Discussion on oversaturation in the PE scene and its nuances

[DBL]

There are so many good releases right now, I don't know why anyone would waste time with mediocre ones.

Because you might never hear about them, for example. Even if you tried to, or think you tried but did it wrong, heh.

I think the question of "what's your methodology to doing so?" referred to your statement "Time to move away from faceless Facebook and Instagram and only follow the good stuff." How and where does this following happen? If you are not on social medias, where do you get exposed to the good stuff and not (only) the mediocre stuff when it comes to power electronics? Is great power electronics being discussed somewhere, are there some trustworthy reviewers, and so on?

What are the current power electronics releases and projects that spark a discussion, and where does it happen?

As a side note, in this context I wouldn't count labels' adverts as me hearing about GOOD stuff, as if it's just an ad by itself (with no comments, reviews, some visible feedback), it's no different from a social media advert/post despite the different context. Just the same as being subjected to some random youtube link in a stream of other youtube links.

[Manhog_84]

There are so many good releases right now, I don't know why anyone would waste time with mediocre ones.

Because you might never hear about them, for example. Even if you tried to, or think you tried but did it wrong, heh.

I think the question of "what's your methodology to doing so?" referred to your statement "Time to move away from faceless Facebook and Instagram and only follow the good stuff." How and where does this following happen? If you are not on social medias, where do you get exposed to the good stuff and not (only) the mediocre stuff when it comes to power electronics? Is great power electronics being discussed somewhere, are there some trustworthy reviewers, and so on?

What are the current power electronics releases and projects that spark a discussion, and where does it happen?

As a side note, in this context I wouldn't count labels' adverts as me hearing about GOOD stuff, as if it's just an ad by itself (with no comments, reviews, some visible feedback), it's no different from a social media advert/post despite the different context. Just the same as being subjected to some random youtube link in a stream of other youtube links.

This forum, zines every now and then and couple of noise podcast are the only ones I follow. SI forum has always been active enough, that if some release is worthwhile, it is mentioned here. No need to follow some shitty Facebook groups or Instagram feeds.

There's also a couple of threads here, one with good recommendations for recent PE releases, and "Power Electronics is dead" that was a bit similar discussion as this thread.

[Penon]

I don't think there's much I can add to this conversation that hasn't already been said. However, one thing stands out to me: even in nuanced discussions on this topic, people sometimes seem to conflate two distinct concepts - technology itself and what people do with it. A lot of (sometimes snobbish) disdain seems to be directed at digital technology and digital distribution, as though the technology itself is at fault. I don't think that argument holds up.

Digital technology allows musicians and labels to share music with more people, faster, more conveniently (for both artists and listeners), at a lower cost, with infinite durability, and at higher quality than any physical medium (even CDs). It's hard to claim that this is a bad thing. Sure, digital formats lack personal touch and sentimental value, but I'd argue the main thing about a music release, at the end of the day, is music itself (except anti-records, which is a niche within a niche), and for this core purpose, digital technology appears to be superior in almost every way.

That said (and this is what I think is separate to technology as such), digital formats have certainly lowered entry barriers for both fans and musicians. But I don't think this has come at a cost. It's additive. Dedicated fans and artists remain engaged, often participating in more meaningful interactions, live gigs, prioritising physical releases, and generally making extra effort when it comes to exploration or participating in the scene more generally. Meanwhile, digital platforms have opened the genre to casual listeners and newcomers ("noise tourists" is a term I hear now and then). Some of these newcomers will become dedicated, die-hard fans or long-standing artists, while others will naturally fall away over time. No harm is done to the genre or its loyal core fanbase, I think.

