TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- Emotion in Modern EDM
Pages (5): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec in any case i tend to feel that less explicit emotional content is better, because explicit emotion inevitably becomes a farce (armin's new album)

I completely, comprehensively, utterly disagree with "inevitably". You're taking an obvious failure in execution and curing the headache by cutting off the head. Explicit emotional music is frequently a farce. Solution: stop making it. The fact you'd say it "inevitably" leads to farce would indicate that it's actually more difficult to be overt and still credible and effective.

In my personal opinion, the progressive house of the mid-90s (epic house) was the most successful execution of overt emotional content without lapsing into farce or over-kill. Not only were the emotions maximalist but so was every aspect of production (for that time) and composition. This is actually why I think the epic house movement was so short lived: it was too difficult to make. Not enough producers had the talent to pull it off.

quote:

Originally posted by paulandrews Do you think the listener's response to that has to be lesser too?

I'm not particularly interested in the listener's response. I'm more concerned with the attitudes and values, and also the actual aesthetics of the music. I'm not ruling out the validity of minimalist music, and I'm not trying to discredit the reaction of people who enjoy it. What I am doing is attacking the ideologies behind minimalism's current dominance.

When you actually think about it, the control of what's cool and trendy in electronic music comes down to relatively few people. The actual majority of electronic listeners overwhelmingly prefer things that are not cool, or trendy. The massive success of Basshunter in the UK charts underlines the silent majority of people who love Scouse House and cheesy dance music despite the complete and utter media silence towards it. If you take a genre like jungle, it's still relatively popular within its own scene, but since a spell in the mid-90s it hasn't been the trendy genre and hasn't enjoyed the attentions of the media. Jungle isn't trendy, but dubstep now is. Dubstep gets far more coverage than jungle right now, even though jungle is a larger, older and more widely established scene.

In terms of the idea of emotion being uncool, this idea is being perpetuated very much by a small group of people. A few DJs, a few key labels, a few key websites. You have to wonder exactly how much of a shit people might have given about The Field had Pitchfork not praised him so highly. Minimal/tech-house/techno is actually not a huge scene. It doesn't have chart success, it doesn't sell in huge numbers and the actual number of people dancing to it outside its major centres is probably very low. In Berlin or London or wherever it might be very popular, but outside there you'll find it's probably no more popular than any other genre, and perhaps less.

This "less-emotion" aesthetic movement is in power largely because it keeps telling us it is. It never ceases to amuse me when Mixmag, who used to love progressive house when it was trendy, now can't resist sniping at the genre. The same mindset is true of the RA review I cited. The attitude seems to be that everyone who ever liked progressive in the 90s was actually wrong and couldn't see how cheesy and overblown their stuff actually was, where as minimal has shown us the way and is actually the right way to do things. The exaggerated rhetoric of the RA review, which is quite clearly talking shit by saying the compilation is "exactly the same as any number of 90s releases", is the aggressive ideology at work. The likelihood is that in a decade we'll have found a new aesthetic direction and we'll be looking back at minimal and making exaggerated claims about its deficiencies and failures in order to bolster support for the bandwagon its currently profitable to chase.

I'm not trying to say minimal is better or worse than 90s prog, or anything remotely like that. However, I can quite clearly see people voraciously attacking any music that in any way resembles 90s prog and using all kinds of propoganda to devalidate it and its contrary perspective. The more key people do it, the more it seeps down to the crowds, who accept this new ideology and asphyxiate anything that wants to be more emotionally direct, in the process destroying a valid form of musical expressionism under the false truth of it being "cheesy".

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J In my personal opinion, the progressive house of the mid-90s (epic house) was the most successful execution of overt emotional content without lapsing into farce or over-kill. Not only were the emotions maximalist but so was every aspect of production (for that time) and composition. This is actually why I think the epic house movement was so short lived: it was too difficult to make. Not enough producers had the talent to pull it off.

i'm not sure, but I think you just proved my point:

i'm glad it was able to be explictly emotional and not become a farce.

but people don't make epic house anymore...

you're right - I agree that it is more difficult to pull off good music this way.

it's great that you have such admiration for it, but i think it's distorting your views somewhat...


