Minimal I am
What is the point of the Black Eyed Peas? I can handle pop music plenty but I’ve always really hated their weird plastic tracks, especially the “dancehall” ones. So some of you may have heard that annoying new Will I Am track with the “baby where you get your body from” hook. Anyway, if you thought that was bad then check out the song “Get Your Money” a minute or two into this video, in which Will I Am samples one of the biggest dance hits of the last few years. I think I feel a little sick. Still, I guess the track in question (I won’t spoil the surprise) had to escape from techno at some point. BTW I heard about this on ILM.
steve q wrote:
c*nt
Posted 16 Sep 2007 at 4:30 am ¶
steve q wrote:
(not you)
Posted 16 Sep 2007 at 4:31 am ¶
lex wrote:
Haha that’s actually really great though. I used to hate the BEPs but will.i.am’s turned into one of the most interesting pop/r&b producers around over the past year or so.
Posted 16 Sep 2007 at 5:57 pm ¶
mano wrote:
jesus christ…thats terrible.
Posted 16 Sep 2007 at 7:05 pm ¶
Ger wrote:
That’s horrific.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 11:47 am ¶
todd wrote:
so brutal, the body language of strippers??
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 2:21 pm ¶
ilya wrote:
I’m with Lex. Anything that brings another spin to a track we are familiar with or exposes it to a new audience is good. It’s all part of the internal dialogue in pop music.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 2:25 pm ¶
CW wrote:
They are appalling.
Everyone will claim to dislike their music, but the same people (usually female) will dance to the very worst of their music with abandon.
The worst being the likes of My Humps and that Will I Am track you’re talking about.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 3:40 pm ¶
detroitio wrote:
What great techno goody are they sampling? It sounds like a cheap and generic bassline that’s so nondescript it could’ve been made by anyone. Or were you being sarcastic with the “sampled from one of the greatest dance hits of late” comment?
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 8:35 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
I said “biggest” not “greatest”, if you read the post you’re misquoting.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 9:33 pm ¶
Eoghan wrote:
“My humps, my humps, my lovely lady bumps”
Poetry plain and simple. You might not see it now, but in years to come its eloquence and purity of form will be acknowledged by the learned and the wise.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 9:39 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
I particularly hate that one “shake that thing, city of sin”. Why does he sing in a Jamaican accent in it? That’d be like if Eminem did a song in blackface.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 9:41 pm ¶
aidan wrote:
the first track in that video samples magazine 60-don quichotte (an italo track from 1981)..the original is amazing, not into the will.i.am tune but it’s a clever sample. you can see the bit he samples at 1:51 in this clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WB2z6H9ej9U.
the mandarine girl sample is just wrong though.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 11:04 pm ¶
detroitio wrote:
Ronan wrote:
I said “biggest” not “greatest”, if you read the post you’re misquoting.
—————————————–
So which track is it? Again, it sounds very nondescript from the sample, and I’m surprised that anything this generic could be considered the biggest dance tune of any year.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 11:39 pm ¶
Tim F wrote:
The track in question was both big and great. It was a bit of a slowburner though - definitely seemed a bit underwhelming and simple on first exposure but then charmed with how accomodating and addictive it was.
What’s interesting about this is that - unlike with, say, Kanye sampling the vocoders from Daft Punk - this track in its original form was not much more than a bassline and some nice atmospherics, so the Will.I.Am track ends up sounding like a very odd vocal version of the original.
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 4:02 am ¶
detroitio wrote:
Surely there is a reason why you hesitate to name the track in question… Is this only due to the fact that the track’s perceived “greatness” was due to it being charted by some big name–undoubtedly minimal–djs??
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 5:58 am ¶
Linds wrote:
i love dancing to the black eyed peas
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 8:50 am ¶
Ronan wrote:
Linds: lol
detroitio: No I’m amazed you don’t know it to be honest, if I hated a style of music I’d generally know a few of the biggest hits in it as these would be the backbone of that dislike. And I said “biggest” because I am absolutely certain that it was one of the biggest selling 12s of the last few years, I don’t have figures but I know the label it’s on even with an unpopular release sells 7000 or 8000, I’d say this could have sold twice or three times that, and it was re-released and cross-licensed over and over. also I hesitate to even call it minimal, I said “dance” because it was charted by DJs across the board, this record was absolutely gigantic. So you’re incorrect to assume I’m talking about a record that was solely big with minimal DJs. This can happen when you speculate about a record you’ve never heard of.
As for why I don’t name it….well, everyone single person here seems to know it, perhaps you took a wrong turn somewhere? I can direct you back?
