|
On the Trance Listener (pg. 12)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by Googooly
Prove it to me with FACTS, not just words.
then i swear i'll blieve you. |
Sorry to put such a strain on your cognitive abilities and vocabulary, but this is a pretty good explanation...
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
That I need to provide evidence only reinforces your distance from what you're talking about. The lack of trance singles, albums and compilations in the charts compared to four or more years ago is the most obvious evidence that it no longer sells, although everyone on TA has heard from producers' mouths how acts and labels have folded because trance isn't worth anything anymore. It's no longer given significant coverage by dance music press. it's no longer played by most of the clubs that used to champion it and it's no longer heard on the radio stations it used to dominate.
Of course, you're from Chicago and as every American TA knows, trance was never popular in mainstream terms in America. You don't know it's commercially dead because you never saw it commercially alive. Anyone who lives in the UK or Europe knows how diminished trance's popularity is. If you need a statistic to tell you so, you don't have the first clue and all the pseudo-intellectual debate posturing in the world won't hide that fact.
Of course, the fact you made the point in the first place shows me that you obviously don't know what you're talking about. Trance was popular- chart topping singles in 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000 and 1999 in my country, compilations topping supermarket charts... There's no point in excusing the endless watering-down of trance as a mission to popularise the genre, because it isn't working. If anything, it's a blinkered refusal to see their kingdom fall into ruins that has prompted all the major trance names (those who didn't jump ship when it crashed down) to scrabble desperately to preserve their popularity by making derivative pop e. Trance is less and less popular by the year in every territory that matters. Every clubber knows it. Tiesto and Armin may try and persuade you otherwise with their hyperbole blitzkreigs, but don't be fooled.
Ironically enough, it's this demise that has seen the cynicism set in here. Trance's return to the underground, kicking and screaming, is why most people here have given up on it. The truth of it is that the club scene is big enough and powerful enough to elect its own heroes and movements, and contrived attempts to control it won't work. Trance was popular because it found the right combination of the underground and the populist, and when it tipped that balance it lost it. Every scene has done it, from hardcore to drum 'n bass to breaks and occasionally even (gasp) house.
This is no judgement on whether trance should be popular or not, it's merely a statement of fact: trance isn't going to usurp 50 Cent and it isn't ing supposed to. If it becomes popular again it'll do it by winning back the club scene, and it won't do that with contrived pop music and mind-numbing marketing. And the likelihood is that when this eventually happens, out in Chicago you won't even realise. |
|
|
|
| spc |
| quote: | Originally posted by Googooly
What are you talking about? ibiza expression?? |
:haha: :haha: :haha: |
|
|
| HaeD |
| I believe he is right in someway. Imo the House scene is in a worst shape than trance and there is way more crap in the pseudorave then it use to be. But in a way trance get way more hateful comment. For myself Guetta being the #1 house dj this year, was the bigest insult to my musical taste and I didn't complain. but trance fan seem to endlessly bash, maybe there is more of them here and it's tranceaddict so we are bound to see more trance thread but it's still a fact that don't bother me at all cause I can only agree with them. |
|
|
| XaNaX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
Sorry to put such a strain on your cognitive abilities and vocabulary, but this is a pretty good explanation... |
you should have misspelled 25% of the words and ed up the grammar in system-j's post so googooly would have a better chance of understanding it |
|
|
| Googooly |
| quote: | Originally posted by XaNaX
you should have misspelled 25% of the words and ed up the grammar in system-j's post so googooly would have a better chance of understanding it |
wow your as funny as kersty the clown in the simpson...
thank you, come again. |
|
|
| Googooly |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
Sorry to put such a strain on your cognitive abilities and vocabulary, but this is a pretty good explanation... |
Maybe it is to you, but to me and many many more trancers its just a load of bollocks. |
|
|
| The_G0dfather |
| quote: | Originally posted by Googooly
kersty the clown in the simpson...
|
:stongue: |
|
|
| Googooly |
| quote: | Originally posted by The_G0dfather
:stongue: |
^_^ |
|
|
| idoru |
| quote: | Originally posted by Googooly
^_^ |
He's laughing at you. |
|
|
| Googooly |
| quote: | Originally posted by idoru
He's laughing you. |
and im laughing at him. |
|
|
| Alex |
| quote: | Originally posted by Googooly
and im laughing at him. |
The bold part goes on the him, you ing idiot. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Alex
The bold part goes on the him, you ing idiot. |
Nah, Googooly got it right, surprisingly. The bold is on "at" to emphasize that he's laughing "at" someone rather than "with" him. |
|
|
|
|
