|
On the Trance Listener (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
Absolutely correct.
Also an undeniable truth.
Is this an exception or a rule? Can you not look at the percentages of those who listen to trance, on one hand, and those who listen to minimal, techno, and sax house, on the other hand, and come up with some sort of stastical analysis or percentage that makes this statement nothing more than a statement of percieved fact created by your own misled perceptions? |
Of course the percentages are different, there are far more kids starting threads about trance stuff than people who have been here a while discussing house with sax in it or why some new poker flat release is awesome. Does the fact that it occurs less somehow make it more tolerable?
| quote: |
I do not assume to know people's intentions. A general consensus, if a survey were taken, would agree with my statement.
|
Would they? I think the vocal minority of people who cry foul at any dissent or mention of dislike certainly would. I dunno about the rest of the people on this forum who talk about and debate music all day. Or the people who have been posting here for years and don't seem to mind.
| quote: |
As for the rest, to each their own. I agree that debate and constructive criticism is healthy, but only if it is done in a manner that allows for progress or the construction of new avenues of thought. Your initial comment met no criteria for being constructive. |
I wish people would stop saying this and then ignore it completely. It's a two way street. You can't say "everyone is allowed to like what they want" and then tell people they shouldn't analyze/criticize/express their feelings about something. Some people feel strongly about music, and many with vastly different tastes and emotions, invariably those will clash on a message board...I really don't see a problem with it...the same thing happens in real life, in debates, in politics, in sports, ad infinitum... The best you can do is try and be civil, believe in what you like with an open mind, and not let other people get to you so much. |
|
|
| IntoTrance |
| Having an open mind in this community is, from my own observations, severely lacking. |
|
|
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
Having an open mind in this community is, from my own observations, severely lacking. |
I'll agree, but on every side.
I posted a thread on a great producer from Montreal and only 2 people from there replied. Tiesto's new album gets 50 pages (including huge arguments and flame wars)...who is to blame? |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
If we purchase a piece of music in person, is its quality changed depending on where we purchase it? Is a compilation of Beethoven goin to sound any different if you buy it at Best Buy or purchase it from a small, family owned shop specializing in musical instruments? |
I don't think you understood my post, and if you did you're twisting it into something you can easily argue with. So let me restate:
Trance is not popular anymore, and the only way not to realise that is to have no connection to the world it was formerly popular within. |
|
|
| IntoTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
Of course the percentages are different, there are far more kids starting threads about trance stuff than people who have been here a while discussing house with sax in it or why some new poker flat release is awesome. Does the fact that it occurs less somehow make it more tolerable? |
I am not addressing the idea of tolerability. Relative to the "rest" of the community, those who are listening to, and discussing trance music is much larger. This correlates indefinitely with your own observation of there being an increasingly higher rate of occurence, nullifying the strength of that particular argument.
If there are more people that are unhappy than are happy with the "war on terror", naturally there will be more vocalization of and attention upon the "unhappy" side. |
|
|
| IntoTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I don't think you understood my post, and if you did you're twisting it into something you can easily argue with. So let me restate:
Trance is not popular anymore, and the only way not to realise that is to have no connection to the world it was formerly popular within. |
What evidence do you have that states that trance is no longer popular? Are you not posting on "trance"addict.com? Is there some kind of statistic or research that says "Since 2001 or 2002, the self-ascribed "Golden Age" of Trance, amounts of listeners has dropped?"
Are you not among those who agrees that a mainstream, popularization of trance, which is apparently occuring as we speak, would be destructive to the genre? Does the acceptance of this statement (mainstream "popularity") as fact not destroy the argument (no longer popular whatsoever) you have just tried to make? |
|
|
| Paradox Lost |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
I'll agree, but on every side.
I posted a thread on a great producer from Montreal and only 2 people from there replied. Tiesto's new album gets 50 pages (including huge arguments and flame wars)...who is to blame? |
It's not necessarily a matter of blame. I doubt you'll find many who will claim that Tiesto is more obscure than the Poker Flat label, and despite the intense and large scale flames that the big Dutch acts receive in almost every thread that bears their name (including many that don't), look at the top 5 in this year's TA top DJ's poll. It's simply a matter of numbers.
This also accounts largely for the lack of activity in your above mentioned thread, and although many are simply too closed minded to even give this producer (who was it, by the way?) a fair chance, I'm also sure that a number simply don't identify with this artist- this doesn't necessarily amount to closed mindedness. |
|
|
| IntoTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by Paradox Lost
It's not necessarily a matter of blame. I doubt you'll find many who will claim that Tiesto is more obscure than the Poker Flat label, and despite the intense and large scale flames that the big Dutch acts receive in almost every thread that bears their name (including many that don't), look at the top 5 in this year's TA top DJ's poll. It's simply a matter of numbers.
This also accounts largely for the lack of activity in your above mentioned thread, and although many are simply too closed minded to even give this producer (who was it, by the way?) a fair chance, I'm also sure that a number simply don't identify with this artist- this doesn't necessarily amount to closed mindedness. |
Agreed. |
|
|
| nefardec |
| quote: | | I feel like it is my duty to write this. To inform you all, from an objective point of view, how absolutely ridiculous you have all become. |
this is where you failed
objective...what pretense in every post you've made here!
:rolleyes:
edit -
| quote: | | I have rarely participated in any formal discussion on these boards |
please feel free to participate on such a basis in the future |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
What evidence do you have that states that trance is no longer popular? Are you not posting on "trance"addict.com? Is there some kind of statistic or research that says "Since 2001 or 2002, the self-ascribed "Golden Age" of Trance, amounts of listeners has dropped?"
|
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. |
|
|
| nefardec |
| quote: | | And the likelihood is that when this eventually happens, out in Chicago you won't even realise. |
*cues up Phuture - Acid Tracks* :p |
|
|
| Ishkur |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
What is wrong with allowing Trance to gain a foothold with the rest of the more popular music genres? Would this foothold not LEAD to more expansion and progress within the genre once a certain standard has been established?
|
no.
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
What evidence do you have that states that trance is no longer popular? |
I think the purest evidence is the rise of the fraternal nomenclature "electronic dance music" at the precise time that trance became a thoroughly uncool word to say around the trend-seeking masses.
The biggest DJs are not called trance DJs and haven't been for several years, and you'll struggle to find the word anywhere near their grotesquely narcissistic flyers, posters and CD releases (except for Armins ASOT, but that's about it). Their promoters, labels and marketing handlers all call them dance DJs, and that's the way their music is packaged to the public. |
|
|
|
|
