Review: Taciturne - 6 Fragmente In Der Chronologie Des Wahnsinns - Fischkopf 12

Taciturne is one of the most sought after of the early underground hardcore producers. not a small feat when one takes into account that he only released 3 and a half records (or rather, two halfs - there is also a split EP he did under a different name) during his active period. Yet he fully deserves this appreciation.
"6 Fragmente In Der Chronologie Des Wahnsinns" means "six fragments in the chronology of madness" in english.
it is probably a reference to a well known independent movie, "Sechs Fragmente in der Chronologie des Zufalls".

A1 - Mourning

there are six tracks on this record so start with the first, "Mourning".
the name is rightly chosen. it starts with quiet, calm, choral chanting, a bit gregorian, but not "epic" gregorian, something soft and slow. then the beat comes in, sounds like a distorted 909. the speed is slow, but with a lot of offbeat kicks lined in the rhythm. after a while a breakdown comes, and we hear the sound of a heartbeat speeding up. in fact this creeped me out one night, when i was listening to it half asleep and wondered why my heart suddenly seemed to sound so strange, before i realised it was in the track.
this is actually all elements the track has, yet this is enough. the track is wonderful and great, the concept is just brilliant and well worked out. hardcore enthusiasts might label it as "doomcore" and it could be used in such a set, but it is also much more than that.

A2 - Dexpanthenol

if you're an experimental hardcore fan, go for this one. abrasive sounds, broken rhythms and hard beats.
to be honest, for me less interesting than the other tracks on this record, yet still hugely better than most productions

A3 - Boys Don't Cry (Revisited)

this track stands out with it's ironic sense of humor. it's a remix of Boys Don't Cry by everyone's favorite postpunkwavegothic band, The Cure. this was when a time when remixes of "pop" tracks where not common in the scene outside the "happy hardcore" world. i remember taciturne once did a chart for the french TNT magazine (one of the most spread hardcore zines back then) which had only synthpop and new wave songs in it, so i think he honestly likes The Cure. the track is a lot of fun either way, should put a smile on everyones face. what i especially like is the complete intentional trash/lofi way this track is produced, the sample often somehow muddles up as if token from a bad tape, and seems somewhat offrhythm most of the time. lovely.
"we're pleased to welcome Robert Smith from The Cure".

B1 - Phenylephrin-Hydrochlorid

from the fun of the end of the A-side to something very serious again. maybe this could be called nightmare techno? a very slow beat, a drone throughout the track, and one of the most creative uses of the mentasm sound i've ever heard. in the middle of the track it speeds up and becomes somewhat more of a hardcore affair.
brilliance. play this when it rains outside.

B2 - Haematopan F

anthem. the track starts with a slow, but very hard pounding, industrial distorted kickdrum. then more metal and noise sounds are added, and a female voice declares "hardcore" (where did he take this from?).
but it doesnt end at this, in the middle of the track choral sounds come in and add a very soothing touch to this track.
it's hard to find words for how good this track is. it just has such a big impact, while being cold and chill.

B3 - Phenprocoumon

the last track and this is my favorite track of this record. a bit similiar to A2 again, we have lot's of unstraight rhythms and distortion. but what makes this track so stunning is the melody that comes in now and then. it sounds almost japanese or chinese, very soft, very still. this antagonism between this melody and the abrasiveness of the rest is amazing.

so there are six complety great tracks on this record, that stand out from a lot of other music.
a masterpiece. top notch. magnificient.

How I Learned To Love Hardcore

How did I get into hardcore? It was 1995, I was 14 and heavily into rave and hard trance. That sound swept through Germany, it was essentially mainstream—much more popular than trance or house is now. Hardcore was a part of it, but unlike the happy rave sounds, it was boycotted by the TV and radio stations (which unlike today were the main source for new sounds.) I asked my rave friends about hardcore, and most said two things: “Good for dancing, not so good for listening” and “Terrordrome is better than Thunderdome”.
Then, one night the following happened. MTV’s Party Zone was on. Some guys I’ve never heard of—Alec Empire and others—were talking about a label I never heard of, Digital Hardcore Recordings. They played the video for Atari Teenage Riot’s “Speed”, which took place inside a squat. I instantly knew that was where I’ve always wanted to be, and the sound I’ve always wanted to hear. There was no return.