I don't think the reason for its demise is a lack of talent but the result of changing values in the culture.

edit: also I am considering Armin's new album as a symptom of a greater societal epidemic. Maybe you take issue with that as a method, I can see why. But I am trying to look at this question of 'inevitability' as a collective generic phenomenon. Sure, there are exceptions, but the whole idea of 'genre theory' is to consider a thing as having its own sort of collective, generic life.

And I tend to think that in any movement of art, it's inevitable that the explicit expression or execution of an idea/genre moves towards farce if for no other reason than it begins to parody itself after a certain critical mass is achieved.


people are still making techno after basic channel (whose emotional content I consider to be 'implicit', but i don't think it's in any way a farce. atheus - deploy, quantec - metamorphosed, etc

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec edit: also I am considering Armin's new album as a symptom of a greater societal epidemic. Maybe you take issue with that as a method, I can see why. But I am trying to look at this question of 'inevitability' as a collective generic phenomenon. Sure, there are exceptions, but the whole idea of 'genre theory' is to consider a thing as having its own sort of collective, generic life.

I'm not talking about a genre so much as a general aesthetic. You could use Armin as an example of what has become of epic/uplifting/vocal trance. Even then though, I'd take issue because the result alone is not proof of the theory. Just because epic/vocal trance did descend into Armin, doesn't mean it has to. You'd have to reperform the experiment to see if the emergent scenario was the same, and that's an impossibility.

quote:

And I tend to think that in any movement of art, it's inevitable that the explicit expression or execution of an idea/genre moves towards farce if for no other reason than it begins to parody itself after a certain critical mass is achieved.

But is that an essential property of explicit expression? I think it's somewhat naive to say that minimalism is immune to self-parody, because it is just as strong in character as explicit expression. The amount of "shit minimal" around would suggest that slavish copying of genre conventions is already well in effect, and it's not hard to see this mindless imitation for-the-sake-of-it as a grotesque caricature of the "real thing".

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec it's great that you have such admiration for it, but i think it's distorting your views somewhat...

I could say the same is true of you. It seems fairly obvious you aren't a trend-follower and you have genuine love of the music you play. However, you have the current establishment firmly on your side so your perspective is subject to constant affirmation by the movement you fit into. Imagine loving a style of music and then finding it suddenly come to power, with everyone important now "getting" your musical love. To you, this is the pinnacle of the musical experience, where your perosonal tastes perfectly align with the zeitgeist and you are living in that moment. You're much less likely to question the revisionism and propoganda of the ideology, even if you have no direct part in it.

quote:

Originally posted by noikeee I think you're forgetting that, despite the scene having become way more globalized nowadays, there's still plenty of differences between every local scene. Things are genuinely shit in some places. Some places don't even have a scene.

Absolutely, but the opposite is true as well. Just because your podunk town has a scene full of posturer's doesn't mean the rest of us are suffering as well. I think it has much more to do with the parties people choose to go to. You would think there were two separate WMCs in Miami given the disparity in reviews. As usual the folks going to the big clubs to see the big jocks found themselves over-charged, ripped off, trampled on and marginalized, while those of us who stuck to the smaller parties thrown by like-minded people and with passionate talent had the time of our lives.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles I think this is a general trend that applies to more than just music. Unguarded enthusiasm and overt expression of emotion are out. Sarcasm, the appearance of apathy, and ridicule are in. Those are what get you cool points. Their translation into music becomes "subtlety." EDM is at a musical place similar to where classical was in the early 20th century, IMO. At that time the fashionable composers felt that it would be "kitsch" to keep using the emotional gestures of the 19th century Romantic composers (similar to how producers today view the excesses of '90s trance). They thought of the melodically rich compositions and sweeping arrangements of those compositions as "old hat," part of an outmoded era of music, quite similar to how that RA reviewer spoke about the new Seaman Renaissance compilation. It was uncool to write such "obvious" stuff anymore. They thought it was beneath them, childish, to attempt to "move" people with music -- or at least it become "uncool" to try to do so in an open and accessible manner. So what did they do? They started writing atonal and process music, purposefully divorcing themselves from any close relationship to the emotions of their audiences, and striving for originality by going "beyond" tonality. The EDM analogue to these atonal works are the complex, effects-laden but melodically sparse sounds adopted by so many "minimal" and tech-house producers. Going "beyond" the easy openness, enthusiasm, and frank expression of emotion that was so prevalent in '90s dance music.

