TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- Trentemøller- an example of pure talent!!!!
Pages (8): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 »

now back to how epic trentemoller's productions are

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Dance music is disposable mostly because it's dance music. Gebrauchsmusik, music made for some external purpose -- dancing -- rather than solely for its own sake. When people's dancing days are over, they largely forget about it. Rock used to be like this, too, until it started having artistic pretensions in the '60s. Same thing with hip-hop and the '80s. In their beginning phases, they were both just throwaway soundtracks to dance parties for the kids, not self-conscious "art forms" pontificated about by aging critics with beards and glasses. Maybe dance music will one day enter the Bearded, Bespectacled Critic Phase one day. Maybe it already has...

I completely understand what you and nefardec say about the disposability of dance music but, but what i think is that not all dance music is equally disposable. I simply can't equate those modern minimal-influenced stuff with Northern Exposure 1 and 2, Orbital's Brown Album, Underworld's "Second Toughest..." or even trancier tracks like some of LSG's tunes. These kind of EDM sub-genres could be the "missing link" between the "raw EDM" and a more sophisticated kind of EDM which has yet to come. Those kind of sub-genres maybe have "snippets-of-music" (as nefardec said) and this is why they are more remembered maybe (we all know the "raving" for some of older prog, techno and trance tracks in Youtube. Will there be "raving" for some of Radio Slave's or tha majority of Kompakt tarcks etc. in 10-15 years time?)


As you cleverly said, many forms of music started as dance music. In a matter of fact, every form of art seems to proceed in a similar fashion, starting as something raw and chaotic and progressively evolving into more lawful and elaborate forms-prime example the greek ancient drama which evolved from the wild ecstatic, hedonistic dances dedicated to god dionysus. It seems that EDM started to follow a similar pattern, starting with the wild, let-loose, raw hedonism of Chicago House, adopting a more sophisticated futuristic jazzy ID with Detroit Techno, becoming spacey with German Trance and gradually going even more and more progressive, adding more complex elements, effects, layers and melodies in the process (90s progressive). All this is excellent, and instead of going into the more sophisticated and musical, you suddenly get a kind of mindless back-to-the-most-simple-and-most-stupid-disposable-form-possible with that abomination which is the post-00s so-called "minimal" and minimalistic influences in EDM in general (and IMO this is not just "raw" like Chicago House, its just plain stupid to the point that it becomes disturbing).


I don't know why this backwards jump was made, maybe the post-00s society as a whole has become stupid and this is reflected to what is hot at the moment (maybe the overall stale technocratic prosperity of post-00s western society who knows), but thing is that EDM doesn't develop this way. What is even worst, is,(like System-J said) that EDM is inherently short-lived and strongly depends on the DJ-format. AS a result, artistic development and evolution can be even more slower (even non-existent?)and consensus-dependent. Why damn people are ready to jump though in whatever is served to them? Is it because DJing is always about the new records and hence a DJ always somehow has to adapth to whatever is "hot" at the moment? (even if we are talking about "hot shit") Maybe one ends-up liking the stuff because he/she is involved with it?

quote:

Originally posted by elFreak The Ramones

Punk is good, but i prefer post-punk e.g. Joy Division, The Sound, first albums by The Cure, The Chameleons etc. i like my punk darker and more atmospheric In a matter of fact i was thinking recently to make a post-punk/new-wave DJ set lol.

interesting, as there are no complex melodies, lyrics, funk, more than 3 chords yet the music is still remembered and idolized by young punks today.

awaits the book you will write.

ps rock and roll hall of fame.

Yeah guess what, there are 3 chords in there!!!



p.s. i hope you don't try to make an analogy with the trash featured in your set (sorry!) with rock n roll or punk because i lol very hard.

Petran:
I don't think you're giving modern EDM much credit. Yeah, there's an annoying glut of tech-prog nonsense clogging up download sites, but there are still a number of quality albums (as in, ACTUAL PHYSICAL RELEASES!) coming out.

Plus, haven't you noticed all the love-ins for late-80s/early-90s dance music this past year? It seems there are a number of producers out there that are remembering what made the music back then so timeless and are concentrating on those sounds and ideas rather than adding yet another fart/clap/hiss track to the glut.

the thing is PETRAN that no one cares if you laugh hard, and the sooner you realize it, you can stop living in your bubble.

quote:

Originally posted by Sykonee Petran: I don't think you're giving modern EDM much credit. Yeah, there's an annoying glut of tech-prog nonsense clogging up download sites, but there are still a number of quality albums (as in, ACTUAL PHYSICAL RELEASES!) coming out. Plus, haven't you noticed all the love-ins for late-80s/early-90s dance music this past year? It seems there are a number of producers out there that are remembering what made the music back then so timeless and are concentrating on those sounds and ideas rather than adding yet another fart/clap/hiss track to the glut.

