|
Bpm (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Zoso |
I used to enjoy the 140bpm range, but in my old age (ha ha) I now prefer a track to not exceed 138bpm. ISOS5 really has given me a new appreciation for the 130-132bpm range as well. If I've had an overly stressful day at work, spinning a set at the 130bpm range seems to be more relaxing than mixing at 138bpm, for example. Some tracks simply hit their sweet spot at a lower bpm, I think. Smith & Pledger pres. Aspect - Hijack is a good example. I love this track, but if I get it over 134bpm it loses its magic (at least for me).
That was some silly nonsensical rambling, wasn't it? God I need sleep. |
|
|
| SMC |
| quote: | Originally posted by DOOMBOT
By the way, there are a lot of elements that you can add to a track to make it seem like it is moving faster then it really is. A lot of my favorite progressive & tech-house tracks are like that. :) |
True. A good 130bpm makes ppl dance more than a boring 150bpm tune. Tempo isn't really that important imo. |
|
|
| gizzymcg |
| At peak times 140-144 is still gotta be used just to get a crowd really energetic. But yeh i would agree most trance DJs are playing a lot slower these days. The best of them like O'Bir still rattle it out when its required though. Didnt like the part of the Armin went through and wouldny play anything above 138 and some tunes just sounded rubbish that slow for the type of tunes they were. Horses for courses really |
|
|
| KilldaDJ |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zoso
I used to enjoy the 140bpm range, but in my old age (ha ha) I now prefer a track to not exceed 138bpm. ISOS5 really has given me a new appreciation for the 130-132bpm range as well. If I've had an overly stressful day at work, spinning a set at the 130bpm range seems to be more relaxing than mixing at 138bpm, for example. Some tracks simply hit their sweet spot at a lower bpm, I think. Smith & Pledger pres. Aspect - Hijack is a good example. I love this track, but if I get it over 134bpm it loses its magic (at least for me).
That was some silly nonsensical rambling, wasn't it? God I need sleep. |
well thats fair enough rly if u listen to a slow set when u get home from a hard day at work but im talking about when ppl party to 130ish bpm sets.
i know im gunna get flamed for this but a good rockin party doesnt rly get fired up with this prog stuff, not that i find.
i mean the only stuff that can get a trance party going is probably hard trance or something, but like tech and other stuff thrown in is just as good.
thats my cause for the decline in the trance scene as of late, it was marketable in the 2000 when it was fast, energetic and vibrant, it was a whole party scene ffs! (whever u put that down to drugs or whatever, is up to u)
and yes random rambling is good, makes me feel better :wtf: |
|
|
| TOR |
| quote: | Originally posted by KilldaDJ
i know im gunna get flamed for this but a good rockin party doesnt rly get fired up with this prog stuff, not that i find.
|
Tech house works like a treat, as Doombot pointed out :) |
|
|
| KilldaDJ |
| quote: | Originally posted by TOR
Tech house works like a treat, as Doombot pointed out :) |
well tech house/tech trance is a winner (pvd - live @ energy 2003)
i dunno how it would be portrayed nowadays but in that particular set, it was ing banging. :D |
|
|
| DanAX |
| My bpm varies base on the dancefloor 130-141 |
|
|
| isoterra |
thing with most epic trance is that it isn't groove-orientated, so for it to really have effect it has to have drive... and with anything under 140 that drive just isn't there. for me, at least.. i think it's a shame DJs are playing it slower these days
anything deeper/groovier really needs to be slower to get the effect.. though i generally don't associate myself with stuff under 130 |
|
|
| KilldaDJ |
| quote: | Originally posted by isoterra
thing with most epic trance is that it isn't groove-orientated, so for it to really have effect it has to have drive... and with anything under 140 that drive just isn't there. for me, at least.. i think it's a shame DJs are playing it slower these days
anything deeper/groovier really needs to be slower to get the effect.. though i generally don't associate myself with stuff under 130 |
that was the word i was looking for, 'drive'
sets nowadays dont have that particular drive, as u say with that lower bpm, thats non existant
so really this topic is the debate about the difference between 'groove' and 'drive'
ive always been into the whole more driving harder stuff, hence the higher tempos, faster rolling basslines, euphoric arpeggios etc...and breakdowns wouldnt last for 5 minutes |
|
|
| DOOMBOT |
| For those of you who are saying there aren't tracks out there under 140BPM with drive, you are very misguided and misinformed. There are a ton. ;) |
|
|
| KilldaDJ |
| quote: | Originally posted by DOOMBOT
For those of you who are saying there aren't tracks out there under 140BPM with drive, you are very misguided and misinformed. There are a ton. ;) |
yeah maybe. but i bet u that track is more driving at 145bpm than +0% |
|
|
|
|
