TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- Amazing new discovery in the early house/ acid house music history
Pages (8): « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 »

Different time-zone, Jay.

Today 13:37

Does this mean Canada goes +1 in the summer too?

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated That has to be the most clumsy clusterfuck of an explanation I've ever read. Also, it's been bought up quite often during my time here: people saying "You're just a genre compartmentalist! You can't keep cramming music into all these little perfectly labelled boxes! Music defies that!" That's a ridiculous sentiment, because that's the whole reason genres exist in the first place. If music has certain characteristic, yes - it can and should be labelled as whatever it is. Obviously there are cases where a certain piece occupies more than one genre or style, but that doesn't change the state of play.

You really didn't get that it was tongue-in-cheek? I mean I called the TB-303 a bird for christ's sake!


I think it's all well and good to be a genre 'compartmentalist', but there's really no point, unless you're trying to sell or buy records. That said, I think there are other more useful ways to label music that are more current than the traditional genre paradigm, namely by tagging music to describe the constellation of influences, sounds, collaborators, and context that comprise it. I would love to be able to walk into a record store and be directed to music based on these multiple dimensions.... but alas, the limits of cartesian space. I like it best when record stores divide things up by artist or label, or if they do genres, i like when it's a very broad genre and not all splintered, where the price tags have a couple good descriptive words for those records that I'm not familiar with.

As far as talking about music history goes, genres in this way really don't accurately describe the reality. It's more useful to talk of them as cultural movements, like we do in art history. Talking about the genre as we know it today doesn't have much to do with the actual history of its content. However, it is interesting if you look at genre in a diachronic way to see how the genre itself changed in definition, perception, and importance. That could almost be a field of linguistics

Ishkur's guide kind of does this - it has the genres as kind of different stars in these blob constellations. Interesting to note his description of 'acid':

quote:

Raves weren't actual raves until this came along. 1988, the Summer of Love, the Hacienda, Shoom, Heaven, and all that. Well, first they were called acid house parties, then they were raves. The music itself is actually pretty moody and sinister compared to today. We always think of the music at parties to be upbeat and energizing. I think the whole motif of this evil-sounding, mechanical 80s music in dark rooms with minimal lighting and hundreds of people squashed on drugs swaying about like automatons to be quaintly cool. Of course, at the time this must have freaked out the suits. It would've freaked me out too. It's definitely lost its edge since those seedy days. Rave-oriented music now is just too warm, receptive, and pleasant-sounding to give its origins any justice.

not a mention of tb303, and he talks about it as a cultural movement and motif/theme. While most of the samples he provides are pretty TB-303 heavy, it seems that he considers the motif and effect to be more important to the definition than the instrument itself.

And other tracks he labels as 'classic' like 'bring down the walls' and 'can you feel it' have the 303 sound..

i don't think that guide is particularly accurate or authoritative, though.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Does this mean Canada goes +1 in the summer too?

+1 in spring

so much stuff prefigures acid house... if you think of some of the trends in italo and hi nrg too, the way basslines are modulated, the squealing sound effects.




and this is from 82


SYSTEM-J - this track - is it right to call the bassline 'acid', if the term hadn't been invented when it was created?

This thread is getting pretty catty

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec not a mention of tb303, and he talks about it as a cultural movement and motif/theme. While most of the samples he provides are pretty TB-303 heavy, it seems that he considers the motif and effect to be more important to the definition than the instrument itself.

I see you've carefully ignored his blurb on the TB-303 itself. I know Ishkur considers "acid" to mean the sound of the TB-303, because I've talked to him about it.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec SYSTEM-J - this track - is it right to call the bassline 'acid', if the term hadn't been invented when it was created?

Interesting question. I can't think of any reason why not, but at the same time it feels odd to use a term to describe something that existed before the term did. It brings to mind a great quote I read on Discogs about Blue Monday that says "Would be one of the top five house tracks ever, if house had been invented yet."

from wikipedia's article on that track

quote:

It was one of the first commercial releases to feature the Roland TB-303, a bass synthesiser which later played a pivotal role in the later acid house movement

here's another tb303 track from 81



and another '82


'83 (maybe they should have called it 'juice' instead of acid


what about this 1984 queen?


and here's some '84 acid electro

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J I see you've carefully ignored his blurb on the TB-303 itself. I know Ishkur considers "acid" to mean the sound of the TB-303, because I've talked to him about it.

Yes and no.

Acid is a specific sound, but it's no longer just the 303, although the 303 is a good chunk of it.

