork person corrected a bit instead of the usual back slapping. Kode is always like that in interviews really who ever interviews him. I dont think anyone was saying it was a bad interview and I think the destroying comment was just flipant.
he's spot on about the dubstep myth right now though he's articulated it well and its good to see that in a place like p4k.
I liked the article, sounds like for the same reasons you liked the article, I just possibly misread the tone as a bit elitist. But yeah, it was a good read and I think the disagreement helped.
THAT SAID - Stealthy is also correct.
but I'm not to fussed about pseud cliches and I bet its a mission to get away from anything like that when your talking about your philosephy book to p4k.
I think it's nice to see people take Pitchfork without the kind of reverence that can usually surround it. That's why it was so entertaining reading Joker obviously not caring who it was interviewing him.
As much as it gets slated on here, I've got very little problem with P4k - anything I don't like, I just don't read - and they've turned me on to some fantastic music over the past few years. From my end it's more the feeling that they missed a trick by removing Martin Clark's contributions from the site for the majority of the year. If you read most of his 'Month of...' columns, he writes in a pretty jargon free way and makes a big effort to tie the rapid changes within the scene to what's going on outside of it.
The interview itself is a good one. @Luis_Carruthers, I think the arguing over names is fair enough. It's a notoriously swift moving set of genre parameters and next to impossible to keep track of if you're not listening to more or less everything that comes out. The fact that something big and wobbly and ravey can be lumped in with material that sounds more like 90s warp, UK garage or Berlin techno, all under the name 'dubstep', does little favours for anyone not knowing where to start listening.
haha I think thats how it was done for the guardian purple trilogy peice, hence the purple-rainbow-raining-sweets-on-a-rainbow-road-from-mario story haha
It's an (apparently) pretty honest piece that throws up some interesting answers, I don't really know what your definition of 'shoddy journalism' is in this instance, but given the journalist in question has editorial control of the way in which he comes across, I don't think I'd fault him for keeping a bit of tension in. I mean, it's not a technical points scoring exercise, what would actually be gained by the journalist coming across as infallible when it's not him being interviewed at the answers are interesting? Maybe this is of more interest to the man on the street than the dubstep forum hardcore, but I don't think that's a bad thing.
they just moan about dubstep dieing, joke threads, saying 'BIG' and/or 'SAFE' to threads about new releases.
Not much gets discussed to be honest, a lot of peeps know whats going on though its super geeky but a lot of it is still just as oblivious as random indie sites are to what Kode9 has to say. This thread will prob have more comments than the equivilent on DSF.
I liked this interview anyway.
And yeah, the book sounds potentially pretty astonishing!
you write about the 'disagreements' in the interview and that's why i think it's poor journalism. in a couple of instances we're reading the words of someone who is correct (k9) and someone who is incorrect (the journalist) and the man on the street might think they're disagreements.
did jungle clubs exist in edinburgh in the early '90's? from the interview you might say yes, but that could be wrong. did funky come from dubstep? from the journalist's words you might say yes, but it did not. it's about right and wrong, not disagreements. maybe this all makes me elitist, but i think if the journalist got his facts right it would be a better piece for the man on the street.
Anyway, been talked to death at this point, but this thread has made me consider whether or not the interviewer would have elicited the same depth of answers had he not set up an idea which Kode9 could then debunk.
And yeah, the book should be at the very least an interesting read.
Yeah, okay. This whole article could take in about £60 in the next Pseud's Corner...