TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- what are some edm artist that are respected by the underground and the mainstream.
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

Faithless I guess

quote:

Originally posted by Unique2701 Faithless I guess

No

quote:

Originally posted by sljiva No

Depends on what you consider as "respected by the underground". Some Faitless tracks ended up pretty high in the billboards. Considering how mainstream that was, the result could've been much worse.

quote:

Originally posted by paulandrews Define underground/mainstream.

Underground is something that will never come to you. You must go to it.

Mainstream is the opposite.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur Underground is something that will never come to you. You must go to it. Mainstream is the opposite.

Well put.

quote:

Originally posted by Unique2701 Depends on what you consider as "respected by the underground". Some Faitless tracks ended up pretty high in the billboards. Considering how mainstream that was, the result could've been much worse.

If we take the assumption that "underground" only likes what is obscure, original, forward thinking or genre (re)defining (generally, music not for the masses), I don't know why the hell would "underground" respect Faithless. They are non-stop on the radio, in commercials, they collaborated with people like Boy George and Dido, they are one of the best selling EDM acts ever, Insomnia is pretty much the standard cool techno song for underage kids who listen to pop and R&B... and on top of that they haven't done anything genuine or innovative in their career. There were far better acts in UK, like The KLF, Leftfield or The Chemical Brothers, who were all doing something innovative and were respected by "mainstream" at the same time.

quote:

Originally posted by sljiva If we take the assumption that "underground" only likes what is obscure, original, forward thinking or genre (re)defining (generally, music not for the masses), I don't know why the hell would "underground" respect Faithless. They are non-stop on the radio, in commercials, they collaborated with people like Boy George and Dido, they are one of the best selling EDM acts ever, Insomnia is pretty much the standard cool techno song for underage kids who listen to pop and R&B... and on top of that they haven't done anything genuine or innovative in their career. There were far better acts in UK, like The KLF, Leftfield or The Chemical Brothers, who were all doing something innovative and were respected by "mainstream" at the same time.

Stop talking shite. Salva Mea and Insomnia are two of the most influential house records of the mid-90s. The amount of tracks that copied the pizzicato synth sound alone was unbelievable, and they were amongst the first high-profile tracks to perfect the breakdown/hook/drop template that would influence anthemic and epic trance.

And if you think they've never made anything innovative or "genuine" (whatever the fuck that means), you've never listened to No Roots from start to finish. That album completely tears down the conventional definition of a "song"... big house anthems melt into acoustic ballads, hooks, vocals and lyrics are shared and scattered throughout and genre is categorically rejected. And just for the hell of it, they recorded the entire album in one key, and I challenge you to name me another electronic record that did all that this album album did under one cover.

And "underground" should respect them because they perfected the technique that's partially responsible for bringing anthemic and epic trance to us? I don't think anyone should respect that kind of originality. That's like saying let's respect Benny Benassi for inventing/popularizing that farting bassline in house music (or whoever did that).

And you're right, I've never listened to No Roots. I couldn't be bothered after I've heard couple of awful tracks off it (Miss You Less See You More, I Want More). But I'll believe you if you say it's good (although this ("big house anthems melt into acoustic ballads, hooks, vocals and lyrics are shared and scattered throughout") kind of recommendation doesn't really encourage me to listen to it).

quote:

Originally posted by Unique2701 Faithless I guess

I was also gonna say Faithless.
Definetly well respected in both camps.

John Digweed?

Daft Punk and Deep Dish only two that come to mind.

quote:

Originally posted by palm depends on what mainstream we talk about, do we talk about mainstream edm (avb, tiesto etc) or just mainstream (mtv,viva). of course u dont hear oliver lieb on mtv but u find oliver lieb tracks in all djs playlist the last 10 years

avb and tiesto might be mainstream for us, but for regular people even they are sort of underground. depends a lot what the country is though. and i think unfortunetly a lot of avb and tiesto fanboys don't really respect oliver lieb, nor have they even heard that many of his tunes.

Ahhh some hilarious replies in this thread...especially Pryda.

quote:

Originally posted by sljiva And "underground" should respect them because they perfected the technique that's partially responsible for bringing anthemic and epic trance to us? I don't think anyone should respect that kind of originality. That's like saying let's respect Benny Benassi for inventing/popularizing that farting bassline in house music (or whoever did that).

The underground respect Daft Punk (according to this thread) and their innovations brought about an absolute slew of mainstream house records. And you cite The KLF, who inspired a monumental amount of crap in the early 90s.

That's beside the point though. Salva Mea and Insomnia crossed over into the mainstream, and then bastardised, watered down poppy imitations came out of the woodwork. That's a frequent sympton of being underground yet having mainstream success. You say The Chemical Brothers were a respected, innovative act, yet their big-beat sound was subject to all kinds of shitty mainstream imitations in the mid-90s. That's what happens. It seems hypocritical to praise the Chems or The KLF and condemn Faithless, and even if you don't like them, saying they never innovate is plain libel.

quote:

And you're right, I've never listened to No Roots. I couldn't be bothered after I've heard couple of awful tracks off it (Miss You Less See You More, I Want More). But I'll believe you if you say it's good (although this ("big house anthems melt into acoustic ballads, hooks, vocals and lyrics are shared and scattered throughout") kind of recommendation doesn't really encourage me to listen to it).

I didn't say it's "good". It's a decent album, but not their strongest. What it is, is innovative. You claimed Faithless never innovate, No Roots is an innovative album.

I can see why you'd be hesitant to include Faithless on this list, because in recent years they've had an irritating habit of vomiting coffee-table MOR pap uncontrollably. They've done a capital job of destroying their own reputation, especially after going back on their "retirement" and releasing a terrible album afterwards.

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