TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- Help me understand what happened to Trance...
Pages (9): « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 »

quote:

Originally posted by Donkeyness You didn't get it.

yes i did.

quote:

Oh yeah...real godfucking desperate lengths...like taking 60 seconds to type a message on the internet...wow.

or perhaps longer than that. and also perhaps frequently, on a regular basis. and also perhaps reregistering countless accounts to say the same thing over & over again after people keep realising who you are and remembering you're a cancerous waste of space no-one likes.

quote:

The pop machine transformed trance in order to accomodate those 'reasons'. When it did, the underlying intentions of the music changed from (what ishkur said about classic trance) to (what ishkur said about new trance). The evidence of this is stupid people who take trance too seriously by DJ worship and comparison to classical music and glossy flyers an blah blah blah all that stuff he said about it. Don't you pay attention?

the music doesn't even have underlying intentions you thick fuck, that's what i was arguing against. do *you* pay attention?

quote:

Listeners are like that because that's the way they were born. People are born stupid, and remain that way unless they take action to remedy that fact.

unfortunately it doesn't work all the time does it, maturing your music tastes doesn't necessarily make you less stupid, as you've proved time & time again.

quote:

Originally posted by isoterra the music doesn't even have underlying intentions

Yes it does.

Its purpose is to make money.

Ishkur pissed on trance and now it's decaying

Ishkur takes the piss at everything, you fools just never get it and you wankers that don't, just continue arguing like mofos. Trance is not dead, certain forms just went back underground again, its the music cycle.

I know I know, that's what I said in the very first thread I participated in with this subject.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J And why even bother arguing with Ishkur? It's not as if he's ever actually took part in a meaningful debate on this subject in his life, and he's damned if he won't run away crying if you try.

Well.. what he says about Ferry Corsten killing trance is complete garbage but his scathing criticisms of mindless DJ worship is spot on if i may say so

quote:

Originally posted by Numidia Well.. what he says about Ferry Corsten killing trance is complete garbage but his scathing criticisms of mindless DJ worship is spot on if i may say so

Yeah this is one thing I will also admit to agreeing with Ishkur on, the DJ Worship thing. I used to worship Tiesto and Armin lol, back in 2002 and 2003, but for the past two years or so i've become less and less about all these big name DJs. They still might play some stuff I like, but that doesn't make them godly or anything. I realize they are human and have their faults just like everyone else, people just elevate them to god status like they can do no wrong. They can't remain on top forever, and there are plenty of DJs who aren't number 1, 2, 3 or 4, or even on the DJ Mag Top 100 for that matter that are better.

Deejays are just normal people with jobs that most of us would kill to get....playing other peoples records to massive groups of people.

quote:

Originally posted by torontotrance Deejays are just normal people with jobs that most of us would kill to get....playing other peoples records to massive groups of people.

Exactly...

quote:

Originally posted by Numidia Well.. what he says about Ferry Corsten killing trance is complete garbage but his scathing criticisms of mindless DJ worship is spot on if i may say so

Most of what he said has more flaws than the Empire State Building, and is based on an incredibly simplistic, generalised world-view so he doesn't have to try very hard. Call him up and he'll act like it's a joke, despite the obvious amounts of energy he puts in. Ultimately he's a gigantic, eloquent, skillful attention whore, and all his claims to elitist, intellectual glory are nothing more than a glowing, neon "look at me!" sign we all fall for.

But yes. DJ worship sucks.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur Yes it does. Its purpose is to make money.

sure it is. there i was just thinking, the trance scene is literally awash with seven-figure profits coming out of people's ears at the moment. how silly of me to overlook it initially.

its profit, numbnut

its all about making lots of coin....its called capitalism....welcome to the real world people

quote:

Originally posted by torontotrance its profit, numbnut its all about making lots of coin....its called capitalism....welcome to the real world people

true
That's why most of ASOT producers produce 2+ tunes per week just for Armin to have something to spin for his radio show.

To be honest, some of these Armin worshippers freak me out even more than the Tiesto ones. Yes, he's a good, talented dj and producer and I have a lot of respect for him but stop treating him like the Messiah.

