Newsgroups: rec.music.industrial
Date: Sat,  5 Sep 1992 16:19:09 -0400 
From: Joshua John Buergel <jbbb+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Industrial Music for Industrial Snobs
	<Bu2GIG.3yp@ecf.toronto.edu>
Distribution: rec

Now you've gone and misinterpreted me.  Look what I said...

>>subclassification of music.  Some classification is necessary for the
>>purposes of this newsgroup (i.e. it is supposed to be for 'industrial',

I agree that some classification is definately necessary.  But you're
trying to overclassify things.  It simply isn't necessary to try to
describe a group as 'grunge industrial'.  Once you've decided that the
band would interest the people who read this group, further
classification just invites misinterpretation.  Just describe the group
based on their sound, rather than trying to label it.

>Ok, I promise from now on when I want to talk about a band I'll post my
>reviews of every one of their works. That should avoid pigeonholing and
>overclassifying music.

I didn't say that you need to post reviews of every one of their works. 
I didn't even say you needed to post a single review of anything they've
done.  Instead, I merely asked that you try to describe their sound with
a real description, rather than a meaningless label.

>It would work too, there's already enough bandwidth wasteage for this kind
>of thing to hide in. 

Hardly a waste of bandwidth.  If you're describing a band, you're bound
to interest somebody in them.  It would be less a waste then arguing
over which pidgeonhole a band belongs in.

>I have a real problem with yourtype. If music cant be classified then why the
>fuck is this rec.music.industrial? Why isn't everything in rec.music. Cause
>of bandwidth. So you split it up. So who decided where the split is? Thats
>functional and very useful because no one can read the 7 megs/day in the
>rec.music hierarchy, but it also pigeonholes any band who cant straddle
>crossposting to 8 different groups without 8 people yelling "get out
>of my newsgroup" about it.

Flying off the handle again, I see.  Calm down.  My post wasn't a
personal attack, it was directed at the whole of rmi.  There isn't any
poing railing at me.  I don't know you, and couldn't care less what your
opinion of me is.  You're only giving yourself an ulcer.  And you
weren't paying attention.  I said that some classification is necessary
to have a newsgroup.  Oh, and how did you classify me already?  You have
seen one post by me, and already I'm a type.  Must be a fun world you
live in.  All these neat little divisions you can stick people, music
and everything else in.  Whee.

>I am really sorry, but I dont know what world you live in, but i hope you have
>fun trying to find music that you like. I have noticed EVERYWHERE THAT I GO
>that people have tastes which run along veins and these veins consist of
>strings of bands that sound similar to one another. When I'm met with the
>classic answer "I like anything" it means "I'm not into music."

I have great fun trying to find music that I like.  There are few
greater thrills for me than to find a band that just makes me go "Wow!".
 And I agree with you.  People have tastes that tend toward certain
sounds.  However, I have yet to meet a single group of people who will
classify their music in exactly the same way.  So, a better way to find
out if something is in the same vein as other music you listen to is not
to label is, but to actually describe it.  What better was to compare it
with other music you own?

>If you really appreciate it when idiots who must think like you do things like
>playing funk on the sound system before MBV goes on stage (assuming it wasnt
>just to make MBV look better) or putting totally incompatible bands together
>to play a show,then thats up to you.  FLA/Neubauten... Celtic
Gales/DHI... etc.

Look, I can tell when two bands sound alike.  I'm not an ass.  I never
said that two bands can't sound similar.  What I said was that there
aren't two bands who sound exactly alike.  Don't try to put words in my
mouth.

Also, I'm not sure about this funk played before MBV, but I know that
they used to specify music to be played before they came on.  So, the
"idiots" playing the funk were most likely MBV themselves.  As for
unrelated bands touring together, well, variety is the spice of life. 
If I were to hear, say, three bands who are very similar sounding right
in a row, I'd probably get bored.  Of course, I'd get bored at an FLA
concert anyway...

>I eexpect to see EVERY one of your posts in every rec.music.* newsgroup from
>now on, since every band has its own style. Either we reduce rec.music to
>that and that only, or we have a rec.music.head_of_david and a rec.music.scorn
>and a rec.music.godflesh, &c &c - one for every band. It works, no? alt.music
>enya is trying to become rec.music.enya...

Here is a worthless argument.  Go back and read what I said right at the
beginning of this post.  And chew a valium.

Joshua Buergel      | Every time she slit her wrists
allroy+@cmu.edu     | I wish she hit instead of missed.
jbbb@andrew.cmu.edu | Every secret family crime
                    | All my love a waste of time.
                    |    - ALL, Scary Sad