TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- Unique Tracks
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

quote:

Originally posted by Rex-Deus Granted, people who excel at their respective field to the point of overshadowing pretty much everyone else do typically receive vast amounts of baseless criticism from unhappy cynical types too scared to achieve anything remotely comparable themselves.

what a clueless gimp you are

The Marcia Blaine School For Girls - Quolet

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Funny how I don't throw "baseless criticism" at Faithless, isn't it? Especially as Faithless have sold over 11 million records- far more than Tiesto ever will- and had a string of influential and classic records. Also funny how I don't go around throwing "baseless criticism" at all those other big acts I've frequently praised on TA, isn't it? Of course, it isn't funny, because you don't have the slightest fucking clue who I am and what I say about different artists- you've just made a blind assumption because I've attacked a track you like and simultaneously shown up your knowledge, and so you have to lash out with an idiotic and false accusation. So please shut the fuck up. I made an entirely valid point, one that has been pointed out by countless people. If you listen to Traffic, and then a Faithless track like "What About Love", you'll see what I mean.

I didn't directly infer that, but since it seems to have struck such an emotional chord with you, it answers any doubt there may have been.
You're entitled to your opinion, but just because you have the spare time granted to make yourself a self proclaimed expert doesn't make your opinions factual. Go ahead and prove my point about most critics being socially intoverse unhappy people though.

quote:

Originally posted by Rex-Deus I didn't directly infer that, but since it seems to have struck such an emotional chord with you, it answers any doubt there may have been.

Now here's some quality backtracking. "Because you're angry, it proves it!" Seems we have an amateur psychiatrist on our hands.

It's quite obvious you were inferring it, even if you weren't directly. If you reply to a specific part of my post by quoting it, it's standard Internet conduct that you're replying specifically to what you've quoted. Now either you were aiming it at me, or you were making a completely irrelevant observation to a specific part of my post.

Logically your assumption is wrong, as examination of the evidence would show, as opposed to cack-handed deduction based on two posts I've made. Look at my posts on TA and you'll find that I don't criticise all big acts just because I'm jealous and bitter- because I have a lot of praise for many of them.

quote:

You're entitled to your opinion, but just because you have the spare time granted to make yourself a self proclaimed expert doesn't make your opinions factual.

Spare time? Ah, more generic insults shrouded in pretentious bollocks. Basically that's "You have no life!" dressed up a little. Seriously, it doesn't take much spare time to be familiar with the discographies of Faithless and Tiesto: two of the biggest electronic acts in the world.

As for whether my "opinion" is factual- why don't you actually listen to the tracks I told you to? Did you even know Maxi Jazz was part of Faithless when you made this thread?

quote:

Go ahead and prove my point about most critics being socially intoverse unhappy people though.

Let's get this straight. I've "proved" your point by being aggressive towards you? I may as well claim you're socially "intoverse" (whatever the hell that means- possibly "introverted") because you couldn't handle a criticism on a piece of music without being forced to attack the character of the person who made that criticism.

And save me the psychobabble- you can't even spell it vaguely correctly.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Now here's some quality backtracking. "Because you're angry, it proves it!" Seems we have an amateur psychiatrist on our hands. It's quite obvious you were inferring it, even if you weren't directly. If you reply to a specific part of my post by quoting it, it's standard Internet conduct that you're replying specifically to what you've quoted. Now either you were aiming it at me, or you were making a completely irrelevant observation to a specific part of my post. Logically your assumpption is wrong, as examination of the evidence would show, as opposed to cack-handed deduction based on two posts I've made. Look at my posts on TA and you'll find that I don't criticise all big acts just because I'm jealous and bitter- because I have a lot of praise for many of them. Spare time? Ah, more generic insults shrouded in pretentious bollocks. Basically that's "You have no life!" dressed up a little. Seriously, it doesn't take much spare time to be familiar with the discographies of Faithless and Tiesto: two of the biggest electronic acts in the world. As for whether my "opinion" is factual- why don't you actually listen to the tracks I told you to? Did you eve know Maxi Jazz was part of Faithless when you made this thread? Let's get this straight. I've "proved" your point by being aggressive towards you? I may as well claim you're socially "intoverse" (whatever the hell that means- possibly "introverted") because you couldn't handle a criticism on a piece of music without being forced to attack the character of the person who made that criticism. And save me the psychobabble- you can't even spell it vaguely correctly.

owned imo.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J I don't criticise all big acts just because I'm jealous and bitter- because I have a lot of praise for many of them.

