New Rave. The return of electronics to the forefront?

Watching Glastonbury on TV last weekend, I noticed heavy over-usage of the term 'New Rave' by the presenters. It sounds like a vast umbrella term invented by the NME, admittedly some months ago, but does it have any substance? Are we on the cusp of a 'New Rave' wave?

So far I've heard the likes of The Klaxons, Simian Mobile Disco, Hot Chip, LCD Soundsystem, Ladytron, Client, and probably others, all thrown under this 'convenient' term. Is this just a reaction to boredom with guitar music or a genuine movement with the likes of The Chems and sleeping Hartnoll Brothers as its overlords?

Discuss. I for one hope it kicks off big time. Dusting off the glow-sticks as we speak. PHAT!

is that interchangable with electroclash? or not 'indie' enough for that?

His Holiness, The Pope wrote: is that interchangable with electroclash? or not 'indie' enough for that?

Wasn't electroclash about 2005?.. I dunno. Not bought the NME for years. Not hip enough. I'm not sure its about being 'indie' anymore. Seems to be more about a number of artists making albums twiddling the knobs, Cambo style, and being taken seriously.

Load of shite. CSS are Blink 182 (juvenile lyrics) mixed with decent dance choons.

The rest are kerap.

Big Black wrote: Load of shite. CSS are Blink 182 (juvenile lyrics) mixed with decent dance choons.

Well they are from Brazil. Should stick to exporting footballers.

Burt Reynolds wrote:

Big Black wrote: Load of shite. CSS are Blink 182 (juvenile lyrics) mixed with decent dance choons.

Well they are from Brazil. Should stick to exporting footballers.

Haha Under 21s this last while has been great value. Intriqued by the direction some of the musuk is going though. Cleaner bit stronger and as long as it's not just a repeat looped back track.. Cheers myspace for links all over. Even Interpol's over there.

New Rave? Wasn't "rave" revisted in the late '90s and was later stopped because of all the E being consumed? I think those bands mentioned are more "electroslash" or "new-synthpop" (as opposed to old school synthpop, which actually had a melody).

Fuckin LABELS!!!!!!!!!

There's not a record in the charts that wasn't recorded with all the digi-fu available.

The days of "electronic music" as an entity are 10 years behind us.

Heavy metal bands use more gadgets now than Kraftwerk or New Order even had access to.

But if there's a trend towards live machines I'm all for it. We need more Gillians (and chems and Hartnolls), and less mimers/dat-dancers.

Electronic/techno muzik has gone crazy nowadays. String instruments are no longer used. Almost everything is programmed. Just a touch of a button and all the music comes in. Musical talent is not much of an issue now. Everything's beat music now, not much of rhythm.

I really have nothing against it. I listen to Client, Hot Chip, Ladytron, and of course, the popular ones Paul Van Dyk, ATB, Chicane, Chemical Bros., etc.

Call it electronic, rave, electroclash, trance, electronica, and the hundered new genres that came out recently. The problem is, its really hard to distinguish one from the other.

Anyway, the groups you've mentioned are more of electronic or electroclash genre, ratner than new rave.

Anyway, here's a picture from Glastonbury: :)

That's right subcultured, the machines write the music, no talent required

PLANK!

Let's get something straight, with the possible exception of the Roland Transistor Bassline model TB303, electronicc instruments do NOT create a damned thing, that's why if you put a genius at the controls you get Impact(the Earth is Burning) or The Box or Blue Monday or Star Guitar, and if you put a spastic in front of the machines you get Alice Deejay/other shite that goes fruntump fruntump fruntump for 8 minutes.

And as for playing live with machines, well a traditional instrumentalist only needs to worry about his competency and self expression, an electronic artist must worry about those as WELL as whether the flummytron9000 will actually come in in the right key (New Order used to get fucked by Random Tuning Syndrome all the time, yes, even the digital kit could go wobbly).

The other thing that an "machinist" needs that others do not, is the ability to switch from left brain to right brain and back at will, or to sync them up (read a study once that says the node between the two hemispheres is designed differently in Japanese people, hence their penchant for giving dull technical concepts names like "circuit of the winter crane" and "gentle wind subroutine"). Going from creative mode to "FFS work! you jumped up car alarm!" mode and back is taxing. It gets much worse (to the point where even an old synth geek like me cannae handle it for long) when doing everything on a digital audio workstation, where all instruments and effects share a screen an an input device....like painting the house through the letterbox!

As an aside the TB303 is insane, it was built insane and gets worse with age (all current models that have not been refitted will have alzheimers owing to the long-ago failure of their onboard powercell). They are so TORUOUSLY hard to program that the fact that, when left alone in a dark room for a few years, they program themselves by cosmic ray and quantum means (no, really), is not so much a fault as a saving grace. I can confirm from personal experience,everthing that professor Hartnoll says on the subject of 303's.

