Quote Originally Posted by stjohn View Post
i see what your sayin but i dont think the analogy holds up. mnml could be guilty for directly pinching underground techno's potential. its easy to listen to, most of the time its relatively energetic, and its pretty disposable, which alot of everyday punters seem to get attached to. big clubs would much prefer to put on this trendy music because they bring a certain crowd. so there is a direct correalation between the activity and popularity of the two IMO.

that saying, ive always believed that variety is spice of life and theres room for everything in good nights music. even country & western....

either way it doesnt affect me that much, because i buy the stuff i like, and try to make the stuff i like, no genre omitted. but it is less and less often that you see/hear good honest-to-jaysus techno out and about.
Minimal never stole any crowd.
Those that walked away from techno and hopped to minimal, were never into the former beyond it being something to go clubbing to. They will hop to the next fashion when it occurs.
Minimal is just house mostly, and the house crowd dig it.
But again, I think people are looking in the wrong direction.

Pure Techno has always been underground, and probably always will, it is an aqquired taste, and doesn`t pander to the masses, it became fashionable for a while, and now has gone back underground.

Clubs will always go for the money maker, minimal again, is not to blame.

Also I think techno has evolved, and a lot of what I would consider to be techno these days, most die hard techno fans wouldn`t call techno, because it doesn`t fit their narrow brackets.

I think the main complaint can be translated to "why hasn`t techno stayed exactly the same as it always was?"

The answer?
Because that isn`t what techno is about.