Listening to Electronica: A Guide for the Perplexed Noob

[Jafo]

Howdy. As a classically-trained musician -- yes, a l4m3r -- I could really use such a guide. Anybody have one?

OK, now that you're done laughing at the clueless noob, can somebody give me some pointers? Because I find all of this quite bewildering! I mean, it's as if you all eschew melody and harmony, and just focus on sound and static repetition, using tonal changes for contrast, and loops as motifs. The only center I can find is in the rhythm tracks -- indeed, it seems as if there are multiple centers, or no centers at all. And the sounds are so very harsh, dissonant, and aggressive; there is no place of rest.

Please don't take this the wrong way; I wish to understand, not offend. Having followed many discussions here, I know you to be intelligent and well-intentioned musicians, and that the error is mine. So, how should I listen to your music?

Thank you.

[ew]

You're halfway there- you see where we're bending (or destroying ) rules and conventions to get our points across. So, discard those rules as a prerequisite to what makes good music, and listen to it as SOUND, instead of music.
ew

[Joxer the Mighty]

http://www.di.fm/edmguide/edmguide.html

Might be of help.

[Bunnyboy]

of course there is ishkur's guide, but the best way to use that is to read about/listen to the examples and then not to follow them. He is very scathing


You are in a good position - you know the rules, therefore you can break them musically, as opposed in a random way

get some records by people you have heard of. check out the warp records site and the planet mu website for snippits (among others).

get some records by (IMHO) Autechre and the Aphex Twin and really fuckin enjoy them. Also read some interviews with people like that in music tech magazines - there was a great one in SoS with Autechre some time last year talking about the gear that they use and the reasons for making their beautiful racket

[Jafo]

Some seriously good stuff here... Thanks!

[liars&ashes]

So, how should I listen to your music?

----With your ears of course
----Granted there is a lot of repetition,and overall lack of musicality in a lot of electronic music,there is also a whole new world of sounds and sound interactions,I know that's what got me interested in it.
----I would think that if you can pick out the individual parts of a symphony to hear/enjoy/understand it,those same techniques can more or less be applied to electronic music. Another thing that helps over time is,the more of it you make,the more you will understand what you have heard on other people's tracks.

Jeff

[Jbravo]

in my experience, a person's understanding of music evolves, taking small leaps from one stepping stone to another, from one type of music that is instantly accessible eventually reaching another one that was previously bewildering. I'm not sure it's possible or even worthwhile to make a giant leap from one to the other without understanding all the stages inbetween the two.... That's just my personal observation based on how my taste in music has diversified and evolved over the years, from ABBA (everyone gets them right?) to more avant-garde electronic stuff about 25 years later.

As long as you like something and are passionate about it, what does it matter?

[anoke]

The only center I can find is in the rhythm tracks -- indeed, it seems as if there are multiple centers, or no centers at all. And the sounds are so very harsh, dissonant, and aggressive; there is no place of rest.

Huh? You already grasped the essential theory. </sarcasm> Actually - I'm wondering the very same thing. I think it's about creating "perceived tension between elements". Though we are now talking about genre that still is in somewhat constant flux..


but answering your question..

The guide in which Joxer posted URL to is a classic. Listening music always is a good thing - compilations might be useful.

Reading both (and following links) should give you some insight aswell:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronica
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambient


(disclaimer: I know only little theory. I envy you. I know "too much" though.. Most of the time I'm fighting "i know there's a way to do this easily, I'm not going to spend next three days trying different things to find a solution "-feeling - hence I get nothing done...))

[Borogove]

OK, now that you're done laughing at the clueless noob, can somebody give me some pointers? Because I find all of this quite bewildering! I mean, it's as if you all eschew melody and harmony, and just focus on sound and static repetition, using tonal changes for contrast, and loops as motifs.

Here's some random thoughts for you to chew on.

Since a major portion of "electronica" is intended as dance music, rhythm is way more important than melody, and the intent is to engage the booty first, the viscera second, and the brain last. Classical music goes in pretty much the other direction. You could have a bunch of cavemen hanging out around the campfire with nothing but sticks and rocks and you have the basic ingredients for a dance party right there (no offense to anyone intended there, even the cavemen). So anything beyond that is gravy.

Much of classical music is transmitted via the written page. Melody and rhythm are expressed very clearly there, dynamics slightly less so, and timbre much less so. So the attitude there is that you can reorchestrate the music for different instruments, for full orchestra or for string quartet, and it's the "same piece of music". An analog filter sweep, on the other hand, would lose its essence if it went to piano or flute.

