STRATIFICATION, CIRCULARITY AND FLOW:

Techno ‘sound grips’ and environmental experiences of music

Roberto Agostini
(r.agostini@unibo.it)

Saggio pubblicato in Popular Musicology, 3/6, 1998, pp. 53-72.

Techno? Stuff people dance to? Stating that techno is merely dance music is a
simplification, or even more so a reduction of this phenomenon tone single
meaning. As I will argue, techno possesses an interesting and often complex array
of cultural and musical aspects for those of us interested not only in dance but
also contemporary and popular music. While the spectacle of dance forms the
main focus for sociocultural and ethnographic studies, its formal and structural
features and modes of appropriation, are frequently overlooked in such studies.
Techno and rave forms of expression cannot be simply positioned within an
analysis of urban youth cultural studies and its link to dance. Indeed, any brief
survey of journalistic reportage and numerous internet sites is sufficient to
emphasise the vast range of musical and cultural interests within rave culture.
Interestingly, techno and rave appear to be singular ‘transverse’ phenomena with
ties to various tradition, such as urban dance, popular African American music,
rock, as well as experimental music situated between popular and ‘art’ music1.
The official alt.rave FAQ demonstrates the general complexity of techno music
and its sub-genres in close detail. From such descriptions what emerges is that
techno is not homogenous music. The rather useless proliferation of jargon
related to style actually disguises the heterogeneity of this form of musical
expression. Therefore, if on the one hand it is true that techno possesses specific
musical features that differentiate it from other styles (the predominance of pulses
and grooves, the absence of vocal parts in a typical song tradition manner,
repetition, and production through sampling techniques), it can be argued that
this branch of music is rich and diverse both with regards to its musical traits and
its mode of appropriation. Of further interest, in this FAQ is the specification of
two tendencies within the area of techno. One involves the orientation towards
dance, which is characterised by a search for repetitive and compulsive sonorities
through the pumping of rhythms. The other involves and orientation towards a

1
Cf. web references in Hyperreal, and for a historical contextualization, cf. Straw (1995), and
Redhead (1993).
sense of ‘immersion’ within a sound-filled environment in which we are not
necessarily obliged to dance or move. In turns this involves an open attitude
towards any type of sound which functions as a means of stimulus. Techno is
therefore situated at the point where these two tendencies intersect; at a juncture
where rhythms, grooves and heterogeneous sonic installations fill the social
spaces of mass gatherings. All this is produced through the manipulation and
experimentation of sound technology, which can range from the most
unrestrained and violent loudness to tranquil and mystique-like atmospheres.

STRATIFICATION AND CIRCULARITY

Songs are the most diffused forms of popular music; they are brief musical pieces
consisting of lyrics which are usually poetic in nature. Furthermore, they possess
codified formal structures, which, due to the segmentation of the lyrics, consist of
clearly defined sections, such as strophes, choruses, verses, and bridges. The
successions of such sections are all regulated by several straightforward
procedures. Songs are closed and autonomous musical form. They contain clear
beginnings and ends, both of which are announced by an intro and coda, and
developed in codified forms (i.e. verse/chorus, chorus/bridge)2. Moreover, the
principal element of songs is melody. Most songs consist of catchy, memorable
tunes profiled against an accompaniment consisting of rhythmic and harmonic
structures which are underpinned by pronounced bass lines. And, in sections
where the vocals do not appear, one often finds instrumental solos3. Significantly,
there is no trace of this song structure in techno music.
First of all, vocal parts, as they traditionally occur in popular song, are not found
in techno. Yet, this is not because of the absence of a vocal part. As Tagg (1994b)
maintains, one of techno’s notable features is the absence of the
melody/accompaniment dualism. Even while Tagg’s consideration is liited in its
scope (Hesmondhalgh 1995), there are nonetheless two issues that might lead
one to believe that his affirmations can be generalised: first, when a piece
contains some musical features typical of techno, and in addition melodic lines, it
tends to be labeled ‘commercial’. That is to say, ‘not authentic’ and thus scarcely
plausible as an example of techno. Second, such dualism is absent even in
ambient music, as exemplified in the work of Orb, FSOL, and Richard James, in
which the perception of a distinction between melody and accompaniment is the
result of listening habits (for example, how we perceive the bass register as
‘background’ and the high register as ‘foreground’). That ‘background’ tends to
emerge to the ‘foreground’ of our experiences of techno is undeniable. Such
changes, at least in comparison to other forms of popular music, are however
more profound: a techno track does not follow the norms that regulate the
syntactic articulation found in most of songs.