As for lack of online discussion, it is a very sad thing indeed but I just don't think it has much to do with digital formats. Mp3 has been around for nearly 30 years, including last 15-20 years as a total mainstream, but online forum discussions and long-form blogging culture started disappearing quite a bit later, with new age social media and low attention span culture rather than due to digital formats.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

I don't think most underground music can be, or should be rated in terms of "music itself", if that is limited into "sound coming from speakers". It would appear as absolute fact, that the easiness feeds mimics. In this process of imitations with minimal effort, we may get music that is ok to listen through, but that's that. I think this is absolutely a cost, and the cost is that meaning of expression is traded for comfort. All that little "effort" that comes with integrity and passion, actual personal interactions, physical world creativity, physical world action and thought processes involved with it is far less. Even simples things, like did you do some "legwork", or just sample youtube out of convenience, google picture search artworks. Did the noise spark discussions with maker and contemporaries or someone who might have listened to it? Does maker have any real emotion or something to say about work he does? and so on and on. 

Especially power electronics, if you strip it down to point of "good music",big part of it appears as if makers was fixated on easiness of mimicry of basic formula. That the qualities required for actually good basic stuff and or interesting material wasn't even recognized. Sure, I had fun doing it, is fine. Also easy access to hear material, great.

However, for example other music styles, establishment lapdogs creating "punk" in 2025 that sounds as if AI made it, distributed exclusively by multinational corporations. What a joke. Or Black Metal project by jaded family man sitting in his sad sad "mancave", recording couple doable riffs on virtual guitar amp over perfectly programmed drums. None of this is sentimentality to past, just stating, notion of what is, or what contributes to creation of "good music" is up to debate.

Not entirely related to this topic, but "follow, where?" is interesting question. Many have noticed, and its been studied that internet changed so much within last 5-10 years. One thing that creators were warned of, is already broken: that older idea of "following something" online. Now you can "like" things and almost zero things you "follow" or "like" appears on feed. Its algorithm curated junk mostly. This has been mentioned as increasing trouble for so called content makers. Sure they can be podcasting and doing videos all they want, but a lot of currently barely functioning platforms that enable you to reach even the OLD already loyal fans, are deteriorating.   

However, of course I'm not jaded or hopeless by any means. Each year been great, and fact is that power electronics tends to have very different pace than noise, I am not cautious even if there would be couple dry years, so to say. The little forum enables, I absolutely recommend using "playlist" or "noise related random talk" or even "new interesting releases" -topics as very low effort ways of proving otherwise. If there really is fantastic releases you think people ain't hearing about and they should, it would be great to have even short comments and hints towards what to check out.

[Penon]

A lot of very interesting thoughts and observations in your post, as always.

 
Regarding the discussion about whether technology and convenience come with a "cost" I think it ultimately depends on whether they replace more thoughtful, dedicated methods or enhance them. For instance, if there were 1,000 PE artists who sourced audio samples from rare second-hand VHS tapes and crafted handmade collages from personal collections of vintage magazines, modern technology now enables 1,000 more artists to achieve similar results with less effort - using platforms like YouTube and Google Images, as you mentioned.

The real issue arises if the original 1,000 artists become complacent due to these conveniences and stop (or never start) making the effort they otherwise would have. While I don't believe that's generally how the world works, if it does happen, then yes, it would be a cost and a loss to the scene.

I could speak at length about my own experience, which, in some ways, has been directionally the opposite of what you fear. The lower barriers to entry pushed me to start my journey in music-making. I remember that in the first couple of months, I fully embraced every technological shortcut and convenience: sourcing samples from YouTube, releasing music online without accompanying physical formats(those were individual songs anyway), and - forgive me Father for I have sinned - using AI-generated artwork. I even used AI voice generator to create "fake" samples because I couldn't find the ones I wanted (or because they had background music, for example). Yet, as I grew more comfortable with these "lazy" methods, I gradually found myself diving deeper: experimenting with unconventional gear, seeking out unusual sources, replacing samples with original lyrics and vocals, introducing field recordings, and eventually creating my own artwork.

For me, technology was an enabler, helping me begin and then evolve toward a more sophisticated approach (though whether this reflects in the actual quality of my work is not for me to say but at least there is hope). Of course, I recognise that generalising from my personal experience to the broader population is a dangerous business, but I am not arrogant enough to think there is something special or unique about my case.