Registered: Nov 2003
Location: P R E S T O N ,England,UK
Haha that is brilliant!
quote:
Originally posted by Nostalgic
Minimal: Bleep Bloop.
Tech-house: Plink Plonk.
Nov-17-2009 20:42
SYSTEM-J
IDKFA.
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Manchester
quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
BP and others use trends and marketing categories under the guise of genre. It may be a legitimate (albeit cynical) way to look at genre, but it's not the only way.
Genres are trends and marketing categories. Not just in music. Genre is considerably less than a core ethos or even a list of requisite features than it is a way of interpolating a certain audience.
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Genres are trends and marketing categories. Not just in music. Genre is considerably less than a core ethos or even a list of requisite features than it is a way of interpolating a certain audience.
'
i'm not expressly disagreeing with you, but i think actually the trend or marketing category contains genre. Genres are like self contained kits of parts that can even be combined and manipulated to serve new trends.
BTW - Is it just me, or are we on more or less opposite sides of the fence from a little discussion we had months ago? (where I insisted that techno as a genre contains cultural content outside the music itself)
Nov-18-2009 21:34
Zak McKracken
Trance
Registered: Jun 2003
Location:
there are big differences between minimal and mnml also. mnml is that crappy techhouse shit which gonna die1 true minimal will live forever deep down, and u wont find it in any chart. check out sand_leaperīs set, its FUCKING AWESOME!
forget about what these others say:
"deep minimal tech house"
"minimal avantgarde"
its all bullshit.
Nov-18-2009 22:27
SYSTEM-J
IDKFA.
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Manchester
quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
BTW - Is it just me, or are we on more or less opposite sides of the fence from a little discussion we had months ago? (where I insisted that techno as a genre contains cultural content outside the music itself)
I don't remember that as a genre argument so much as a musical argument. I mean, your argument about cultural content was as specific as a Jeff Mills EP, so genre is only a level of categorising music.
My argument would be that genre is external to music. It's undoubtedly a cultural framework, but it isn't actually the music. You can listen to a techno track without knowing the word "techno" and still get the effect. It's when you start looking for more of what you heard that "techno" enters the equation. Then it becomes a way of organising a record store or a review section. A way of selling and buying and handling music.
You're really opening a massive can of worms here.
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I don't remember that as a genre argument so much as a musical argument. I mean, your argument about cultural content was as specific as a Jeff Mills EP, so genre is only a level of categorising music.
My argument would be that genre is external to music. It's undoubtedly a cultural framework, but it isn't actually the music. You can listen to a techno track without knowing the word "techno" and still get the effect. It's when you start looking for more of what you heard that "techno" enters the equation. Then it becomes a way of organising a record store or a review section. A way of selling and buying and handling music.
You're really opening a massive can of worms here.
as i said, i agree - i mean i posted 'in the end these are all stupid labels that attempt to categorize things for easier consumption.' just a few posts earlier.
my interest is more in what comprises genre (both for musicologists and for marketers), and what makes it more or less desirable for marketing.
i mean in the past, genre was one of the least important aspects of deejaying, and now it is the rallying cry of aspiring deejays worldwide.
Nov-19-2009 00:38
SYSTEM-J
IDKFA.
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Manchester
quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
my interest is more in what comprises genre (both for musicologists and for marketers), and what makes it more or less desirable for marketing.
As I've mentioned before, there are two main ways of classifying genre: inner and outer form. Inner form defines genres by some inner "essence" a genre encapsulates. Outer form defines genres by lists of identifiable features that must be satisfied.
I think genre is so important in dance music because it's an industry of vast numbers of largely anonymous people operating behind aliases who release relatively small amounts of music. If you ever look at an indie/hipster/rock DJ's Myspace, they list long streams of artist names that define their sound, artists that have larger and defined bodies of work. In dance music it doesn't work very well, so we categorise music more through genre and record label.
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Levels is...decent...damn better than a lot of the shite dominating the charts at the moment. It sounds absolutely nothing like...a billion and one similar tracks in this big-room style. I always had a soft spot.
Nov-19-2009 01:27
Schadenfreude
Bird is the word.
Registered: Oct 2009
Location: Pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa- Pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-ooma-mow-