Aidan: Didn’t notice that Magazine sample, that track is quite cool, I have it somewhere.
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 9:10 am ¶
jd wrote:
jeez lads, put him out of his misery: Booka Shade - Mandarin Girl …. I for one hate the track with a passion. I didn’t hear it for a good year after it was released either, although I had heard the hype, so I know exactly where Detroitio is coming from.
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 12:17 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
it’s “body language”, not “mandarine girl”, so yep, you do know where he’s coming from.
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 12:25 pm ¶
todd wrote:
body language is definitely not minimal, i always thought of it as slow deep-house. i won’t hesitate to call it one of the best dance tracks of the last few years either, there’s nothing wrong with being simple. i do find it strange that someone would be reading this blog who’s never heard it.
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 2:23 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
yeah I agree really…some may call it minimal and it was part of the rise of people calling all sorts of stuff “minimal” but that doesn’t mean it is…
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 2:26 pm ¶
marc wrote:
I never heard anyone call Booka Shade minimal. I, for one, loved that track.
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 2:31 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
well, I worked in a store at the time and people seemed to call everything minimal! but I guess experiences vary.
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 2:32 pm ¶
Linds wrote:
“Ludicrous”
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 3:19 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
hehe…”declared arguido”
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 3:22 pm ¶
tom/pipecock wrote:
ah, a booka shade track. i too had no idea what it was. i will say this: booke shade live @ DEMF was one of the worst things ive ever seen in my entire life. i couldnt even stomach 10 seconds of it.
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 7:19 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
what was it that you hated in particular? too trancey?
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 10:56 pm ¶
tom/pipecock wrote:
uh, everything? the music was just nonsense, it sounded like crap i heard at bad raves in 98 while waiting for good deejays to play. the rock band waving drum sticks in the air to “get the crowd pumped” wasnt really my cup of tea, either. basically, it was everything that is wrong with dance music.
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 11:04 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
Well I quite like Booka Shade, though they wouldn’t be sacrosanct for me these days by any means…but I don’t think they are representative of dance music in a really big way anymore, either what’s wrong with it or right with it.
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 11:06 pm ¶
tom/pipecock wrote:
theyre all style over substance in their live show. i cant really comment on their recorded output. im bad at remembering exactly how bad music sounds, i just hear it once and recognize that it is bad and then turn it off
Posted 18 Sep 2007 at 11:41 pm ¶
todd wrote:
wow RA’s best live act is down for the count ! on a side note,tom: i liked aril brikha’s latest lp, just try driving your car around tokyo to it !
Posted 19 Sep 2007 at 4:38 am ¶
Tim F wrote:
Pipecock your comments (here and on RA forums) are always astonishingly devoid of meaningful content.
I used the Booka Shade Essential Mix as my soundtrack at the gym yesterday - worked brilliantly, I’d forgotten how intense and energetic and unstoppable it was. Didn’t work so well when i actually saw them play a similar set live because of the crowd and a dodgy club soundsystem. I think despite their big room and pop tendencies the pristine quality of their production actually works better on headphones.
Posted 19 Sep 2007 at 12:39 pm ¶
lou wrote:
“booke shade live @ DEMF was one of the worst things ive ever seen in my entire life. i couldnt even stomach 10 seconds of it.”
This was my experience as well. I swung by the main stage to see what they were all about and couldn’t leave fast enough.
Posted 19 Sep 2007 at 1:23 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
I’m pretty sure this post now has more comments than any other I’ve ever done on this blog. So Will I Am is good for something!
Posted 19 Sep 2007 at 1:25 pm ¶
tom/pipecock wrote:
Tim F: “Pipecock your comments (here and on RA forums) are always astonishingly devoid of meaningful content.”
hahahaha. “astonishingly devoid of meaningful content”?!?! thats the best thing i’ve heard this week. of course this is coming from somebody who links to their blog that hasn’t been updated in nearly 2 years. i guess you are not solely devoid of meaningful content, but indeed any content whatsoever!
anyway, my workout music of choice is not surprisingly the exact same as my dance music of choice: some rhythm and sound/burial mix, theo parrish deejay sets, some dj assault, etc. none of which, of course, is based on the pristine quality of production. it just makes me wanna move! it’s that simple.
Posted 19 Sep 2007 at 4:16 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
I swim in the local public pool…no music, plenty of screaming kids.
Posted 19 Sep 2007 at 4:18 pm ¶
todd wrote:
i hope this post’s comments never end !
Posted 19 Sep 2007 at 8:41 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
this post is a web community now
Posted 19 Sep 2007 at 8:59 pm ¶
Tim F wrote:
Pipecock I meant that you’re always saying “it was the worst thing ever” or “it is everything wrong with dance music” and then never going into any detail.
