a few thoughts on what makes a track Essential and Canon Worthy

one of the things with a music like jungle is that as a cultural formation it was so new, different, bracing that on a certain level ALL of it sounded amazing - because the fundamental proposition of the music is challenging, head-disrupting, life-rearranging. Such that virtually any instantiation of those generic properties done reasonably well is exciting to a fan.   In such circumstances the difference between a Classic and a solidly executed tune is less clear; only the truly sub-par, not-up-to-snuff, verging on defective tune rules itself out of consideration and contention.

When time elapses, though, the newness factor fades, and the canon starts to settle into shape

Seems like there's two bases on which a candidacy of canon-worthiness can be mounted

1. EXEMPLARY-NESS

absolute conformity to what the genre is about - not just essential but essentialist. Consummate genre-icity that approaches the definitive, in the sense of defining what this music and how it works. Example - "Terrorist" by Renegade.

2/ DIFFERENCE

the tracks that stretch the format, bend the form, renew the music, strange-ify it, push it forward into new spaces, open up unexpected possibilities - or become odd one-offs, that are never followed by anyone else. The quirky, the bent, the unusual groove, the uncommonly atmospheric or abstract-leaning. Example - "Drowning In Her" by Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse aka Foul Play - a track for which there is no like in all of jungle.