I don't say that there is not good electronic music coming out at the moment, there is good music, although, even good music coming-out at the moment is a bit stale, recycling older ideas, and there is nothing really new coming-out IMO. The thing is not "to remember" what made music back then timeless (we have anough retro sounds thank you!), the thing is to develop new forms of music which will be timeless. We had that bloody electroclash in 2002 as a reminder of 80s electro and IMO period was a major backlash in EDM. We don't need retro 808 sounds, farty basslines, synths and acid sequences in todays EDM. What we need now is new ideas. And its crazy if you think about it, there are countless VSTs, synths, sequencers possible to come with all sorts of sound, possible to play with the sound in all sorts of different ways, yet the minds of the producers are stuck in the same things (its getting even worse when the label "supports the producer in stucking into the same things"), they are fixated into the same ideas. I mean ok, we had rock n roll in the 50s, but we got Pink Floyd in the 70s. We had punk in the 70s-a simple but radically different way t make rock music. We didn't get rock n roll all over again in the 70s.


You mean the label, "Get Physical" (correct me if im wrong)? Sub-par techny-house and techno. Its ok i guess but just nothing special, i used to listen and DJ to similar stuff in 2001, although i would say that tech-house was better back then, Eddie Richards and Circulation ftw. Unless you have some specific release in mind i should check.

quote:

Originally posted by elFreak the thing is PETRAN that no one cares if you laugh hard, and the sooner you realize it, you can stop living in your bubble.

To "stop living in my bubble" means to conform to whatever crap is considered "hot" at the moment and not to discuss about it? Or to stop arguing with you?

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN I completely understand what you and nefardec say about the disposability of dance music but, but what i think is that not all dance music is equally disposable.

I agree. Some of it has stood the test of fifteen or twenty years time, and will probably be respected much longer. But I think there is a valid general principle that music written for specific contexts is usually seen as more "disposable," even if there are some exceptions.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN You mean the label, "Get Physical" (correct me if im wrong)? Sub-par techny-house and techno. Its ok i guess but just nothing special, i used to listen and DJ to similar stuff in 2001, although i would say that tech-house was better back then, Eddie Richards and Circulation ftw. Unless you have some specific release in mind i should check.

Heh, no not Get Physical.

If we are to compare EDM with rock music, you should realize that rock music as an artform has been stagnant for years. Perhaps the last innovative thing it did was grunge, but even that was just borrowing elements of punk and injecting it with a different mood. Most major genres of music tend to have their initial 'dance' phase, progress through an artistic revolution, and then eventually taper off into formulae with various tweaks and fusions here and there, depending on whatever outside influences it may be drawing upon. But REAL innovation? I don't think we're going to see that anytime soon within EDM; it's in its comfy formulaic stage, same as several other major genres are. It seems the innovation period only happens once. It's now a matter of producers ably working with the foundations to spark new variations on them.

Mind, jazz went nearly half-a-century of doing the same ol' before Miles & Co. shook that shit up.

quote:

Originally posted by Sykonee Heh, no not Get Physical. If we are to compare EDM with rock music, you should realize that rock music as an artform has been stagnant for years. Perhaps the last innovative thing it did was grunge, but even that was just borrowing elements of punk and injecting it with a different mood. Most major genres of music tend to have their initial 'dance' phase, progress through an artistic revolution, and then eventually taper off into formulae with various tweaks and fusions here and there, depending on whatever outside influences it may be drawing upon. But REAL innovation? I don't think we're going to see that anytime soon within EDM; it's in its comfy formulaic stage, same as several other major genres are. It seems the innovation period only happens once. It's now a matter of producers ably working with the foundations to spark new variations on them. Mind, jazz went nearly half-a-century of doing the same ol' before Miles & Co. shook that shit up.

Ah you meant "actual physical releases" like CDs? Its that what you meant? lol. So, suggest me some albums.



I don't want to draw analogies with rock, although i think i did it already. Thing is that rock does not have the inherent constraints that System-J desrcibed before. First it does not have to be "4/4 dance", second it does not depend on the taste of the drunken masses in order to be published, third it is based on the medium of the album, not on singles. All these give it considerable advantages on making it more innovative and experiment with it. Are you sure you know about rock other than mainstream bands? For me grunge was not innovative at all, shoegaze was probably far more innovative in that same era (but it was more underground). If you search there are quite innovative rock bands in the 00s, Sigur Ros, Godspeed You Black Emperor!, Mogwai, Explosions in the Sky and even moremainstream ones like Radiohead have done innovative things. Post-Rock as a whole when it first appeared in the end-of-90s beginning-of-00s was very innovative. Neo-Prog rock like Oceansize is innovative as well. If you look at coldplay as a rock reference you wont find innovation and experimentation, but there are enough underground rock subgenres which are (or were).




