Universal acclaim- based on 50 Ratings
MarkWApr 30, 2003For who says this album isn't coherent,i answer:look at the cover.A typewriter,Symbol of the infinity of combinations of real.just what justifies,dear Rolling Stone,the chaotic names of the tracks,what justifies their random disposition in the album.Even if i'm sure that for Aphex himself,at least the tracks order HAS got a sense.But also:this album HAS been wanted to be on 2 cds.30 tracks there are,none of them eliminable.Why everybody weeps the inutility of the piano tracks or of lornaderek,bit4,aussois,and doesn't care of the abundance of drum/drill'n'bass tracks?Cause they think the last ones are normal.When you listen to Drukqs you have to consider every track at the same level,every sound with the same dignity.what emotion suggests you rdj mama's voice?don't care if you don't think it's music,try to concentrate to what that SOUND suggests you.every track wants to prepare you to the next one.every track has right to be,such as bbydhyonchord,which fundamentally is a not too happy tribal house piece,and i feel a sort of irony towards mainstream and its ultra-celebrated house music,so little and stupid after 6 astonishing tracks.It's musical conformism squeezed and reduced to a fragment of song by the intelligent,absolutely NOT crazy music.Dear critics,haven't you noticed that all the drum'n'bass tracks,at least on cd 1,are variations of the same melodic pattern,which finds its peak in the central stop of Mt st michel?and what they say about the piano tracks?bad Satie's copies,uncoherent with the rest,too simple etc.Who knows Rdj know sthat piano is a great new entry,anticipated by that Nannou on the Windowlicker EP.But this wouldn't justify those tracks if they weren't REALLY beautiful.Modified piano gives a different appeal and atmosphere every time,and we can find connections with the titles sometimes,see Father.Aphex likes to put in contrast headfucked technology with classic sounds.Who did this before?this is the novelty.Drukqs doesn't present any new kind of music,but it's a refinement and a revolution of the concept of 'album'.I think it's normal if even some of the fans didn't appreciate it. … Full Review »
Mar 16, 2013I have a number of Aphex Twin albums and this is by far the worst. It was apparently written as a "deal breaker" and I can believe it. Many of the tracks are abbrasive without any reedeming quality and are simply unlistenable. This album does not give you a remote idea of what Richard D James (Aphex Twin) is capable of producing. It's a little tiring to see arrogant comments such as those by AlphaHacker who seem to think that only their opinion and personal tastes matter. I have at least 10 Aphex Twin albums, including a few he made under different monickers and Drukqs is terrible. It seems like he put almost no effort into it.
Someone commented, "Aphex Twin isn't out to please people or make a cohesive album." Fine, but that doesn't mean that we can't share our opinions on this album. There are two or three tracks I enjoy out of all the tracks on the 2 CDs. This is the only Aphex Twin albulm I own that I simply won't listen to. Every other album of his that I own, including Selected Ambient Works 85 92, Selected Ambient Works II, I Care Because You Do, Richard D James Album, Analogue Bubblebath III, Chosen Lords, Windolicker, Come to Daddy, Hangable Auto Bulb, Surfing on Sine Waves, put Drukz to shame because Drukz is a lousy album.
If you like the album, fine, that's up to you, but don't try pretending that only the opinions of those who like it matter, because that's not how it works. Many people even diehard fans of Aphex Twin like myself dislike this album and many of those who've not heard it will dislike it. I don't like the album. I think it sucks and my opinion is just as valid as those who give it a 10/10 and call it genius, no matter what you think of the album. Proclaiming it "genius" doesn't mean that your opinion is worth more.… Full Review »