|
| quote: | Originally posted by Trance Nutter
A track can be popular amongst the trance community, but still be relatively underground, in the broad spectrum of music today. The thing that annoys me is when people immediatley label music "Cheese" because it is popular, or because everyone raves about it on the forums.
For example, today i read a thread where someone labelled
System F - Out Of The Blue cheese. This track is a trance classic that was innovative and new at the time it was produced. The track achieved a lot of success and helped to make Ferry famous, but it was produced with the music as a priority, not mass appeal or money. I think everyone would agree that the uplifting sound pioneered by Ferry Corsten has been overused, but that does not mean that a once great track is now "cheese".
Also, it is neccessary to make the distinction between commercial dance music, and dance music that has commercial success.
Commercial dance music like DJ Sammy, Ian Van Dahl, Lasgo etc is made with the intention of making money, it is made to appeal to the masses and it is very successful in doing this. I am sure some of these artists have made millions by making dance music with popular appeal. I don't really like those artists, and i don't really like the sound of the music they produce, or the seemingly formulaic nature of that music, but that does not neccesarily mean the artists have no musical ability or that they are worthless. Artists like DJ Sammy (just one example) have chosen to go down that path, but that is their choice. I think that commercial dance music that is created with the intention of having mass appeal and making a great deal of money is the definition of "cheese". |
Well let me respond to that with three statements from someone else (NOT ME):
In North America, there is a strong stigma towards commercialisation of various forms of music by eclectic social tribes who consider those forms of music as belonging to them.
There are people who completely and totally define their musical tastes based on popularity. It makes them feel individualistic, different, unique and hence better than everyone else to know that their music is their own private secret, to be worshipped and cherished and praised above all else. But when something they like becomes popular, this sense of individuality and specialness is lost. The music then is scorned and ridiculed, and in some cases expelled from their pantheon of music altogether. Trance enthusiasts have a tough time coming to grips with the fact that tracks like Alice Deejay and Ian van Dahl are trance, when they've had such overwhelming popular appeal. Other tracks, like Sandstorm, are also exorcised from trance canon, and DJs like Tiesto and Oakenfold are disrespected because they've acquired a sizable following of non-trance consumers. (for the record, I don't hate Tiesto and Oakenfold because they are popular. I hate Tiesto and Oakenfold because they suck. But I digress).
In Europe, this discrepancy isn't heartfelt as much. If anything, the lines often blur, especially on pop radio where deep, dark trance tunes will play side by side with Brittney Spears.
The reason why Europe is more palatable to electronic music in the first place is because of its universal appeal across so many varying cultures smacked close together like that. Lyricless music has tons of success in an area where 14 languages are spoken in a 500 mile radius. In America, where a very large mono-linguistic culture dominates, lyrics hold more weight, power, passion and meaning, and thus instrumental tracks are treated as gimmicks or not real music. Especially when the model of American audio and recording is focused on the star and the message. The music is a distant third when it comes to album-oriented marketing.
Thus: pop music is defined in America as music that has a star, has a message (however trite and shallow it may be), and has lyrics. This is a tidy schism to trance fans, who can avoid the pop world by simply avoiding lyric-filled, star-driven music accordingly, and preserve their sanctioned unconformity.
To answer the question, then: yes, top40 remixes are uncool. But that doesn't mean that they are wrong or bad in some way. The music must be judged on its own merit, and for what it's worth top40 R&B has actually been the more relentlessly experimentative genre out there, and it is now lightyears ahead of anything trance has done in the last 5 years. Sometimes top40 remixes can be pure genius, but if it carries that distinction of crossing the line from trance to pop (a very thin one indeed, and getting thinner all the time), it won't even be given the chance it deserves.
I really like Justin Timberlake and Kylie Minogue. How about you?