But i don't want start pissing competitions between EDM and Rock, there is no meaning in that. Thing is to make EDM develop its' own way, even within its' inherent constraints i described before.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN I don't say that there is not good electronic music coming out at the moment, there is good music, although, even good music coming-out at the moment is a bit stale, recycling older ideas, and there is nothing really new coming-out IMO. The thing is not "to remember" what made music back then timeless (we have anough retro sounds thank you!), the thing is to develop new forms of music which will be timeless.

Personally I don't think anything really new is going to submerge in the near future. There is no need for more layers, more sounds, more posibilities because I guess from a technical point of view the top almost has been reached.
A violist maybe would like something better than a Stradivarius, but we all know that is not likely to happen.
I can understand many would like to, but I think we have been "lucky" to witness a lot of EDM development since 1990.

In other genres like Rock nothing new has happened for a long time, but this does not mean no good rock is being made any more. Also in time the reference will change. What we now call classic could be concidered as experimental over 20 years.

Many of us were lucky to experience the changes in EDM since 1990, but youngsters didn't. As an example I wonder what youngsters once think of this:

Leon Bolier feat. Simon Binkenborn - I Finally Found

I guess I don't need to tell what classic track has been "copied" half way. I wouldn't be surprised if youngsters would remember this one over the classic over 15 years, especially when they heard it like this:

Leon Bolier Feat Simon Binkenborn - I Finally Found (Dub Mix)

We can't see in the future, but to me The Beatles aren't as classic as U2 have been to me. U2, I like, The Beatles to me is just old crap, if you know what I mean.....
Nevertheless a historian would tell me the The Beatles were the classic and not U2 and he would be right, but.....

Woah you guys are getting pretty deep into this. I think there is some great stuff being pumped out. But like everything, the bar is much higher than where it was at in the earlier days. It was easy to be fresh and original in the early days. You can't compare, sick tunes get pumped out every year and between listening to trance, house and techno it never really gets old or stale to me. I'm just glad some people are starting to call out minimal around these parts.

quote:

Originally posted by Sykonee Mind, jazz went nearly half-a-century of doing the same ol' before Miles & Co. shook that shit up.

Dude!! This is really unfair & shows you have a very poor understanding of jazz history.

Early jazz (teens era, before the term jazz was even used much) is very diverse on its own, although there aren't very many recordings to study. The 20s gave us Hot Jazz, - the style Louis Armstrong, Kid Ory, and so on made popular. The 30s had Big Band which is very sonically dissimilar to earlier forms even to the most untrained ear. In the 40s, Charlie Parker etc. created Bebop, which introduced riffing, complex chord patterns, and expanded upon the virtuosic playing we encountered in the "Hot" era.

You are very right that Miles's "cool" style is a very obvious progression in the history, but to say that it stagnated for 50 years is totally ridiculous!!

take it back

quote:

Originally posted by mehta

Oops, heh. I forgot that there might be someone as someone as obsessively into jazz as most are into EDM here. Yes, there are major branches during those periods, but Big Band was generally the most popular form (I guess with bebop being the 'underground') and held dominance for years before cool came about.

Petran:
Rock was very much a singles market for much of its early 'dance' history. 'Concept albums' didn't come about until the 60s. And thank you for pointing out shoegaze, I tend to neglect that one (underground!).

I think the difference we have here is that I tend to take in electronic music as a whole -including its massive clubbing variant- so I see innovation pouring out from the experimental and non-clubbing-orientated offshoots, whereas you're focusing primarily on club music for this discussion.

Wow... I'm glad I decided to read the last few pages of this topic. Lots of interesting ideas being thrown about.

I've struggled with trying with trying to reconcile what I know to be good musically, and what I actually enjoy musically. I *think* I have pretty good taste in music, I enjoy many different genres and styles, but the stuff I listen to for pleasure is far simpler than a classical symphony. For christ's sake, Xpander is the same two chords over and over again - but I'd probably enjoy listening to it more than a great classical work.

I'm honestly not sure how to resolve this. Maybe I just have bad taste? Many critics thought Jazz was terrible dissonant garbage but now we think of it as some of the best music of the last century. I don't think that in 50 years dance music will be revered in the same way jazz is, but at the same time I can't think of any specific reason why it won't. It's certainly got quite a mythology built up over the last 25 years. Are abandoned warehouses going to be a generation's Savoy ballroom?

This pops again in lots of different ways. When a noob posts "OMG THIS TUNE SOUNDS SO MUCH BETTER WHEN ARMIN PLAYZ IT!" we all laugh at him. A tune sounds the same no matter who plays it. But at the same time I think there is a certain energy that any DJ has when he is physically there - even if it's just a way for lots of people to have the same focal point while dancing. I'm sure Ishkur just shot himself if he was reading that but it's really true, for most people at least. I'd like to think I'm better than some stupid Tiesto worshiper but again, there's nothing specific I can point to that actually supports that.