Yes, i thought of the same analogy recently as well. EDM was like the micrography of the whole classical music, starting with the more raw but romantic music, developing into more epic and bigger compositions (romantic), passing through more experimental phases (impressionist, expressionist) ending in atonal musicless obscurity.


Now i understand that "emotion" is a subjective first-person experience making the whole thing very relative. Although, i tend to have some crypto-platonist aesthetical belief (yes it is a belief) which says that :



"If we play various pieces of music towards a crowd and ask them to rate the emotionality of those pieces of music, and this crowd has no preconceptions, previous attitudes, stereotypes and beliefs towards the sounds which are played to them, is it quite possible that we will end-up in a statisitical normal distribution, in which all subjects would have agreed on what is the most emotional towards what is the least emotional" ( a bell curve).


That is, there are some "universal aesthetics" in music, which don't neccesarily have a metaphysical/mystical (platonic) explanation (e.g. the highest emotion reflects a platonic/godly ideal), but maybe result from hard-wired evolutionary processes. This would mean, that, a combination of notes rated to be of "high emotionality" from our sample, would be considered to be of "high emotionality" from the general population as well, and this, regardless of the instrument which plays them. E.g. I consider this track to be of "high emotionality", and if one leaves behind preconceptions, attitudes, stereotypes and beliefs towards (post) rock (which could be negative, e.g. i listen only to EDM, rock is crap and hence i perceive this to be crap as well), most would consider this track to be highly emotional (i played this track to many people with many different musical preferences and all agreed to this, but still i need a largel sample):

whole-track:


Explosions in the Sky- "Your Hand In Mine"

http://www.explosionsinthesky.com/m...rHandInMine.mp3


IMO, these simple chord progressions would still sound beautiful, even if they are played in a piano, in a violin or in a saw-synth etc. Plus, this is modern rock so i would like to add tha the "lack of emotion" is something that IMO characterises EDM and by no means modern music as a whole in general.



IMO, deep/tech house and minimal have magnitudes of emotion but they are low, i really mean that. I doubt that anyone is going to cry or feel really happy and full by listening to any of the tracks listed in Nefardec's list. Yes, these sounds are cool, primal,moody hypnotic sounds,so yes, they tend to evoke some basic emotional response, but i don't thing that the emotion they evoke are of high magnitude (see my first post). Simply because they don't have substantial melody. I tend to like these deep sounds myself but i never got goosebumbs by listening to a Timewriter track because they are not melodic enough, or to be more precise, because they don't have enough melody! I like them because they are really basic and hypnotic.


I also thing that many kinds of music are more of an "acquired listen", and by saying this, i mean that, in the same way that thoughts, beliefs, stereotypes and attitudes for something can make us hate it, in the same way these same internal representations can make us love it. That is, simply because "minimal" is considered to be:
"cool",
"more experimental",
"it has a more mature crowd",
"it is more elegant",
"it is more futuristic" etc...

these propositions can readily distort the emotional experience one has and indeed make him/her really love it! This is an acquired aesthetic and i agree that it happens all the time towards all forms of music (towards EVERYTHING actually!) but, despite such environmental influences, i still thing that there is a more basic universal aesthetic core.

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis Absolutely, but the opposite is true as well. Just because your podunk town has a scene full of posturer's doesn't mean the rest of us are suffering as well. I think it has much more to do with the parties people choose to go to. You would think there were two separate WMCs in Miami given the disparity in reviews. As usual the folks going to the big clubs to see the big jocks found themselves over-charged, ripped off, trampled on and marginalized, while those of us who stuck to the smaller parties thrown by like-minded people and with passionate talent had the time of our lives.

