|
Sven Väth, pop trance & dinosaurs (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| renttresnor |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
According to who? A good deal of what is accepted progressive trance does not use the altering bassline at all. Ishkur identified that as one of the common features of prog trance, but he's also defined prog trance as trance with a breakdown. Neither of which are universal applicants: they're just common features of progressive trance. |
Look, what is 'accepted' is usually not what is 'the truth', especially in the case of Trance. Yeha, prog trance introduced formulaic breakdowns into trance music. The key is that it wasn't epic or anthem trance yet. The breakdowns weren't as big, nothing was as overblown as it was to become. Epic and/or anthem are basically everything that prog trance is, except magnified many times.
| quote: |
I was just wiping out the possible idea that changing bassline = progressive. "Progressive" simply meant a new, forward-thinking sound, with no single technical music element defining it. |
Well if you want to get into that, the bassline was forward thinking because it thought forward to 1998+ to when every trance track would be like that, while before 1995 very few did, if any.
| quote: | | And as I said, it was different in many ways. Dark & Long (Dark Train) is almost universally considered progressive trance, and it has neither a lead-introducing breakdown nor a changing bassline. However it sounded much different to trance in 1994 and so, like Leftfield's early productions, it gets named progressive trance to show the progression in sound. |
Leftfield made progressive house, duh. As for the rest, even if you're right, that's just one track. You can find an exception to anything if you look hard enough. So what?
| quote: |
That's a feeble argument. You have no credibility to oust the common consensus of thousands of informed individuals. A lot of whom who are floating around this forum. They've been listening to trance longer than you and I, they know their history... and they call it progressive trance. |
Actually, that's a feeble argument. It's called appeal to authority or argumentum ad populum. And it don't impress me.
| quote: | | They'd look doubly retarded because they'd be wasting their time using a field of expertise that is not essential to the debate. Not as if you're one to do that. |
And saying trance is defined by its ethereal and uplifting qualities is much better. How stupid of me. |
|
|
| renttresnor |
| quote: | Originally posted by Psy-T
when the rule does not use the words "generally" and/or "usually" or eqivalents, exceptions do prove the rule false. |
Well they're probably not Trance then, are they.
| quote: | | you're the one who claims there are definitions to all genres, hence the burden of proof is on you. |
I claim that a person of the proper education would be able to define it properly. Nothing in that requires me to define anything. What proof do I need that musical education will better allow people to describe the elements of music and how they apply? |
|
|
| Psy-T |
| quote: | Originally posted by renttresnor
Well they're probably not Trance then, are they. |
oh, use the easy way out then, lump em all into the abstract of techno :o
| quote: | Originally posted by renttresnor
I claim that a person of the proper education would be able to define it properly. Nothing in that requires me to define anything. |
no, your claim was this:
| 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. |
| quote: | Originally posted by renttresnor
What proof do I need that musical education will better allow people to describe the elements of music and how they apply? |
to describe music? none, that's obvious; on the other hand, to describe genres, which are marketing terms at their purest, is a completely different feat to acheive with the aid of a musical education and is far more likely to be definable using marketing education.
nice try, give it another shot though. |
|
|
| Zombie0915 |
| good to see radaghast acting like his old self, these 10 pager threads are great fun. |
|
|
| eFeKz |
trance has evolved plunty..since its introduction in the late 80s, trance music has really changed. from its basic techno roots, trance is much more involved in producing the sounds for the tracks.
as time has progressed, more software, better synths and compression filters have come around allowing more versitility and virtually made the possibilities limitless for sound production.
the whole concept of pop trance; trance following a structure, im not sure i quite under stand what you're talking about. trance always has an intro, then a peak usually euphoric middle, with an outro...
is that what you're talking about? or are you toying with the notion that all artists and producers sound the same? keep in mind many tracks that are being produced now are being made with a software program called Reason so that might explain some of the sound-similar problems you're discribing.
also, of course Above & Beyond's stuff is going to sound some what a like, anjunabeats has a monopoloy on some of the top artists heard on ASOT and TATW (obviously lol)
my 2 cents.:eyespop: |
|
|
| thoughtlessjex |
| quote: | | Actually, that's a feeble argument. It's called appeal to authority or argumentum ad populum. And it don't impress me. |
So are you saying that no consensus should be reached on what trance is, because it would immediately be invalidated due to it's nature as a popular opinion?