Blah... I've got a dozen other things I haven't been able to figure out but I'll stop there. I've dug myself into quite a mental pit and every time I've tried to climb out I just get more cognitive dissonance piled on

Ok I said I wasn't going to ramble on any more but I lied.

I've listened to dance music for thousands of hours, probably millions of bass drum THUMPs. How is it that during that time I not only haven't grown bored of the simplest beat there is, but I still crave listening to it? There has to be something about this music that makes it uniquely attractive. I am totally and utterly clueless as to what it is, but I think it's there.

quote:

Originally posted by Armitage Ok I said I wasn't going to ramble on any more but I lied. I've listened to dance music for thousands of hours, probably millions of bass drum THUMPs. How is it that during that time I not only haven't grown bored of the simplest beat there is, but I still crave listening to it? There has to be something about this music that makes it uniquely attractive. I am totally and utterly clueless as to what it is, but I think it's there.

It's an affinity for rhythm, most likely. It's a very primal sensation.

quote:

Originally posted by Armitage Ok I said I wasn't going to ramble on any more but I lied. I've listened to dance music for thousands of hours, probably millions of bass drum THUMPs. How is it that during that time I not only haven't grown bored of the simplest beat there is, but I still crave listening to it? There has to be something about this music that makes it uniquely attractive. I am totally and utterly clueless as to what it is, but I think it's there.

i got really bored of that simple beat

now ive moved to simpler beats lol


*throws on an atmospheric/dub techno mix*

actually it's pretty complex, just subtle

link this atmospheric dubness.

quote:

Originally posted by Armitage Wow... I'm glad I decided to read the last few pages of this topic. Lots of interesting ideas being thrown about. I've struggled with trying with trying to reconcile what I know to be good musically, and what I actually enjoy musically. I *think* I have pretty good taste in music, I enjoy many different genres and styles, but the stuff I listen to for pleasure is far simpler than a classical symphony. For christ's sake, Xpander is the same two chords over and over again - but I'd probably enjoy listening to it more than a great classical work.

I don't think "complex" necessarily means "good." Simple music can be great. One of my favorite classical pieces is the first movement of Gorecki's Symphony No. 3, but it's basically just the same twenty-four bar melody played with strings and repeating over and over in different registers:

http://www.philosophaster.com/music...st-movement.mp3

Seems like it would be difficult to compose just because of the way the different registers have to fit together, but the form is actually incredibly simple. Simpler than a lot of electronic music, even.

I wouldn't worry about "reconciling" your tastes. A person who has an honest enthusiasm for dance music is better in my book than some pretentious wanker who thinks the purchase of a couple Beethoven and Brahms recordings will lift him into the ranks of high society. A posture of musical snobbery can be an amusing way get people riled up, but it's just silly to take your tastes as the absolute measure of what's "good" or, even worse, try to corral and direct your own emotional responses and listening habits to conform to what someone else has told you is "good." Just listen to what you like and try to expand your horizons by looking for new kinds of music you might enjoy...

quote:

Originally posted by Sykonee It's an affinity for rhythm, most likely. It's a very primal sensation.

So true.
Only one person has it stronger than the other.
Like this track, so simple, so nice, you even could call it boring, but I just can't stop loving it....(or anything close to it).

Timeless Altitude

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles I don't think "complex" necessarily means "good." Simple music can be great. One of my favorite classical pieces is the first movement of Gorecki's Symphony No. 3, but it's basically just the same twenty-four bar melody played with strings and repeating over and over in different registers:

I agree, the point I was trying to make is that a well liked tune like Xpander (which I think is overrated but it's a good example) is considered 'good' by this board.

quote:

Originally posted by Sykonee It's an affinity for rhythm, most likely. It's a very primal sensation.

I don't know if that answer satisfies me

We all understand the hypnotic effect that a steady beat has, but I don't understand why it exists or how it works.

quote:

Originally posted by Armitage We all understand the hypnotic effect that a steady beat has, but I don't understand why it exists or how it works.

I think you will find some answers if you check how Brainmachines work. Besides sound also light is being used.

quote:

Originally posted by Armitage I've listened to dance music for thousands of hours, probably millions of bass drum THUMPs. How is it that during that time I not only haven't grown bored of the simplest beat there is, but I still crave listening to it? There has to be something about this music that makes it uniquely attractive. I am totally and utterly clueless as to what it is, but I think it's there.

Paul Hartnoll (of Orbital) called it the "primal thump".

many people use the analogy of the heart beat while in the womb, i just tend to think of it as something to let you know when you move your feet.

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