And lots of fake moustaches.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN I doubt that anyone is going to cry or feel really happy and full by listening to any of the tracks listed in Nefardec's list. Yes, these sounds are cool, primal,moody hypnotic sounds,so yes, they tend to evoke some basic emotional response, but i don't thing that the emotion they evoke are of high magnitude (see my first post). Simply because they don't have substantial melody. I tend to like these deep sounds myself but i never got goosebumbs by listening to a Timewriter track because they are not melodic enough, or to be more precise, because they don't have enough melody! I like them because they are really basic and hypnotic.

well, people are different I guess. These things tend to affect me more, whereas I get turned off from really gushy stuff.

In any case, this was a thread about emotion, not a specific kind of emotion

trance produced now a days still has plenty of emotion in it. maybe u dislike what trance is now a days or u are too old to be listening to trance, but it still has as much energy as it ever did and gives u a great feeling inside, atleast for me and i know alot of other ppl too.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec I think the most emotional dance music provokes emotions you already have rather than attempt to force their own upon you. There is a lot of dance music that presents emotion in a very roundabout way, like trance music that uses classical melodies and fake string sounds, obvious breakdowns, huge buildups, vocals, etc... that's really easy for most people to get into because it is a sort of social sign for emotion what i am interested is more a basic emotional response in the guts, visceral, one which is arrived at and intuited rather than adopted or mimicked. (everyone reach for the lasers!) For me this basic emotional response is instinctive, unconscious. I don't listen to music to change my mood. I change my music to fit my mood. I drown myself in it. related to drowning and to what i find emotionally/spiritually important in dance music are these words from mircea elidade's "the sacred and the profane" I find this immersive quality in dub techno and deep house for instance, or the thickly layered, undulating formlessness that is detroit techno. It provides a return to a basic emotionally mutable state (the water). a 'framework for freedom'. In the midst of this sea of possibility, emotions surface and take form

Ok, i just red your post. Adding to my previous post...yes...you have right there. Deep and dubby techno produces a basic response but it is not emotional. It is a feeling deriving-as you say-from the sound's mimicking of ambient environments. This,(and as i said in my previous post) reflects universal hard-wired pre-given processes that exist in the human brain, namely, that the sounds of water/air/sea etc. sound pleasant because, through out the evolutionary history, the human brain is evolved to interact with and live on such environments.


IMO, (as you said?), what these genres do is to "trick" the human brain by evoking somthing "pseudo-archetypical" rooted on instinct and biological predespositions.

I want to discriminate between a feeling and a more elaborate emotional experience though. A feeling could be something more simple and abstract, e.g. a pleasant feeling. An emotional experience is a more elaborate reaction comprised of both physiological determinants as well as feelings and cognitive processes, resulting in the phenomenological experience of "emotion", or, happyness, sadness, anger, fear, disgust (these are probably the basic 5 ones-hence "pleasure" is part of happyness but it is not equal to it). When i'm talking about emotions, i'm talking about such elaborate phenomenological experiences not just any feeling. My theory is that even these more elaborate experiences/responses can be evoked by universal information hard-wired in the brain. Hence a specific note-sequence could, up to a certain extend, evoke such an emotional experience. Why? Because it could possibly mimick language processes such prosody.


Since IMO you need a note-sequence to do that, i doubt that genres such as tech-house and minimal techno can carry emotional information, since they lack a note-sequence in the first place. Their sounds can be pleasant or moody or hypnotic (e.g. various feelings) but not emotional.

PETRAN,

it's interesting that you make that distinction, because I had the same realization just a few hours ago as I was waiting for the train.

The basic response is definitely not the same kind of emotion.


