Justifying picks [was: (fax) RESULTS OF FAX POLL!]

[Skip Acuff]

Christian,

This is a splendid idea.  Can't wait to hear the hardcore mix, and I hope someone does a "Guilty Pleasure Fax Trance Mix", too.

Skip

-----Original Message-----
From: Christian [mailto:cvon at junglist.ca]
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 9:36 PM
To: Skip Acuff; Fax List
Subject: Re: Justifying picks [was: (fax) RESULTS OF FAX POLL!]


Skip - thanks for the reply. True enough - dj'ing is sometimes 
underrated (though, god knows I've seen too many overrated DJ's in my 
time). I guess I just look at the two differently - what I've done 
requires a lot less effort and exhaustion than what someone like Pete 
has to go through to ensure his work is disseminated. I also recognize 
this challenge because I'm now working my way into production (though 
still on the hobby level), and it's a vastly different animal than DJ work.

With all that said, I love what I do, and there is nothing more 
beautiful than a mix that comes together - in a way, it is a form of 
composition, to be sure. I do have a number of mixes I have had on my 
site (www.junglist.ca), but they're all low-res MP3, so (and I have been 
meaning to do this for some time, so thanks for the excuse!) I think 
I'll throw some high-res mixes back online. Also - I second you in 
highly recommending Jackthetab's Fax mixes (as well as some of his 
personal production and other mixes (the antiroboterwelt mix in 
specific)) which are excellent.

At the risk of starting another 'should we or shouldn't we make Fax 
mixes' debate, I'm happy to host any Fax mixes anyone has lying around. ;)

I'll post a link to the list when I have a few of the mixes up, and, as 
always, would love any feedback. I have just finished a Fax 'hardcore 
mix' and am already bristling at the sort of response that I'm likely to 
get from mixing an hour's worth of things like "It's A Dirty Job". But 
hey - it is, isn't it? ;)

cheers,
Christian.


Skip Acuff wrote:

>Christian,
>
>Thanks for the thoughtful response.  If you don't mind my saying so, you
>are too modest.  DJ-ing may not be rocket science, but it can be art.
>The details of designing a mix logistically must be complemented by an
>insight into the ineffable emotional dimensions of the music.  It's like
>singing or playing an instrument.  You can't bullshit an audience on
>whether you are adept at either.
>
>I would like very much to listen to one of your fax mixes if you have
>one on line somewhere.  BTW, Jack has done a few that are worth hearing.
>
>
>Best regards,
>
>Skip
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Christian [mailto:cvon at junglist.ca] 
>Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 4:31 PM
>To: Skip Acuff
>Cc: faxlist
>Subject: Re: Justifying picks [was: (fax) RESULTS OF FAX POLL!]
>
>Hey Skip - that would have been was me, and I didn't really offer an 
>explanation at the time - so now I'll try to put it into context:
>
>IMHO it's an apples to oranges comparison between straight recordings 
>and 'best of' recordings, even if mixed. The fact that it's mixed 
>'interpretively' (as compared to say "A View To A Chill") to me doesn't 
>change what it is - or more likely what it isn't. There is no new 
>material, just (yes, I know that's a big 'just') a re-interpretation of 
>existing material, which to me, makes it almost impossible to compare on
>
>a level playing field with true Fax albums that offer up a single
>project.
>
>I'm not attempting to demean the track selection or mixing on either of 
>the cookbooks (though speaking as someone who's dj'd for nearly 15 years
>
>now, I can say it's not exactly rocket science), but as a self-admitted 
>purist, I just don't feel that it's a 'new creation' as far as the music
>
>goes - though I'll easily say that it is a new creation in terms of 
>interpretation. But those, to me, are two different things, and thus 
>apples to oranges - I wouldn't want to compare them, as they're two very
>
>different species.
>
>Now, that said, if we all want to have a poll rating the various Fax 
>mixes that I know many of us have done over the years, then I'll stack 
>any of my mixes against the cookbooks any day (I often have three tracks
>
>playing together simultaneously and beautifully, but it doesn't make me 
>a better artist than Namlook). But to weigh them against the original 
>albums, to me, just isn't a fair or equal comparison.
>
>cheers,
>Christian.
>
>Skip Acuff wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Someone suggested that it wasn't kosher to pick the Ambient Cookbook 2.
>>Why not?  It is a very sophisticated mix that puts each component into
>>    
>>
>a
>  
>
>>new context, and even combines some components to create a new work.
>>    
>>
>In
>  
>
>>short, AC2 is an independent work of art, IMHO.
>>
>>Skip
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Kyle Schrock [mailto:monkeygra at gmail.com] 
>>Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 3:24 PM
>>To: faxlist
>>Subject: Re: (fax) RESULTS OF FAX POLL!
>>
>>a lot of my picks i selected as a result of having been able to hear
>>them via the MP3 discs, but i chose the specific album, and not the
>>entire series/mp3 disc.
>>
>>---------------------
>>
>>--schrock
>>_______________________________________________
>>faxlist mailing list
>>faxlist at 2350.org
>>http://2350.org/mailman/listinfo/faxlist
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>faxlist mailing list
>>faxlist at 2350.org
>>http://2350.org/mailman/listinfo/faxlist
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>


-- 
sublight - dj, producer, junglist
w - www.junglist.ca

check my record collection:
http://www.discogs.com/collection?user=sublight

add yourself to my map:
www.frappr.com/peoplechristianknows