TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- Are Vocal Trance bad for Trance?
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

In all seriousness, vocal trance probably got it's start with Tilt - Invisible. Before this track (pre-1998), it was rare for trance to have any vocals at all, much less any singing (sampled voices/chants notwithstanding). It neither needed nor required them to put the listener in a trance (its modus operandi).

Sure, vocal trance existed in some unfocused incarnation before this track, but this is what put it on the map as a commercial juggernaught. But let's step back for a second.

In the mid-late 90s a whole generation of artists wanted to combine the flighty, emotional piano chords of Dream Trance with the pop-song structure of eurodance. That's what epic trance essentially is (or was, rather): dream trance + eurodance. The most popular track of this era? For an Angel.

Tilt - Invisible was the first commercial epic trance smash that realized if you put meaningless lyrics and an angelic, high-strung, thin, whispy voice over top of it, you can convince the suits that its pop music and they'll play it on the radio. Vocal trance was born--as nothing more than late 90s epic trance with singing. Eventually as the years went on, since the commercial 'song' release was always given more press than the instrumental 'track' original, producers stopped making epic trance anymore.

There really is no such thing, technically, as "vocal trance", when nothing has been done to the production of the music at all. Push - Save Me is the exact same song as Sunscreem vs Push - Save me, the only difference is the latter has some silly tart singing over top of it. Vocal trance was just a marketing gimmick. It was a cheap, aimless and uncreative ploy to get an underground floor stomper onto mainstream radio if given the verse-bridge-chorus top40 song structure format. In most cases, vocal trance tunes at the time were an afterthought: they were made ONLY after the original track made it big, in an attempt to squeeze more money out of it by re-issuing it with lyrics.

Furthermore, there seems to be a strong stigma against Ian van Dahl, Fragma, Alice Deejay and Lasgo--artists enormously successful for their vocal trance work yet expelled from the trance pantheon for being too commercial. How ironic, when that was vocal trance's purpose in the first place: to be a corporate radio schill, selling feather-like, milquetoast, fake trance pap to the masses for easy digestion.

Oceanlab, Motorcycle and DJ Sammy all use the same presets, guys. So knock it off with your pretentious elitism. You listen to sugary, sacharine schmaltz. Stop taking it so seriously.

Spirit5, you don't listen to trance and you never have, you're just in extreme denial coming to grips with the sad revelation that you're a wanton celebrator of ridiculously tepid crap.

A label on a CD doesn't make your music what it is, no matter how much you want to bullshit yourself into believing it so.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur The most popular track of this era? For an Angel.

In your little neck of the woods, perhaps.

i like Above and Beyonds vocal tracks

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J In your little neck of the woods, perhaps.

Go ahead, ask this forum.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur In all seriousness, vocal trance probably got it's start with Tilt - Invisible. Before this track (pre-1998), it was rare for trance to have any vocals at all, much less any singing (sampled voices/chants notwithstanding). It neither needed nor required them to put the listener in a trance (its modus operandi). Sure, vocal trance existed in some unfocused incarnation before this track, but this is what put it on the map as a commercial juggernaught. But let's step back for a second. In the mid-late 90s a whole generation of artists wanted to combine the flighty, emotional piano chords of Dream Trance with the pop-song structure of eurodance. That's what epic trance essentially is (or was, rather): dream trance + eurodance. The most popular track of this era? For an Angel. Tilt - Invisible was the first commercial epic trance smash that realized if you put meaningless lyrics and an angelic, high-strung, thin, whispy voice over top of it, you can convince the suits that its pop music and they'll play it on the radio. Vocal trance was born--as nothing more than late 90s epic trance with singing. Eventually as the years went on, since the commercial 'song' release was always given more press than the instrumental 'track' original, producers stopped making epic trance anymore. There really is no such thing, technically, as "vocal trance", when nothing has been done to the production of the music at all. Push - Save Me is the exact same song as Sunscreem vs Push - Save me, the only difference is the latter has some silly tart singing over top of it. Vocal trance was just a marketing gimmick. It was a cheap, aimless and uncreative ploy to get an underground floor stomper onto mainstream radio if given the verse-bridge-chorus top40 song structure format. In most cases, vocal trance tunes at the time were an afterthought: they were made ONLY after the original track made it big, in an attempt to squeeze more money out of it by re-issuing it with lyrics. Furthermore, there seems to be a strong stigma against Ian van Dahl, Fragma, Alice Deejay and Lasgo--artists enormously successful for their vocal trance work yet expelled from the trance pantheon for being too commercial. How ironic, when that was vocal trance's purpose in the first place: to be a corporate radio schill, selling feather-like, milquetoast, fake trance pap to the masses for easy digestion. Oceanlab, Motorcycle and DJ Sammy all use the same presets, guys. So knock it off with your pretentious elitism. You listen to sugary, sacharine schmaltz. Stop taking it so seriously.

