TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- Trance now vs. Trance then (pre 1995)
Pages (6): [1] 2 3 4 5 6 »

Trance now vs. Trance then (pre 1995)

this has been in my mind for a while now.

We listen to stuff like Humate's Love Stimulation or Secret Knowledge's Sugar Daddy and consider them as classic tunes. Both these tracks were released around 1993 and they were played heavily by djs like Paul van Dyk, Dr Motte, Cosmic Baby etc...
What if these tracks were played today in clubs, how would people feel? How would you feel? What if you paid to go see Paul van Dyk tonight and his set looked like this:
01. Alien Nation - Intro
02. Gemini 6 - Skysoaring
03. True Love - Breath Of Stars
04. Effective Force - Diamond Bullet
05. Cosmic Baby - Cosmikk Trigger I
06. Cosmic Baby - Oh Supergirl
07. Microglobe - High On Hope
08. Voov - Strobe Light
09. Futurhythm - Transmanic
10. Cosmic Baby - The Space Track
11. Humate - Love Stimulation
12. Cosmic Baby - Heaven's Tears
13. Visions Of Shiva, The - How Much Can You Take?
14. Cosmic Baby - Sweet Dreams For Kaa
15. Loopzone - Natural High
16. Visions Of Shiva, The - Perfect Night
What if Cosmic Baby released a new album that sounded exactly like Stellar Supreme. What if In Between sounded like 45 RPM?

it's a tricky thing

ideally you would see a transformation of the crowds and the clubs themselves.

there's a completely different cultural attitude now, and it's not really relevant.

i seem to talk about this a lot, but there was a futuristic ideal embedded in this music that wouldn't be as strong now that we have been desensitized through inundation of trance and dance music. The novelty of the music was probably what made it the best. even though I haven't heard a lot of these tracks in a club, the fact that I have heard so many things since they were created by people who HAD heard these tracks means that I am now biased as a listener and somehow vicariously jaded - basically it would just come across as a sort of themed oldies night


since you are sort of fetishizing something that is already indirectly part of the collective consciousness of dance music, that is, some part of these tracks has affected everything else that's occurred since then, and those have in turn affected other things, etc, and the fact that it has also directly been experienced by several people, it would not have the same effect.

it would be like when i went to see jeff mills at tresor and everyone treated it like a concert performance. i doubt it was like that at the original tresor.

since I was not part of that generation, it would be wonderful to hear in a club, but it wouldn't be the same in any way, since the context is completely different.


in short, i think we need to respec the past for what it was, and move on and live in our own time with our minds towards the future.

All of this is fine and dandy and this idea is good (that the attitude in the scene has changed, the music is more pop) but really...and I say it routinely..is this the type of sound that MOST people on here or others who got into trance..were into? I mean what's the average age of people on here? I was 10 years old in 1995, and 8 years old in 1993. I didn't grow up a "tranceaddict" or a "clubber" or "raver" whatever, 8 year olds don't belong at raves and certaintly can't get into clubs. So

I assume that the average age of people on here is 20 - 25, so I doubt that most even know what they are talking about if they didn't actually experience it back then, other than read about it, watch videos, listen to the music etc. So it's a little silly to be focusing on how much better this music was back then when I am sure most people were into it around the late 90s and early 00s, when it became more well known, popular....esp in places like the US and Canada where even now...it's not a very accepted or well-known genre (but probably more than it was in 1993).


And to answer your question, most likely no. The reason? Technology..it's changed a lot since back then. You didn't have 2 Ghz processors back then...most computers were like 50 - 100 mhz and sound processing wasn't the same...digital prodution wasn't as common as analog. Things need to progress, and so does music (and the techniques to make it). Vinyl is being replaced by CDs, CDs are slowly being replaced by DVDs, MP3s etc. New technology doesn't mean better production, but you can't expect things to always stay the same. Most rock is much different than it was in the 1950s when it began, so is trance.

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 I assume that the average age of people on here is 20 - 25, so I doubt that most even know what they are talking about if they didn't actually experience it back then, other than read about it, watch videos, listen to the music etc.

Yeah and nobody ever learned anything by reading and watching things, and talking to people who were there...rouffle.

Re: Trance now vs. Trance then (pre 1995)

quote:

Originally posted by Minhaj How would you feel? What if you paid to go see Paul van Dyk tonight and his set looked like this:

I'd probably slap him and tell him to quit living in the past.

