Originally posted by Trance-MB
Well, actually I didn't explain why I liked it. But because it was played everywhere that means others besides me really liked it. I don't think I need to explain why I liked it.
Yeah, "it was played everywhere" argument is always much stronger than your own opinion towards something
Posted by Trance-M on May-16-2008 19:23:
quote:
Originally posted by sljiva
Yeah, "it was played everywhere" argument is always much stronger than your own opinion towards something
It just explains that more people liked this version than disliked it, otherwise the one you like was played most. Your reaction doesn't leave much space for others opinions. You react as if it's the worst example someone could think of. Many IMO will disagree. Probably you also don't think it's a classic.
Posted by sljiva on May-16-2008 21:09:
quote:
Originally posted by Trance-MB
It just explains that more people liked this version than disliked it, otherwise the one you like was played most. Your reaction doesn't leave much space for others opinions. You react as if it's the worst example someone could think of. Many IMO will disagree. Probably you also don't think it's a classic.
It's not the worst example, but it's far from the best. He probably posted it because it's from 1992, and people around here have somehow respectable attitude towards classic trance, and they rarely criticize it. But bad classic trance exist (even awful) and it must be pointed out. This track is a perfect example. The instrumental part is pretty mediocre (see the video I posted). There's so much better classic trance from 1992, and even Dance 2 Trance made much better tracks. And the vocal part is just stupid. I mean, "I believe in a power of American Natives". What's so good about that line? It just diverts your attention from anyway mediocre inst. part.
I think the only reason why they put vocals was the fact that DJ Dag couldn't express his fascination with American Natives that much with just instrumental part. I don't think it was because of commercial appeal or because of the "first trance track with vocals" title.
Posted by Trance-M on May-17-2008 18:49:
quote:
Originally posted by sljiva
It's not the worst example, but it's far from the best. He probably posted it because it's from 1992, and people around here have somehow respectable attitude towards classic trance, and they rarely criticize it. But bad classic trance exist (even awful) and it must be pointed out. This track is a perfect example. The instrumental part is pretty mediocre (see the video I posted). There's so much better classic trance from 1992, and even Dance 2 Trance made much better tracks. And the vocal part is just stupid. I mean, "I believe in a power of American Natives". What's so good about that line? It just diverts your attention from anyway mediocre inst. part.
I think the only reason why they put vocals was the fact that DJ Dag couldn't express his fascination with American Natives that much with just instrumental part. I don't think it was because of commercial appeal or because of the "first trance track with vocals" title.
The vocals just sound good, and IMO are used as an instrument. Many tracks have that like "Open Your Mind" or "Don't You Want Me". In 1992 this I think was one of the best. To me it's most important that the vocals sound good. What they mean doesn't matter that much as long as they are not extreme rude or stupid like in many hardcore tracks.
Indeed lateron there are better vocal trance tracks made, but I think a classic as this one is worth mentioning especially for the younger t.a.'s
Posted by MrJiveBoJingles on May-17-2008 18:55:
quote:
Originally posted by Trance-MB
The vocals just sound good, and IMO are used as an instrument.
But they don't sound good. They sound canned and corny.
What other tracks do you think have "good" vocals?
Posted by Trance-M on May-17-2008 19:15:
quote:
Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
But they don't sound good. They sound canned and corny.
What other tracks do you think have "good" vocals?
The tracks I already posted at this topic. But don't forget the fact that in 1992 I never heard somebody complain how the vocals sounded. That's the point with many classics, they now sound old. Just a few don't, like: Scooter - Cosmos (but doesn't have vocals however)
I not only judge based on the vocals though. If the track without vocals sucks, the vocals cannot make up for that. Vocals do not always have to be perfect to keep a track great.
Posted by sljiva on May-17-2008 19:19:
quote:
Originally posted by Trance-MB
The vocals just sound good, and IMO are used as an instrument.
No and no. I won't enter into discussion whether they sound good or not, because it's a matter of taste. To me they sound awful. But they're definitely not used as an instrument here. If you want to hear a track where the vocals are used as an instrument check out this one (notice how around 00:53 they come in smoothly and serve as some sort of angelic layer of instrumentation. They don't immediately steal the show and that's the most important thing. The same thing happens again at 5:30):
Posted by MrJiveBoJingles on May-17-2008 19:47:
quote:
Originally posted by Trance-MB
That's the point with many classics, they now sound old.
Of course classics "sound old," because they are old.