Doctor? Occassional lecturer in synthesis, sampling technology and "computers, electronics and improvisation".

reason and fruityloops

Burt Reynolds wrote: Watching Glastonbury on TV last weekend, I noticed heavy over-usage of the term 'New Rave' by the presenters. It sounds like a vast umbrella term invented by the NME, admittedly some months ago, but does it have any substance? Are we on the cusp of a 'New Rave' wave?

Its actually called "Pop" music. Strange I know.

I actually quite like it. Me and John who some of here know went to see Klaxons twice in one day at The Ritz. After the first one, we were told by some 17 year old that he didnt like it because "It was full of kids." Awesome.

Burt Reynolds wrote: I for one hope it kicks off big time. Dusting off the glow-sticks as we speak. PHAT!

www.paloozahead.com/burt

I was at Sonar last week and when Simaian Mobile Disco came on in the main room it emptied pronto. I thought that their stuff was horrible lightweight over stylised nonsense (but then I had been listening to an absolutely amazing 2hr set by Richie Hawtin). The fella in the other room (Ben Mono), in contrast, played a lovely mix of tunes from classic old school house, funk and what have you, to bring everyone down gently. We tried to go back into see the Simians as we thought we might have been a bit harsh. But they were still shit. And Timo Maas was on in the other room- more bollocks!

Nu-rave. it won't last

Wow! Thanks Doc for that info! I really don't know mych about sythesizers and keyboard models except for the brand name, and not the model. Anyway...

If you watched 24 Hour Party People (i'm sure you did!), it was mentioned there about the Haçienda how the machines replaced the performers. As it was mentioned in the movie, "you don't need bands...." Moreover, more lines from the movie "they are applauding the DJ, not the music, not the musician, not the creator, but the medium. This is it, the birth of rave culture..." So basically, New Order, Factory, Tony Wilson, etc. were the pioneers in this thing.

But of course, the difference is, New Order still plays string and percussion instruments. And their musical talents are not much recoznized. As the title of Alice Deejay's only album says "Who Needs Guitars Anyway?"

Electronically produced music can hardly be called 'new'...

I notice The Chemical Brothers being referenced a lot as the way live electronic music should be? Why? Take away their visuals and it's just two blokes twiddling knobs while the sequencers plod along. Not saying this is a good or a bad thing but don't make them out to be some kind of creative geniuses.

The majority of my favourite tunes fall within the very broad church that is "electronica" but hardly any of these tunes have ever been played "live". When your Kevin Saunderson's and Juan Atkins' were changing the musical landscape forever they weren't even thinking about playing the stuff live. They were just thinking about creating amazing music.

Personally I think a lot of these acts creating live shows out of sequenced, instrumental music are doing it purely to tap into a consumer base who have difficulty understanding anything that differs from the music=band=concerts=tshirts model i.e. indie kids. The real home of electronic music has always been and will continue to be the clubs.

'New Rave' is a loada bollocks. It's not new, an it certainly aint rave

Don't get me wrong, I really like Klaxons and Simian Mobile Disco, but anyone who thinks shite like CSS and Hadouken etc are the future of 'new rave', or indie, or indie electro, or whatever label you give it, are seriously deluded.

old lead foot wrote: reason and fruityloops

Are minor offenders compared with *EEJay.

I would suggest they are not actually music progs at all, but rather DJ software. And I've always hated people being paid 2 grand an hour cos thhey can put a record on anyway.

You CAN do some useful stuff with Reason, although it's ruddy hard to step out of the "cult of the four bar loop" with it.

Make everyone use Cubase (or Logic or Sonar), and let nature take care of itself.

Dj/club "producer" using Cubase.....beeek book book book beek book book book and fuck all else.

GlasVegas wrote: I notice The Chemical Brothers being referenced a lot as the way live electronic music should be? Why? Take away their visuals and it's just two blokes twiddling knobs while the sequencers plod along. Not saying this is a good or a bad thing but don't make them out to be some kind of creative geniuses.

The majority of my favourite tunes fall within the very broad church that is "electronica" but hardly any of these tunes have ever been played "live". When your Kevin Saunderson's and Juan Atkins' were changing the musical landscape forever they weren't even thinking about playing the stuff live. They were just thinking about creating amazing music.

Personally I think a lot of these acts creating live shows out of sequenced, instrumental music are doing it purely to tap into a consumer base who have difficulty understanding anything that differs from the music=band=concerts=tshirts model i.e. indie kids. The real home of electronic music has always been and will continue to be the clubs.

Running the machines live is an art in and of itself. With the Chems, their interactive involvement ranges from, push go, leap about and move faders, to more or less creating new pieces on the fly.

I tend to agree that there is a lot of bluff in "live electronic music", and probably for the reason you suggest. But for me, as someone who has done the deed, it IS important to play this stuff live, and of paramount importance to make it a unique performance, something a tape machine cannot do (unless run by Alex Paterson...whole Orb first tour, 8 dat machines, yet a different gig each night). There's something amazing about standing over a pile of vicious,near glowing electronic, and I fuckin loves it. If I had to hold up a real post child for doing it live it would be orbital, Man you can hear the ground hum on their 303's so live are they :D

Point taken about clubs, and the early greats, but there are two counter points I would make. Dance music in clubs has little or no chance to experiment or add real musical depth, bash bash bash bash bash bash 140times a minute and don;t you dare pull that beat out for more than 16 bars if you don;t want hung, whereas you can get away with pissing about and being more adventurous in a concert environment ( not to mention thhat you can stop between tunes to reload instead of....well I won't get into the mechanics of keeping the beat going with machines). The other thing you are forgetting is that the chaps you mentioned were often seen in a DJ box with an open reel tapeeck, a 909, a 303 and whatever other groovy circuits they could find.....Like Hawtin said..."Decks, FX and 909's"/#. It beat lifting a tone arm on and acting like you made the record...I wonder if the security guard at the louvre turns the lights on and acts like he painted the Mona-L.

Bottom line, I've played hundreds of gigs in a band as bass slave (and 2 as keys, horrible). and I've done hmmmmm 30 or 40 on my own (or with Rich/others) electronically, and I know for a fact which one takes the more effort, and which pays better emotional dividend. I dunno about talent mind :D

Point of Order, the home of electronic music is the stage, there were electronic gigs long before disco. If you ask me, the true home of electronic music is either in the KGB surveilance labs ( where the theremin was designed) or The BBC Radiophonic Workshop (no point explaining that if you need it explained really)

Steve One wrote: Electronically produced music can hardly be called 'new'...

How so?

Newer than music made with accoustic drums, the oldest machine known to man (yes, older than the wheel). Or bits of animal flesh stretched over bits of tree.

I knew this cocksucker of a folk mandolin player once and he started a fight with me one night about "natural" music. He banged on about wood and gut and all the hippy shite on earth. He then asked me with a sneer, "and what do YOU use then".

My reply..... "sand, rocks, ancient animal and plant remains".

Just as natural and nothing had to die just to makke it.

I wonder if the security guard at the louvre turns the >lights on and acts like he painted the Mona-L.

Not that I'd want to defend over-hyped DJs, but maybe a fairer comparison would be with the _curator_ of a gallery, on the grounds that they select their 'exhibits'. And folk like Charles Saatchi or Roy Strong seem to be as full of themselves as any DJ.

PS are the Klaxons any good, their previous cd is only £4 in woolies. But I don't want to repeat the awful mistake of buying the Kaiser Chiefs and the Zutons cds solely 'cos they were only £3 each.

Is it just me, or is 95% of this thread in some kind of bizarre dyslexic txt spk??

Doctor Clayhead wrote: Is it just me, or is 95% of this thread in some kind of bizarre dyslexic txt spk??

my bits are just the usual subtle blend of techlish and gibberish.

Doctor? wrote: I knew this cocksucker of a folk mandolin player once...

Oh surely they all are, Cambo!

You can't even walk down the street today without one forcing his filthy cap into your path.

:\pimp3:

This one was a cocksucker's cocksucker.

Besides, it's buskers with accordians that want exterminating first.

Of all the groups listed only Hot Chip and Ladytron are of any worth, the rest are fucking terrible.

If these are the new faces of rave music (which they are not), then rave's def gonna die

Tristan Jayol wrote: Of all the groups listed only Hot Chip and Ladytron are of any worth, the rest are fucking terrible.

If these are the new faces of rave music (which they are not), then rave's def gonna die

Yeah! I have to agree. With Client! The others are so-so.

Indeed!

Tristan Jayol wrote: Of all the groups listed only Hot Chip and Ladytron are of any worth, the rest are fucking terrible.

If these are the new faces of rave music (which they are not), then rave's def gonna die

I just listed a few; i dunno who NME are putting up for this alleged wave. Its certainly not rave in the late eighties sense, more pop as Liam said, with keyboards.

As for SMD, the new album is rather good, not been able to sample their live set, so no comment. Its a shame that Simian split up and then started having posthumous hits.

Re: Cambos comments on playing keyboards and live sequencing etc, you only have to watch technogeeks Hot Chip onstage to understand the skill and nightmares of playing keyboards live.