Re: Trance now vs. Trance then (pre 1995)

quote:

Originally posted by Minhaj What if you paid to go see Paul van Dyk tonight and his set looked like this: 01. Alien Nation - Intro 02. Gemini 6 - Skysoaring 03. True Love - Breath Of Stars 04. Effective Force - Diamond Bullet 05. Cosmic Baby - Cosmikk Trigger I 06. Cosmic Baby - Oh Supergirl 07. Microglobe - High On Hope 08. Voov - Strobe Light 09. Futurhythm - Transmanic 10. Cosmic Baby - The Space Track 11. Humate - Love Stimulation 12. Cosmic Baby - Heaven's Tears 13. Visions Of Shiva, The - How Much Can You Take? 14. Cosmic Baby - Sweet Dreams For Kaa 15. Loopzone - Natural High 16. Visions Of Shiva, The - Perfect Night

I'd probably say "stop whoring your X-Mix-1 - The MFS-Trip compilation" to him

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 All of this is fine and dandy and this idea is good (that the attitude in the scene has changed, the music is more pop) but really...and I say it routinely..is this the type of sound that MOST people on here or others who got into trance..were into? I mean what's the average age of people on here? I was 10 years old in 1995, and 8 years old in 1993. I didn't grow up a "tranceaddict" or a "clubber" or "raver" whatever, 8 year olds don't belong at raves and certaintly can't get into clubs. So I assume that the average age of people on here is 20 - 25, so I doubt that most even know what they are talking about if they didn't actually experience it back then, other than read about it, watch videos, listen to the music etc. So it's a little silly to be focusing on how much better this music was back then when I am sure most people were into it around the late 90s and early 00s, when it became more well known, popular....esp in places like the US and Canada where even now...it's not a very accepted or well-known genre (but probably more than it was in 1993).

Why do you always say this, what exactly is the point you're trying to make?

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 All of this is fine and dandy and this idea is good (that the attitude in the scene has changed, the music is more pop) but really...and I say it routinely..is this the type of sound that MOST people on here or others who got into trance..were into? I mean what's the average age of people on here? I was 10 years old in 1995, and 8 years old in 1993. I didn't grow up a "tranceaddict" or a "clubber" or "raver" whatever, 8 year olds don't belong at raves and certaintly can't get into clubs. So I assume that the average age of people on here is 20 - 25, so I doubt that most even know what they are talking about if they didn't actually experience it back then, other than read about it, watch videos, listen to the music etc. So it's a little silly to be focusing on how much better this music was back then when I am sure most people were into it around the late 90s and early 00s, when it became more well known, popular....esp in places like the US and Canada where even now...it's not a very accepted or well-known genre (but probably more than it was in 1993).

So you have to have been there in the early 90s in the clubs to enjoy this type of music? Bullshit. Lots of people love this type of stuff even though they never experienced it back in the early 90s.
Age got nothing to do with this. If your type of logic were used for other types of music that would mean that you can't enjoy Beatles just because you weren't born when they where around.

Re: Re: Trance now vs. Trance then (pre 1995)

quote:

Originally posted by sljiva I'd probably say "stop whoring your X-Mix-1 - The MFS-Trip compilation" to him

plusone

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 All of this is fine and dandy and this idea is good (that the attitude in the scene has changed, the music is more pop) but really...and I say it routinely..is this the type of sound that MOST people on here or others who got into trance..were into? I mean what's the average age of people on here? I was 10 years old in 1995, and 8 years old in 1993. I didn't grow up a "tranceaddict" or a "clubber" or "raver" whatever, 8 year olds don't belong at raves and certaintly can't get into clubs. So I assume that the average age of people on here is 20 - 25, so I doubt that most even know what they are talking about if they didn't actually experience it back then, other than read about it, watch videos, listen to the music etc. So it's a little silly to be focusing on how much better this music was back then when I am sure most people were into it around the late 90s and early 00s, when it became more well known, popular....esp in places like the US and Canada where even now...it's not a very accepted or well-known genre (but probably more than it was in 1993).