What about Grace - Not Over Yet? I've always considored it to be the first commercial trance track.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur Spirit5, you don't listen to trance and you never have, you're just in extreme denial coming to grips with the sad revelation that you're a wanton celebrator of ridiculously tepid crap. A label on a CD doesn't make your music what it is, no matter how much you want to bullshit yourself into believing it so.

So basically, we are all wrong.. all DJs, producers, labels, fans and websites are wrong.. we dont listen to trance. Thats pretty sad, maybe we should give this whole site another name as well.

quote:

Originally posted by Subtle So basically, we are all wrong.. all DJs, producers, labels, fans and websites are wrong.. we dont listen to trance. Thats pretty sad, maybe we should give this whole site another name as well.

Hehe. Well, there are often threads bitching about the lack of trance talk in the Music Discussion, claiming the site should be renamed because of this.

quote:

Originally posted by Subtle So basically, we are all wrong.. all DJs, producers, labels, fans and websites are wrong.. we dont listen to trance. Thats pretty sad, maybe we should give this whole site another name as well.

Yeah that's is weird. Ishkur always makes it out to be like the music I like or we like, is not trance or "true" trance or is utter shit, when it's what 80% or more of people on here listened to or listen to who are not into psy or goa or other music other than trance. The ones who were really into the old 90s style are the minority, AND if you only focused on them, then your missing a lot of the tracks that are or will be considered classics like BT's "Flaming June" and "Mercury & Solace", PvD's "For An Angel" and "Another Way", The Quest's "C-Sharp", Free Radical's "Surreal", Salt Tank's "Eugina" & "Dimension", Solar Stone's "Seven Cities" & "Solarcoaster" and many others. If trance was only what Ishkur and a few other people on here...think it is..in their definition, then about 70% of well established trance artists and DJs would not be considered "trance".

I can understand the argument against using the term trance on CDs that are truly not all trance, like those "Ultra Trance" CDs, but to well estbalished artists, producers and DJs who we all know as trance, and as nothing else..and not to consider them trance (as the majority of people do consider them) then that's just weird...being overly picky (oh it's only trance if it's got this hypnotic groove effect going on). It's like saying it's only rock if it's got a guitar and drums and singing or should only sound like it did in the 50s when it began. If that was the only true rock music, then that would mean over 50 years of rock music with many different artists and sub-genres would not really be rock. There's lots of rock that uses other instruments and has other sounds other than the typical electric guitar, bass, drummer and singer....Pink Floyd being an example of one that definitely broke the rock convetions.

I really think this forum should be renamed, people bitch and moan about trance and those who do talk about trance...always get people who come in just to start stuff. I've just always found it funny that talking about trance on a forum with trance in it's title yet people bashing those who do talk about it, doesn't make sense. It's kind of like having a movie forum and not talking about movies...not saying this forum esp this MD board, has to talk about trance all the time, just weird that it seems more people don't like trance (it seems) than those who do (well the more vocal ones are usually those who don't like it anymore or as much, i've grown out of a lot of it, but I still like it and talk about it). There's no rule if you've grown out of something you can't ever talk about it anymore or still appreciate it, listen to it from time to time.

quote:

Originally posted by Sykonee Hehe. Well, there are often threads bitching about the lack of trance talk in the Music Discussion, claiming the site should be renamed because of this.