I remember there was a video of him standing on top of the turntables doing the Jesus pose at a club. I posted "guys, don't you think that's a little over the top?"... most people's response was "So what? It's Armin he can do whatever the fuck he wants".

Let's just all take the worshipping down one notch okay? Not a lot of notches.. just one at the very least. please? thanks

The situation is, of course, more complicated than either side would like to admit.

Decline theories like Ishkur's are well-worn trails. See Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death" for an example. There will always be individuals who criticize cultural changes. Print culture decried Television culture, just as Rave culture decries Club culture today, using almost the exact same arguments -commercialism, lowest common demoninator mass marketing, lack of substance, baseless pretensions, etc. The argument that Ishkur employs is decades old.

As Ishkur admits, he started listening to "trance," in 96-98, and thus he has no first-hand experience in the rave scene of the late 1980's and early 1990's. Thus, his opinions have been formed purely from secondhand information and general nostalgia. As we all know, the danger of nostalgia is its inevitable bent towards romanticism. Thus, Ishkur's view of the classic era of trance is highly romanticized, and cannot be considered definitive.

This does not vindicate his critics in anyway, however. This is not a case of either Ishkur being 100% right or his critics being 100% right. As I said before, the situation is more complicated than either one would probably admit.

quote:

Originally posted by Numidia To be honest, some of these Armin worshippers freak me out even more than the Tiesto ones. Yes, he's a good, talented dj and producer and I have a lot of respect for him but stop treating him like the Messiah. I remember there was a video of him standing on top of the turntables doing the Jesus pose at a club. I posted "guys, don't you think that's a little over the top?"... most people's response was "So what? It's Armin he can do whatever the fuck he wants". Let's just all take the worshipping down one notch okay? Not a lot of notches.. just one at the very least. please? thanks

I doubt Armin does it to be worshipped, he would do it because of the euphoria of the crowd, the music, just the whole atmosphere of it.
And if anyone does it to be worshipped then fuck....go home!

quote:

Originally posted by Stasis The situation is, of course, more complicated than either side would like to admit. Decline theories like Ishkur's are well-worn trails. See Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death" for an example. There will always be individuals who criticize cultural changes. Print culture decried Television culture, just as Rave culture decries Club culture today, using almost the exact same arguments -commercialism, lowest common demoninator mass marketing, lack of substance, baseless pretensions, etc. The argument that Ishkur employs is decades old. As Ishkur admits, he started listening to "trance," in 96-98, and thus he has no first-hand experience in the rave scene of the late 1980's and early 1990's. Thus, his opinions have been formed purely from secondhand information and general nostalgia. As we all know, the danger of nostalgia is its inevitable bent towards romanticism. Thus, Ishkur's view of the classic era of trance is highly romanticized, and cannot be considered definitive. This does not vindicate his critics in anyway, however. This is not a case of either Ishkur being 100% right or his critics being 100% right. As I said before, the situation is more complicated than either one would probably admit.

damn, that is quite an interesting looking book, never heard of it before. I'm sure we all realize that this issue is realy complex though, it would explain why these threads get so long and why they always come up again and again.

quote:

As Ishkur admits, he started listening to "trance," in 96-98, and thus he has no first-hand experience in the rave scene of the late 1980's and early 1990's. Thus, his opinions have been formed purely from secondhand information and general nostalgia. As we all know, the danger of nostalgia is its inevitable bent towards romanticism. Thus, Ishkur's view of the classic era of trance is highly romanticized, and cannot be considered definitive.

Yeah, this is a useless paragraph. According to you, any opinion about the past would be less credible because of nostalgia whether one was there or not, but especially if one was there. I suppose it hadn't occured to you that people might have the ability to set nostalgia aside and look at a situation objectively.

And stop calling it "Ishkur's view". He may be the only one who has fully thought about the situation and voiced his concerns here, but there are a lot of people who think along the very same lines as he did, and some who thought along those lines even before he did. When you attribute the general opinions on 'classic trance' versus 'post-96 trance' he presents here as somehow only owned by or originating from him you're creating a situation where it's much easier to criticize Ishkur instead of criticize the arguments he makes, then pretend what he said is wrong or less valid because of it. Like you just did or like this guy does:

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J EDIT: And why even bother arguing with Ishkur? It's not as if he's ever actually took part in a meaningful debate on this subject in his life, and he's damned if he won't run away crying if you try.

