TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- What's so great about classic trance?
Pages (4): « 1 2 3 [4]

Hey, attention whore.

Yes you.

Osterzone.




What is so great about 2010 trance?

older trance is just so deep, the range it had as a genre was amazing. innovation at every corner. it sounded like a human actually made it...it was sexy, groovy, melodic, mean...etc etc. now it's just the same old tired sound being pushed by a bunch of tired producers who should stop producing. modern trance is too predictable, it's now boring, uninspired and full of empty melodies. the tracks have a horrible energy, i'm practically overwhelmed and ultimately bored. i really do miss all those classic trance tunes that had sooo much power and drive, they just didn't punch you in the face with it...

class trance do have very charming melody, e.g Robert Miles.

Make me dream...

quote:

Originally posted by GrimReaper Classic trance is not about the same damn trance classics everyone who's ever listened to trance knows about.. the term is merely a reference to an era for the early days of trance, roughly around '91-'96.

Whilst I know that amongst the regulars on this forum, the definition of "classic trance" is as you describe but where is it set in stone that this is the only acceptable definition?

If my friends and I are chatting about old trance tunes, sometimes we will say Trance classics, other times classic trance. In both cases, we are referring to the 97-02 period of trance.

Often on this board disagreements and misunderstandings occur because one person posts tunes that they believe to be "classic trance" (97-02) and then someone else comes on ranting how that's wrong, classic trance is the older stuff - Cosmic Baby, L.S.G, etc.

This always frustrates me because clearly the first person has a different definition of classic trance to the second, so then we get several rants back and forth over what is nothing more than a misunderstanding over which era we are discussing.

Classic trance should always be about the sound that is no longer in play. That would be 1988-2001 era. Otherwise you are gonna have to be a bit more specific, because you will get a lot of answers, like on this thread.

My interest lately has been into pre-trance trance stuff. I will hopefully make a mix of that sometime

I like classic trance mostly for all the work it did for Kosovo in the late 90's.

1.Because its very easy to lose your motivation and inpiration in todays studio

2.Most of the time,Excessive choice leads to poor production


3.Production has become more intellectual than a 'feeling', you can tell when a track has been forced

Its because of a bunch a shit really

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Leigh 1.Because its very easy to lose your motivation and inpiration in todays studio 2.Most of the time,Excessive choice leads to poor production 3.Production has become more intellectual than a 'feeling', you can tell when a track has been forced Its because of a bunch a shit really

ill bite.

(1) the studios of the 90s werent magical places, nor so romantic.
(2) excessive choice is a misnomer. there aint such a thing -- i think you mean choosing synths and phrases at random, laying them onto a track without a real purpose for them, but even then it can leads to interesting improvisational stuff.
(3) i doubt very much that this was ever true, in any genre. tracks aren't produced in a flash, on a whim, out of inspiration. the mind-numbing hours its takes to make even a nice synth dissipates that feeling and it is largely intellectual. there's millions of edits that dont show up on the final product. even when you think of poets, dont assume their work happens all at once, on a whim. it takes a long time, with much editing and erasing, "intellectual" decision and approximation.

quote:

Originally posted by pozz (3) i doubt very much that this was ever true, in any genre. tracks aren't produced in a flash, on a whim, out of inspiration. the mind-numbing hours its takes to make even a nice synth dissipates that feeling and it is largely intellectual. there's millions of edits that dont show up on the final product. even when you think of poets, dont assume their work happens all at once, on a whim. it takes a long time, with much editing and erasing, "intellectual" decision and approximation.

Many tracks are produced in a flash mate, often within a few hours. I'm not including all the final polish, mixdown etc (which can take ages) but for many producers, they consider their best work the ones that came together very quickly when inspiration was flowing.

However as the technical production has taken greater and greater priority over actual song writing, I can see how some producers treat the whole affair in a more scientific, intellectual way, allowing little room for true creativity to occur.

quote:

Originally posted by G-Con Many tracks are produced in a flash mate, often within a few hours. I'm not including all the final polish, mixdown etc (which can take ages) but for many producers, they consider their best work the ones that came together very quickly when inspiration was flowing. However as the technical production has taken greater and greater priority over actual song writing, I can see how some producers treat the whole affair in a more scientific, intellectual way, allowing little room for true creativity to occur.

mmm true. but you think this was produced in flash?



this intellect vs. intuition is false. i remember Laidback Luke said in some interview that he produces his tracks in 4 hours tops, which is why he has some ridiculous high number released on beatport and they all sound the same.

what trance artists have said this before? what are some great tracks that have been produced quickly?

quote:

Originally posted by pozz what trance artists have said this before? what are some great tracks that have been produced quickly?

PVD wrote For an Angel in one night.

i agree with most of the stuff said here about how classic trance was much more original, organic and meaningful. apart from all that stuff that is already established , there are two more things i wanna point out as factors that had an effect on the huge appreciation for classic trance:

1) Saturation and availability.