2
Cf. Fabbri (1996a; 1996b).
3
Cf. Tagg (1994a) with regard to the melody/accompaniment issue. By melody, what is intended
is the ‘linear’ succession of notes, which, within a musical context, is experienced in an
‘autonomous’ fashion as a principal part. This is more important in respect to the rest of the music
that is present. This then is the sonorous line that is memorable, catchy, pleasing, lyrical, and
emotive. Cf. Stefani and Marconi (1992).

2 Stratification, Circularity and Flow

At the structural level, the types of constructions which tend to create
expectations and, therefore, aspects of tension-relaxation or antecedent-
consequent are absent. Techno consists of neither lyrics, melodies nor a harmonic
structures. In this music, traditional contrapuntal or melodic-harmonic
compositional techniques based on variations or development are not applied.
Therefore, there are not the chordal-type progressions or melodic line formations
that are articulated through the structures of the western canon. Instead, the music
is made up of maintained sonorities, of grooves, and of isolated or constantly
repeated brief musical fragments. These elements function as a continuous flow of
music (grooves, maintained sonorities) or a single ‘static’ units that can both be
isolated or repeated through patterns, riffs, and loops. In this manner, any sense of
direction, of movement, of development, of past-future, of beginning-end is
absent. In other words, techno does not lend itself to segmentation through
closure, resolution, and the notion of development that follows a linear course
towards a cadence ending. Rather, one encounters musical structures which
constantly turn in upon themselves; structures that never conclude but go on
infinitely.
This does not imply, however, that no sort of sectionalisation can be found: at a
specific point the musical continuum concudes, thus indicating the end of a
specific piece. Otherwise, it might transform, signaling passage indicators to the
ensuing sections. Within techno, one does not find the codified forms typical of
popular songs, or in other sense, those forms which imply a beginning sometimes
signaled by an intro, or linear progressions regulated by clear norms and
conclusion characterized by a cadence, finale or coda. Lacking both lyrics and
harmonic-melodic based structure, it is only natural that this music is organized
around a logic different from that of traditional popular songs; its particularity lies
in the absence of any sort of codified form. Thus, the succession of the various
musical sections within a techno piece is fundamentally based on the free
juxtaposition of sonorous movements, each endowed with a particular
characteristic which is opposed to a progressive chaining together of the various
parts that conform to the so-called linear logic of beginning-end.
Up till now, techno has been described mainly in negative terms. This might be
due to its lacking the melody/accompaniment dualism, as well as the formal and
structural articulations normally employed to delineate the course of a musical
piece. Now let us take a look at a more positive-based reading. I would suggest
that might be described as a stratified and circular sonorous flow; stratified in the
sense that it is made up of a simultaneous gathering – or vertical accumulation –
of various sonic layers that are themselves made up of one or more tracks.
Techno is born out of the overlapping of tracks (Tagg 1994b; Fikentscher 1995;
Langlois 1992), of which each one consists of units repeated sequentially, a
variety of sonorities, and/or ‘isolated’ sounds. Each track is inserted into or
removed from the continuum by means of mixing operations. From a listening
point of view, techno tracks tend to be organised in layers which can be formed
by one single track or by the gathering of a number of tracks. These layers are
generally configured into vertical patterns, regulated by the logic of free
juxtaposition more so than by more traditional norms that control
melody/accompaniment models. This means that within these stratified
configurations there are no layers that assume the role of ‘melody’. Furthermore,

