|
Sven Väth, pop trance & dinosaurs (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| humilis |
| quote: | Originally posted by ONION
That is absolutely spot on... what creates that hypnotic feel is the constant repetition of a leadline or bassline... and subtle tweaking of these sounds...
As for what sven vath is saying hes absolutely correct... and its the same argument that most "oldskoolers" make when referring to todays 'Trance' - That its always the same structure... that its predictable... That everyone uses the SAME ing sounds. Unlike other genres like Rock - certain instruments / sounds need to be predictable... In electronic however music we have the technology to make any sound we ing want to... So why are producers out there copying each other... Why are they all using the same structure? As long as the music is hypnotic theres no need to copy.... |
+1 |
|
|
| Psy-T |
| quote: | Originally posted by renttresnor
Trance isn't a subjective term, it's a genre of music characterized by definable characteristics of music. You see, that's what usually makes a genre a genre. |
so go ahead and specify those characteristics, and while you're at it, mind defining ambient, techno, electro, breakbeat, etc? |
|
|
| andreas1999 |
| quote: | Originally posted by CHRles
But that's exactly what I'm talking about when I say Trance is the most popular form of EDM where polls are concerned. As far as popularity contests go, Trance is still king by a longshot. It has the biggest global fanbase, and that means something to a lot of people.
We're not talking about what you may view as quality music, but rather about acknowledging Trance's popularity. |
But if house makes the top lists (like 'Call on me' in the UK, yes it's house even if people here call it cheese) and trance doesn't, how exactly does that work?
Maybe seeing Tiesto playing in front of a million people is an overwhelming experience. And maybe this tight electro house, which IS more popular over here in Europe (I don't really know what's big in the US), doesn't work very well in a huge stadium like trance does. This kind of music works better in a smaller club with a nicer, more personal atmosphere.
Or maybe Trance still is big in the rest of the world and it's only over here in the UK where house is big(?). Personally I think trance (as we know it today) peaked at around 98-99 with big commercial hits, but has been fading ever since. |
|
|
| dj christian |
| I can't believe that people still listen to Trance today no matter which style it let it be minimal, ambient, anthem etc. Trance is envolving so does everything but calling it Trance today would be a sin, in it's shape today it is something else. If i had that "Back to Future" car i would send those ****heads:whip: who's claiming they are listening to Trance back to '92 and in my opinion real Trance have never been Trance since the mid nineties end of period. |
|
|
| RebeL9 |
| quote: | Originally posted by dj christian
I can't believe that people still listen to Trance today no matter which style it let it be minimal, ambient, anthem etc. Trance is envolving so does everything but calling it Trance today would be a sin, in it's shape today it is something else. If i had that "Back to Future" car i would send those ****heads:whip: who's claiming they are listening to Trance back to '92 and in my opinion real Trance have never been Trance since the mid nineties end of period. |
yeah i find it quite funny that alot of people today say they listen to "real trance" when they listen to Tiesto, Above & Beyond etc.
Not much of the original ingredients is left in those tunes what made trance TRANCE back in the days. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by renttresnor
No. |
Yes. Listen to Seven Ways by Paul Van Dyk, from 1996, for an easy example.
| quote: | | Yeah, what use would techical music terms have in trying to define trance music? Wow, you've opened my eyes buddy. |
Have you actually listened to much trance music? If so then you'd realise that there's no technical qualifier for progressive trance to be progressive. I don't even think that prog trance and prog house shared a defining characteristic when the names were coined. "Progressive" just meant forward-thinking. A new sound of house and trance. The first progressive house track- Not Forgotten- didn't have that note changing bassline at all. Progressive trance was just the name applied to the new sound of trance music that arrived in the mid 1990s- it was different to the earlier "classic" trance sound, so it was given a chin-stroking label. I've heard hundreds of prog trance tracks, and there's no particular musical element that connects them.
So what help exactly would music theory be in this debate, again? |
|
|
| Floorfiller |
| quote: | Originally posted by RebeL9
am I the only one who laughed at this sentence?
