I see a lot of people use directional terms like "progress" or "moving music forward" when talking about dance music. There are even "progressive" subgenres of EDM that incorporate such a term in their name.

In the context of classical music, musical "progress" was widely seen as the incorporation of broader ideas of tonality, as well as experimenting with musical form and instrumentation; basically expanding the idea of what "music" was, or what was permissible in music.

But what do people mean by such terms with respect to dance music? Incorporating new sounds? Making more complex or original arrangements?

Do terms like "progress" and "moving music forward" have much utility in the discussion of dance music? If you use them, what do you mean by them?

it's a difficult time to talk about progress when everything coming out is so retrospective

anyways I think innovation can happen on several fronts

- methods/process.

- rhythm

- tone (lots of tonality has already been done)


i think the last two have been done as much as they can be done.



however there are always new methods.

one thing i am really into is granular re-synthesis and parametric sampling

i think I talked about this in one of my long threads in MD.



we've developed some of our own mythologies and libaries of sounds that carry meaning for us now. It's a bit of a post modern phase - making music in reference to older music.

Artists have a burning desire to be original. By claiming they're playing or producing something "new" "forward thinking" or whatever the term may be, they are trying to convey to their audience that they're being "original." In reality they likely arn't doing anything that hasn't been done before. The boundaries for dance music appear to have been pushed to the limit. A lot of people think it is dying, and I can't say I disagree. Perhaps it's just a phase, I don't know. Dance music has just been exhausted. Regardless of what some may believe, dance music does not have unlimited boundaries. Sure you may write a different melody, but everything always goes back to its core 130 bpm with a kick, some percussion, a bassline, a guitar, melody, etc.

I personally think dance music needs more good vocal tunes. We need some big name artists to sing some good music. I'm not talking about cheesy vocal trance crap that AVB and all his spawns are putting off.

I really believe the next step for dance music is main stream and the only way we'll get there is with good lyrics because Americans cannot and will not embrace music that doesn't have lyrics. The majority just can't relate to it. Solid vocal tunes, of all genres, is the next step in my opinion.

___________________
www.myspace.com/djstephenwiley

www.myspace.com/olympikrecords

Are you talking in the sense of moving an individual track or set forward, or in moving music or "the industry" as a whole forward?

quote:

Originally posted by david.michael Are you talking in the sense of moving an individual track or set forward, or in moving music or "the industry" as a whole forward?

The latter.

quote:

Originally posted by StephenWiley Artists have a burning desire to be original. By claiming they're playing or producing something "new" "forward thinking" or whatever the term may be, they are trying to convey to their audience that they're being "original." In reality they likely arn't doing anything that hasn't been done before. The boundaries for dance music appear to have been pushed to the limit. A lot of people think it is dying, and I can't say I disagree. Perhaps it's just a phase, I don't know. Dance music has just been exhausted. Regardless of what some may believe, dance music does not have unlimited boundaries. Sure you may write a different melody, but everything always goes back to its core 130 bpm with a kick, some percussion, a bassline, a guitar, melody, etc.

To be honest, the repetition and recycled/re-applied ideas... herein lies a lot of the appeal to dance music for me. To an extent, obviously.

quote:

Originally posted by david.michael To be honest, the repetition and recycled/re-applied ideas... herein lies a lot of the appeal to dance music for me. To an extent, obviously.

Same here. To an extent. There is a reason we all love dance music. While the sound might change a lot over time you know that 4x4 kick will always be there. And what else could be better for a night of drunken clubbing?

___________________
www.myspace.com/djstephenwiley

www.myspace.com/olympikrecords

I think in progressive house (Leftfield, Underworld etc. period) we had the classic idea of expanding and progressing the genre, just like in progressive rock or anywhere the term had been used before. One problem is that there is only so much you can do in dance music in terms of progression, innovation and experimentation. You can only do so much before it ceases to be dance music, or at least dance music that actually inspires people to dance. There are a lot of limitations inherent to the genre.

And also people started copying a certain sound and continued calling it progressive for all time to come. Not good.

quote:

Originally posted by david.michael Are you talking in the sense of moving an individual track or set forward, or in moving music or "the industry" as a whole forward?

I think 'the industry' has little to do with anything forward thinking. The establishment is conservative. The industry makes money off of this.

Moving forward IMO is outside of the industry. It is kids in their basement programming synths in max/msp and writing programs that let you adjust chords in recorded music. it's people that don't give a fuck about the industry because they are having fun doing something no one has ever heard before.

quote:

Originally posted by StephenWiley Dance music has just been exhausted. Regardless of what some may believe, dance music does not have unlimited boundaries. Sure you may write a different melody, but everything always goes back to its core 130 bpm with a kick, some percussion, a bassline, a guitar, melody, etc.

This is something I have thought about before. What room for innovation is really left? Everything I hear in dance music these days seems like:

(a) Slight altering of a pre-existing idea, or a "new take" on an old sound.

(b) Combination of two or more different pre-existing ideas.

(c) Importation of some non-dance style or sound into dance music.

I think one area that has largely stayed unexplored in dance music is musical form, the arrangement of the track into different sections. But I guess if you make that too complicated, you risk alienating people, since dance music genres have always been simple and accessible compared to their non-dance analogues.

quote:

Originally posted by SMC I think in progressive house (Leftfield, Underworld etc. period) we had the classic idea of expanding and progressing the genre, just like in progressive rock or anywhere the term had been used before. One problem is that there is only so much you can do in dance music in terms of progression, innovation and experimentation. You can only do so much before it ceases to be dance music, or at least dance music that actually inspires people to dance. There are a lot of limitations inherent to the genre. And also people started copying a certain sound and continued calling it progressive for all time to come. Not good.

I'm hoping that this will be a discussion about what moves dance music forward though, and not another "what does the term 'progressive' mean to you?" thread. Only because that one's been done here a million times before.

Not nitpicking at you, I was just kinda expecting that to happen.

here's a question:


when was the last time you heard something that was so original you couldn't remember anything that sounded like it - it reminded you of nothing?


i think this sort of progress takes baby steps. it's more of a collective phenomenon