A few months later, I got internet, and found out more about this DHR. The DHR webpage mentioned labels like Fischkopf, Napalm, GTI, and Bloody Fist. I was thrilled. Fischkopf was a hardcore label in the city I lived in! How exciting.

I was 15 by this point, and and started to learn more about the gabber side of things. I learned that Mokum was one of the most respected gabber labels around, so I bought Cyberdrome Alien City Part 1, one of their compilations. It introduced me to artists like Wavelan, Speedfreak, and Chosen Few. I knew now hardcore was the thing for me. The next compilation I bought was Thunderdome 12, and then Industrial Fucking Strength. That one really hit me hard. When DJ Skinhead came on, I was legitimately frightened . I had to take the CD out of the player before it was finished!

More compilations followed, and I became lost to hardcore and gabber. I finally picked up something by DHR—Alec Empire’s Destroyer Album. I was surprised how “dark” it sounded compared to the more upbeat Mokum and Ruffneck stuff I listened to. It took me six months before that album really grew on me.

I found out Fischkopf was run out of a techno store in Hamburg called Container Records. I headed there, went up the stairs to the store, and entered paradise! A wall with “hardcore” written on it (next to some fancy skulls) and full of underground hardcore CDs. The full section of hardcore vinyl was categorized by labels, sublabels, and in the case of Fischkopf, even by releases (one folder full of Fischkopf 12, for example). I bought Ec8or’s self-titled album and a Fucking Hardcore 5 CD. The former, again, took a while to grow on me. The first vinyl I bought was Fisch 14, Eradicator’s Agit Prop LP. When I heard the first track on it—with the “everything is war” intro—I fell in love.

So that’s how I got lost in hardcore.

The Crisis Of Music

what is the crisis of music these days, that so many people seem to feel, yet find it hard to put in words often? - only to be denounced by those who assure everyone that everything would be "fine". it is that music is only made for petty, small, boring, useless, mindless reasons - to get rich, for fame, for a social position, for greed and material selfgain. to became a star, a megaseller - or at least a "star" within an enclosed "underground scene". music should be made for positive things, for ideals - for the good of humanity, for utopian concepts, to help others, to heal others. to add something good, something truly good and positive and wonderful and fantastic to this world. but this is to most parts lost now. oh, i know a lot of people say this was always the case, just "covered up" so maybe not visible to everyone. but this is far from the truth. even if we would say it was like that, even in the full extent, there is a change in quality now. some promoter or musician might have joined a radical, utopian youth culture for money or fame, and covered it up with nice words. but at least the possiblity of making truly utopian music was acknowledged. these guys might have though "yeah, we are clever, the others strive for social change, but we go for luxury". but nowadays, this position itself has become almost an impossible - for these people. if an electronic musician says he makes music for the revolution, for a free world, for a radical change of the social system, or a peaceful, equal society - he will simply be laughed at, not taken serious, in fact a lot of people would assume he or she has lost his or her mind. because this "utopian viewpoint" is simply not understandable to most people now. almost impossible - but not quite. because, after all, there are still people who believe in the revolution, in a just society and world, and in wonderful, adventurous ideals and concepts. maybe they do not even lack numbers, as opposed to the radical 60s or the punk years of the 70s. but they for sure have become less visible, less "public". in fact, i often get feedback by people who are still radical and dreamers, but most say they feel alienated to the material, greey, shallow music cultures and subcultures that feed the bullshit of the masses and the rest these days. this could be an intermission to say to these people: go on with the struggle! you are for sure not alone. to go on with the topic, if music is not made with a high and positive ideal in mind, it loses all it's value, it's spark, the elements that are interesting and special and outragous (in a good way). this music - becomes the shallow tripe that it is. just think about it - some of music that is most respected and well-known these days, was it not made by dreamers and idealists, who had the most ideal social structures and radical concepts in mind? couldn't that serve as a proof that indeed this way has - its merits? who will think of bands or musicians in 50 years that just swam with their greedy peers in a shallow soup. also what i see a lot these day, is that, especially upcoming musicians, walk a road without orientation. they put a lot of work and energy, and quite some hard sacrifices, into their art. then it first gets ignored, gets picked up by a label or distributor or something else, than "public" interest vanes, and they slowly get back to their start and are in danger of fading into obscurity. this is the danger when music is not based on a high ideal! if you have an ideal - for example, helping people, giving them a positive outlook at life - you have already "attained" everything with your art, when you do this very thing. even if you only help 2-3 people this way, you have done a good deed. and it doesn't matter how many other people listen to your music or stuff like that. and even - which is unlikely - you do not manage to do something good with your art - at least you have tried, and this is noble in itself, and you have done something good and do not have to blame yourself. so what are these high ideals art could be based on? i already mentioned some - to create a revolutionary situation by your music, or helping a radical struggle with your output. music can be a vehicle to make people aware of social and political issues by your lyrics or titles. a noble way is to make music that generally spreads a feeling of amazement, something adventurous, marvelous - for adventure and marvel is what the world needs! and, the most noble act could be, to create art that *heals* others, gives them hope and an outlook and a good foundation for their life. it is no sense to try to make a comprehensive list here - any noble and good and high ideal is worth being put into art. so the next question would be, *how* to put these ideas into? well it should be obvious - just do it. use vocals or lyrics to achieve this, or the direction of your music, the general structure of your art. also there are many many more ways. and, in the end, if you are guided by high ideals when doing your art, they doubtless will end up in your art! so go ahead. 

