|
Is Ishkur correct on Progressive trance? (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| stren |
| quote: | | ...and ishkur, ishkur mothaa !!... |
|
|
|
| tribu |
| No, Ishkur is 100% right all of the time. |
|
|
| Bret Hart |
Defintion of Opinion:
A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof
~~~Thus I challenge any TA to PROVE Ishkur right or wrong in his definitions/samples. Thus verify if indeed its 100% opinion bull |
|
|
| sandstorm03 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Haak
hehe, too hard to explain, but i wouldn't judge a tune to be trance or progressive trance depending on how many layers it has. and i just thought "it has a progressive bassline" sounded funny. |
:P it is hard to explain. Thats why i try not to put it to words.
Its not about how many layers. It could have a billion and 2 layers but not be progressive.
Jan told me something interesting. I asked what the difference between what he was playing, and why he wouldn't call it deep house(he called it techno). He said the main difference is the approach taken to the production.
wise man.
When i distinguish stlyes the first thing i notice is the bassline. If you get a bassline that hits the same on every 4 notes, other then the fact that its probably a pvd track, it "most likely" isn't prog trance. Cause it has a different "flow" from a longer bassline.
When i think progressive trance I imagine a track that starts from the basics. like a rawer sound. Kick, high hats a synth or two. Then ever 16-32-64 bars it introduces another element. Then another element. then another. then u get your breakdown, and mostlikely build to the "choris." now thats your obvious cookie cutter out line. Imo the more effective basslines are ones that are repetitive, and lead only to the next measure. Like maby a longer bass note on 3+ then go into 1. It creates that rhythem and flow to the next bar. Repetitveness is key in a lot of casses.
Now almost every track is "progressive" in a simple term. I think tracks that take it to that next level are deemed progressive.
when I think of Perception (i cant put it on atm). It doesn't really "progress" It essentially starts at the same level as it ends. Obviousely it gains a few layers but its not really repetitive, in the single measure sence. Its more repeaded on 8/16 bars like trance.
IMO its similar to the breed that markus plays a lot. The melodic prog trancey stuff.
call it what you want. You would not be wrong to include perception in prog trance. But it shouldn't be the most notible to call this or that track prog trance. |
|
|
| sandstorm03 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bret Hart
for example, I have an opinion that the earth is round.
I disclaim to you its my opinion.
How do you prove my opinion to be true?? Or false???
Answer. you find the facts and either prove or disprove my opinion.
We should approach Ishkurs guide the same way. Either prove or disprove his statments using facts.
In this case, what are the facts ( i.e. the true definition of prog., etc).
I don't know the answer but I am hoping someone does |
WE SHOULD NOT NEED GENRES AT ALL! There is no point in calling this one thing, and that another.
just listen to what you like.
BTW not once did i say that ishkur was wrong. |
|
|
| sandstorm03 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bret Hart
~~~Thus I challenge any TA to PROVE Ishkur right or wrong in his definitions/samples. Thus verify if indeed its 100% opinion bull |
where is the source of the basic definitions? Since all scientific proof is based off something already done. |
|
|
| Bret Hart |
Ishkurs Definition of Progressive:
Progressive is a pretty pretentious word to begin with, so if you're bold enough to actually call your genre anything like that you better have something pretty ing impressive, groundbreaking and forward-thinking to call it that. Like, music that will make you fly or breathe underwater or something. Since that's the case, Progressive Trance is easily the most misnamed genre in the history of music. In the annals of trance, it made huge leaps backwards. Most oldskool trance enthusiasts admit that they stopped listening to trance right after Progressive Trance came around (legend states around 96 or so). The genre doesn't actually do anything new or inventive. But what it DID do was codify--that is, write in literal stone--the trance template of breakdown-build-anthem, an infused pop gimmick that all of a sudden made this strange, space-age music suddenly acceptable to the sonically docile masses. No longer long, unwieldy, repetitive and unresponsive, trance became a familiarity, an image, associating itself (and its artists) with all the trappings that keep the pop music world intact. It all went downhill from here.
------
Ok, I don't know so I am not sure if this is correct or wrong defintion. But I found it funny how he made funof those wannabe cool ass people who think listen to progressive is 'better' than any other form of EDM.
Now is his definition correct?? Why?? |
|
|
| sandstorm03 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bret Hart
Ishkurs Definition of Progressive:
Progressive is a pretty pretentious word to begin with, so if you're bold enough to actually call your genre anything like that you better have something pretty ing impressive, groundbreaking and forward-thinking to call it that. Like, music that will make you fly or breathe underwater or something. Since that's the case, Progressive Trance is easily the most misnamed genre in the history of music. In the annals of trance, it made huge leaps backwards. Most oldskool trance enthusiasts admit that they stopped listening to trance right after Progressive Trance came around (legend states around 96 or so). The genre doesn't actually do anything new or inventive. But what it DID do was codify--that is, write in literal stone--the trance template of breakdown-build-anthem, an infused pop gimmick that all of a sudden made this strange, space-age music suddenly acceptable to the sonically docile masses. No longer long, unwieldy, repetitive and unresponsive, trance became a familiarity, an image, associating itself (and its artists) with all the trappings that keep the pop music world intact. It all went downhill from here.
------
Ok, I don't know so I am not sure if this is correct or wrong defintion. But I found it funny how he made funof those wannabe cool ass people who think listen to progressive is 'better' than any other form of EDM.
Now is his definition correct?? Why?? |
I do not see a definition. I see him mention "breakdown-build-anthem" & 1996 can I use that? |
|
|
| Bret Hart |
| quote: | Originally posted by sandstorm03
I do not see a definition |
That is Ishkurs defintion (seen above). What is the correct defintion wise TA's ??? ;)
Is Ishkurs opinions WRONG??? Is Ishkurs opinions totally in wrong??? Have you no in idea what is wrong and what is right??? |
|
|
| Bret Hart |
| quote: | Originally posted by sandstorm03
I do not see a definition. I see him mention "breakdown-build-anthem" & 1996 can I use that? |
Let me rip out some words to make Ishkurs defintion stand out:
Progressive Trance is easily the most misnamed genre in the history of music.
In the annals of trance, it made huge leaps backwards. Most oldskool trance enthusiasts admit that they stopped listening to trance right after Progressive Trance came around (legend states around 96 or so). The genre doesn't actually do anything new or inventive. But what it DID do was codify--that is, write in literal stone--the trance template of breakdown-build-anthem, an infused pop gimmick that all of a sudden made this strange, space-age music suddenly acceptable to the sonically docile masses. |
|
|
| sandstorm03 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bret Hart
That is Ishkurs defintion (seen above). What is the correct defintion wise TA's ??? ;)
Is Ishkurs opinions WRONG??? Is Ishkurs opinions totally in wrong??? Have you no in idea what is wrong and what is right??? |
Ishkur does not define much to be wrong or right. I don't think the samples he selected are the best to fit the genre. Id assume Ishkur knows the same.
I just posted what i feel about prog trance, but i wont put a definitive definition to it. |
|
|
| Bret Hart |
| quote: | Originally posted by sandstorm03
I don't think the samples he selected are the best to fit the genre.
|
Keep in mind that these samples are for Progressive Trance NOT Progressive House. I figured this was a trance board so we should keep the discussion closer to something you TA's would be more fimilar with.
Ishkur also has a definition of Progressive house. With different samples. |
|
|
|
|
