Search - Cristian Vogel :: Whipaspank

Whipaspank
Cristian Vogel
Whipaspank
Genres: Dance & Electronic, Special Interest, Pop
 
  •  Track Listings (4) - Disc #1


     
?

Larger Image

CD Details

All Artists: Cristian Vogel
Title: Whipaspank
Members Wishing: 0
Total Copies: 0
Label: Old Mute
Release Date: 1/9/2001
Album Type: Single
Genres: Dance & Electronic, Special Interest, Pop
Styles: IDM, Techno, Experimental Music, Dance Pop
Number of Discs: 1
SwapaCD Credits: 1
UPC: 5016025682775
 

CD Reviews

What's a "Whipaspank"?
03/12/2001
(4 out of 5 stars)

"I don't know, but to me it sounds good. What it has: 1) one of those "melodies", or I say, almost-melodies, that convey an emotion somehow - the sort trance fans like. 2) what sounds like a syncopated rhythm, but the rhythm itself isn't chromatic as some trance tracks have. 3) a pretty complicated bass line. 4) some distorted background voices speaking something in English. 5) background static. 6) some high-pitched tones here and there that are completely discordant with the regular beat and bass line. But 6) accentuates 2) and 3) and vice versa: some musicians try to get this effect and don't quite get it - either one part masks the other, or the whole thing sounds so discordant that the whole mess is headache-inducing. But Cristian Vogel somehow makes it work: I read he has advanced education in music theory, and like with BT, you can hear this.That's what it's like - my guess is, you'd either really like it or you really wouldn't. It has an edge to it, it conveys an emotion, but isn't somehow "dark" or "brooding" like some trance. It has a catchier beat than trance. I saw the song listed on Sven Vath's homepage as something he liked. I agree with him. It's something unconventional in a genre where artists I think pride themselves on being "unconventional". But it sounds really good too - not just "being different" just to be that way.I've not heard the fourth track on this: but if this description sounds like something you'd like, the three mixes are probably reason enough to shell out $. Unless you're between jobs maybe. To me this is 5 stars but it's kind of unorthodox and wouldn't be 5 for everybody - that's why I label it with 4."