It should if trance is only those artists who were around from about 89 or 90 till 96 or is only psy or goa trance. Any of those in the progressive and epic catagories wouldn't be trance, an overwhelming majority of them who have made the sound what it is. Sure they kinda broke away from the really repetitive, hypnotic and acidiy sound of some of the earlier stuff, but they are what made the style known. Not every single trance track I like or other people like, or one by the bigger names, is only with a huge long extended breakdown ala Rank 1 "Airwave".

Sure there's those out there, but I don't hear that on every single track even the big guys like Armin van Buuren, Paul van Dyk and Ferry Corsten play or have produced. "Blue Fear" one of Armin's classics, doesn't have a 3 minute breakdown and it is known as a trance classic. Lots of people listen to that and who are into it think "trance". Tiesto's "Magik" series was basically all trance, and not every track was with a 3 minute breakdowns that people say have "killed trance". Even tracks like Gaia "4 Elements" produced by Armin van Buuren does not have a long 3 minute breakdown. It pretty much flows throughout with some minor tension and release. Some little breakdowns are so common to almost every genre of music, some type of climax or tension and release.

quote:

Originally posted by RebeL9 What about Grace - Not Over Yet? I've always considored it to be the first commercial trance track.

& Jam & Spoon vocal tracks were very successful in the early 90-ies

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 It should if trance is only those artists who were around from about 89 or 90 till 96 or is only psy or goa trance. Any of those in the progressive and epic catagories wouldn't be trance, an overwhelming majority of them who have made the sound what it is. Sure they kinda broke away from the really repetitive, hypnotic and acidiy sound of some of the earlier stuff, but they are what made the style known. Not every single trance track I like or other people like, or one by the bigger names, is only with a huge long extended breakdown ala Rank 1 "Airwave". Sure there's those out there, but I don't hear that on every single track even the big guys like Armin van Buuren, Paul van Dyk and Ferry Corsten play or have produced. "Blue Fear" one of Armin's classics, doesn't have a 3 minute breakdown and it is known as a trance classic. Lots of people listen to that and who are into it think "trance". Tiesto's "Magik" series was basically all trance, and not every track was with a 3 minute breakdowns that people say have "killed trance". Even tracks like Gaia "4 Elements" produced by Armin van Buuren does not have a long 3 minute breakdown. It pretty much flows throughout with some minor tension and release. Some little breakdowns are so common to almost every genre of music, some type of climax or tension and release.

Just wondering where and when someone have said that only psy and goa have ever been "proper" trance? For example old tracks as Zyon - No Fate is neither goa or psy trance but still is a perfect example of melodic trance without being the slightest fluffy.

quote:

Originally posted by RebeL9 Just wondering where and when someone have said that only psy and goa have ever been "proper" trance? For example old tracks as Zyon - No Fate is neither goa or psy trance but still is a perfect example of melodic trance without being the slightest fluffy.

Well that what the argument seems like, to me at least, put forth on here over and over, that melodic progressive and epic trance isn't true "trance" because it doesn't sound identical to the older stuff. See that track might be good, but again it's not what got me, or other people on here, into the sound. And fluffiness, well there's a lot of melodic trance that is emotive without getting into overt fluffiness. Do you consider Micro de Govia fluffy? I've been a big fan of his, and he makes emotive and beautiful music but it's still got a slightly tougher edge to it. But I don't really expect in the music I like to always have this dark, cold or harder-edged sound. I mean maybe it's because my personality, I am not an agressive person and I don't like really "tough" banging music (one of the reasons i'm not into metal or hard trance or darker full on psy), just energetic and uplifting. So naturally I am drawn to the melodic, uplifting stuff that isn't so pop-like with sing songey vocals (maybe some of the older stuff like that as mentioned). You might consider something "fluffy" while I consider it beautiful and emotive.

