|
| quote: | Originally posted by Ishkur
Tranceport.
Ah yes.....Tranceport.
That was the beginning of the end. It was like the "Super Dance hits 1998" of the scene back then. All the day's trance chart toppers....11 of them, in fact...studio stitched together with as minimal mixing as possible, but with some bloke's face slapped on the cover.
That changed everything. Compilation CDs were around before and after, but what changed everything was that it wasn't just another throwaway title like so many other rave mix discs were....It wasn't just Tranceport. It was OAKENFOLD PRESENTS TRANCEPORT. Just a simple little change of direction in marketing, and it suddenly hooked a new generation of gullible little poptarts, so engorged in the pop world of image, style, and album-oriented marketing....this was something they could sink their teeth in. This was something they could like. This was something they could enjoy. It wasn't another one of them faceless, nameless, bootleg trance CDs that the scene traded. It was legit. It was authoritative. It was OAKENFOLD.
In truth, the CD was actually pretty dismal. Most trance comps had more than a pitiful 11 tracks. 14 was the standard. People should've felt short-changed by this one, where the tracks go on too long, and mixing is non-existant, and there's no cohesion, care, quality, or purpose to any of it. Just a bunch of pop hits.
But man. Witness the power of marketing. Even today, people still look back and see it as the mix of nothing that changed everything. Why? Not because of the music, or the professionalism, or the quality, or the wealth and breadth and depth and power and epic, sweeping scope of the mix. But because of the name attached to it.
Why?
Good question. I guess, when it really comes down to it, people don't want to explore things on their own. They need to be told what to like, first, before they can go forth and enjoy liking it.
Hmmmm. |
You have no cohesive argument. I can get an idea of what you're trying to say, but you're arguments are mixed and to some extent contradictory. First of all, when writing in such sugar-coated way, try to funnel your argument to one concise point. It seems like your arguments are forced, rather than serious. Now to the topic:
From what I understand, you're complaining that Oakenfold simply did a half-ass job and made a mix of 1998s "already top hits". One paragraph later, you're complaining that Oakenfold's name, branded these "crappy" songs and sold them to the blind and naive public. Thus, forcing us consumers, to listen to crappy songs that Oakenfold found appealing. I'm sure people loved each and everyone of these songs before Oakenfold released this mix CD and I'm more than sure that you're wrong about this CD being the prototype mix for the "superstar" DJ mix. Let's face it, Oakenfold had released mix CDs before this one and countless other trance/house/progressive/psy DJs were releasing mix compilations that were garning raving reviews at the time.
If you feel like expressing your fury against Oakenfold, do it in a decent way. Most of you're post are interesing reads - some of which I agree with - but with regards to Oakenfold, you definately have some skewed arguments. It seems like you have some biased emotion towards him, which is, in a cute way, clouding your thoughts.
|