This applies to music in general imo. When I started with trance back around 97, i had no internet to download stuff from, so every CD I got a hold of was much more precious than anything i downloaded recently. I had a bunch of CDs and had listened to all of them so many times that I not only liked the songs like before, but really grew into them and started glorifying the music. Cause I had no more of the stuff, and that was the best for me. I still do the glorifying with a lot of stuff from back then (Chicane - Far from the maddening crowds, favorite still). But the point is, back then you had a limited supply, you had to pay relatively big bucks for it so there is a reason for you to appreciate it even more, apart from the actual, objective quality.
Today I can download anything I want for free - it is not as cool as an original CD/vinyl that you can touch and feel and get attached to, and you can have a ton of music on a HD, thus making it inevitably a little less valuable in your eyes. It all sounds samey too, same buildup-breakdown formula, same rhythm.

So not only was it better stuff, more original, but it was RARE. That fact also gave it additional value.

2. Motives

No one can persuade me that I am wrong when I say that it is all for the money these days when it comes to bigger producers/DJs/whoever. Everyone is just spamming my email accounts, facebook and what not, to vote for them or some crap like that.
It is widely known that formulaic and standard widely available stuff makes money - therefore producers don't want to be as original, but also a big part of it comes from the average label who wants that certain hype sound of the moment. Make something out of the ordinary today, and you wont sell really.

Back in the 90's, the story was different. Yes, the producers also wanted to sell back then, but it wasn't the only goal. The scene was small at the start, they knew there wasn't as much money. And whoever started making the music at the moment, didn't start making it for fun on a laptop - those people were probably already big music lovers and artists since they were around all the expensive equipment, synths, samplers and such in the first place. So they made what they loved, not what everyone else loved. And that new & interesting stuff they made was what sold a lot too actually, and they earned much more money on record sales than today.

I conclude this post thanks for reading

quote:

Originally posted by euphoria If you really have to ask then I'm afraid you will probably never understand.

This.

Just make friends with someone who has old records and find a new hobby.

It'll be worth it!

quote:

Originally posted by MeLLyMeL This. Just make friends with someone who has old records and find a new hobby. It'll be worth it!

These people are an extinct species.


I have tried and failed miserably.

quote:

Originally posted by stealthman These people are an extinct species. I have tried and failed miserably.

Ppl with records?

quote:

Originally posted by MeLLyMeL Ppl with records?

People with old school Trance records who are willing to engage in a B2B session with likeminded folk. Nowaday's they're all kids with Pioneer CDJ's and Armin Van Buuren mp3s ripped off the net.

quote:

Originally posted by G-Con PVD wrote For an Angel in one night.

The question was regarding good tracks, though.

this is why its classic...

Try some good Classic House:


http://soundcloud.com/jason-hambrec...sics-part-i-mp3

quote:

Originally posted by pozz ill bite. (1) the studios of the 90s werent magical places, nor so romantic. (2) excessive choice is a misnomer. there aint such a thing -- i think you mean choosing synths and phrases at random, laying them onto a track without a real purpose for them, but even then it can leads to interesting improvisational stuff. (3) i doubt very much that this was ever true, in any genre. tracks aren't produced in a flash, on a whim, out of inspiration. the mind-numbing hours its takes to make even a nice synth dissipates that feeling and it is largely intellectual. there's millions of edits that dont show up on the final product. even when you think of poets, dont assume their work happens all at once, on a whim. it takes a long time, with much editing and erasing, "intellectual" decision and approximation.

1.Im not on about the environment,i'm on about the hardware.Hardware is VERY inspirational, at least for me

2.There is way to much choice these days, too much isn't a good thing.I think limiting yourself is good

3.Total crap, many of the best tracks ARE produced with a flash of inspiration, maybe not the whole song, but the main part of it, e.g, melody, or the feel of the track.IMO, these are the best tracks.Eric Prydz, for example, producers mainly on a fucking train drawing inspiration from what he sees out of the window.Imo, this is were today's music is going wrong.But that's my opinion, im not a fan of that "intellectual" decision and approximation music, music isnt maths

Actually, some classic trance tracks are quite nice, others are utter shite en many more fall in between.
I still prefer epic trance from the 2003 - 2006 era and fullon psytrance, but that's my own taste.
I hate the anthemic years of 1997 - 2002, too much popular shite and only a few nice tracks.
And from 2006 on it has been a mixed bag with a bit too little good trance tracks for my taste.

If people prefer classic trance, so be it, as long as i'm not forced to like all tracks that they like and they don't bash me for having a different taste.
Elitism just sucks.

it was about the melody/percussion... not a disgusting over-processed imposing hard kick.

the beat should really just be there to keep the pace, unless you are going all out bosh.

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