How Music Has Become Meaningless

there has been a lot of talk that contemporary music, and its associated scenes, are kinda shallow, superficial, devoid of meaning. while others dismiss this is purely subjective opinions. what people rarely realize is that music has become meaningless in the most literal of senses.

let's take a look at the past; people in the 60s believed that their music would lead to a revolution, to a whole new society, to a whole new world; that it would be able to sweep away all old structures and the negativity enforced by them. punks believed their music would enable them to beat society, to break all rules - and get away with this, win with it.

does todays music still have these powers? does anybody believe that music still could have these powers?

does someone who electronically buys a minimal techno track, believe he could cause a political, social or cultural uprising, a change by this? no.

so music has really no meaning anymore. it's just a good for consumption; restricted to leisure; to get the shallow, limited, cut down joy that capitalism allows its slaves to have for a few minutes between working and sleeping.

the ironic thing is that the last trace of meaning today is found in the megapop productions of the big corporations. because the teenagers still believe their stars are something special, and would lead them to a wonderful escape from everyday life. of course this is nothing to build on; it's just a last refuge; and of course based on lies; but, as it is the usual matter with belief, it's still better to believe in something wrong, then to not believe in anything at all.

but let's leave this pop business behind. music has to have a meaning outside of itself - outside of the track, song itself - to be meaningful. music that is just for leisure time or consumption doesn't do the trick. there has to be a political, cultural content, movement, struggle, party, organisation associated with a certain music to elevate it from the boring rubble of mass content. structures have to be created, leaflets printed, things shouted down the street. music, left to itself - just an isolated song, or track - is an impossibility. it has to be part of a bigger plan, scheme.

and this is still possible. music has the power to change the world. music has the power to change your life; to something wonderful, to something special; to lead you out of oppression or the banality of everyday life. to lead you to adventure, to lead you to excitement.

let's not get stuck with mere political goals. any concept, structure, organisation, that can be tied to music, that brings the unknown, the daring, the amazing to people's life is worth supporting. there is nothing wrong with gaining pleasure by music; just the consumer society non-pleasurable banal "joy" that is associated with common music, is the problem; you can reach pure, true ecstatic pleasure by music, so don't bother with less.

the possibilites are still there. we just have to realize them, and utilize them.