===================================================================
Furthermore, there seems to be a strong stigma against Ian van Dahl, Fragma, Alice Deejay and Lasgo....I've seen it before. Because of the unprecedented popularity of their tracks on pop radio, trance lovers (you know, the REAL trance lovers) have felt fit to expel them from the trance pantheon altogether, claiming that they aren't real trance, but some mutant hybrid of pop and Epic Trance. They refer to this music as "cheesy". But what is cheesy? Well...simply put, sacharine schmaltz. Music that really lays the emotion on thick, is never subtle, and in some cases is utterly ridiculous. Bubblegum trance. It seems to me that you have a voracious appetite for this cheese music, and wish to separate it from the more earnest kinds of Epic Trance. But the trance you supplied and the description you gave indicate that you're not really sure what constitutes actual Euro Trance, except for the fact that it's gotta be cheesy, and it's gotta have retarded vocals.
In Anthem Trance there's cheese. In Epic Trance there's cheese. In Dream trance there's A LOT of cheese. In Hard Trance there's a REAL LOT of cheese. And Dutch Trance is the living embodiment of cheese. But despite the gag-enducing pop-tartedness of these tracks, they're still representative of their respective genres. They still contain the same production tricks, the same layout, the same sounds and pads and leads, and they still evoke the same emotion from people. (whether that emotion is rage or bliss, however, is largely up to the listener).
This is an error that I see lots of trance listeners make: they define the music by how it makes them feel (and then, second, they organize it according to how popular it is. Nobody wants to admit anymore that Darude's Sandstorm is Anthem Trance, despite the fact that not only is it Anthem Trance, but one of the better ones to come out in recent years. That's part of the reason for it's unparalleled success). In doing so, they make up all sorts of crazy categories, one for each emotion supposedly. But all those categories really don't exist. And neither does "euro trance". At least, not until you can come up with more justifiable proof of its existence. Or unless you want to define "euro trance" as an umbrella for all cheesy trance music coming out of Europe (boy, is there a lot of it), like Anthem Epic, Dutch, Progressive, Hard, and probably Epic House and Eurodance too. The way "Hard Dance" is used to bunch together Happy Hardcore, NRG, UK Hard House, Freeform, Trancecore, and Hardstyle. <--- Though there might be euro cheese in that music too.
======================================================================
That's a very Ameri-centric way of looking at it.....but quite honestly, I really don't think they give a shit. They're neither conscious nor unconscious of the desire to produce music that "breaks into mainstream pop radio in the states"....(honestly, what musician thinks that way?)....they just make the music they like to make. Whether it makes it big on pop radio or not does not expel it from what it is.
ie: Sandstorm. Would you cease to think of Sandstorm as an Anthem Trance track because it became insanely popular? It could've been any trance track that made it big instead. It's no more than timing, opportunity, and idiot luck that made it the preferred pop radio trance staple that it did.
For every Lasgo or Ian van Dahl or Alice Deejay, there are a 100 For an Angels that did not catch on with the masses as easily and addictively as those did (but boy, did those producers ever try. Make no mistake about it: Every trance musician wants their track to be as popular as ever. Yes, that means North American radio airplay too, if they can manage it). But would you change your tune and say Paul van Dyk was a pop trance musician if For an Angel had become a bigger, more monstrous hit than all of them combined?
This is basically what you're saying. You're defining genres by popularity, and then retroactively looking for other instances and features of the sound that support this conclusion. Bad science.
| quote: | | So basically, my point is that trance music (with commerical success) has vastly different motives to commercial dance music, and this is why it is NOT cheese, generally speaking. Of course there are exceptions, and there are borderline cases. |
Your "commercial dance music" is still epic trance, whether you like it or not. Stardust - Music Sounds Better With You is still French House, Spiller - Groovejet is still Funky House, Soulsearcher - Can't Get Enough is stil vocal diva House.
It's not really the producers trying to make tracks that make it on the radio so much as the style of music being pop friendly and chosen at random by marketers. Or it could just be a really excellent track.
___________________
Robots, machines, mechanical beings
Automatic and synthetic, we have the means
To take control of this planet and the human race
With our electronic rhythms and the Armageddon Bass
Last edited by Radagast on Sep-21-2004 at 07:10
|
