Page 1 of 3
the guide's unbelievable definition of dubstep
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 7:07 pm
by snufkin
http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2009/ ... op-culture
I point you to near the bottom of the page
"Dubstep: Drum'n'bass with more more drums and less bass"
They also file starkey under wonky which I must object to. I suppose idiotic journalism is what's keeping dubstep in the contented fringes so I shouldn't really complain.
love
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 7:11 pm
by ST100
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 7:21 pm
by shambandito
if atleast it would have been: drum n bass with LESS drums and MORE bass..
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 7:30 pm
by pete_bubonic
before this gets out of hand:
THE ARTICLE IS A JOKE
I mean just read it!
I thought it was pretty funny.
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 7:36 pm
by snufkin
pete bubonic wrote:before this gets out of hand:
THE ARTICLE IS A JOKE
I mean just read it!
I thought it was pretty funny.
if by funny you mean written over a bowl of humous and coriander by a 30 something from hampstead who just loves to STATE THE OBVIOUS REALLY LOUDLY then yeah, funny funny funny.
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 7:40 pm
by -dubson-
the whole thing seems pretty sarcastic to me
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 7:41 pm
by Pada
-Dubson- wrote:the whole thing seems pretty sarcastic to me
same.
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:25 pm
by georgedallas
haha i read this in the guide today and was gonna make a thread. it's not really a joke though, the whole article is a guide for people who don't know shit about shit, so i doubt they're chatting balls to make dubheads laugh
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:30 pm
by slothrop
Well, it's not like any of it would make much sense to people who don't already know what this stuff is, so yeah, I'd guess it's basically a joke. Albeit not actually a funny one.
The 'definition' goes a bit beyond that , btw - something like "much appreciated by serious faced people who don't so much dance as let the bass buffet them."
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:56 pm
by concept
Pretty spot on.
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 9:21 pm
by j-sh
the amount of ironic self referencing in the guide is painful.
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 9:27 pm
by altered state
lfmao
that made my evening.
good work!
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:13 pm
by caunterstrike
wat do you expect? how many gaurdian readers do you know that listen to dubstep?
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:17 pm
by hera
drum & midrange
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:00 pm
by computer rock
When I read it I thought it was supposed to be a bit of a piss take, nuffin more.
However this:
Anything that gives away the fact that London media types' fondness for donk is mainly based on patronising class voyeurism.
is spot on. see the documentary they reference on vbs.tv to see shoreditch's answer to louie theroux fop around in exactly this manner as he 'attempts to understand' donk culture.
Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:12 pm
by etzel
caunter wrote:wat do you expect? how many gaurdian readers do you know that listen to dubstep?
I can only speak for myself: the two best things in life
Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2009 12:01 am
by dubluke
eeeeh lighten up man, the whole thing is clearly a joke! and if this was being written in a serious way, they'd have at least got the bit about stern faced people right
Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2009 1:30 am
by jimitheexploder
bless the guardian for trying but...
They really are fucking up the whole *ahem* wonky / dubstep thing
I mean first Reynolds talkin shit about Ketamine and its influnce on instrumental hip-hop and now this.
I'm pretty sure they should just give up and go back to enjoying a bit of lonley singer song writer accoustic music and deciding what they should give 4 stars out of five in the whole music monthly magazine.
Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2009 1:35 am
by corticyte
I agree, definitely make sense if it was 'less drums and more bass'
pretty funny article really...
Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:30 am
by snf
hera wrote:drum & midrange
lol, nomination for new genre name. love it.
i do think the article is largely tongue in cheek
