Mr Knesh wrote:
Automatic Gainsay wrote:
As far as I can tell, he may have been an "electronic music theorist" as someone on here cited from the Wikipedia article, I can find no evidence in any of the writings from him or about him that suggest any of his music was performed or meant to be performed by electronic instruments. The most electronic thing I have ever heard from him was the use of a cylinder from a sonogram in a reproduction of one of his musical pieces. This counts as electronic, but anyone can guess as to whether or not Luigi Russolo actually intended the piece to be performed this way.
I appreciate the logical fallacy and ad-homonym argument that you project onto this board, but I had expected a little more from you. In the future I recommend citing sources that suggest a counter-argument to my statement, rather than attacking my intelligence.
Listen. I have made a study of the history of electronic music since 1987. And by "electronic music," I'm not talking about pop bullshit or what has been hailed by techno artists and DJs from the internet. I'm not f**k around. If I cite goddamned Luigi Russolo as an important person in the history of electronic music, it's not because I'm just making names up
. I'm sorry he wasn't involved with Kraftwerk or any of Donna Summer's tracks in the late 70s, but as far as Electronic Music is concerned, his views, his work, and his statements were important in the foundation of the pre-1960s artistic movement which gave rise to music and philosophy which led to the voltage controlled synthesizer. If you have any doubts, I'll be glad to send you extensive documentation, or even quotes of his viewpoints. I called you a moron because you were willing to make a face at my listing of his name without explaining exactly why.
"Electronic music theorist?" I mean, seriously
. At the point at which Russolo was very specifically defining what electronic composers would come to want, THE TECHNOLOGY DIDN"T EXIST. Duh? Are you really saying that because YOU couldn't find evidence to suit YOUR VIEWS in a f**k WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE that he just isn't justifiable as a foundation of electronic music? How about if you OPEN A BOOK?
Okay, I'm getting too hot. You're right. If Juan Atkins didn't cite him as an influence, he can't possibly have any relevance.