TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- Trance is fading, My take on things
Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »

quote:

Originally posted by elFreak funny thing about your theory, kraftwerk and company came waaaaaaaaaaaay before disco

Did they change after disco?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karlheinz_Stockhausen

to say all electronic music comes from disco is false no matter what you say.

were certain influences from disco prevalent in certain styles yes....but that statement is wrong wrong wrong.

right on! for electronic music historically we can go waay back, even before stockhausen. let's say john cage maybe ... edgard varese a little bit too.

I'm not really arguing that the techniques for production or the sounds come from disco, obviously. But genres are defined by grooves, not techniques so much.

edit: I never said "electronic music comes from disco," but I will argue that it is the root of 4-on-the-floor EDM, period.

quote:

Originally posted by elFreak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karlheinz_Stockhausen

rip

the first electronic 'pop' music though i think you could say is dub


and i think you actually could argue that all electronic music came from dub

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec you actually could argue that all electronic dance music focusing on breaks came from dub

fixed

quote:

Originally posted by mehta what differentiates trance is that it takes from everything and doesn't give a shit about defining itself.

Yes, what?

quote:

Originally posted by mehta depending on what fucked up definition of progressive you have, it fits into other categories of edm easily

Well obviously its generally a subgenre, however its certainly a significantly different development worth mentioning with its own style and stuff.

quote:

Originally posted by mehta psy is a sub-genre of trance & it emerged at the same time (early 90s) - don't believe me, look up pioneers of the warped groove goa? look above - only a psy/goa freak like you thinks it is a completely separate deal

Maybe goa isn't significantly different, but it's a fair bit different from mid-late 90s trance, and a step further psy is no more like post 2001 trance then it is like house. Psy is a lot different from mainstream trance. May as well say disco is exactly the same as house.

dub techno?

not quite breaks.

Obviously the exact history and root of all this shit is complex & different artists would make different claims.

Elfreak - dub in the techno/house sense refers to a kind of bassline. Then again, I could be wrong -- I'm just another amateur dj/producer kid who is studying in a fairly isolated way.

In the future maybe some organization will teach all of this and standardize the terminology so that people aren't constantly arguing about nothing and confusing eachother.

My original point that trance is a very recent genre and hasn't had time to stabilize rests. There are loads of producers. People who are worried about the direction mainstream/big room is going should check out minimal trance. Of course, it's basically grouped in with minimal techno.

Blah blah blah

keep it coming



(But at least this thread has some useful discussion now instead of being another dead end complaint)

so this minimal "trance" you are referring to i have to hear.

It better not be from Kompakt.

quote:

Originally posted by Darkarbiter Yes, what?

uh basically what I mean is that trance tends to take elements of different genres and use them indiscriminately. ie, acid lines in psy, "electrohouse" basslines that are starting to appear in many popular tracks, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Darkarbiter Well obviously its generally a subgenre, however its certainly a significantly different development worth mentioning with its own style and stuff. Maybe goa isn't significantly different, but it's a fair bit different from mid-late 90s trance, and a step further psy is no more like post 2001 trance then it is like house. Psy is a lot different from mainstream trance. May as well say disco is exactly the same as house.

We don't disagree. When I play house music for my mom she says "this is disco." Just depends on how closely you pay attention & how familiar you are.

quote:

Originally posted by elFreak so this minimal "trance" you are referring to i have to hear. It better not be from Kompakt.

Not a fan of kompakt?

I will hit you up with a list of names & some mixes to check out soon. Promise. You might call it melodic techno or something. Who knows.

i can see where this guy is coming from with his post. he's clearly not a regular poster here...and he enjoys trance. so he probably thought it would be a good idea to post his opinion on trance on the tranceaddict forum. surely enough, most of you don't fall under a trance addict classification.

that's fine. but i'm with him on this one. after listening to many other genres including mainstream hip-hop, rock, all the different types of edm, i think trance is probably the most genuinely versatile. of course, i speak of all "subgenres" within trance in combination. which is another topic that pisses me off as well but i'll save that when someone makes a good thread on that to post about.

fact of the matter is - trance still does speak to some of us. and though some of you may have "grown out" of trance, some of us still enjoy the music and don't bash on it. please, stop effectively sucking that enjoyment out of us

quote:

Originally posted by mehta Not a fan of kompakt? I will hit you up with a list of names & some mixes to check out soon. Promise. You might call it melodic techno or something. Who knows.

i am a fan of kompakt, but i have heard the argument of minimal trance used in respect to it before, and the argument has always been false.

i look forward to seeing if you can prove me wrong.

cool. let's try just one track at first and see what you'd call it.