I was thinking to myself whether or not it was in fact emotionless. The kind of music I was describe is rather meditative, and meditation is generally anti-emotion. Emotion clouds the meditation. Eliade, in that passage I quoted describes the reverse of the 'flood/deluge' (immersion) as the creation of form (emersion). I think emotion is related to this concept of creating a form from the formless. This is why I think melodic forms and structures carry emotions.


But in all my personal experience meditative music becomes rather emotional. It's not an instant emotion that someone would get from a Power Chord, but it's an emotion arrived at from the repetition.

We have to define emotion here for this thread to be useful. I mean, ambivalence, Loneliness, Boredom, Anxiety, Depression, etc can all be emotions that might correspond to minimal techno. They're not the same as 'Euphoria' obviously, but they are nonetheless emotions.

In any case I think euphoria can build from repetition. (eg 808 state - the extended pleasure of dance, ricardo villalobos - 808 the bassqueen) tracks like the villalobos and jam & spoon - stella give me a certain kind of building reverie that is far stronger than the sugar high I could get on epic trance. simple dub techno tracks like atheus make me feel like i'm flying. it's a euphoria that stems from the freedom


also if it makes any sense, I really like music that inspires a sense of wonder and mystery. wonder is an emotion, right? i definitely aim to create that sense of mystery in my own composition

as you said, I believe melodic sequences are related to human language. Aril Brikha's Ex Machina is a great example of an emotional melody that 'speaks'

However, there is plenty of emotion to be found chord changes over time.

Chopin's Prelude, is a great example.

hate seem to be the modern EDM emotion

EMOTION INCOMING!

my little pony, pills and unicorns.

One thing that pisses me off about this whole issue, is that while listeners want "new", they can't handle "new" as it goes against their traditional views of what the music "should" sound like. If you take down-tempo for example, you'll seldom hear people saying that the music should have been done this or that way, but rather that they perhaps think one or two of the melodic elements could've been enhanced in one way or another by musical content backing here or there; you're essentially free to make music any which way you want to, and people eat it up. With trance, if you do something different, it's not conformist enough; I cannot tell you how many times I've been told that I've made a great piece of music, but that it's not really the type of track the label is looking for, as they want something clubbier (and by clubbier they mean less musical content focus, and more fx, sparkles, and club tricks focus), or that the label has said that the melody and structure is too complex, and then have asked me to dumb it down a bit so that it becomes releasable. At that point (the latter) I typically tell the label to fuck off. There's this stupid notion - and I see this has already been touched on - that music first and foremost is the production quality, and only secondly is the musical content.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J What I am doing is attacking the ideologies behind minimalism's current dominance. When you actually think about it, the control of what's cool and trendy in electronic music comes down to relatively few people.

I think that applies to trends in general. There are always few key factors/people who determine what's going to be cool. They need to have good access to what's currently happening in the underground, and they have to know a lot of people - in case of the magazines have a wide following. Hasn't it always been like that, though? Were the reasons behind previous booms in music somewhat different to those behind minimalism? Printed magazines and the spread of word have always been there, but they usually influenced only the local scene. With the rise of internet, the scene has just become more globalized, speeding up all the processes behind trends, making them wide-spread, and more transparent. Furthermore, we can even immediately watch how the readers/listeners respond, as they provide instant feedback on various messageboards or community servers. Hasn't all this just become more visible?