Your gym mix sounds good though.
I have used Theo Parrish before but found it was too slow (I mostly do running/cardio) - I always modulate my breathing to the beat and run out of air. Put most disco revivalist stuff in this category too. Deep house works well. The harder end of European techno is possibly too fast though.
Posted 19 Sep 2007 at 11:48 pm ¶
tom/pipecock wrote:
“Pipecock I meant that you’re always saying “it was the worst thing ever” or “it is everything wrong with dance music” and then never going into any detail.”
when it comes to something that im going to say “is the worst thing ever”, that generally means that any aspect of that record/producer/whatever that you can think of, i’m not feeling it. its hard to even start when that is the case.
personally, im down with the elliptical trainers, set for hills. nicely combines the cardio with the power, and at a lesser speed than straight up running. in general around 100-120 BPM is good, though in the case of the r+s or burial mix, its so slow you can go double time, which i really like.
Posted 21 Sep 2007 at 1:58 am ¶
marc wrote:
I saw Booka Shade at WMC a year ago and thought they were excellent. I guess I’m in the minority here though. I suppose I can see how in another setting they might not work as well.
Posted 21 Sep 2007 at 4:34 pm ¶
Silas wrote:
I always workout (only running) on ‘Loco Dice - A chico a rhytmico’ from ‘Harissa’. I play it twice and then im exhausted. But it works perfectly, because his tracks always build up slowly without having to wait like 5 minutes before anything really starts. Plus its BPM seems the be the same tempo as my running.
Posted 21 Sep 2007 at 9:13 pm ¶
Silas wrote:
Another thing, i think it’s sort of strange that a track from germany, even though it might be huge in the dance world, got to the ears of will.i.am. I mean how did it happen? It’s not that european dance tracks are played a lot in the US.
Posted 21 Sep 2007 at 9:22 pm ¶
todd wrote:
i like to run to my ‘halloween sounds’ tape.
Posted 22 Sep 2007 at 1:30 am ¶
Tim F wrote:
I hated the crowd when I saw Booka Shade, and this partially spoilt what would have otherwise been a great gig. The show was put on by a club night called One Love which is the flagship night for that weird scene in Melbourne that captures a cross-section of commercial electrohouse, indie haircut stuff (Justice etc.) and the endless avalanche of local stuff - it’s populated by lots of former rock kids in assymetrical haircuts and Wham “Choose Life” style t-shirts. “Mandarine Girl”, “Body Language” and “In White Rooms” were huge among this crowd, and the whole night was just people like this jumping up and down and pumping their fists enthusiastically (admittedly Booka Shade’s riff-heavy sound was quite accomdating to this approach). I couldn’t even pretend that they were only there for the hits because they seemed to know every song!
Only thing worse is clearly heavily amphetamined techno crowds, who act kinda the same really but with less notable hair.
P.S. Probably my most used running mix this year has been Sebo K’s Resident Advisor podcast. The only drawback is that the Villalobos remix of Depeche Mode arrives just as I’m starting to have to push myself to keep going, it seems to just go on and on forever, and time actually slows down (it works well in other contexts though). Once I get past that hump I’m good for about another four or five tracks.
Posted 23 Sep 2007 at 3:07 pm ¶
Jamie wrote:
Detroitio - its booka shade he’s sampling u twat how do u not know that. and its an unreal track and it IS one of the biggest techno tracks of the last few years. i’d like to go to your house one day and beat some sense into you but i dont think I could fit under a rock that big.
Posted 23 Sep 2007 at 5:58 pm ¶
Jamie wrote:
ps when im in the gym i listen to Slayer. hahahha, minimal tech just doesnt pump me up.
Posted 23 Sep 2007 at 6:06 pm ¶
Jamie wrote:
Edit: “doesnt pump me up [as much as slayer does]” - still gets me in the mood for dancing until i fall down
Posted 24 Sep 2007 at 8:07 pm ¶
Detroitio wrote:
@jamie–You’re a joke of the highest order–showing disbelief that someone wouldn’t immediately recognize a sample this poor, generic, and just plain bad. It’s good that you admit to listening to Slayer, this way the whole blog-reading world will know to explain away your lack of musical taste and idiotic remarks by the obvious loss of brain cells due to what must be excessive headbanging. You must feel very proud of yourself.
Posted 05 Oct 2007 at 7:21 pm ¶
Ronan wrote:
I reckon a lot of bloggers like Slayer.
Not me though.
Posted 05 Oct 2007 at 7:31 pm ¶