Roberto Agostini 3
even if at times one layer (especially the groove) may emerge above the others,
the accumulation of various layers tends to form a junction point at which no one
layer takes on the appearance of an autonomous foregrounded element over an
accessory accompaniment in the background.
The flow of sound, as I have been suggesting, is also circular. This circularity
depends on the fact that its development in time does not respond to a linear
logic of beginning-end, which in turn lead to closure. Instead, the single layers
are made up of musical units which constantly revisited themselves according to
a logic that one might define as ‘cyclic’ or ‘circular’. To sum up so far then, the
musical flow of material in techno can be differentiated from certain other forms
of music in that: a) from a vertical perspective it is not based upon the
melody/accompaniment model, but rather upon the stratified model (the
simultaneous presence of layers regulated by a relationship of free non-
hierarchical juxtaposition); b) from a horizontal perspective it is not based upon
the linear model, but rather upon a circular model which consists of repetitive
structures that constantly return upon themselves and therefore create open-
ended structures, such as those sometimes found in post-punk and experimental
pop forms.
These features of techno signify a unique quality in popular music due to the
radical and definitive way in which they emerge. But, if one looks back at the
history of popular music, their antecedents are clearly visible. An absence of the
melody/accompaniment dualism was, for example, widespread in specific forms
of early electronic rock (Eno, Tangerine Dream). Furthermore, since the 1960s
there was a tendency in dance songs to create stratified and circular structures
even if a melody was always discernible. For example, soul songs of the 1960s
and disco songs of the 1970s contained within their accompaniment specific
layers that consisted of repetitive structures developed around the rhythm. Their
principal features become the groove, rhythm and sound, whereas tonal tensions
were diluted through modal cyclic structures. A track often continues its course
made up of riffs and grooves until dissolving into another track. Fitzgerald, for
example, finds a clear anticipation of free formal structures which have been
clearly referenced in the 1960s soul songs of Holland-Dozier-Holland (Fitzgerald
1995: 8). By analysing music played in discos during the 1970s, Krasnow points
out several cases in which the beginning and end of pieces are distinguished by
riffs which do not serve the function of introducing, resolving and thereby
cadencing. Rather, they favour the fusion of one track to the next through the
‘mixing’ phase. Thus, as Krasnow concludes, “[t]he details of the piece do not
create a narrative. They are vital to the sound of the piece, but do not build it”
(Krasnow 1995: 8). On the other end, Fikenstcher focuses his attention upon the
second half of the 1970s and on the 1980s. He compares compositional
conceptions in pop songs to track-oriented modes of writing. Experimenting
mainly with 12” records, mixing techniques direct attention towards the track as
the central compositional element rather than those procedures usually associated
with traditional song-forms (Fikentsker 1995)4. Such antecedents thus demonstrate
how such changes in popular music have evolved, and how they are rooted in

4
Cf. also Goodwin (1988: 270-271).

4 Stratification, Circularity and Flow

the general development of software and hardware in music technology. We
therefore need to understand this as a means of electronic production rather than
just a mere means of reproduction. However, what is of utmost importance here
is not so much the role played by music technology, but rather the actual features
which emerge and inhabit the broader landscape of popular music.
So far I have been arguing that techno music is characterised by a different form
of musical structuring than that found in the traditions of European musical
practice. Within the Western canon, piece of music tend to lead to a melodic-
affective appropriation which is endowed with both syntax and rhetoric: they
introduce, narrate, and conclude through following a linear course which has a
clear beginning and an expected end. Compositional attitudes based on
contrapuntal or harmonic-melodic variations or developments and on traditional
codified forms are almost always implicit within the notion of ‘evolution’, of
‘discourse’, ‘narration’ through which the listener is asked to follow. In techno the
absence of melody in tandem with structural circularity neither allows the music
to lend itself to melodic-affective appropriations nor to take on a narrative course,
story, or discourse (see Krasnow 1993: 41; Langlois 1992: 230; Toop 1995).
Rather than appropriate portions of closed texts, such as choruses or an entire
song, techno invites the listener to freely ‘grip’ on to the musical continuum in a
fragmented fashion, without worrying about a beginning or an end, of a past or a
future, but, rather, with a constant perception of the present: techno music is
constantly demanding the ‘now’.

FLOW
Up to now I have attempted to introduce the question concerning the ‘beginning’
and ‘end’ of a piece of music. Indeed, it seems that the idea of ‘opus’ is
inapplicable here, and that the very idea of a techno ‘piece’ is more a convention
than a reality. Rarely does one listen to an entire techno track. Usually we are
faced with a continuum of tracks that succeed one another without interruption.
Here the question of beginning and end becomes quite meaningless. Even the
titles of tracks become unimportant. And, although endings in one sense do exist,
they are primarily a result of convention or objective limitation.
Such characteristic that distinguish techno tracks are not new to dance music. The
concept of songs as self-contained structures has been abandoned for some time
now. Since the end of the 1960s, DJs have mixed tracks into one another without
interruption, creating flows that are characterised by rhythms, grooves, and
countless varieties of sounds. Choice of songs to be included in a ‘flow’ are as a
rule made on the basis of the ‘appropriateness’; the primary objective being not to
stop the rhythm, thus providing continuity to the dance (Krasnow 1993: 41; Straw
1995: 250). There is however a fundamental difference between the continuum of
dance music based on song-form, such as disco, and techno. In disco, when
continuity can be guaranteed by DJ’s skills, the beginning-end aspect of a track is
always present. In this manner, the dancers are led into the affective realm of one
song only to then find themselves within the dimensions of another song. The
tracks are therefore recognized, and the course taken from one song to the next is
an important indicator of the DJ’s ability. In disco, therefore, DJs attempt