+1, I was 4 in 1993. But I started listening to EDM fairly early, when I was 11, which was in 2000.

in '93 i was 16 and already clubbing ....
love to here the old tunes ..... and there are enough party's where they play um so what's the prob??

enough people nowadays young and old still go crazy on the old tunes...

in either case everyone should save themselves about 5-7 years and just move on to house.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec since I was not part of that generation, it would be wonderful to hear in a club, but it wouldn't be the same in any way, since the context is completely different.

I essentially agree with nefardec here, certainly based on my own experiences of going to Retro nights playing stuff from the early 90s. As great as it is to hear an old classic in a set in a club, the experience is completely different to if that music were new and the whole event wasn't... I hesitate to say "contrived", but certainly artificial. It isn't ever a "right here, right now" experience like hearing a brand new track that you love is, because the whole experience is just a recreation of the past and you can never actually capture the past, just reconstruct it.

The other side of the question is, I suppose, "What if new music still sounded like old music?" I do genuinely love music from the 90s and not just because of nostalgia or peer-pressured reverence, because I can hear tracks in old sets that nobody talks about today and still love them and their sound. If the sounds of the 90s were new and uncharted territory in 2007, I think I'd like them a lot more than what is new and uncharted territory in 2007. But if dance music hadn't evolved in 20 years, we'd all be sick of the same damn things.

I suppose the point that emerges, un-rehearsed from this rambling is that a lot of us think the early 90s were better than today, but we don't necessarily want today to be like the early 90s. We want our period to be as good as back then, but we want it be ours, fresh and uncharted and "right here, right now" to us, which isn't always the case. Particularly in trance.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J I essentially agree with nefardec here, certainly based on my own experiences of going to Retro nights playing stuff from the early 90s. As great as it is to hear an old classic in a set in a club, the experience is completely different to if that music were new and the whole event wasn't... I hesitate to say "contrived", but certainly artificial. It isn't ever a "right here, right now" experience like hearing a brand new track that you love is, because the whole experience is just a recreation of the past and you can never actually capture the past, just reconstruct it. The other side of the question is, I suppose, "What if new music still sounded like old music?" I do genuinely love music from the 90s and not just because of nostalgia or peer-pressured reverence, because I can hear tracks in old sets that nobody talks about today and still love them and their sound. If the sounds of the 90s were new and uncharted territory in 2007, I think I'd like them a lot more than what is new and uncharted territory in 2007. But if dance music hadn't evolved in 20 years, we'd all be sick of the same damn things. I suppose the point that emerges, un-rehearsed from this rambling is that a lot of us think the early 90s were better than today, but we don't necessarily want today to be like the early 90s. We want our period to be as good as back then, but we want it be ours, fresh and uncharted and "right here, right now" to us, which isn't always the case. Particularly in trance.

So if you heard Sasha 1995 essential mix LIVE today, you wouldn't enjoy it because it doesn't sound fresh? Personally, i'd sacrifice my left testicle to hear that set live or any 1999 set live TODAY, regardless of how "old" it sounds

i don' want to step on anyone's toes here, but i personally cannot listen to older, 'classic' trance music. i've tried numerous times to listen to old sets, and old mix albums and to me, it just seems like that music either sounds cheesy, or is pure 'acid' trance. for instance, i went to a classic trance night about a year ago and the dj's played all old stuff that sounded pure like cheese. don't hound me too hard for saying this but this is my opinion. i know most of you guys were around during the early days of trance and this is why you have an appreciation for the early tunes, and i respect that. me personally, it's just not my taste. and i'm sure that i'll still keep trying to listen and enjoy older trance music. any suggestions on what to listen to would also help.

quote:

Originally posted by oldblue1224 i don' want to step on anyone's toes here, but i personally cannot listen to older, 'classic' trance music. i've tried numerous times to listen to old sets, and old mix albums and to me, it just seems like that music either sounds cheesy, or is pure 'acid' trance. for instance, i went to a classic trance night about a year ago and the dj's played all old stuff that sounded pure like cheese. don't hound me too hard for saying this but this is my opinion. i know most of you guys were around during the early days of trance and this is why you have an appreciation for the early tunes, and i respect that. me personally, it's just not my taste. and i'm sure that i'll still keep trying to listen and enjoy older trance music. any suggestions on what to listen to would also help.

