|
| quote: | Originally posted by Sand Leaper
Whether a track sounds better at 130 or 150 isn't the point, though. This is about PREFERRING slower or faster music as a preconceived notion, regardless of what the music's actual ideas and creative content is. That's why I think sweeping statements like this...
...are a bit short-sighted. They presume that electronic music in general follows the same formula that "sounds better" when played more slowly, and that a higher BPM automatically means that a track is more energetic. While this is certainly true for a lot of electronic music, there is also loads of music that it does not ring true for (one example of this would be how playing Speedy J - De-Orbit at the wrong speed suddenly became a trend after the jungle brigade picked it up. Another is how dubstep is often seen as "too slow to dance to", when really it runs at 140 BPM). Since electronic music is so varied, filtering your tastes based on the BPM count strikes me as a bit narrowminded.
I wasn't offended, don't worry. This isn't really so much about my set as it is a general pet peeve of mine, especially seeing as how clubnights have become so genre-specific. |
Ah I can't really be arsed to argue, tbh I think we're probably more on the same page than you think.
I wasn't judging based on BPM count, I just found that I enjoyed it a bit more in that situation after I'd slowed it down! And my comment about getting older was just a slightly lighthearted observation of how my listening habits have changed.
Without wanting to sound like a c**t (but probably managing it anyway), I'm probably actually one of the more musically open-minded people on TA. I also often say things in much more generalised and exaggerated terms than I really mean (sometimes to make a point, sometimes trying to be funny, sometimes just because it's easier than being specific), so maybe I should watch that 
___________________
Stu Cox |   
|