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Emotion is thoroughly out of style. Which isn't to say people don't like it or search for it. Let me use an example. I'm currently reviewing Dave Seaman's new Renaissance mix- the Masters Series Part 10. Listening to it, I found myself comparing it to Seaman's old mixes for Renaissance, such as the Mix Collection Part 4 in 1997, as Dave's stated intention was to encapsulate the current sound of progressive house, where as the 1997 Mix Collection did just the same for 11 years ago. My basic conclusion was that prog house has lost a lot of energy and a lot of emotional overtness, particularly in the last few years, as it tries to lose its image of music for the 90s and stay relevant. However, checking out the Resident Advisor review of the same record, I read this: "...Seaman evaporates the goodwill he�s built up by moving into the big room with a string of peak hour builders so cheesy and melodically overblown that you�ll wonder if you�ve been teleported back to the late 1990s." To me, a self-confessed fan of the 90s progressive sound, this new mix was the sound of prog trying to cut itself down to a more sparse, reserved sound. However, to the trend-following RA guys, it's "cheesy" and "melodically overblown" simply by being prog house. I mean, the peak-time tunes we're talking about here are typified by the use of Who Killed Sparky? by Sasha, which I'm sure everyone is familiar with. Compared with what Sasha was making and playing in the late 90s, this could not be called "cheesy" and especially not "overblown". RA conclude their review with this damning judgement: "In the end, The Masters Series 10 sounds like little more than a repackaged late 90s Global Underground mix or any of the numerous others Dave Seaman has already done for Renaissance in the past." And there it is. Its emotional content automatically render it dated and interchangable with the music of the 90s. Emotion is not cool, it isn't forward-thinking and it isn't edgy.

Oh man, I was reading that review and was gonna complain how that emotional/melodic type music has fallen out of favor with the critics. Excellent post.

So when does your review of Seaman's album go up?

Well, I certainly think EM (not so much EDM) is capable of eliciting certain emotions like fear, joy, melancholy. To my opinion, this has more to do with composition, however, the subject which cryophonik broaches.

For my part, I found experimental electronic music to be most emotive (this can include ambient, noise, industrial - on the whole a kind of 'experiment' with sounds and samples - whether they be vocals or otherwise). But ultimately, I found beatless experimental music to affect my emotions most - perhaps because most sounds in reality don't have 'beats' as are present in Industrial productions (not to mention of course any 4x4, electro, idm, drum & bass, etc.).

That said, I used several tracks in my mix (most notably U Fear ETP) to engender a spirit of fear...for if you don't find any parts of the set scary, you might as well be emotionally numb.
I played it for a close friend and I noticed at once how his entire mood grew black and he seemed to be wrestling with certain negative, perhaps harrowing, emotions. I never noticed this with anyone when they listened to other EDM...

quote:

Originally posted by paulandrews I think that applies to trends in general. There are always few key factors/people who determine what's going to be cool. They need to have good access to what's currently happening in the underground, and they have to know a lot of people - in case of the magazines have a wide following. Hasn't it always been like that, though? Were the reasons behind previous booms in music somewhat different to those behind minimalism? Printed magazines and the spread of word have always been there, but they usually influenced only the local scene. With the rise of internet, the scene has just become more globalized, speeding up all the processes behind trends, making them wide-spread, and more transparent. Furthermore, we can even immediately watch how the readers/listeners respond, as they provide instant feedback on various messageboards or community servers. Hasn't all this just become more visible?

It hasn't always been true. Certainly not in the 1980s and in the UK rave boom of the early 90s. That was a genuine youth culture movement. Rave records were getting into the mainstream charts despite the fact that no big record labels would touch them and no mainstream stations would playlist them. There has been a steady process of commodification of a once-genuine youth culture movement (as is always the case), and we have reached the stage where it is almost completely controlled by a few key people. The same process has generally been true of all genuine youth culture movements.

However, just because it happens and is happening doesn't mean we should be complicit with the ideology of that system. I have plenty time for the minimal aesthetic but I want to see it exist alongside other forms of expression, rather than choking the life out of them so it can become dominant. So when I see things like that RA review, I'm not going to merely accept them as "things that happen", especially when I have the power to counter it.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr Game+Watch So when does your review of Seaman's album go up?

I've had to put all reviewing on hold for the moment because of excessive pressure from university work. The next week or two... hopefully.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J The myth here is that subtlety is desirable and superior.

To my opinion, utterly untrue. I don't want to seem to belabor this but the scariest track I've ever heard (U Fear ETP) is such solely on account of its subtlety. The beginning is not even scary, but the way it slowly grows - or rather descends - into an aural nightmare is almost uncanny.

quote:

Originally posted by AlphaStarred To my opinion, utterly untrue. I don't want to seem to belabor this but the scariest track I've ever heard (U Fear ETP) is such solely on account of its subtlety. The beginning is not even scary, but the way it slowly grows - or rather descends - into an aural nightmare is almost uncanny.