"I also read an interview with Above & Beyond in Dj Mag where they basically blamed the bad name trance has today on people like DJ Sammy and other pop trance producers"
:stongue: :stongue: :stongue: :stongue: |
i love reading trance articles from all those guys...they really seem pretty clueless about a lot of things. i mean i loved when armin interviewed about his last album and was talking about how diverse it was and how he thought he took his work to an artistic level. diverse how? and if you're such a great artist, why do you have to co-produce the whole thing with people? just such a joke. |
|
|
| kid nyce |
| I liked it when DJs DJ'ed and Producers Produced - I guess you mash them together and you get an "artist" |
|
|
| dj christian |
| quote: | Originally posted by kid nyce
I liked it when DJs DJ'ed and Producers Produced - I guess you mash them together and you get an "artist" |
Exactly you got it right there, when the dj's end up making musik it just end up bad. :mad: |
|
|
| paranoik0 |
This is the set I was talking about earlier:
[[ LINK REMOVED ]]
(i'm guessing the current policy is that it's ok to put up sets ocasionally as long as we don't turn TA into something filesharing-based. if not, feel free to remove the link)
I'm not claiming it's trance all the way, there are some tracks there that don't have anything to do with it, but some are clearly influenced by it. Are those "neotrance"? I don't know. I'm guessing they are.
I also must correct myself a little after re-listening to this, as I don't think it's particularly based on the whole long/repetitive/hypnotic oldschool idea. It's just more focused on synths playing melodies. It sounds good, and that's enough to me. |
|
|
| Zombie0915 |
My idea of trance is that it is a combination of repition and engagement. Repitition alone is not enough, the listener will ignore it, or focus on stuff external to the music, or get bored, preventing the music from working its magic. Engagement is the stuff in a track that can keep a person interested and focused. Basic psychology tells us that a person cannot be hypnotized unless they want to be hypnotized, you can't tie somebody dowm and entrance them and program them to do things that are harmful to themselves. So we need this engagement for trance to work, but engagement is the most tricky musterious subjective thing, nobody knows why we like the things that we like.
Science struggles to explain it, we come ever closer to understanding the chemistry behind falling in love, we may even dig up hints as to how we sense beauty, yet the understanding of why we like the things that we like, how we choose which stimuli engage us, is still out of reach of our best research. Trance is interesting in that it seems to be music with a purpose, musicians explore different methods for engaging people into their repititions, different repititions creating different kinds of trance.
I think most trance is a compromise, things that are known to work in a crowd are coupled with repitition, but not so much repitition that it hinders the engagement, getting people engaged in repititions seems to be quite tricky so we have this compromise music because that is what happens to be the most engaging for the dancefloor crowd these days. Perhaps in an earlier time people were more willing to be engaged by repitition, maybe the novelty of the machines and the sound caused people to be more interested in repitition then they are now.
It is alot like running, you run and get tired and your body sends you pain signals, but if you run long enough and hard enough your body gives you a huge rush of endorphins. Trance is the same, you listen to this stuff and get bored by the repetition, but if you can stay immersed in it for long enough that euphoria kicks in and you start understanding what makes this music so great. I think that these days people are less patient and less willing to stay immersed in repitition long enough for it to work its magic, so we compromise with them by introducing pop structure. I am hoping that we can gradually re-introduce more repititions and scale back the pop structures in a smooth transition to return to a more hypnotic music, but we first have to have people who want to be hypnotized. |
|
|
| andreas1999 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zombie0915
It is alot like running, you run and get tired and your body sends you pain signals, but if you run long enough and hard enough your body gives you a huge rush of endorphins. Trance is the same, you listen to this stuff and get bored by the repetition, but if you can stay immersed in it for long enough that euphoria kicks in and you start understanding what makes this music so great. I think that these days people are less patient and less willing to stay immersed in repitition long enough for it to work its magic, so we compromise with them by introducing pop structure. I am hoping that we can gradually re-introduce more repititions and scale back the pop structures in a smooth transition to return to a more hypnotic music, but we first have to have people who want to be hypnotized. |
i could never fall in to trance by this pop trance we have today ('jump the next train .. take a ticket to the other side ..'), too much cheese dripping off of me by the time the track ends to fall in to anything. i still like this track but talking about this kind of trance music and 'hypnosis' in the same sentence is just wrong.
the type of trance (i think) you're talking about already exists, minimal or techno (not the "20-loops all packed in to one and then a bassline"-style techno). i saw eric prydz play at The Cross and the house music he plays is so much closer to 'trance' than the fluffy pop trance we have today.
a great example of trance (to me) is Elektrochemie - Don't Go. It won't be labeled as trance but play that track in a dark room, lots of people and loud volume, and you're much closer to being hypnotized than listening to some girl singing about lost love or satellites :)
BUT i still like the lyrics from 'as the rush comes'. |
|
|
|
|