Roberto Agostini 5
continuity by assuring a passage from one song to the another is as effortless as
possible; the primary objective is to guarantee a homogeneous and fluid flow of
musical material. Whereas in techno, where there are stratified and circular
structures, the notion of continuous sonic flow is implicit within the built up of
the overall sound object. Here listeners do not ‘grip’ onto the idea of an ‘opus’,
but rather onto the level of the specific portions of text. This often occurs without
any concern for whether these portions coincide with a specific title, section, two
titles fused together, etc. DJs are therefore not obliged to create, at least in the
disco sense of the meaning, an ‘effortless’ mix. On the contrary, they are free to
work through the means of a logic of juxtaposition and collage. In this way the
track is varied and often full of surprises: breaks, scratching, silences (inadmissible
in the 1970s), sudden changes, and hooks become the principal musical codes of
a DJs repertory.
Also, in ambient music the idea of a sonic continuum is nothing new. On the
contrary, the objective of muzak and much of the seventies ambient style is
precisely that of achieving an undifferentiated sonorous flow which is void of
affective leaps or sudden changes, thus functioning at a low level of awareness.
The purpose of the musical expression is to provide sensorial stimuli and create
certain atmospheres and moods. But all of this take place without drawing any
attention to itself. The listeners position themselves within the musical flow,
entering and exiting on the basis of a decisions that are not always made by in
first person (as one encounters in offices and supermarket muzak), and without
any concern for when a track begins or ends. In ambient music, the idea of
opuses, of complete musical pieces, to be listened to from beginning to end, does
not exist. The listener’s attitude is therefore formed by a willingness to immerse
oneself within sonorous continuum, to live within sonic worlds, to be stimulated,
‘massaged’, and transported by sounds while one’s attention is focused
elsewhere. Within techno this attitude is consciously pursued by means of the
structuring of continua that, rather than seeking homogeneity, assumes an active
role as a rich force in stimuli. In this way, techno takes to an extreme point that
which has already been in existence in dance music; that which had already been
realised in countless ‘sound designs’. The idea is of a music made up of a
continual sonorous flow on to which listeners can freely grip.

SOUND-GRIPS AND TRACKING THE GROOVES

The term ‘sound grip’, prese di suono, was coined by Gino Stefani, who, in an
informative essay on popular music, employed it to describe several tactics of
‘popular appropriation’ of music, or, several ways to relating to music typical of
popular culture (Stefani 1986). ‘Appropriation’, a transverse category to the
production/consumption dichotomy, might be understood as one’s way of dealing
with object, of reacting, of using. The term ‘sound grip’ thus refers thus to the
modes and effects of an act of appropriation of a musical object, an act that
adapts the object to particular exigencies, competencies, and capacities on the
basis of a given project in determined circumstances. From this perspective,
music is ‘appropriated’ by the subject who ‘sound grips’ it. By ‘grip’ what is
implicated is that which is actually is ‘gripped’; the point at which the object
lends itself to the act of appropriation, and the features for which the object is

