|
| quote: | Originally posted by PETRAN
They weren't but trance was always about the melodic riffs, the arpeggios and the gated strings mate. Not super-saws but saw riffs or whatever. The fact that there is a difference says nothing in terms of quality other than the fact that for some reason or the other you prefer the early-90s sound. Quality is a very vague and subjective term. One Music nerd (like...me!) could say that early 90s trance had some "pioneering" ideas and hence has the highest quality by default, by any trance that followed. But then again if you don't include the idea of "novelty of sound", early 90s trance was very poor musically.
And anyway, trance was actually "trance" (the hypnotic repeatetive sound) only during its elder German days. For the most part, trance was always about the melodies and hence was more commercial. Even Jam and Spoon and Paul Van Dyk in 93 were demonstrating a more melodic, theme-driven commercial sound. |
I think the overall quality in the case of trance music should be judged by how effective it is in performing it's designated function... which is, putting people into a state of trance. The repetitiveness factor plays a major role here and this gives the early trance music an edge over today's pseudo-trance garbage.
|