[RobertKerans]

All music genres burn out, they all devolve into trash or repetition, so inevitably every almost genre description is going to bookended with when/why/how that happened else it wouldn't really be an accurate history. There's no need for the hyperbolic "Does the author actually like any music?" when about half the descriptions are him talking about great music

> The peak period for any popular genre is 3-5 years, and then everyone wants to move on to the big thing

[noelwelsh]

I agree, but read, say, the entry for Drill'n'Bass. This happens to be a genre I like (Girl/Boy Song by Aphex Twin and and u-ziq's Lunatic Harness being some favourites of mine). However, according to Ishkur "the result [is] not complex ... it [is] just busy and schizophrenic". So there we go. No redeeming features here.

[RobertKerans]

But it _is_, as a rule, both busy and schizophrenic. It's neither complex nor danceable; I like Aphex Twin a lot, but his contributions there, with exceptions, tend to veer toward the "quite possibly just taking the piss" part of his back catalogue -- notably none of the artists he mentions really produced anything like their best work under that banner

[noelwelsh]

The point is not whether the music is busy etc. Yeah it is. The point is that the author of the guide is excessively negative about many generes. According to the guide drill n bass is all trash. He doesn't mention any redeeming qualities in the review. Same for UK garage and glitch. The author seems to only like old school USA dance music (not that I have read every entry).

[Hard Normal Daddy is generally considered one of Squarepusher's best albums and it's drill n bass.]

[RobertKerans]

Yes, but you're doing exactly the same thing. Why should it have any redeeming features, bar it being a breeding ground for a few acts that went off and did better things, (this is mentioned in passing), and being the punchline for a good joke on Father Ted?

A balanced music review that's good to read is rare. You have things you think are good, and you have things you think are bad, and the meh ones in-between: who cares? Not you. Validation that what you like/dislike - good. Putting into words what you thought all along - good. Part of the reason the site is so loved is because of the kickings doled out to genres (which a vague enough containers disowned by those put in them at the best of times) vs. the things he clearly loves, and, shit, that's what you want from reviewers, not an anodyne history lesson. Music is deeply, deeply tribal, it isn't neutral

Like Squarepusher. "My Red Hot Cock" is really good. But bar that, he's good at playing that stupid six-string bass and making generally-undanceable dance music that people like to stroke their chins to. Saying Hard Normal Daddy is considered one of his best albums -- well that's a pretty shallow pool! Considered by whom? Not by me. Hard Plastic is miles better by dint of the fact it has actual tunes. And the music I like is the best music, and the music I dislike is crap. Weirdly enough the music you like is also the best music and the music you dislike is the worst but anyway, Squarepusher is like one of the jazz acts on The Fast Show, or something John Peel would put on when he was having a mild breakdown. (nb I do actually really like Squarepusher, I'm just arguing against his music because it is frankly unlistenable to most people)