I wouldnt say its any cheesier but what I do find is older trance tends to be more boring sounding. It just doesnt have as much kick as modern trance and the tracks arent as dynamic, they just sound flat. Its probably because they didnt have the technology to produce tracks to such a high standard back in those days.

quote:

Originally posted by Erotic Buddha So if you heard Sasha 1995 essential mix LIVE today, you wouldn't enjoy it because it doesn't sound fresh? Personally, i'd sacrifice my left testicle to hear that set live or any 1999 set live TODAY, regardless of how "old" it sounds

No,I'm not saying that at all. To sum up briefly what I mean, I'll go back to a few weeks ago at a retro night, when the DJ dropped Bedrock's "For What You Dream Of". I absolutely loved it, and it was fantastic to hear it in a club surrounded by people going nuts to it. However, I already knew what was going to happen in the track. I knew the words, I knew the builds, I knew how the melody would cut out when the track dropped... It was great to hear everything I knew in that situation, but you cannot seriously tell me it was a better experience than hearing that track for the first time in 1993 in a club and not knowing what this track was and what it would do next.

quote:

Originally posted by oldblue1224 i don' want to step on anyone's toes here, but i personally cannot listen to older, 'classic' trance music. i've tried numerous times to listen to old sets, and old mix albums and to me, it just seems like that music either sounds cheesy, or is pure 'acid' trance. for instance, i went to a classic trance night about a year ago and the dj's played all old stuff that sounded pure like cheese. don't hound me too hard for saying this but this is my opinion. i know most of you guys were around during the early days of trance and this is why you have an appreciation for the early tunes, and i respect that. me personally, it's just not my taste. and i'm sure that i'll still keep trying to listen and enjoy older trance music. any suggestions on what to listen to would also help.

what are you comparing with when you say it sounds cheesy?

quote:

Originally posted by Aristronica in either case everyone should save themselves about 5-7 years and just move on to house.

House fanboi detected

TBH I can handle cheesy stuff... I can handle guitars in psytrance... and vocals in stuff... but pretty much any house sounds incredibly cheesy to me. So I doubt I will ever like it

+1 To the just cos I wasn't born then doesn't mean I can't like it btw

Yea yea trance music, extremely cool, hypnotic, trippy, emotional sound. The X-MIX-1 was dope. How about the amazing resistance d?



Resistance-D- "Skyline"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1PYHBCw4XA



Isn't it a beautiful tune? It conjures universal feelings and cosmic images, as all good trance music should do.


As for the comparison between the old and the new trance, they are quite different sounds altogether. Anyway i wouldn't call old trance "cheesy". On the contrary, most tunes were much darker then the current ones. What i like in this older sound, is its' underground and raw, analogue sound. Plus, the tunes were much more diverse back then, they didn't all have a bloody super-saw lead playing the cliche a-la summery nostalgia melody (not that i don't like nostalgic melodies...its just that summery-nostalgia melodies are not the whole story...they somehow get boring making you sometimes to hate summery nostalgia and looking for the winter, and the spring and the night, and the moon and the stars... )

for the n00bs;

Humate - Love Stimulation , the loveclub mix by paul van dyk

probably one of the most saddest piece of music created

Hmm. I've never thought Love Stimulation sounds sad. Almost the opposite, if anything.

looking at that list i prefer trance now then back then!

some of these tunes i really enjoy, some i havent heard at all. but i still prefer todays stuff.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Hmm. I've never thought Love Stimulation sounds sad. Almost the opposite, if anything.

the PvD mix sounds sad 2 alot of people.
i think laurent garnier says something about it in this video.

quote:

Originally posted by RebeL9 what are you comparing with when you say it sounds cheesy?

if i can second guess what he's referring to, i'd say it was more likely the instrumental makeup of the tracks rather than the musical content... so the answer to that would probably be 'anything new'

i can agree to an extent although 'cheesy' isn't the word i'd use.. more like 'primitive'


minhaj: that video was awesome, cheers for posting it. the quote on 24:00 is very interesting too, considering the way things progressed from then on...

as much of an affinity i have for post-98 trance, i do find it a shame the original movement seemed to fizzle out; i'd love to hear more stuff like that with a modern twist to it, then have it run alongside epic trance & be used as a compliment to it. maybe if the 'euphoria' term was coined (as mark reeder suggested in that vid) then the two primary forms of trance could have probably ran alongside eachother...

imagine it.. "do you listen to trance?" "nah mate, i prefer euphoria, although i'm getting into progressive euphoria at the moment"

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