6 Stratification, Circularity and Flow

‘appropriated’ for a specific type of use. What now follows is a discussion of
some concepts surrounding ‘sound grips’, which I see as typifying techno music.
Techno functions mainly at the ‘macro’ level. Or, in other sense, at the level of
continuous ‘sound grips’, of appropriation, which concerns portions of texts of
maximum extension. One can consider the features of techno as appropriated for
different purposes, and therefore directed towards different continual ‘grips’. In
the case of dance, the ‘grip’ corresponds to the individual’s urge to move with the
music. It is therefore centred upon the rhythm and/or groove. In this case,
‘groove’ refers to the rhythmic movement of a portion of text, or, more precisely,
the sequential repetition of patterns which are characterised by a strong rhythm.
Grooves thus contain explicit pulses which are made up of repetitive, jerky
rhythmic patterns; they constitute the principal layers of the sonic flow. Such
layers create a continuity and uniformity within this sonorous flow, therby
stimulating us to move, and thus leaving no space for other types of continuum
‘grips’ (as affective appropriation of music with catchy melodies, or appropriation
based on ‘contemplative’ understanding of the formal development of a musical
composition). The rhythmic flows, regulated by DJs, provoke intense excitement
and states of euphoria; they proceed in cycles which alternate between
intensifications and lapses of tension, climaxes and points of relaxation. Such
operations utilise forms of pleasure which are linked to the body and to
affectivity.
In the case of ambient tracks, the purpose is rather one of carrying out various
types of activities which are accompanied by music. The sound contributes to the
characterisation of one’s environmental surrounds, and the ‘grip’ is therefore
upon the ‘sound’ itself, an aspect which lends itself well to the creation of
atmospheres and moods in which listeners can immerse themselves at a low level
of consciousness. For example, the rhythms are often less forceful and intrusive,
the repetitions less obsessive, the sounds softer, the sonorities sustained, and the
timbres less aggressive. Furthermore, alternating and overlapping layers
communicate a more or less varied, yet relatively homogeneous, affective-
sensorial character. In this sense then it is clear that we are dealing with a relative
homogeneity: ambient techno has little to do with muzak, where the
homogeneity of the flow is at its maximum. On the contrary, it often takes on an
active role, to the extent that it is likely to stir up moods or create atmospheres in
relation to contexts. Naturally, more the music tends to be oriented towards
listening, the more attention is concentrated on the musical text. Notably though,
in this case the listener’s attention is focused upon the evocative power of the
sound rather than upon the search for complex forms and structures or the
technicalities of compositional or performance skills. When approaching such
repertory, musical analysis needs to liberate itself of certain concepts surrounding,
for example, ‘notes’ and ‘scales’ in order to adopt relevant analytic categories to
deal with ‘atmosphere’, ‘mood’, and ‘association’. Both in dance and ambient,
the appropriation of large portions of text is favoured by music structured in a
sonorous flow. A flow which is layered, circular, and continual, thus permits us to
freely ‘sound grip’ on the music in an irregular and ‘fragmented’ manner.

Roberto Agostini 7
ARRANGEMENT
Techno is not intended to be ‘played’ in a traditional sense. The only
performances are those of DJs who, by using turntables, mixers, drum machines
and samplers in a creative way, determine the structure of the music. This take
place through the use of recordings, alternating fragments, overlapping tracks,
scratching techniques, varying the turntable speeds, inserting live sounds, and
mixing tracks in such a way as to obtain a continuous sonic collage.
What then are the recorded sources used by DJs? Remix versions of a title track
are produced within a compilation through the skills of the DJ. Yet, a remix is
nothing more than a different version of a track that has already been recorded
and released (Langois 1992; Tankel 1990; Fikentscher 1995). Various versions of
a track are often assembled into compilations that seem to avoid breaking the
idea of ‘flow’ with reference to its overall sonic support. In this way, the desire to
‘freeze’ and ‘possess’ any portion of the original becomes apparent. By no means
is it coincidental that the record is released under the name of the DJ who has
remixed and compiled them: by being the guarantor of the arrangement, the DJ
becomes, in one sense, its author.
What is useful in such cases is the notion of arrangement as a manipulative
appropriation of music already in existence (Stefani 1986). In arrangements the
musical objects are modified on the basis of determinable exigencies and
circumstances; they are processed and manipulated to the point at which they are
adapted to the relevant musical project. Now, due to the fact that the musical
object in techno consists of numerous tracks, the manipulation of the tracks
themselves constitutes the actual process of arranging. DJ performances,
compilations, and remixes are therefore arrangements insofar as the musician
intervenes directly by remixing tracks and attempting to structure them into a
continuum on the basis of a determined project (i.e. dancing, chilling out, etc.).
Alongside this dimension of the ‘composition’ process – definable as the
elaboration of original musical tracks – the practice of arrangement occupies a
prominent position. It should be stressed, however, that techno's tendencies of
reutilising materials and creating collages lead the musician to the systematic
utilisation of ‘stolen’ sounds. This is made possible by the process of sampling
techniques (Goodwin 1988; Schumaker 1995; Harley 1993). Moreover, if we take
into account the increasingly common practice of creating versions upon
versions, the very notion of an ‘original’ (as in traditional compositional terms) is
clearly jeopardised, especially as the key figure to emerge in techno is the DJ,
alongside the producer and sound engineer.