If you can't beat 'em, insult 'em and make yourself look like a fool.

quote:

Originally posted by Stasis Decline theories like Ishkur's are well-worn trails. See Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death" for an example. There will always be individuals who criticize cultural changes. Print culture decried Television culture, just as Rave culture decries Club culture today, using almost the exact same arguments -commercialism, lowest common demoninator mass marketing, lack of substance, baseless pretensions, etc. The argument that Ishkur employs is decades old.

yeah yeah blah blah blah...I know that already. Hell, even made the motivational poster.



But guess what: He's wrong, and your assumptions are off. There IS an objective criteria to the rise and fall of things. Empires, trends, scenes, fads, music, what have you. They all follow the same pattern: rise, climax, and then a decline. Deconstructing WHY this happens is paramount to understanding human demographics, systems, psychology and economy.

Why does something get popular? Why does it decline or evolve? If you're not going to explore these questions, then I will, but if you don't have anything better to offer other than to say that my claims of oversaturation, mass appeal, market uniformity (not commercialization. I never once said commercialization. I said market uniformity. There's a difference)--all of which happened, are happening and there's oodles of objective, concrete evidence that supports this--are baseless? Seriously, fuck you. Put something that we can work with on the god damn table, fencesitter.

quote:

As Ishkur admits, he started listening to "trance," in 96-98

But my first rave was in 94. And my first friends were all oldskoolers. In my formative years I did a lot of things I doubt a lot of kids do today: I listened. I looked. I learned. And most importantly, I danced and I loved.

Whatever I did not know, I went and found out about it.

Don't you people do that?

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur I listened. I looked. I learned. And most importantly, I danced and I loved.

Funny that, anyone who does the same, but happens to like the more recent variation of trance, is an idiot in your books

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur But my first rave was in 94. And my first friends were all oldskoolers. In my formative years I did a lot of things I doubt a lot of kids do today: I listened. I looked. I learned. And most importantly, I danced and I loved. Whatever I did not know, I went and found out about it. Don't you people do that?

Why do u contantly come on here acting like you are so old school and that some how gives you some sort of street cred??

I went to a rave in 1989 and was clubbing every weekend from 1991 up to last Friday...does that mean i can bitch and moan like you with impunity?

so what is to be done? Can anyone come up with a solution? What are the fans of this music to do? Obviously there is a divide between pop aspects and the unique aspects of the classic trance form, are we to fragment ourselves even further because of this divide? It would seem that even classic forms had pop aspects, but people approached these in a joking manner, is the solution to simply bring back that behavior and acknowledge pop? To me it seems people flirt too much with blurring the borders between pop and art for this distinction to be that simple.

If the trance form has declined, are we to flee to some new form? Is it even possible to re-create what was lost from the original trance in today's world?

I just wonder what all of this means to us, and how we should act on this information. If commercialism is bad, the solution might be to support musicians who don't market, publish and sell, in the sphere of EDM that is called 'freetekno', but most people here hate that music, the crowd seems politically charged and caring more for revolution than for music. If the problem is formulaic stuff we can all continue on this campaign against samey music, but it just seems so futile, have we made any progress at all in reducing samey music with these campaigns over the last 5 years?

It is really easy identifying all of these problems, but what are the solutions?

quote:

Originally posted by Zombie0915 but what are the solutions?

Listen to what you like is the solution and tell kids like Ishkur to whine and moan in the corner with his old schooling raver pals.

I did put a lot on the table.

I attacked your central point -that there are objective means to guage cultural trends. I disagree. Nostalgia and therefore romanticism will always fundamentally prevent us from accurately comparing the past to the present.

Anyway, yes Ragadast/Donkeyness, that does mean nostalgia will always reduce credibility. It is impossible to set that aside. Doing so would be like setting aside one's memories or experiences in making a judgement.

Maybe generations from now people might be able to look back and make something that approaches an objective analysis of the situation, but these days that's simply not possible.

Thanks for the "Fuck You" by the way. I was a big fan of your website -I think it's hilarious.

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