Alex Millan - Arpegia

quote:

Originally posted by mehta

mehta,

dub's biggest influence is the revolution that came with the use of the studio console mixer as an instrument. this is the backbone of all electronic music we have today.

the processing and production techniques are the most important aspect of electronic music, not the form.

also all looping can basically be traced back to early dub tape experiments. (cage notwithstanding)


again i'm not talking about musical form, i'm talking purely in terms of technique, because the history of electronic music is at its core a history of technology



dub is a verb, it is a technique! even in terms of reggae it only refers to the processed b-sides and versions of records, it's not a real genre. there's no dub techno, there is techno with dub production techniques and aesthetics

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec mehta, dub's biggest influence is the revolution that came with the use of the studio console mixer as an instrument. this is the backbone of all electronic music we have today. the processing and production techniques are the most important aspect of electronic music, not the form. also all looping can basically be traced back to early dub tape experiments. (cage notwithstanding) again i'm not talking about musical form, i'm talking purely in terms of technique, because the history of electronic music is at its core a history of technology dub is a verb, it is a technique! even in terms of reggae it only refers to the processed b-sides and versions of records, it's not a real genre. there's no dub techno, there is techno with dub production techniques and aesthetics

Cool. I'll admit that I troll a bit in order to get people to post meaty tidbits like this.

I actually disagree that the production techniques are more important than the forms and grooves when we are making dance music.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec mehta, dub's biggest influence is the revolution that came with the use of the studio console mixer as an instrument. this is the backbone of all electronic music we have today. the processing and production techniques are the most important aspect of electronic music, not the form. also all looping can basically be traced back to early dub tape experiments. (cage notwithstanding) again i'm not talking about musical form, i'm talking purely in terms of technique, because the history of electronic music is at its core a history of technology dub is a verb, it is a technique! even in terms of reggae it only refers to the processed b-sides and versions of records, it's not a real genre. there's no dub techno, there is techno with dub production techniques and aesthetics

mash up respekt brap! Zaggazaw.

quote:

Originally posted by mehta Cool. I'll admit that I troll a bit in order to get people to post meaty tidbits like this. I actually disagree that the production techniques are more important than the forms and grooves when we are making dance music.

without the technique there would be no grooves to be had

chicken or the egg?

edit: there is nothing remotely trance about the track you posted, but then again the samples around are quite short.

quote:

Originally posted by mehta Don't worry mang, trance is pretty much the newest genre of music on the planet. It takes a while for stuff to become stable.

Jungle is newer. Dubstep is considerably newer.

quote:

Originally posted by mehta what differentiates trance is that it takes from everything and doesn't give a shit about defining itself.

Actually, that's progressive house. The fact you said progressive could fit into many other genres is proof of this- progressive has always been about genre infusion. There has been progressive at every tempo from 120 to 135+, and it has at one point or another taken from almost every other style going. By comparison, trance hardly takes from anything.

quote:

Originally posted by Darkarbiter Minimal 98? Progressive 95?

Progressive is just as old as trance- Leftfield's Not Forgotten and React 2 Rhythm's Rhythm Addiction both from 1990. Minimal is at least as old as 1993- Plastikman's first 12" came out then.

dan bell also came out with an ep in 1992 that although was referred to as glitch, is considered one of the first "minimal" tracks...that is if you can consider having a first track in minimal because it is more of a modus operandi than a genre to me.

quote:

Originally posted by elFreak without the technique there would be no grooves to be had chicken or the egg?

You are somewhat right in that it's impossible for humans to accurately reproduce electronic rhythms, but also wrong in the sense that the original dance grooves were always created by human drummers. It's only in the last 30 or so years that machines have replaced us in this respect.

Thanks for humouring me guys! it means a lot that you aren't totally dismissive.

and elfreak, if we don't get to it in this session I'll start a minimal trance thread in the next while with audio clips and stuff. and right on about minimal being a modus operandi more than a genre, I'm with you on that 100%

edit @ system-j: right on about jungle and dubstep, my disclaimer of "pretty much" was intentional. I tend to hyperbolize in order to attempt a point. and I agree with you about "progressive" - it's a massive genre, but it seems like a lot of people tend to pigeonhole it a bit based on current trends

quote:

Originally posted by elFreak dan bell also came out with an ep in 1992 that although was referred to as glitch, is considered one of the first "minimal" tracks...that is if you can consider having a first track in minimal because it is more of a modus operandi than a genre to me.

Many genre theorists would say that a genre is a modus operandi.

quote:

Originally posted by mehta I agree with you about "progressive" - it's a massive genre, but it seems like a lot of people tend to pigeonhole it a bit based on current trends

This is true and it pisses me off. Because it's progressive house people see it as a sub-genre, but I'd argue that progressive has done more than enough to justify being a genre in its own right.

let me rephrase...minimalism is not only applicable to music. To me it is still techno and i don't class it as a sub genre, that is solely my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by elFreak let me rephrase...minimalism is not only applicable to music. To me it is still techno and i don't class it as a sub genre, that is solely my opinion.

this is kinda nit-picky but I always differentiated between "minimalism" in music and "minimal" music.

"minimalism" comes out of steve reich/terry riley and refers specifically to repeating an idea and slowly expanding on it.

"minimal" just means slowing it down or taking taking some of the shit out. strangely though, lots of minimal techno is actually super complicated compared to "maximal" stuff like gabber -- a slower tempo gives a lot of room for more complicated rhythms.

techno is not relevant to the speed it is played at...not all techno needs to be like schranz.

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