LOOPS
By considering ‘sound grips’ at a ‘micro’ level, there is a tendency to perceive
music as elementary single units in techno. The principal elementary units, very
important to our understanding of techno, are figures which undergo constant
repetition and create the tracks and layers of musical flows known as the loops
The concept of ‘loop’ is of analogical origin and clearly does not represent
anything new within the field of popular music. The current intense use of loops
as creative techniques demonstrates significant shifts in the aspects of

8 Stratification, Circularity and Flow

compositional control and in the sensibility of taste. Indeed, loops frequently
serve as the actual starting point from which one departs when creating a track,
particularly through the overlapping and processing of numerous loops; this form
of processing can be complex. By employing loops, compulsive rhythmic
structures and riffs are often created, which function as important indictors for
dancers, especially in so far as providing motorial stimuli and stirring up intense
emotions. In this way, loops appear to resemble those very structures whose
incessant repetitions permit the ‘freezing’ and ‘dilation’ of the sensations involved
in their recognition, and thus, the experience of the present. This is evident, for
example, in traditional riffs, where: “that moment of lucidity [the sensation of
recognising] is dilated for a duration that is much longer than normal [...] giving
the impression of living the present with an intensity that other types of musical
experience consent to for only brief separated moments” (Fabbri 1980: 50).5
Loops, riffs, and, in general, compulsive repetitions therefore bring about a
dilation of the present which generates euphoric excitation, a sense of pleasure
that is implicit within dance.
Tracks which constantly repeat elements, whose homogeneity and continuity
makes the process of segmentation problematic, also exist. This is the case of
ambient. In such cases, ‘sound grips’ at micro level (loop) do not occur, while at
macro level (groove, sound) they can be observed. Even if the tracks can contain
what in a technical sense can be referred to as a ‘loop’, here the continuity and
homogeneity of layers doesn’t lead to a ‘loop appropriation’, but rather to
appropriation based on larger portion of the text. So, the grips on loops are
widespread mainly in dance techno, while the ambient doesn’t have any
particular ‘grip’ at micro level.

ENVIRONMENTAL EXPERIENCING MUSIC

Within this brief excursion into techno music not much mention has been made
of the aspects of sampling and collage. In addition, other points of consideration
should include the difference between repeated musical units (for example, the
difference between female vocal fragments and a bass riffs), the use of extra-
musical sounds, the search for specific sonorities, the role of hooks and breaks,
and the effects of modal construction. What I have set out to offer here is a
general survey of techno music.
It is worth noting that techno appears to be one of the contemporary musical
activities in which several important changes within the musical scene of the past
few decades are clearly evident. Areas of dance and ambient music denote a
search for ‘environmental experiences of music’ which are in line with the
increasingly widespread involvement with music ‘preconsciously’ and non-
contemplatively. Such an attitude indicates a trend towards an appropriation of
music as a means of communicating moods, atmospheres, associations, emotions,

5
Fabbri’s statements referring to the use of riffs in rock have been extended to the obstinate
structures of techno in general. For further analysis on this, cf. Fabbri (1980, 1995), Di Pisa (1992),
Middleton (1990: 267-92).

