TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- Mnimal and Tech-house
Pages (8): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 »

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec BP and others use trends and marketing categories under the guise of genre. It may be a legitimate (albeit cynical) way to look at genre, but it's not the only way.

Genres are trends and marketing categories. Not just in music. Genre is considerably less than a core ethos or even a list of requisite features than it is a way of interpolating a certain audience.

interpolating...i like that word.

it sounds like something capt kirk would do to a green bitch in hyperspace.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Genres are trends and marketing categories. Not just in music. Genre is considerably less than a core ethos or even a list of requisite features than it is a way of interpolating a certain audience.

'

i'm not expressly disagreeing with you, but i think actually the trend or marketing category contains genre. Genres are like self contained kits of parts that can even be combined and manipulated to serve new trends.

BTW - Is it just me, or are we on more or less opposite sides of the fence from a little discussion we had months ago? (where I insisted that techno as a genre contains cultural content outside the music itself)

there are big differences between minimal and mnml also. mnml is that crappy techhouse shit which gonna die1 true minimal will live forever deep down, and u wont find it in any chart. check out sand_leaper�s set, its FUCKING AWESOME!

forget about what these others say:
"deep minimal tech house"
"minimal avantgarde"
its all bullshit.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec BTW - Is it just me, or are we on more or less opposite sides of the fence from a little discussion we had months ago? (where I insisted that techno as a genre contains cultural content outside the music itself)

I don't remember that as a genre argument so much as a musical argument. I mean, your argument about cultural content was as specific as a Jeff Mills EP, so genre is only a level of categorising music.

My argument would be that genre is external to music. It's undoubtedly a cultural framework, but it isn't actually the music. You can listen to a techno track without knowing the word "techno" and still get the effect. It's when you start looking for more of what you heard that "techno" enters the equation. Then it becomes a way of organising a record store or a review section. A way of selling and buying and handling music.

You're really opening a massive can of worms here.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J I don't remember that as a genre argument so much as a musical argument. I mean, your argument about cultural content was as specific as a Jeff Mills EP, so genre is only a level of categorising music. My argument would be that genre is external to music. It's undoubtedly a cultural framework, but it isn't actually the music. You can listen to a techno track without knowing the word "techno" and still get the effect. It's when you start looking for more of what you heard that "techno" enters the equation. Then it becomes a way of organising a record store or a review section. A way of selling and buying and handling music. You're really opening a massive can of worms here.

as i said, i agree - i mean i posted 'in the end these are all stupid labels that attempt to categorize things for easier consumption.' just a few posts earlier.

my interest is more in what comprises genre (both for musicologists and for marketers), and what makes it more or less desirable for marketing.

i mean in the past, genre was one of the least important aspects of deejaying, and now it is the rallying cry of aspiring deejays worldwide.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec my interest is more in what comprises genre (both for musicologists and for marketers), and what makes it more or less desirable for marketing.

As I've mentioned before, there are two main ways of classifying genre: inner and outer form. Inner form defines genres by some inner "essence" a genre encapsulates. Outer form defines genres by lists of identifiable features that must be satisfied.

I think genre is so important in dance music because it's an industry of vast numbers of largely anonymous people operating behind aliases who release relatively small amounts of music. If you ever look at an indie/hipster/rock DJ's Myspace, they list long streams of artist names that define their sound, artists that have larger and defined bodies of work. In dance music it doesn't work very well, so we categorise music more through genre and record label.

Gents, is this minimal techno, not tech-house is it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hk5Ovz7phKc

quote:

Originally posted by mr.anderson Gents, is this minimal techno, not tech-house is it? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hk5Ovz7phKc

no, it just sucks really, really hard

umek has not been relevant since 04.

IMO WARNING!!

Tech = technology

Futuristic sounds, and different pads. Atmospheric feel with enough depth. Thats pretty much tech-house for me.

Minimal is more stale. Not so much pads and content is quite simple.
But minimal can go pretty deep.

A friend recently put it quite nicely when he said that what's currently being classified as 'minimal' is simply today's version of progressive house. Goes a long way in explaining why 90% of it bores the fuck out of me...

Minimal Techno, on the other hand =

Rob Hood
Terrence Dixon
Pole
Regis
Surgeon
James Ruskin

to name a scant few of many.

If anything, the old prog guys have been trying to cross over to tech house, not minimal techno.

Again, what's being touted as minimal these days is not techno. So the prog guys are still producing prog, they've just changed the sounds and relabelled it as something else.

Scrolling through the BP Top 100 "Minimal" chart, most of it sounds like either techno (but not minimal techno usually, funnily enough) or tech house to me, not prog.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Scrolling through the BP Top 100 "Minimal" chart, most of it sounds like either techno (but not minimal techno usually, funnily enough) or tech house to me, not prog.

That's what he said, the sounds have changed - but the prog song structure conventions that made it prog in the first place have survived - dramatic buildups, breakdowns, chorus-esque sections, etc.

In pure techno, elements are added and subtracted vertically as layers - the emphasis is not on the horizontal 'song' sequence. It's a subtle distinction but I think it's pretty evident.

compare this robert hood track (vertical, layered, a 'sound image' or 'sound sculpture') with this generic tech house track (horizontal, sequential, a 'sound narrative')

rob hood


generic


the rob hood track uses pure sound synthesis and sampling with the simple addition and subtraction of elements in the sonic space to create momentary sound sculpture, whereas the generic tech house track uses simplistic hooks, filters, oompa bass, other effects to create buildups and narrative structure.

the generic track is like a boring, slow version of a prog trance or prog house track, stealing sound design and superficial aesthetic from minimal techno, but it feels in no way like it. it is severely reduced, but still accessible and understandable by the world-at-large as a 'song', whereas the rob hood track is more like an UFO, as some alien sound artifact which demands its own understanding.

