|
Live in the now - For an Angel was good 9 years ago! (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| dj_kane |
| quote: | Originally posted by distant
Would you trust someone who said that For An Angel is the best track ever made, if that particular tune was the only one he had ever heard?
No, of course not.
Get a grip. Read my post. Come up with a proper argument. THEN post. |
he didnt say for an angel was the best track he ever heard. he said at the time he thought it was the best. what was yours at this time? half the people here would probably disagree with it.
diffferent tastes, different people. wise up! |
|
|
| distant |
| quote: | Originally posted by dj_kane
he didnt say for an angel was the best track he ever heard. he said at the time he thought it was the best. what was yours at this time? half the people here would probably disagree with it.
diffferent tastes, different people. wise up! |
And I was implying he didn't have a clue about what he was talking about.
So let me rephrase the question, Jarvmeister. What are ten other tracks you like from that period? |
|
|
| Jarvmeister |
| quote: | Originally posted by distant
But it does make it more informed. Read my post again. |
Which is irrelevant if you can't prove it. Move on.
Now shut up and discuss the topic clog boy. |
|
|
| RickyM |
| I never saw all the fuss about 'For an Angel' anyway, the lyrics were too annoying, and that offbeat synth got on my nerves. |
|
|
| distant |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jarvmeister
Which is irrelevant if you can't prove it. Move on.
|
Prove what? My argument? Or that I know more? |
|
|
| Subtle |
| what the hell is going on here ? :wtf: |
|
|
| RebeL9 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jarvmeister
Nope - this is what I mean:
Get 2 people - exactly the same.
Get two tracks, with, for the sake of argument, the same qualities across the board.
Produce one with old technology, one with new. So long as the same level of skill goes into each, out the other end will come a better production, INO, from the new technology.
Me and a mate were discussing thsi the other day, you can't easlity mix a classic 98 trancer (like, for example TBR - Trancewave) with a modern trancer (Like for example Hydragen - Creature Of Habit) becuase they are such different levels of production.
Don't get me wrong - a classic track is a classic track, and nothing can take that away from it - but a modern more polished track, of equal ingenuity and quality, brings more to the table.
Jarv |
yeah but still does the lack of polished sound limit the tunes other quality aspects? the problem is not the technology actually. the main problem is that the majority of the trance tunes produced today aren't anything you will remember for a longer time. it just goes right through your ears. one may argue and say "you only cherish that tune because you put it into a historical context". maybe so but I would also say that the tunes back in the 90s were more diverse. you could have several different sounds from one label. The labels were not limiting itself to just one sound. You had more diversity together with hungry producers which didn't only strive after being played by the biggest DJs. |
|
|
| Soeder |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jarvmeister
Yes structure and melody are important.
But just like a modern supercar is better to drive than a classic supercar, so a track produced with modern technology can be deemed a better production than one with old technology.
If that weren't the case then people would still be producing tracks as they were produced 10 or 20 years ago.
Jarv |
Music is not functional as a car is. Judged by the look, old cars looks way better than new cars because they're designed with passion and creativity. Not mass-produced the same way as now. The same thing goes for new and old trance in my opinion. |
|
|
| Jarvmeister |
| quote: | Originally posted by distant
What are ten other tracks you like from that period? |
I fail to see how this is relevant to the topic. If you're trying to catch me out by highlighting I know nothing about music from that era then forget it. I'm not going to do as you command in a thread I created where you are causing a nuisance of yourself.
I know what I like - and I couldn't give a what you think. |
|
|
| RebeL9 |
note that I am not one of those that hype For An Angel. It's a good track but very far from one of the best. It's not even in my top 100 list.
I am only sceptical against those who thinks modern technology is all we need and the rest is fixed automaticly. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by distant
I may be an , but I don't see you coming up with any counter-arguments. I just see bitterness. Don't worry honey, you'll get there. |
Bitterness towards what, exactly? You realise I have everything at my disposal to become exactly like you. I know exactly how to use Discogs and I'm fully capable of employing P2P. All I'd need to do is surrender my social life and I could fire snob-bullets with the best of them. You don't have anything I cannot easily obtain. There's absolutely nothing special about you.
But besides that, I've been heavily criticised recently for dragging numerous threads into the quagmire of self-indulgent arguments, so I'm doing my best to cut down. Maybe if you look at your own posts and the ridiculously loaded arguments you're making you could figure it out yourself, but let's cut the logical processes out of it briefly and I'll use a simply one. You recently said your list of favourite tracks would be much like Cobalt's. I think you know full well that Cobalt knows a load about trance throughout its history. Now... take a wild guess at what one of his self-admitted favourite tracks is. |
|
|
| Arraias |
| Forbidden Fruit the version of the album Seven Ways is faaaaaar superior. |
|
|
|
|
