|
Trance and Techno Definitions (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| New Wave |
| I went to the recordstore here yesterday and I listen to some melodic techno. So I don't know what the threadstarter is talking about but you are totally wrong. Never definition a style cause it's to huge for giving it a definition. |
|
|
| Ishkur |
| quote: | Originally posted by Aiwendil
not much of a logical fallacy
|
The logical fallacy is also known as False Conclusion. For example: All white people have blue eyes. Therefore, anyone who has blue eyes is automatically white.
It's wrong because it doesn't take into account people who are not white who have blue eyes.
In the context of what we are talking about, you are calling Akufen trance because he embodies any (or all) of the descriptors I gave for trance, which is wrong because anyone can embody those descriptors and not be considered trance. It's a stupid analogy, and I want you to stop it with that sophomoric line of thinking.
The difference between What Time is Love and typical acid house of the period tended to be bridges, choruses, and vocals. Acid house still had those. Trance did not.
| quote: | Originally posted by Aiwendil
therefore i ask, do these tracks from Psychic TV, The KLF, and Icon Of Coil fit within the musical specifications which define trance music after it became an established genre? |
Yes, given the original definition as given by Mark Reeder of MFS Records in 1991.
Icon of Coil is not trance, and never has been.....I have no idea where you got him from. |
|
|
| eRRaTiK |
| ^^ OMG it's that dude that created the guide!!! :D |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| Ish, you've just won me a very old argument against this guy. Thanks. |
|
|
| Aiwendil |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ishkur
The logical fallacy is also known as False Conclusion. For example: All white people have blue eyes. Therefore, anyone who has blue eyes is automatically white.
It's wrong because it doesn't take into account people who are not white who have blue eyes.
In the context of what we are talking about, you are calling Akufen trance because he embodies any (or all) of the descriptors I gave for trance, which is wrong because anyone can embody those descriptors and not be considered trance. It's a stupid analogy, and I want you to stop it with that sophomoric line of thinking. |
what the hell are you talking about? my point was not to use your descriptors to prove that akufen is trance, but to point out that all of the descriptors you use to tell us why the klf is trance can easily be used to describe at least one other genre of music/edm, therefore cannot be relied upon to describe trance in a sufficient enough manner. subsequently, we still have no reason to believe that the klf IS trance based on your faulty description of it. which i explained already, and which you chose to ignore. i believe you just committed a logical fallacy, and i believe it's called a RED HERRING.
we never did have any reason to believe that the other artist's lp's you mention are trance, because simply stating that they are trance does not make them so. however, i do believe you have the ability to both describe trance in terms of music theory and tell us why all of the tracks you give us fit that description exactly. i don't believe you wish to take the time or the effort.
| quote: | | The difference between What Time is Love and typical acid house of the period tended to be bridges, choruses, and vocals. Acid house still had those. Trance did not. |
so the definition of trance is that it doesn't have bridges, choruses, or vocals?
| quote: | Yes, given the original definition as given by Mark Reeder of MFS Records in 1991.
|
he didn't give a definition. he just started a trance label. if someone were to describe the common musical properties (that are not common among any other genre) of those trance tracks, they would be giving a definition. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
You're doing it again. Genres are not exclusively defined on what they don't have. Many genres share attributes, but lack others. Trance is not all music that doesn't have bridges and choruses, but no music that does have them is trance.
Your argument follows the bias that you don't want The KLF to be trance because it undermines those labels and artists you love so much. You'll only accept a definition of trance that fits in with what you want to hear, and you won't accept anything but. |
|
|
| Aiwendil |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
You're doing it again. Genres are not exclusively defined on what they don't have. Many genres share attributes, but lack others. Trance is not all music that doesn't have bridges and choruses, but no music that does have them is trance. |
double negative, i find it it difficult to understand your poorly written rhetoric.
| quote: | | Your argument follows the bias that you don't want The KLF to be trance because it undermines those labels and artists you love so much. You'll only accept a definition of trance that fits in with what you want to hear, and you won't accept anything but. |
your statement is what is known as an ad hominem, and it follows my theory that you're not too bright in the upchuck |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| I find that extremely ironic, especially in direct context. |
|
|
| Aiwendil |
| yeah well let me make it very clear to anyone who might need an explanation (system-j). i am asking ishkur why those artists/lp's are trance, and i will accept them as such when he gives an acceptable explanation. i know he can do so, but so far he has not. i'm not trying to debate over what trance is or what trance is not, i'm trying to get him to give us all some kind of valid presentation. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
You mean you want him to cart out the complex music theory you don't really understand, because you're pedantic and require pin-point definitions as to why something is what it is before you'll concede a point?
I could go further, but it would be wasted on you and you aren't going to listen to me anyway, because you've made that lovely (and overty hypocritical) assumption that because I disagree with you and don't percieve reality in that isolated way you do, I'm an idiot. |
|
|
| Ishkur |
| quote: | Originally posted by Aiwendil
why those artists/lp's are trance |
Because they entrance you.
Now run along now and go play with your ball somewhere else, sonny. |
|
|
| Aiwendil |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
You mean you want him to cart out the complex music theory you don't really understand, because you're pedantic and require pin-point definitions as to why something is what it is before you'll concede a point? |
well, yes. excuse me if i don't accept that those artists's lp's are trance simply because ishkur says they are. as you may or may not remember, i tried to get someone else to tell me what prog-psy is and everyone listed me some artists and told me "that is what prog-psy is". if i refused to accept that then why would i accept ishkur's equally vague information?
as for describing what trance sounds like in musical terms, it wouldn't end up being very complex at all. while i admit i have no formal training in musicology, i'm sure i would be able to understand an adequate amount. i do know some things, like what a drum pattern is, what a synthesizer is, what rhythim is, what a measure is, what a chord is, and so on.
| quote: | | I could go further, but it would be wasted on you and you aren't going to listen to me anyway, because you've made that lovely (and overty hypocritical) assumption that because I disagree with you and don't percieve reality in that isolated way you do, I'm an idiot. |
huh. i think you're an idiot because of your inferior intelligence. :D
| quote: | Because they entrance you.
Now run along now and go play with your ball somewhere else, sonny. |
i play with my balls every day... |
|
|
|
|