Ive noticed the more music sounds deep and boring the more people like it thesedays

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec

Good points, I didn't listen to the samples long enough to get much idea of the overall structure.

continued...

moritz von oswald touches on vertical composition in this video:
http://www.redbullmusicacademy.com/...ning_freestyles

i could take this whole vertical/image - horizontal/narrative dialogue farther by framing it in the context of this fascinating book:


The author of this book claims that the invention of the alphabet precipitated a rise in patriarchy and masculine values (superseding the age-old dominance of the image and feminine values), values which include sequentiality, hierarchy, a one-at-a-time mode of perception, and reductionism. (feminine values being holistic, integrated, all-at-once perception, the dominance of the image) The author cites neurological evolutionary developments in the sexes as the basis for this profound duality in perception and values.

I think this dialogue between image and word manifests itself in electronic music as the difference between pure techno and this generic tech house. techno is image based, sculptural, rhythmic, black music, imbued with deep cultural traditions of an image-based culture, whereas the prog is sequential, of european descent, a word-based culture, from same essential tradition as the choral hymn.

quote:

Originally posted by mr.anderson Ive noticed the more music sounds deep and boring

that's how people who don't meditate describe meditation too



there is a time and place for music of every level of emotion. 'boring', to me, is a lack of emotional dynamics.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec I think this dialogue between image and word manifests itself in electronic music as the difference between pure techno and this generic tech house. techno is image based, sculptural, rhythmic, black music, imbued with deep cultural traditions of an image-based culture, whereas the prog is sequential, of european descent, a word-based culture, from same essential tradition as the choral hymn.

The Belleville three were middle class Americans who lived a very conventional middle class Western life. To suggest that because they were black their music encodes some sort of genetic prehistoric cave painting method of communication seems nothing short of fucking racist.

I also don't think black American music is essentially vertical (blues? gospel? jazz?) in the first place. How closely connected were the Detroit guys to stuff like African drumming anyway? They were listening to disco, funk, and Kraftwerk growing up, right?

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles I also don't think black American music is essentially vertical (blues? gospel? jazz?) in the first place.

Then there's this "black culture is not word-based" bullshit. How exactly is hip-hop not "word-based"?

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Then there's this "black culture is not word-based" bullshit. How exactly is hip-hop not "word-based"?

rapping is not hip hop, and not all hip hop includes rapping. hip hop was a layering, a collage of old funk breaks. furthermore, rapping itself is concerned much more with rhythm, rhyme, etc than the words themselves, especially relative to other forms of lyrical music.

and, ever heard of dub music?

anyways I put it in terms of black and white on purpose to establish clear conceptual poles, but obviously individuals give and take from both traditions. and obviously no matter what culture you are, there exist both images and words. my point was not to say one is strictly one and the other is strictly the other, but rather that there is a dominance of image or word in either.

Furthermore, I am not talking about contemporary black culture or european culture, but rather, origins. there is obviously a european song/hymn tradition in america originating from its protestant founders, and this is the 'gospel' you mention. obviously there is a mix of traditions in music now as there is a mix of people.

Black musicians in the 20th century examined their roots, explored concepts of 'blackness'. the results of this are things like free jazz, psychedelic funk, dub, etc, which destroyed the 'song'. Dub even surrounded a cultural and religious movement, rastafarianism, which glorified africa and african origins.

now, techno is probably more colorblind than dub or it is alien, so maybe I will admit that the connection of african origins to techno is more tenuous, but please keep in mind that this is not something I am only claiming, but something that, for the most part, the musicians themselves support.

Also, you have to ask yourself why techno didn't begin with white kids in minnesota or something. Isn't it a little weird that virtually all of the originators of house and techno come from african roots? and there were many more than just the 'belleville three' This is not just some fiction I have created for the sake of my argument.

quote:

their music encodes some sort of genetic prehistoric cave painting method of communication seems nothing short of fucking racist.

No, this is 'fucking racist'. Sorry, but I did not imply that in any way, this was your invention.

'image' refers to a perceptual mode, not something literal a fucking cave painting. i thought you were smarter than this (or maybe you are just trolling)

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec No, this is 'fucking racist'. Sorry, but I did not imply that in any way, this was your invention. 'image' refers to a perceptual mode, not something literal a fucking cave painting. i thought you were smarter than this (or maybe you are just trolling)

I thought you were smarter than this freeform bullshit you're inventing and then backtracking over.

If I said a white child was born in a village of some remote tribe with no written language and was raised in that culture, and yet that child had an inherent grasp of "word based culture" simply because they were white, it'd be fucking ridiculous. Black Americans have lived in the same culture as white Americans for hundreds of years. Ancient black culture is absolutely irrelevant. Any notion there's some inherent non-European culture in black people has to be genetic. Which is why I extended the implication to the notion that black people are inherently prehistoric. Which is your underlying racist connection, despite all your hasty retreading.

You can reference as many pretentious books as you like, but what you said is quite clearly ludicrous. Rapping, MCing, toasting is all black musical culture. It may not be hip-hop, but that's just fucking around with semantics to save face. The musical forms JBJ mentioned are no more "vertical" in composition than many white forms, and the fact rastafarianism promoted African origins doesn't change that.

Finally, this whole argument is very dualistic of you, seperating white and black culture, vertical and horizontal composition. You're a walking mass of ad hoc faux-intellectual drivel sometimes.

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