LOL @ bad pop trying to pass itself off as trance by adding supersaws, a fast beat, and a big breakdown.

yeah, thats basically what i meant... good correction

___________________
April 10: Late Night Suffern Train
June 09: Sohan's Double Fudge Brownie Mix
GUIDO FISTPUMP ANTHEMS MIX
lol@theinternet

bullshit tracklist, why above and beyond again........... its been like that since 2004. Come on, this isn't DJ Mag Top 5 list, Come on armin, surprise us and stop being above and beyond's fan boy here.

___________________
www.dj-liminli.net
www.essentialtunesfm.com

so what exactly is trance while were at it here

anyone care to define? im lost

___________________
Click Here to Subscribe to the Blake Jarrell Concentrate Podcast

This is what is current wikipedia entry for trance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trance_music

A State Of Eurodance

quote:

Originally posted by Blake_Jarrell so what exactly is trance while were at it here anyone care to define? im lost

This is what I think of as "trance":

(1) Repetitive (yeah, all dance music is repetitive, but trance is even more so than other genres of dance music).

(2) Completely or almost exclusively synthesized melodic elements, or maybe samples that are treated so that they no longer sound like they're samples.

(3) No elements that scream out "I'm the center of the track! Listen to me!" This often means no vocals, because lyrical vocals draw attention to themselves right away automatically -- people want to know what they're saying.

(4) Very gradual morphing / bringing in and out of elements throughout a track -- very little "slamming" stuff in. Subtlety.

(5) Generally fairly high tempo (130-150 bpm) with a regular 4/4 beat.

(6) No huge breakdowns.

I used to be a lover of the big breakdowns in trance myself, but eventually my interest switched to the building up of elements and how they work together, away from *that moment* when *that supersaw* came in and everybody's hands went up in the air. Now those big breakdowns strike me as kind of a pale imitation of wanky guitar solos, except in this case (and this is what makes it look most ridiculous to me in a live setting) the performer is just a DJ doing the Jesus pose rather than some dude whaling away at an instrument.

But I don't think it's all or even mostly about performance ego. It's simply that slamming in a big breakdown gives a more obvious structure and focal point to the song and makes it more easily digestible and likeable to lots of people, and I guess I can't really gripe at producers too much for taking a genre in the directions that will lead it to commercial success. They're the ones making a living (or not, very often) from the stuff. I still like the older hypnotic trance better, though.

Anyway, that's my little rant. Everyone is free to differ, and I'm sure some will.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles This is what I think of as "trance": (1) Repetitive (yeah, all dance music is repetitive, but trance is even more so than other genres of dance music). (2) Completely or almost exclusively synthesized melodic elements, or maybe samples that are treated so that they no longer sound like they're samples. (3) No elements that scream out "I'm the center of the track! Listen to me!" This often means no vocals, because lyrical vocals draw attention to themselves right away automatically -- people want to know what they're saying. (4) Very gradual morphing / bringing in and out of elements throughout a track -- very little "slamming" stuff in. Subtlety. (5) Generally fairly high tempo (130-150 bpm) with a regular 4/4 beat. (6) No huge breakdowns. I used to be a lover of the big breakdowns in trance myself, but eventually my interest switched to the building up of elements and how they work together, away from *that moment* when *that supersaw* came in and everybody's hands went up in the air. Now those big breakdowns strike me as kind of a pale imitation of wanky guitar solos, except in this case (and this is what makes it look most ridiculous to me in a live setting) the performer is just a DJ doing the Jesus pose rather than some dude whaling away at an instrument. But I don't think it's all or even mostly about performance ego. It's simply that slamming in a big breakdown gives a more obvious structure and focal point to the song and makes it more easily digestible and likeable to lots of people, and I guess I can't really gripe at producers too much for taking a genre in the directions that will lead it to commercial success. They're the ones making a living (or not, very often) from the stuff. I still like the older hypnotic trance better, though. Anyway, that's my little rant. Everyone is free to differ, and I'm sure some will.

ah cool i see what you are saying. you like a, dare i say, 'minimal' approach to trance?

___________________
Click Here to Subscribe to the Blake Jarrell Concentrate Podcast

quote:

Originally posted by Blake_Jarrell ah cool i see what you are saying. you like a, dare i say, 'minimal' approach to trance?

actually that was the common definition of trance until the poppy elements made an entrance into trance music with Ferry Corsten, Armin, Above & Beyond etc.

___________________
My new oldskool TRANCE mix!

Yeah, pretty much. I'd use "subtle" to describe it, given how "minimal" seemingly gets thrown around too much these days.

"Minimal" may be an even more confusing generic term.

quote:

Originally posted by trancepunkk please never associate good for me wit hlove u more or any of that cheesy crap. good for me was a brilliant tune done to perfection, love you more has shit vocals and is incredibly cheesy

They both sound just as crap to me.