Roberto Agostini 9
motorial stimuli, and synaesthesias6. This phenomenon is certainly not new
within the history of twentieth century music and the mass media age, which has
favoured, in a number of ways, the diffusion of a ‘distracted’ perception of music.
Considering the ubiquitous nature of music, in the modern world human
existence is constantly accompanied by continuous soundtracks, by changing
soundscapes whose sources and production processes are gradually of less
importance. What is at stake here is the concreteness of the musical flow, its
sounds and rhythms in which people find themselves. Increasingly, music is
becoming something to ‘hear’, ‘feel’, ‘live’, and ‘experience’ rather than just
something to ‘listen to’ or ‘understand’. What is gradually becoming of less
importance is the source of the sounds; where they come from and how they are
produced. Techno’s unique quality, with respect to other musical practice, lies in
a certain attitude of awareness and determinedness: the purpose of techno is
explicitly centred around the creation of sound landscapes and moods. It is
therefore comes as little surprise that most of the time the actual sound of techno
is nothing more than just one of the ingredients of rave parties, multimedia shows,
chill out rooms or other environments of public gatherings. Thus, the music is not
necessarily the principal element or catalyst of attention, although ‘hearing’ the
music is nevertheless an important stimulation.
Changes concerning musical experience are accompanied by those alterations
within the musical object which have already been discussed within this article:
what corresponds to the diffusion of an environmental use of music is the
incorporation of a music which is structured in continually circular and stratified
flows. All this occurs to the detriment of a music based upon closed forms,
melody/accompaniment dualism, and linear harmonic and melodic structures
endowed with direction and movement. What is also favoured in this manner is
an appropriation based on macro-portions of text; an appropriation that grips
upon grooves and sound and by so doing freely segments the sonorous flow.
The unique quality of techno lies in its search for environmental musical
experiences. Investigating the reasons which are at the core of such search would
be interesting. One hypothesis could be that such a search stems from the need to
‘leave’ or abandon one’s daily chores, and thus become free to move in some
parallel, alternative, and virtual time-space dimension (Langlois 1992; Melechi
1993). This a hypothesis is stimulating in that it allows us to formulate a
relationship between the changes within the musical experience and those within
our current social contexts.
From such a perspective, techno seems to constitute an integral part of a broader
cultural and artistic scenario which has recently evolved. It occupies a site where
interest in digital technologies, multimediality, interactiveness, polysensorial
stimulation, the search for new spaces and new ways of communication, and the
questioning of concepts such as opus, author, and copyright, all intertwine with
the rediscovery of an interest for psychedelic, spiritual, mystical, and trance

6
Cf. Middleton (1990: 93-96) and Toop (1995) with regard to the environmental experience of
music within our society. Naturally, reference is made to a manner of experiencing music in
relation to the environment according to a very broad perspective. This is not to be confused with
that which is referred to when speaking more specifically about ambient music.

10 Stratification, Circularity and Flow

experiences. Immateriality, spirituality, and electronics often interconnect each
other in the field of music, as in other cultural and artistic fields. Searching for the
environmental experiences of techno could, in other words, be considered part of
that broader cultural and artistic landscape in which the creation of alternative
spaces of experience and escaping from reality through particular rituals often
chacterised by mystical and spiritual shadings (the act of going to a rave or disco
might be considered as this type of ritual), or, in a more diffuse fashion, through
aestheticizing everyday life, certain elements constantly return. One is tempted to
detach oneself from materiality, from the world’s concreteness, and from
everydayness in order to move into ‘another’ world consisting of emotions,
moods, and feelings. By no means is it coincidental that concepts such as
‘virtuality’ and ‘immateriality’ have become diffused, proving to be effective
common traits within the scope of contemporary culture (Ferraro and Montagano
1994).

CONCLUSION
Perhaps all this has to do with the creation of alternative spaces in which one can
rediscover emotive and physical stimuli that protects oneself from the turmoil of
daily hype. Possibly there is a desire to escape from mundane life and so-called
‘realty’, and, thus, a need to find a certain ‘time-space dimension’ in which one
can rest and recharge. Only close cultural, anthropological and psychological
analysis can throw some light upon such interpretative questions.
In conclusion, within a broader process of cultural change, techno can be
considered as a significant musical phenomenon. It must nevertheless be stressed
that nowadays the resurgence of old schemes and ideologies cannot be
overlooked in any valid interpretation of this phenomenon. More precisely, the
re-emergence of the star-personality and the re-born cult of authenticity,
virtuosity, and the author, are linked to DJs, producers, and sound engineers.
Furthermore, the diffused re-evaluation of “turn on, tune in, drop out”, and of
“peace, love, and music” and its fusion with mysticism, magic, and technology is
where current cybernetic and science fiction imagery is integrated with that of
1960s. All this results in a rather superficial mixing of LSD and virtual reality,
Woodstock and rave, psychedelic images and computer graphics. Yet, these are
not simple historical rehashes: in the space that has been opened by techno
music and the rave culture various types of political, cultural, and economic
interests and investments are at stake. These tend to create a continuously varied
and dynamic general picture of what is most obvious when one has to deal with
the questions of a cultural and musical movement so transverse and richly
innovative as techno and rave7.

7
It is interesting to note here that techno, like rap, seemed as if it was going to be a brief fad. On
the contrary, however, techno is now entering its second decade with unexpected vitality.
Numerous author have recently develop interesting interpretations concerning rave, techno, with
other such questions which emphasise both social and cultural changes and the continuities that
re-propose old schemes and ideologies. Cf. Tagg (1994b), McRobbie (1993), Bradby (1993),
Goodwin (1986), Langlois (1992), Redhead (1993).

