|
PvD - For an Angel (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| THE_Chris |
But one thing about For an Angel IS its simplicity.
You have a fairly simple synth line and not a while pile of layering. It works. It works well.
Its better than 95% of the e that comes out thesedays, which has huge epic synths and has got too many layers, just to show off because thats what Reason can do.
For an Angel is a classic. Like it or not. And it always will be. Sure, theres better stuff out there. But theres a hell of a lot of worse stuff. |
|
|
| Spirit5 |
| quote: | Originally posted by RebeL9
it's a myth that all melodic trance is cheesy. i can name numerous trance acts that made melodic which wasn't cheesy or made for the cheesy market.
Marino Stephano (aka C.M.)
The Digital Blonde (Europa EP, Antheum etc)
Mea Culpa
Fire & Ice (especially early works)
De Niro
Friends, Lovers & Family
Vincent De Moor
:)()()()()( |
Exactly, I've been trying to get this across. Cheese is low budget, low production value, silly nonesense that was created in less than a day. I've been trying to stress on here that there's nothing wrong with catchy melodies in trance. Sure i've gotten sick of the *hugely theatrical* breakdown, but For An Angel, as I recall, doesn't have a huge breakdown, it's pretty much a track that builds with a consistent melody throughout. I think "Time Of Our Lives" was a bit silly or cheesy compared to some of his other tracks, like "For An Angel", but thats partially because I didn't like the vocals at all. But I don't understand how a track like this could be considered "Chese" or "fluffy" or whatever, it just irritates me. You can choose not to like it, but calling it that stuff doesn't do it justice. Yeah sure i'm shooting at my own foot, but I'm passionate about these things and don't understand some people's mentality. Maybe it's because i've mostly grown on this stuff for many years that the stuff without melody doesn't appeal to me as much. I don't mind a subtle melody either, but as long as the track has some melodic touch to it and it appeals to me (does something for me) i'll like it. |
|
|
| Spirit5 |
| quote: | Originally posted by THE_Chris
But one thing about For an Angel IS its simplicity.
You have a fairly simple synth line and not a while pile of layering. It works. It works well.
Its better than 95% of the e that comes out thesedays, which has huge epic synths and has got too many layers, just to show off because thats what Reason can do.
For an Angel is a classic. Like it or not. And it always will be. Sure, theres better stuff out there. But theres a hell of a lot of worse stuff. |
+1, thats EXACTLY what I am trying to say. |
|
|
| RebeL9 |
I suppose For An Angel is classed as cheesy by many because it have been played to death. Even I recall it was played very often at the local radio stations here.
The same with Children. Children was a good tune when it was first released by Platipus. But after they sold the right to a bigger label the tune was whored to death on MTV and all radio stations.
I suppose a big value of a tune is killed if its exposed to the wider audience. |
|
|
| Numidia |
| For An Angel is a classic trance tune, there is no debate. Simple yet highly effective and just a beautiful little melody. |
|
|
| THE_Chris |
Unfortunatly, yeah. But **sometimes** that is good too. Cos then the mainstream people get to hear a track that is, at the time, well respected by the scene. Even though 80% of people in the mainstream that hear it would probobly describe it as 'trance crap', the other 20% would be interested in it, and would go looking for similar music. Over time, a few of those people might really get into the scene.
I dont mind the occasional tune being famous in the mainstream, and fair dos if a tune is made and becomes famous without being whored to death. But the problem today is that people are MAKING tunes specifically to try and get them mainstream appeal, as the big trance etc record labels seem to be only signing tunes that have a chance of making money FROM the mainstream. |
|
|
| Spirit5 |
| quote: | Originally posted by RebeL9
I suppose For An Angel is classed as cheesy by many because it have been played to death. Even I recall it was played very often at the local radio stations here.
The same with Children. Children was a good tune when it was first released by Platipus. But after they sold the right to a bigger label the tune was whored to death on MTV and all radio stations.
I suppose a big value of a tune is killed if its exposed to the wider audience. |
True, I thought about that with Sandstorm and As The Rush Comes. I guess I wasn't around when those were whored to death and your talking about. I got into this stuff in 98 with those two tracks, but I wasn't really into the scene and wasn't really that knowledgeable about it anyways. I didn't listen to the radio that much (even though I heard these tunes on a net radio station for the first time, but once I bought many CDs, I stopped listening to it as much). I just knew I liked this stuff better than the monotonous techno that was played at the Detroit Electronic Music Festival, or on the radio. I was getting into electronic music, but the stuff with more melody appealed to me more than stuff that was more of this chuggy rhythm and these noises, the really minimalistic stuff. Prefered (and still do) stuff with a bit more structure to it, and thats why I prefer melodic trance and I don't mind stuff with breakdowns, just as long as the breakdown isn't overdone (ala later 90s and early 2000s dutch trance, still fun to listen to but believe that sound was hammered to death and needs to move on, and it has somewhat). |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by RebeL9
I suppose For An Angel is classed as cheesy by many because it have been played to death. Even I recall it was played very often at the local radio stations here.
The same with Children. Children was a good tune when it was first released by Platipus. But after they sold the right to a bigger label the tune was whored to death on MTV and all radio stations.
I suppose a big value of a tune is killed if its exposed to the wider audience. |
I really liked Children though, despite the crap beats. I don't think you can find one good definitive reason why some people love it and others find it plain- it's all about personal taste and opinion. |
|
|
| RebeL9 |
| quote: | Originally posted by THE_Chris
But the problem today is that people are MAKING tunes specifically to try and get them mainstream appeal, as the big trance etc record labels seem to be only signing tunes that have a chance of making money FROM the mainstream. |
there you said it. spot on. |
|
|
| THE_Chris |
And part of it is that you can hear a tune too much.
Take ATRC. When it first came out, I quite liked it, as did a lot of people. Then it got overplayed. WAAAAAYYYYY overplayed. It was in every single set. The forum turned against the track completly. It converted a lot of non-trancers.
But I still quite like it. Again, theres better tunes out there. But its pretty good. I dont download a huge number of livesets so I didnt hear it everytime one of Armins sets got recorded. But I did get sick of SEEING it in tracklists. I kept saying 'why cant he play something new'. And Im sure a lot of other people did.
I think something that hasnt been touched in here is that theres a difference between getting sick of SEEING a track in a tracklist, and HEARING the track over and over.
Just dont listen to a track ad infinitum and you wont get tired of it. If I heard ATRC in a liveset today, I wouldnt complain about it, even though the entire forum would be up in arms. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| Children and For An Angel are still overplayed. You here them regularly on the radio. The principle track that, for me, was ruined by over-play was Born Slippy. Great record, but severely, severely played out. |
|
|
| vinnie97 |
| A somewhat simple but highly lacking in cheese record that is also 12 years of age is "Ajare," about 100 times better than For An Angel because it is less obvious. The tiresome plucking on For An Angel wears thin on the nerves and on its longevity. |
|
|
|
|