Can Music Change The World?

imagine an isolated tribe on a remote island would lose the knowledge and skills to construct boats. after a few centuries not only the knowledge could be forgotten, but also the existance of the boats themselves. the idea to travel the ocean and visit other islands would be like fairytales and myths to them.

the same has happened in western culture with the truth that art can change the world.

for centuries, people knew that books, plays, poems, music, paintings can change society.

yet if you state nowadays that art can change society positively, that, for example, a single piece of music, when done right, can spark a revolution, one is met with disbelief and ridicule.

yet this was the belief for a long time, even for most part if the 20th century.

for example, for more than half a century the soviets knew that certain art could damage their authoritarian society and lead uprisings, and took great pains to eradicate and ban it.

but also in the west people knew this.

when rock'n'roll happened in the 50s, americans realized this music could overthrow their old, conservative and also authoritarian society.

and indeed this music changed society for good. that a fullscale revolution did not happen was only because the artists and fans lacked true faith in the end and gave up with the total uprising already in sight. not because it was not strong enough for it, or because the authoritans could have stopped it.

it didn't end in the 50s. similiar fears by society happened with 60s rock, punk in the 70s, and plenty of other subcultures.

the last subculture that was seen like this, as a possible "downfall of society" (in fact a positive revolution) was techno and rave in the 90s.

again, the social "techno revolution" was indeed very much possible back then and only stopped (maybe in almost the very last second) because the DJs and producers "switched side" and joined the capitalist business branches and markets instead - for petty self gain. but the revolution is still possible, even today.

so until the end of the 20th century, in both the western and eastern bloc, people knew that art can thoroughly change society. it is only at the turn of the millenium this knowledge was lost.

if we go back in history, we are met with this knowledge again. remenber the "scandalous" books or paintings of the 19th century.

again, the oppenents claimed that if these were allowed to spread, the whole of society would be in danger (again, in these cases a good thing - because not positive social aspects were in danger but rather oppressive, authoritarian structures of society).

imagine that! in the 19th century a single book could have led to a revolution. but this is very much still possible with art today.

if we go even deeper in history, we again see how the church and monarchs went out of their way to battle certain books and texts - because they knew they could end their reign.

if we look at other cultures, for example islam, we again find the knowledge and fear of societal powerful art.

but even in western society today! the far right artists know they can change society by art (and they should be fought on this). the left radical artists, for example political punk bands, know it too.

the church types are scared of certain art due to this. the esoterics believe in the power of art.

there is only a self proclaimed "elite" of conservative media persons, subcultural people and false, boring "rarionalists" who think that music, art and culture couldn't "change a thing"

most examples i mentioned involve a certain "fear" of powerful art; but the fear was only there because it was voiced by those who were entangled in an oppressive and authoritarian society, profiteering by it, and fearing everything that could lead to real change.

almost every culture and society in history and right now knew that art can change the world. isn't it then very unlikely that the "media conservatives" are right?

believe in it - no, rather *know* it - that music, books, all of art can start a revolution - and change the world positively for good.

The Next Hardcore Revolution

A lot of people in the 90s thought Hardcore Techno, Breakcore or "Digital Hardcore" would lead to a political revolution; others might have not had such "high goals" mind but nevertheless thought Hardcore would take the world by storm, and Gabber and Hardcore would make a big impact and especially life would continue to be just a "big party"; others had even lesser objects of desire but at least thought they somehow could live inside the "hardcore world" as a DJ and producer etc. for the rest of their life and would not have to worry about such issues like having a job or caring much about money; living the "artist life" for good.

Nearly all of these people I knew eventually defected from these goals when they got older; and very much joined the boring "everyday world" they did despise so much when they were young.

I too thought all these concepts and ideas failed by the time around the millennium; and thought these things would be impossible to attain by now.

But when I got older, I realized this was not a rational response at all. It's like a scientist who designs a new plane, or train, or rocket. The first unmanned prototype blows up. A setback, yes, even a big setback. But does that mean he or she has to give up? Does it mean the project of designing a new rocket *has* to fail? No, in most cases the scientist will continue to work on it, and if the second prototype doesn't work, maybe the third or the fifth. The history of science is full of examples of technologies and people that failed at first, but the scientific idea turned right in the end (think of the failed attempts at "flying" before the first plane took of for good").

And this is very true for us too. The Hardcore Revolution didn't happen in 1999. But that does not mean it can not happen now, or in the future. We failed - once. So let's get up and try again. Return to our ideals and make sure they come true this time.