Hmm I had more points but they vanished into the ether.

[dystonia_ek]

As a classically-trained musician

There's much modernist post-classical music that's less melodic and rhythmic than most electronica... surely Warp or Skam label stuff should go down like a fine wine after Xenakis or something. Much orchestral composition, even, since the 1950's has focused on timbre less than harmony (check the shimmering, rumbling tone-cluster work of Ligeti and Penderecki from the 60's).
I actually find a the bulk of 'electronica' much too conservative these days.

Ishkur's guide is very high on opinion and loose with facts, so take it with a whole shaker of salt. Many hybrid strains of music combined to give birth to this loose 'electronica' or 'idm' thing... Krautrock, cosmische, avant-gardism of the academic and non-academic schools, dub, post-punk, industrial, techno, hip-hop, house... it's hard to find decent signposts in such vague terrain.

[vurt]

hehe
just open your ears,but remember this you are not in error at all because you want to listen,the only people in error are those who will not even try.
also electronica covers much and often breaks down into many genres and on and on it breaks down until each artist is his own genre well in my opinion thats all best ignored and left to 2 categories good n bad.
a few artists you may want to check out from the many years and hours worth of stuff available are ...

brian eno(master soundsmith)
aphex twin(pretender to enos throne)
wendy carlos(where classical meets electronica)

maybe not the best of everything but definitely a few artists who may introduce you lightly into fresh waters welcome aboard it may well be a pleasant ride

[bengersfood]

Well, I'd agree with Anoke (but without the sarcasm) - to me the body of your comment:

"... eschew melody and harmony ... focus[es] on sound and static repetition ... tonal changes for contrast ... loops as motifs. The only center ... is in the rhythm ... [or] there are multiple centers, or no centers"

reads as a pretty accurate description of the stuff that matters in most current electronic music. If (for example) melody is the thing that really matters to you in music, then "electronica" is going to be a tough listen.

That said, the current scene is pretty broad - I would think you'd find an entry point if you look around. If I can suggest a personal (and recent) favorite, try Efterklang, who seem to mix some traditional song structures (and instrumentation) with weirdly glitchy stuff. Their album Tripper is excellent, but you can download a nice free mp3 at http://www.efterklang.net/

[wrench45us]

well my thoughts are electronica is a much wider and more diverse neighborhood than you've been exposed to thus far.

ishkur's should help significantly
and really trip-hop has traditional song structures and just adds the textures and edge that comes from electronic instruments

maybe stay away from the ebm and industrial for a few days.

[shamann]

Apart from some of the good answers already given, for me much of what makes up electronic music derives from several music theories of the latter half of the 20th century.

A key point is that there are no specific rules. Traditional rules in Western music emphasized really only one way to approach music, and tended to fall into disarray if you tried to extend them to other methods. One could invent new rules (the avant-gardist approach: see Stockhausen or Boulez) or eschew them altogether (the experimentalist approach: see John Cage, Morton Feldman).

A lot of electronic music today is just a popularized (read: less dogmatic) version of minimalism, so you get repetitive structures, minimal progressions, emphasis on micro or macro events and timbre, thematic move towards the material and away from the representational, etc.

If you're up for lots of reading, here are some books I can recommend:

Genesis of a Music by Harry Partch
Haunted Weather by David Toop
Ocean of Sound by David Toop
Silence by John Cage
American Minimal Music by Wim Mertens
Experimental Music by Michael Nyman
Give My Regards to Eighth Street by Morton Feldman
Electronic and Experimental Music by Thom Holmes

That'll give you a good start. Also worth looking at Trevor Wishart's writings, as they really are the only substantial works on a theory of approach for computer music.

Cheers,
Steve

[cron]

There's a great deal of electronica which is melodically and harmonically interesting. One of the most overlooked aspects of Aphex Twin (though mostly his early stuff) is his knack for a subtle melody. See if you can track down a copy of I Care Because You Do.

Fennesz is another artist at the other end of the electronic spectrum making very harmonically complex music with little more than a laptop and a guitar. Walks a tightrope between traditional song structure (melodies, chords, etc), and completely freeform noise. Brilliant stuff, maybe try to find Endless Summer by him, or Venice.

If you're classically trained, maybe listening to some older electroacoustic music or reading electroacoustic theory may interest you. Pierre Schaeffer's Objects Sonore makes for interesting reading.