|
| quote: | Originally posted by Bierheld
I don't see why it wouldn't just be "trance". Basing a subgenre on it's rythmic/melodic ratio is far too arbitrary.
Exactly How rhythmic does a track have to be for it to be considered tech-trance?
Pretty much all genres of electronic music are a mix of both elements, with the possible exceptions of tribal, which is technically pure rhythmic music, and a few far reaches of ambient that can be considered purely melodic.
The only other divisions you can make on this front are EDM, which has rythm as it's main focus (makes it danceable) and electronica, which has melody as it's main focus.
This a sensible way to put it I think, and it means that all trance is primarily rythmic music and it shouldn't make a difference if a track is bit more or less melodic.
In fact, trance in itself can be considered a subgenre, in the more melodic regions of techno. And yes, it has grown it's own sound over time, but that still makes adding a techno prefix redundant in my opinion. |
that's why I was thinking. why not call certain tracks just trance. But shouldn't every track have an official adjective that the community would approve of?
| quote: | | Who should be the official in this case? |
any artist who was making those hands-in-the-air trance tracks in the late 90's
|