I think that attitude is more "implied" than someone coming right out and saying that except Ishkur does get into the "your trance sucks and mine is better" or "it's not "true" trance because it has a 1 minute breakdown and a melody". I can understand the argument against fluffiness or about the labels on CDs that I hate as well...saying they are "trance" when they are mostly just euro-dance/pop stuff. I got into the sound based upon CDs and Net Radio (a trance station) around 98...stuff that was melodic that I liked and was looking for. I didn't really get into because I liked the beats and the bass or whatever, but that was important to making a track energetic to me as well. I just didn't, and don't, focus on that aspect so much. I actually thought trance was the type of music that was overtly repetitive, until I listened to this Net Radio station around 98 and heard tracks with melody that weren't so overly repetitive. I even talked to a producer/DJ at a RecordTown store and he introduced me to the more melodic trance stuff like Paul van Dyk and Bt. If they were repetitive (which they largely still were) at least had an interesting melody or a breakdown to make things, IMO at least, nicer to listen to. While dancing though, i've always found it better to dance to more repetitive, less melodic and more rhythmic stuff that wasn't neccessarily the same music that I listened to.

You have to understand, that I am someone whose approached this music (trance) as more of a listener than a club-goer or festival-goer. I was pretty young during the late 90s (too young to go to clubs) when I got into it, and went to a few events that featured some of the music. Since I turned 18 four years go, i've only been to a few clubs and the clubs around here don't play this music. One club used to (Bleu) but they've gone mostly house now. So my only option is to travel to either Europe or some other city in the US...though to find clubs that play trance in the US is difficult. I approach it as "what is better to listen to?" than "what is better to dance to a club or festival", cause I just don't go to them (don't have the time, money or connections).

Got a sample of the track?

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur Go ahead, ask this forum.

Why bother?

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 Well that what the argument seems like, to me at least, put forth on here over and over, that melodic progressive and epic trance isn't true "trance" because it doesn't sound identical to the older stuff. See that track might be good, but again it's not what got me, or other people on here, into the sound. And fluffiness, well there's a lot of melodic trance that is emotive without getting into overt fluffiness. Do you consider Micro de Govia fluffy? I've been a big fan of his, and he makes emotive and beautiful music but it's still got a slightly tougher edge to it. But I don't really expect in the music I like to always have this dark, cold or harder-edged sound. I mean maybe it's because my personality, I am not an agressive person and I don't like really "tough" banging music (one of the reasons i'm not into metal or hard trance or darker full on psy), just energetic and uplifting. So naturally I am drawn to the melodic, uplifting stuff that isn't so pop-like with sing songey vocals (maybe some of the older stuff like that as mentioned). You might consider something "fluffy" while I consider it beautiful and emotive. I think that attitude is more "implied" than someone coming right out and saying that except Ishkur does get into the "your trance sucks and mine is better" or "it's not "true" trance because it has a 1 minute breakdown and a melody". I can understand the argument against fluffiness or about the labels on CDs that I hate as well...saying they are "trance" when they are mostly just euro-dance/pop stuff. I got into the sound based upon CDs and Net Radio (a trance station) around 98...stuff that was melodic that I liked and was looking for. I didn't really get into because I liked the beats and the bass or whatever, but that was important to making a track energetic to me as well. I just didn't, and don't, focus on that aspect so much. I actually thought trance was the type of music that was overtly repetitive, until I listened to this Net Radio station around 98 and heard tracks with melody that weren't so overly repetitive. I even talked to a producer/DJ at a RecordTown store and he introduced me to the more melodic trance stuff like Paul van Dyk and Bt. If they were repetitive (which they largely still were) at least had an interesting melody or a breakdown to make things, IMO at least, nicer to listen to. While dancing though, i've always found it better to dance to more repetitive, less melodic and more rhythmic stuff that wasn't neccessarily the same music that I listened to. You have to understand, that I am someone whose approached this music (trance) as more of a listener than a club-goer or festival-goer. I was pretty young during the late 90s (too young to go to clubs) when I got into it, and went to a few events that featured some of the music. Since I turned 18 four years go, i've only been to a few clubs and the clubs around here don't play this music. One club used to (Bleu) but they've gone mostly house now. So my only option is to travel to either Europe or some other city in the US...though to find clubs that play trance in the US is difficult. I approach it as "what is better to listen to?" than "what is better to dance to a club or festival", cause I just don't go to them (don't have the time, money or connections). Got a sample of the track?