"Sounding old" certainly isn't the same thing as "sounding bad," unless you're one of those nitwits who think that anything a big producer farts out is gold simply because it's loud and glossy.
Posted by Trance-M on May-17-2008 19:56:
quote:
Originally posted by sljiva
No and no. I won't enter into discussion whether they sound good or not, because it's a matter of taste. To me they sound awful. But they're definitely not used as an instrument here. If you want to hear a track where the vocals are used as an instrument check out this one (notice how around 00:53 they come in smoothly and serve as some sort of angelic layer of instrumentation. They don't immediately steal the show and that's the most important thing. The same thing happens again at 5:30):
I was expecting this answer. So just because they loop a small part 3 times it now is more like an instrument?
They way: "I beliiiiiieeeeeevvvveeeee" is used to me is simular. "Used like an instrument" to me is that they were looking for something to add, in this case vocals, which is repeated and is an important add to the song.
Just like "Don't you want me" or "Open your mind". Most people at one recognize this.
There even are examples where it's very difficult to here whether a real voice is used or an synth sound. I think that's great if you cann't tell.
Posted by sljiva on May-17-2008 20:07:
quote:
Originally posted by Trance-MB
They way: "I beliiiiiieeeeeevvvveeeee" is used to me is simular. "Used like an instrument" to me is that they were looking for something to add, in this case vocals, which is repeated and is an important add to the song.
No. That "I beliiiiiieeeeeevvvveeeee" enters like an attention whore and just screams "listen to me. don't listen to shitty instrumental part!!!". Vocals in my track enter almost unperceivedly and subtly flow with the rest of the elements. They don't steal all the attention, they just enhance the track.
Posted by Trance-M on May-18-2008 12:27:
quote:
Originally posted by sljiva
No. That "I beliiiiiieeeeeevvvveeeee" enters like an attention whore and just screams "listen to me. don't listen to shitty instrumental part!!!". Vocals in my track enter almost unperceivedly and subtly flow with the rest of the elements. They don't steal all the attention, they just enhance the track.
Like always again a matter of taste. I don't think it takes all attention from the instrumental part at all. The instrumental part is what made this track good. The vocals just were added to enhance the track, which IMO worked very well. Compared to your track these vocals just enhance the track a lot more. Question, how old are you? (I'm 33).
Posted by Trance-M on May-18-2008 12:35:
quote:
Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
Of course classics "sound old," because they are old.
"Sounding old" certainly isn't the same thing as "sounding bad," unless you're one of those nitwits who think that anything a big producer farts out is gold simply because it's loud and glossy.
I don't think so, there are classics which don't sound as old as they are. One good example IMO, Scooter - Cosmos.
Some classics can be played at a DJ set nowadays without someone complaining or maybe even noticing it. Other classics you will notice it at once.
Personally I like "timeless" tracks, because these I still like nowadays and meet my current taste.
Posted by breakerboy on May-18-2008 18:47:
Reeves - Lonely
The Thrillseekers - Dreaming of You
The Thrillseekers - Waiting Here For You (Breakfast remix)
Filo & Peri - Ordinary Moment (Breakfast remix)
Oceanlab - Sirens of the Sea (Above & Beyond Club Mix)
Posted by bassline_boy on May-18-2008 19:34:
quote:
Originally posted by DjAyTeKnOtRoNiC
vocals are what killed trance. Vocal trance is to easily mistaken for euro dance, infact there is no difference. Alice deejay could easily be considered Vocal Trance if you compare it to other stuff in the same genre.
better off alone is the most commercial song ever to be mistaken by dave pearse for trance,but dont slag it off cus it is a fucking classic.lol
Posted by hkaliher on May-18-2008 19:44:
quote:
Originally posted by bassline_boy
better off alone is the most commercial song ever to be mistaken by dave pearse for trance,but dont slag it off cus it is a fucking classic.lol
oh sure is classic...
Posted by montana on May-18-2008 19:48:
BT - Mercury & Solace (Mark Shimmon Remix)
Emmie - More Than This (Loafer Remix)
The Aloof - Mind
Kosheen - Catch (Grayed Out Vocal Mix)
Olive - You're Not Alone (Osbourne & Oakenfold Remix)
Posted by Trance-M on May-18-2008 20:27:
Jam And Spoon - Right In The Night
Jam & Spoon feat. Plavka - Angel (Ladadi O-Heyo)
ATB - You're Not Alone
Chicane Feat. Bryan Adams - Don't Give Up
Chicane - Love On The Run
