Sure, to clarify though, I'm not making a solid genre argument by referring to his style as techno so much as I'm making a method argument. That is, whether or not it fits established expectations of particular techno genres/sub-genres is less important from my point of view that it fits an idea of what techno is, i.e., the sound of machines. That said, I think that it's fair to call it minimal abstract techno, I'm not really sure what else you'd call it. It is a rhythmic style that is enforced by the looping nature of his methods.Vortifex wrote:I think I would put Graham Dunning into the category of something like a sound artist, similar to Tarek Atoui (the Brian Ferneyhough of electronica, not necessarily a complement), rather than techno artist. His art is more about the entertaining visual aspect of his method than it is about the musical result.
Sure, no doubt, and, in fact, my criticism of live acts is often that they put method over substance. Here I mean substance with respect to the genre in question. Consequently, when I attend noise festivals my expectations are very different than when I attend a warehouse party.Innovative method is also important for artists like Aphex Twin, but like so many other producers his method is a secret alchemy that's kept hidden from view - the end product has always been what mattered most. Actually in his case his mischievous refusal to talk openly and honestly about his method is part of his image.
I do think that what Graham does is interesting. I would probably refer to it as "techno turntablism." It has many of the quirks of turntablism with some of the aesthetic of techno.