You do, however, act like a condescending know-it-all in hopes of drawing someone into an argument. Whatever that need stems from, you have my condolensces.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Let's get this straight. I've "proved" your point by being aggressive towards you? I may as well claim you're socially "intoverse" (whatever the hell that means- possibly "introverted") because you couldn't handle a criticism on a piece of music without being forced to attack the character of the person who made that criticism. And save me the psychobabble- you can't even spell it vaguely correctly.

You shouldn't let your insecurities get the better of you like that, stop interpreting how people view you on the internet as a measure of self worth. You're trying to make an argument where non exists, as stated earlier my liking the music in question is merely an opinion, even if you would prefer to think you know better, or some knowledge you gleaned will help me "see the light" about it, I could really care less who made it or what it may or may not resemble. I didn't have any problem with your opinion, just the uncouth way you chose to present it while ignoring the purpose of the thread.

Your reading comprehension obviously isn't up to snuff, so I'll re-iterate one of the key points of my first post: trolling is fine as long as you contribute something useful. If you have a legitimate argument to make, go ahead and present it coherently, but making blatantly false statements about suggested spelling errors is folly. It makes you look desperate and hypocritical at the same time.

I'm not sure what exactly makes you happy, but you obviously aren't getting enough of it. Try to be less overtly miserable in the future.

quote:

Originally posted by Rex-Deus You do, however, act like a condescending know-it-all in hopes of drawing someone into an argument. Whatever that need stems from, you have my condolensces.

Ah, so now you're changing the story. Given that your previous accusation has caved in, you're accusing me of something else.

Have I actually acted condescending or know-it-all? You named a track that is well-known for being derivative. I pointed that out. How exactly was I condescending? If we're still throwing about psychobabble we haven't though through properly, perhaps you have an inferiority complex and percieve things as hostile or condescending if they disagree with you. That claim seems about as valid and well-supported as any you've made.

quote:

as stated earlier my liking the music in question is merely an opinion, even if you would prefer to think you know better, or some knowledge you gleaned will help me "see the light" about it, I could really care less who made it or what it may or may not resemble.

This is not about whether or not you like the track. I haven't once attacked your opinion on whether the track is good, and I welcome you to quote me actually doing that in this thread. You won't be able to, because I haven't, but good luck to you.

This is about whether the track is creative or unique. I've given you two tracks to compare to it, both by the people who made Dance For Life. If you actually listened to them, you'd see that the latter track closely resembles both of them, and sounds almost exactly like what I said in the opening post: a combination of the two. Hence: not unique.

quote:

If you have a legitimate argument to make, go ahead and present it coherently, but making blatantly false statements about suggested spelling errors is folly. It makes you look desperate and hypocritical at the same time.

I have a legitimate argument, and I've outlined it above. And I have made no "blatantly false" statements about spelling errors. "Intoverse" is not a word. It is not recognised by Dictionary.com: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/intoverse, nor the Oxford English Dictionary in my hands. If it is actually a word, please cite a source to prove so. If not, it's a spelling error.

Furthermore, how am I being hypocritical? If my argument is incoherent and features spelling errors, please point out any grammatical, syntactical or spelling mistakes which alter the semantics of any statement I've made in this thread. If you can't, then I obviously do not look hypocritical or desperate.

quote:

Try to be less overtly miserable in the future.

I was perfectly happy when I made the original post, and I'm getting some fun out of kicking your ass now. I was "miserable" because you made a character attack on me that is little short of libel, when I made a post that was not aggressive or antagonistic, but merely highlighting a point. You claimed that all perspectives are welcome in your opening post, but you seem completely adverse to someone disagreeing with you about whether a track is unique. What was that about hypocrisy?

What's telling about this is that this argument should really be an entirely musical one. Given that the thread, the opening post and my reply are all about music, I was expecting any discussion to be about the track in question and so forth. What's actually happened is you've made a backhand attack on me and then thrown forth several further personal attacks. Despite prompts, you've not once discussed any of the music I've mentioned to support my argument. You've done a spectacular job of trolling your own thread.

If you're still listening to Tiesto, frankly I don't think you can be making claims about what's unique and what's not. As you said yourself, you've only just recently started researching EDM.

Habersham & Numinous - Leaving Tifton (Digital Witchcraft's Miles From Melbourne Mix

That shit is killa.

Soma - Corporate Anthem Part 1
Der Dritte Raum - Hale Bopp
Omicron - Symbolis
A New Consciousness - Environment
Bedouin Ascent - Mammon
23 Degrees - Going Fast (Trail Mix)
Mystery Of The Yeti - Yeti 1 Part 3 (The Yeti Revelation)

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.