for your information there is more trance styles apart from the ones you mentioned. I've never heard anyone say that tech-trance isn't trance (not talking about the cheesy dutch so called "tech trance") or that the progressive trance Sasha, Warren and Digweed spun back in the 90s isn't trance. I can't talk for all people who say that epic trance isn't trance. There is loads of melodic trance I definetly would considor proper trance. But a very small amount of the melodic trance today is "proper" trance in my ears. It's melodic, maybe too melodic, but it's not entrancing.

And talking about Mirco De Govia, I like his production. He is one of the few left melodic producers today which I still have some hope for.

Seems to take away from the trance experience... I love the emotion in trance, it's kind of like the producer is forcing certain thoughts on my feelings when there are vocals in the trance.

Sometimes it annoys the SHIT out of me, esp when the music is good and the lyrics are stupid and cheesy!

Too many tracks that just slap on vocals on top, instead of working to fully integrate the vocals within the structure of the tune.

BAD!

quote:

Originally posted by sljiva & Jam & Spoon vocal tracks were very successful in the early 90-ies

That's eurodance.

quote:

Originally posted by RebeL9 for your information there is more trance styles apart from the ones you mentioned. I've never heard anyone say that tech-trance isn't trance (not talking about the cheesy dutch so called "tech trance") or that the progressive trance Sasha, Warren and Digweed spun back in the 90s isn't trance. I can't talk for all people who say that epic trance isn't trance. There is loads of melodic trance I definetly would considor proper trance. But a very small amount of the melodic trance today is "proper" trance in my ears. It's melodic, maybe too melodic, but it's not entrancing. And talking about Mirco De Govia, I like his production. He is one of the few left melodic producers today which I still have some hope for.

See Micro de Govia is the sound I love. And productions from others like Steve Helstrip, esp under "Rapid Eye", and Paul van Dyk's old sound from "Seven Ways" and "Out There & Back" and Bt's from "Ima", "ESCM" and some of the tracks on "Movement In Still Life". I've also liked stuff from Steve Gibbs (Altitude), Solar Stone with "Seven Cities" and "Solarcoaster", and Airwave with "Above The Sky", "Another Dimension", "Save Me" and "Ladyblue" and some of the newer produces like Aalto, Super8, Phynn, and Kalafut & Fygle, and a number of others. I like the really energetic stuff, I just find the more melodic stuff better, as long as it doesn't get into heavy super-saws and such, like Svenson & Gielen used to or Rank 1 or a lot of lesser known producers. If there is one DJ I could name that defines the style i've liked over the years, it's Matt Hardwick. The stuff he plays is energetic, chilled and melodic...a little bit of everything.

Oh and I realize there is more styles of trance than the ones I listed. They are the ones though that I prefer (epic and progressive) and have liked over the years. And because their structure tends to be different than goa or psy or some tech trance, they are sometimes put in a different catagory (albiet still "trance"). Beatport and AudioJelly put those in seperate areas..psy has it's own catalogue, and trance (epic, tech, hard and progressive) in their own.

quote:

Originally posted by RebeL9 (not talking about the cheesy dutch so called "tech trance")

Just curious, what sort of cheesy dutch tech-trance are you talking about?

quote:

Originally posted by varun Just curious, what sort of cheesy dutch tech-trance are you talking about?

I think he's talking about Sander van Doorn since he's obviously dutch and obviously popular..has made that sound popular.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Why bother?

You're right....who wants to go through all that Spirit5 drivel?

brevity, man. Jesus fucking christ.

quote:

Originally posted by varun Just curious, what sort of cheesy dutch tech-trance are you talking about?

the stuff Jesselyn and Marcel woods produce. It's not much tech at all. It got very little to do with the old tech trance

quote:

Originally posted by Sykonee That's eurodance.

I was refering to Find Me and Right In The Night.

quote:

Originally posted by sljiva I was refering to Find Me and Right In The Night.

Yes, I know.

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