I'm sorry, but I don't see what you expect to demonstrate with such an example. That your personal favourite example of a certain effect used subtlety says nothing whatsoever about the inherent superiority of inferiority of the method on a general scale.

Besides, speaking from experience of watching many horror films, people tend to be completely divided on whether subtlety or directness are more effective, which merely reinforces my point. Both methods are equally valid when correctly applied, and isolated, specified examples prove nothing.

Compose yourself, I'm not trying to demonstrate nor "prove" anything - which is why I stated "to my opinion." And it's not a certain effect, but rather the entire composition. And first of all, I've never heard of such a myth - for, like you said, people tend to be completely divided on whether subtlety or directness are more effective, which I can agree with. Again, to my opinion, most of the time subtlety induces more fear than directness - I find the latter perhaps more disturbing but never more fear-inducing.

Ultimately, what I'm trying to say is that from my experience, and from what I've observed, subtlety achieves more of a sense of growing fear and suspense, whereas directness achieves more of a kind of direct, instant, fear, if you will, which I would probably consider less emotionally and psychologically effective.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN whole-track: Explosions in the Sky- "Your Hand In Mine" http://www.explosionsinthesky.com/m...rHandInMine.mp3 IMO, these simple chord progressions would still sound beautiful, even if they are played in a piano, in a violin or in a saw-synth etc. Plus, this is modern rock so i would like to add tha the "lack of emotion" is something that IMO characterises EDM and by no means modern music as a whole in general. IMO, deep/tech house and minimal have magnitudes of emotion but they are low, i really mean that. I doubt that anyone is going to cry or feel really happy and full by listening to any of the tracks listed in Nefardec's list.

Guess what ? It must depends on people because there's a few tracks that can get me very emotional in Nefardec's list, noticeably Quince - vitjazzdepth. I listened to the full tune you posted and it left me relatively cold and I dind't care that much. Emotional music is just so much more than the melody! There could even be almost no melody and it could be emotional.
To me the most emotional electronic music was done during 1991 and 1996 with the likes of nuron, redcell, stasis, b12, the black dog, plaid, kirk degiorgio, john beltran etc. There's some stuff that was one in this era that is still unsurpassed today and that I'll still listen in 20 years for sure.

quote:

Originally posted by AlphaStarred And first of all, I've never heard of such a myth...

I'm guessing you don't read major music press outlets such as Mixmag very often. Although I've provided an example of it at work in this thread. You're not going to find it if you're looking for someone to outright say "Subtlety is better". It can be seen at work in the aggressive revisionism towards notable styles to contradict it. Hence descriptions of prog house as cheesy, overblown and dated simply by the default of being prog house.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles At that time the fashionable composers felt that it would be "kitsch" to keep using the emotional gestures of the 19th century Romantic composers (similar to how producers today view the excesses of '90s trance). They thought of the melodically rich compositions and sweeping arrangements of those compositions as "old hat," part of an outmoded era of music, quite similar to how that RA reviewer spoke about the new Seaman Renaissance compilation. It was uncool to write such "obvious" stuff anymore. They thought it was beneath them, childish, to attempt to "move" people with music -- or at least it become "uncool" to try to do so in an open and accessible manner. So what did they do? They started writing atonal and process music, purposefully divorcing themselves from any close relationship to the emotions of their audiences, and striving for originality by going "beyond" tonality. The EDM analogue to these atonal works are the complex, effects-laden but melodically sparse sounds adopted by so many "minimal" and tech-house producers. Going "beyond" the easy openness, enthusiasm, and frank expression of emotion that was so prevalent in '90s dance music.

ill co-sign to this.

Interesting reading this thread, the past 2-3 weeks Ive been making some emotional music for the most part. Two tracks called "Thrive" aka Hopeless Happiness and another called "Baroque" on the happier uplifting side, and one darker/sad track named "Drone" aka Mother Ship.

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