Now, guys, help me out here... See if you agree with the following. This is what I think about MP3, Napster, sharing, and trance, how it all fits together:
It seems to me that the whole trance genre is strongly linked to the idea of sharing music, by virtue of it being part of the whole dance/rave culture.
Consider the following: trance, techno, and electronic dance music together form a unique kind of music, CONSIDERABLY different from all other kinds. What's so unique about it, you ask? Well, in all other types of music, the persons in the spotlight are the authors or composers of the music. Take rock, for example. If there's a particular song you like, your attention immediately turns to the rock BAND behind it, doesn't it?
But with techno/trance the situation is much different; although the composers get some publicity it is the DJ, not they, who is in the spotlight. On the surface the DJ is secondary, but in the rave/dance culture he overshadows the composers. When a DJ releases a mix it is he who gets the credit for the good songs and not the little-known authors.
This brings me to another point: I seriously think no other genre of music boasts the same variety of authors and labels as does the "trance/techno scene." And many of these, if looked at from the pop- and rock- angles, could be considered "one-hit wonders." No wonder there's so much experimental and underground trance/techno music, and so little of it commercial.
Thus I think that the whole rave culture is unique, given the DJ's role and the multitude of authors, and it can't be put into the same categories as all other MP3's that people download. Think, for example, of the last time you bought a CD by a trance GROUP, or BAND, and not just a mix. Now compare this with CD's that are put out by rock stars and pop stars. Certainly, in the latter case, the music industry is very angry about MP3's. But I don't see how it can effectively apply the same arguments to the trance/rave genre.
|