Roberto Agostini 11
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BRADBY Barbara
1993 “Sampling sexuality: gender, technology and the body in dance music", Popular Music,
12/2, pp. 155-76

DI PISA Alessandro
1992 “Riff: tattica e modelli”, in Dal blues al liscio, ed. G. Stefani (Verona, Ianua), pp. 50-72

FABBRI Franco
1980 “Abbiamo un riff”, Laboratorio musica, II/14-15, pp. 48-50
1995 “Abbiamo un riff, o due”, in Annali. Istituto Gramsci Emilia-Romagna. 2/1994, Bologna,
Istituto Gramsci, pp. 209-17
1996a “Forme e modelli delle canzoni dei Beatles”, in Analisi e canzoni, ed. R. Dalmonte
(Trento, Università di Trento), pp. 209-17
1996b “Don’t Bore Us – Get To The Chorus. Serve la noia alle canzoni?”, paper presented at the
V International Conference on Musical Signification, at Bologna, November 1996 (under
publications)

FERRARO Angela & MONTAGNANO Gabriele (eds.)

1994 La scena immateriale (Genova, Costa & Nolan)

FIKENTSCHER Kai
1995 “’Old school – New school’: an examination of changes in the production and
consumption of post-disco underground dance music in New York City”, in Popular
music. Style and identity, e. W. Straw et al. (Montreal, CRCCII), pp. 89-93

FITZGERALD Jon
1995 “Motown crossover hits 1963-1966 and creative process”, Popular Music, 14/1, pp. 1-11

FRITH Simon
1986 “Art versus technology: the strange case of popular music”, Media, Culture and Society, 8,
pp. 259-78

HARLEY Ross
1993 “Beat in the system”, in Rock and popular music. Politics, policies, institutions, eds. T.
Bennett et al. (London, Routledge), pp. 210-30

GOODWIN Andrew
1988 “Sample and hold: pop music in the digital age of reproduction”, Critical Quarterly, 30/3,
pp. 34-49; now in On record, eds. S. Frith & A. Goodwin (London, Routledge, 1990)

HESMONDHALGH Dave
1995 “Technoprophecy: a response to Tagg”, Popular Music, 14/2, pp. 261-3

KRASNOW Carolyn
1993 “Fear and loathing in the 70s: race, sexuality, and disco”, Stanford Humanities Review,
3/2, pp. 37-45

LANGLOIS Tony
1992 “Can you feel it? DJs and House music culture in the UK”, Popular Music, 11/2, pp. 229-
38

MCROBBIE Angela
1995 “Zitta e balla: cultura giovanile e forme del femminile in mutamento”, in Annali. Istituto
Gramsci Emilia-Romagna. 2/1994, Bologna, Istituto Gramsci, pp. 176-97

MELECHI Antonio
1993 “The ecstasy of disappearance”, in Redhead 1993, pp. 29-40

12 Stratification, Circularity and Flow

MIDDLETON Richard
1990 Studying popular music (Bukingham, Open University Press)

REDHEAD Steve (ed.)

1993 Rave off (Aldershot, Avebury-Ashgate)

SCHUMACHER Thomas G.
1995 “’This is a sampling sport’: digital sampling, rap music and the law in cultural
production”, Media, Culture and Society, 17/2, pp. 253-73

STEFANI Gino
1986 “L'arte di arrangiarsi in musica”, Carte Semiotiche, 2, pp. 97-114; now in Musica con
coscienza (Cinisello Balsamo, Paoline, 1989)

STEFANI Gino & MARCONI Luca

1992 La melodia (Milano, Bompiani)

STRAW Will
1995 “The booth, the floor and the wall. Dance music and the fear of falling”, in Popular music.
Style and identity, eds. W. Straw et al. (Montreal, CRCCII), pp. 249-54

TAGG Philip
1994a Popular music. Da Kojak al Rave (Bologna, Clueb).
1994b “From refrain to rave: the decline of figure and the rise of ground”, Popular Music, 13/2,
pp. 209-22

TANKEL David Jonathan

1990 “The practice of recording music: remixing as recording”, Journal of Communication,
40/3, pp. 34-46

TOOP David
1995 Ocean of sound (London, Serpent's Tail)

Hyperreal
http://hyperreal.com

The official alt.rave FAQ 2.2

http://www.hyperreal.com/raves/altraveFAQ.html

Roberto Agostini 13