On the contrary, trance is a cultural phenomenon, and should therefore be somewhat dependant on the culture it represents. For this reason, it as much defined by the strongest consensus of listeners as it is by its musical elements. If this means that genre distinctions have to be somewhat blurry, then so be it.
In other words, there's no need to be anal retentive.
I will admit, though, that any one person may very well reject certain songs as something other than trance, and it will be perfectly true as far as they are concerned, but then solipsism itself only applies on an individual basis. We find ourselves once again relying on the conclusions of the group consciousness. |
|
|
| Zombie0915 |
| yeah, talking about this stuff gets really difficult when there are no common definitions among us. It bothers me that the borders are drawn the way they are but if I reject them then nobody understands whatI'm talking about. |
|
|
| eFeKz |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zombie0915
yeah, talking about this stuff gets really difficult when there are no common definitions among us. It bothers me that the borders are drawn the way they are but if I reject them then nobody understands whatI'm talking about. |
very true, just like to the untrained ear house, trance and techno sound the same.:whip: |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by renttresnor
Look, what is 'accepted' is usually not what is 'the truth', especially in the case of Trance. Yeha, prog trance introduced formulaic breakdowns into trance music. The key is that it wasn't epic or anthem trance yet. The breakdowns weren't as big, nothing was as overblown as it was to become. Epic and/or anthem are basically everything that prog trance is, except magnified many times. |
How can you define what is the truth in this instance? Progressive trance has never been formally defined, and yet you're acting as if it has. Like most forms of music the genre has been defined by the music which people have labelled prog trance. So what is accepted is what is true.
| quote: | | Well if you want to get into that, the bassline was forward thinking because it thought forward to 1998+ to when every trance track would be like that, while before 1995 very few did, if any. |
So the only difference between classic trance and prog trance is the bassline? Of course not. There is a huge difference in sound between the two, even as far back as 1995. That general shift in sound away from what had become trance staples (the choral vocal pads, acid lines etc.) is what I consider the "progresssion". Certainly there was a big change in sound between the two.
| quote: | | Leftfield made progressive house, duh. As for the rest, even if you're right, that's just one track. You can find an exception to anything if you look hard enough. So what? |
I know they did. Their music was the original prog house. It was the point where the tag "progressive" entered into electronic music, and I was demonstrating its initial meaning.
And I can find countless exceptions. Dark & Long is just a really obvious example of the prog trance sound which doesn't have anything to do with basslines, but is undoubtedly a progression of sound, and so was labelled prog trance.
| quote: | | Actually, that's a feeble argument. It's called appeal to authority or argumentum ad populum. And it don't impress me. |
You're arguing against that authority. As someone who is trying to disprove accepted ideas by the informed majority, you are the one who has to give reasons why so many informed individuals are incorrect. Otherwise I can discount you as not being credible and not having a clue what you're talking about.
| quote: | | And saying trance is defined by its ethereal and uplifting qualities is much better. How stupid of me. |
I didn't say that anyone in this thread had made a correct definition. I simply said that technical terms won't help, simply because of how vague a tag "trance" has become in 2006. |
|
|
| paranoik0 |
| See, this is why I don't care about genres anymore. Or well, I do, but don't want to. |
|
|
| eFeKz |
| quote: | Originally posted by paranoik0
See, this is why I don't care about genres anymore. Or well, I do, but don't want to. |
its only minute details which break down EDM, so . |
|
|
| peerpressure |
i guess i made a new thread about something old :mad:
guys... just to be clear... if you still didnt understand what he meant by "neo-trance" then refer to the releases coming from Kompakt.
one review i read from thei releases was "its like trance... but better". |
|
|
|
|
