quote:

Originally posted by kr00t0n The sound of what trance was is different to what it is now.

Call it something else then.

I recommend: Schmaltz.

lol, it's amusing how barrel-scrapingly unfunny & strung together aiwendil's posts start to look once ishkur joins the discussion

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur Call it something else then. I recommend: Schmaltz.

it's about 8 years too late to be saying that though really isn't it?

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur Call it something else then. I recommend: Schmaltz.

RnB doesnt really have much in the way of blues now does it?

And why should the activities a person does dictate the music they listen to?

Musical nazism at it finest

___________________
My Mixes

Actually, there's a terrible amount of blues in modern R&B that....how much blues have you listened to, really?

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur Actually, there's a terrible amount of blues in modern R&B that....how much blues have you listened to, really?

Not a huge amount I admit, but commercial 'RnB' tends to be hiphop with no swearing and less derogatory terms for women. So it isn;t true RnB in the historical sense, doesn't stop people from calling it RnB.

Was just a an example really.

What trance means nowadays, regardless of what it was, does so to more people now than not, so fight the good fight soldier, get a petition going or something, liberate trance from it's terrible present state, and pick me up some pizza when you get back.

___________________
My Mixes

Ishkur: what music do you listen to ?

___________________


http://soundcloud.com/subtara

There is this researcher dude in switzerland who studies trance and talks about trance enducing music on this page:

http://www.trance.edu/music.htm

He seems to agree with ishkur, and has this long set of theories on how to entrance people, alot of those theories seem to be implemented in old trance songs. He also has a group of musicians he likes to train, and he has a pretty interesting book about trances that you can find in lotsa university libraries.

I bet if somebody got in touch with him he could tell us about all sorts of musicians and stuff that follow his trance model. There might be lotsa music coming out that is true trance but we just aren't hearing it becuase it isnt popular at the parties. We are kinda departing from the realm of coonless that is the center of the partying world and venturing into geek territory with real trance though. I'm afraid that even if there were alot of truely hypnotic trance music coming out(and there might very well be some) it would probably only appeal to geeky types and not the bulk of the party crowd. From what I read it seems that original trance music did indeed center around a more geeky type of crowd than the one we see partying today.

I especially like this part of the page:

quote:

Repetition produces trance. But it will be the type of repetition which is 'engaging' or which produces an involvement with the inner reality. In some trance music - such as goa - there are multiple loops, some of which are subtle. Subtle loops tend to bring the attention to a finer focus. The resulting splitting or dissociation results in trance. But that is not the whole story. What 'subtle' is to one person may be different for another. The effect - which is to say, which cognitive functions are disabled - is another story. Again, this can vary between persons listening to the same music.

and this part:

quote:

Most instances of trance music do not allow sufficient time for deeper trances to develop, as complexities are introduced too quickly. Remember, in shamanistic trances, drumming would go on for days. Subtile changes in the rhythm and melodic structures over time will produce deep trances because it is the 'subtilty' which is engaging. Commercial trance music should continue for a minimum of 20 minutes to induce deep trance. Perhaps we are all fortunate that such long trance music riffs almost never happen.

imagine that, a PhD researcher backing up the idea that this older style of trance was actually trance inducing. Maybe ppl aren't just talking shit after all.

Last edited by Zombie0915 on Oct-03-2005 at 13:29

quote:

Originally posted by kr00t0n Things change, so the word 'trance' doesn't mean what it did back in the day... tough, no point whining about it, it's not going to make any difference. You like trance to be xyz, ergo you listen to xyz. Other people like abc, some like 123, personal taste, whilst often an 'arguable' topic, isn't really, because it's personal.

So true. Similarly modern Rock doesn't sound like Rock music did in the 60's (I'm sure your parents will be all too happy to tell you that. ). Times change, and the types of music that are bounded into each genre will obviously change as differing musical styles develop.

___________________

"I expect to pass through life but once. If therefore, there be any kindness I can show, or any good thing I can do to any fellow being, let me do it now, and not defer or neglect it, as I shall not pass this way again."

I dont hear 12 bar struture or songs about struggle and life on the slave plantations in modern RnB.

Usher doesnt sound anything like the RnB from the first half century of the 1900s.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur It's not. You'd think it would live up to its namesake. Go ask Simon Berry what they think of today's "trance".

he would probably say nothing outragoues because he doesn't produce the same trance that he did 10 years ago

compare deeper than deep to mongoose, big difference

___________________
facebook | blog | scrobbler | setarchive | 20160316
"I believe that's referred to as intelligent drum & bass, which obviously means there's a genre of stupid drum & bass out there" (John Peel)

Last edited by montana on Oct-03-2005 at 13:34