worldwide dubstep community
https://www.dubstepforum.com/forum/
I thought that was how dubstep in general worked.fassyman wrote:a sub dosn't suddenly turn a shitty tune brilliant
You think they are biased because it's rudimentary or despite it being rudimentary. Or was rudimentary not what you meant and if it was what criteria are you using for the track being rudimentary given that the tracks 7 years oldHeijerospook wrote: You're right. I suppose people are biased toward the track given how rudimentary it is.
That post was based entirely on garethom's rationalization. Many people equate rudiments to purity; consequently, rudimentary or "pure" things are cherished, even if their aesthetics are displeasing.scspkr99 wrote:You think they are biased because it's rudimentary or despite it being rudimentary. Or was rudimentary not what you meant and if it was what criteria are you using for the track being rudimentary given that the tracks 7 years oldHeijerospook wrote: You're right. I suppose people are biased toward the track given how rudimentary it is.
maybe people just like it and the idea you get to decide why is a bit silly
First of all, how do you use rudimentary? Do you not think that rudimentary things are pure? And of course I think that people like it because it's rudimentary. However, some people like it for both reasons, and others like it for one. One person can like it for being rudimentary, or another person can like it for those awesome sub wobbles. I, however, enjoy the tune more because it's rudimentary. Does that answer your question?scspkr99 wrote:That's not my experience of the use of rudimentary but regardless it doesn't answer the question, you think people like it because it's rudimentary or despite it?
Many people haven't equated rudiments to fucking anything
People who learn english non natively often have a better grasp of the technical constructs of the language but a worse grasp of how it's actually used. I'm old and this may be the first time I've seen rudiment(s) used rather than rudimentary.Heijerospook wrote:First of all, how do you use rudimentary? Do you not think that rudimentary things are pure? And of course I think that people like it because it's rudimentary. However, some people like it for both reasons, and others like it for one. One person can like it for being rudimentary, or another person can like it for those awesome sub wobbles. I, however, enjoy the tune more because it's rudimentary. Does that answer your question?
And I only used "ascetics" because I recently used the word "ascetic" in this thread. I am humble enough to admit that I am a bad typist.
http://dubstepforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=249412
Agree, he's definitely got a lot of talent but they hype that surrounds him is ridiculous.angrybobo wrote:Compa's Anti war dub. Completely over rated, terrible remix. His Dem a Talk sounds like its been made in 10 mins on the way to the cutting lab. Over rated producer in general.
Actually I have read a book that describes the phenomenon that you described. It's an obscure, old book entitled Rosenthal's Linguistry, or something similar to that, I honestly forget. What you are wondering about is colloquial language, which is commonly spoken language. It is obvious that speakers of a foreign language cannot colloquially speak that foreign language because they are not constantly exposed to it, or, more precisely, the proletarians who speak that language.scspkr99 wrote:People who learn english non natively often have a better grasp of the technical constructs of the language but a worse grasp of how it's actually used. I'm old and this may be the first time I've seen rudiment(s) used rather than rudimentary.Heijerospook wrote:First of all, how do you use rudimentary? Do you not think that rudimentary things are pure? And of course I think that people like it because it's rudimentary. However, some people like it for both reasons, and others like it for one. One person can like it for being rudimentary, or another person can like it for those awesome sub wobbles. I, however, enjoy the tune more because it's rudimentary. Does that answer your question?
And I only used "ascetics" because I recently used the word "ascetic" in this thread. I am humble enough to admit that I am a bad typist.
http://dubstepforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=249412
Rudimentary is usually used to suggest something is basic or not fully formed which is why I wondered whether you thought someone would like a tune because of it's failings? Personally I don't think it is rudimentary and think it even less likely to be considered so 7 years ago when it was produced.
No, not unless one is acquainted with Marxist theory.scspkr99 wrote:see we don't use proletarians much either
THANK YOU!ultraspatial wrote:Burnin would be better if it wasn't for that horrible vocal sample.
Don't get this untouchable tune attitude. Just because a tune is a classic doesn't mean people can't express their opinion about it or that everybody should like it.
And imo the whole "it's a system tune" thing is bullshit. A good tune is a good tune, regardless of where you play it (ok, maybe not on laptop speakers). There's plenty of commercial jump up tunes that go off at rave, doesn't mean they're any good. What's even the point of releasing stricly system tunes if people can't enjoy it unless they're at a night?
Yeah omg i know right! lets all start threads about how we all love Mala, place would be hopping then.scspkr99 wrote:Man why would you register on a forum with the specific intention of creating a thread about tunes you're not feeling
This. Rarely use worker or working class etc nowadays.Heijerospook wrote:No, not unless one is acquainted with Marxist theory.scspkr99 wrote:see we don't use proletarians much either
angrybobo wrote:His Dem a Talk sounds like its been made in 10 mins on the way to the cutting lab. Over rated producer in general.
Champions League contendors this year wait and seeBe-1ne wrote:@durag
your avatar is the villa badge, you forfeit any opinion on this purely on that basis.
as much as i'd love to, I won't hold my breath.Durag wrote:Champions League contendors this year wait and seeBe-1ne wrote:@durag
your avatar is the villa badge, you forfeit any opinion on this purely on that basis.
Couple of years we'll be back there, Lambert is a great manager, dont give up hope yet! I know everyone nearly did last season...Be-1ne wrote:as much as i'd love to, I won't hold my breath.Durag wrote:Champions League contendors this year wait and seeBe-1ne wrote:@durag
your avatar is the villa badge, you forfeit any opinion on this purely on that basis.