No one uses a real 303 anymore, which is why this declaration is discontinued. All modern acid is made with clones or VSTs, which come close to replicating the original sound but none of them capture it exactly, and most of them have mods or effects processors built into them for added functionality, including things like filter sweeps, envelopes and MIDI controls (Devilfish, x0x box, Rebirth/Reason...there's a whole bunch of them)....many of them are more powerful than the 303 and have more options, and are fully digital, in contrast to the 303 which was an analog bitch to work with.

For non-303 acid, in a pinch an SH-101 will do, which is similar in appearance and programming. It doesn't have the same kind of rubbery quality to it but it does create delicious, screaming acid lines just the same. Here is an example of the SH-101 in action. Not a 303, but still considered acid.

Polysynths/VSTs are so unbiquetous now and all of them have 303 patches or derivatives. The Roland JP 8080 has an acid patch on it called "Sandstorm". Guess what it sounds like. And it was a manufacturer's recreation of the famous, squelching acid lines in New Order - Confusion (Pump Panel Reconstruction Mix) and voodoo and serano - blood is pumping , and neither of them used a 303 either, but they're considered Acid anthems.

A track can have a 303 and not be acid. Hell, Newleus - Jam on it used a 303 for its bassline and it's the furthest thing from acid. And that's a good example of how versatile the 303 is. Despite original complaints, the thing does as described: it DOES make GOOD basslines. The original documentation for the box instructed you to plug in your settings and just leave it alone. That's not what made it acid.

What made it acid is when people discovered that, in violation of documentation, they could twist the hell out of those knobs -- Tune, Cutoff, Resonance, Environment Modulation, Decay and Accent -- while the pretty little 16-step 1/8th note 4/4 line was playing (in addition to selecting between square or saw tooth waveform), making the little beast sound weird, alien, warped, crazy, screaming, dripping, liquid, harsh, melting, or completely fucked up altogether. It was one of music's happy little accidents. The 303 was not supposed to be played that way.

So there you go: The 303 is not acid. But you can get the best acid from the 303.

The Ten Ragas track, while fascinating, is not acid and has nothing to do with it.

hey i have that keybaord, thanks for the great info

keyboard lol

@ Ishkur: Agreed, i also define acid as that weird squelched sound which originally came from the TB 303 and then later was emulated with other hard-/software.
About 10 or so years ago i was taught that that kind of sound was the acid sound, associated to LSD, because people at the early acid parties took LSD, a.k.a. acid, to enjoy the "acid" music.

@ nefardec: Nice early house and techno you're posting, but the tracks without the TB 303-esque acid sound do not sound acid to me and honestly, if you call those tracks acid, then all of the early house and techno can be called acid as well.
While SYSTEM-J may be a bit of a prick about it, he is right in calling the weird squelched sound the acid sound.

quote:

Originally posted by Barachem honestly, if you call those tracks acid, then all of the early house and techno can be called acid as well.

No.

There are acid tracks, which fit the description i offered (rhythm and bass oriented mechanical, sinister, alien), and focus on the 'acid' sound, and then there are the older disco oriented chicago house tracks, which don't sound anything like that.

eg 'Bang the box' is acid without the squelch

and

'Love Can't Turn Around' is not. nor is 'Your Love'

and heres another early that blurs the distinction i've just made. i mean is it acid? house? disco? italo? this track uses 303. (cant remember if someone posted it before)




house is just house... especially in the early days. but if you MUST make distinctions, i think the one I made in my previous post is important.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur The 303 is not acid.

Indeed, good they used it also here @2:20 Instrumental except Uuuhhhhh This was awesome back then.



This thread made me remember these of my young days but they don't have anything to do with acid or a 303. Maybe they did have some influence on using it though:

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec No. There are acid tracks, which fit the description i offered (rhythm and bass oriented mechanical, sinister, alien), and focus on the 'acid' sound, and then there are the older disco oriented chicago house tracks, which don't sound anything like that. eg 'Bang the box' is acid without the squelch and 'Love Can't Turn Around' is not. nor is 'Your Love'

It ain't acid to me without that certain squelchesque sound.
Maybe you'd better call it dark or industrial,but it ain't acid in my registrar.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec and heres another early that blurs the distinction i've just made. i mean is it acid? house? disco? italo? this track uses 303. (cant remember if someone posted it before) house is just house... especially in the early days. but if you MUST make distinctions, i think the one I made in my previous post is important.

This is more psy than acid.
Add psy to the nomers, psychedelic was already a rock label at that time.

quote:

Originally posted by Barachem This is more psy than acid. Add psy to the nomers, psychedelic was already a rock label at that time.

psy?

Jeee, long ago that I listened this stuff: