|
On the Trance Listener (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Spacey Orange |
IntoTrance chill out dood.
no one's rants ours on ta ever solved any problem whatsoever. i doubt your's will either. g'night |
|
|
| distant |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
Who is to determine between "dimwitted public" and "knowledgeable private"? |
If I had my way, I'd round up all the Armins, Tiestos and Sean Tyases and have them shot. Have trance start from scratch. The people who stay are the ones that truly love the music.
;) |
|
|
| Paradox Lost |
Into, in the spirit of illustrating the various ad hominem arguments leveraged against you, you have succumbed to what a number of others do in this type of scenario and commit them yourself.
That said, I feel a number of people have advanced thoughtful responses to the contentions your formally laid out at the beginning of this thread, and I don't quite see how you dismantled System-J's arguments regarding his position that Trance simply doesn't sell on a significant enough scale. After some apparent misunderstandings, he provided and extensively substantiated explication of what he was attempting to say, of which I have yet to see you respond to.
On that note, you have also yet to respond to my initial response to your arguments. Although I may have done an effective job of summarizing one of your premises, I was nevertheless attacking it, which has thus far remained unanswered.
There are some additional points I would like to respond to, but considering the level of activity that has occurred thus far, I will content myself with just that one. |
|
|
| nefardec |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
It is merely objective because it is an outside point of view, void of any side taking.
You can compare it to the objective or perception of a learned child, just now experiencing the negatives of a communist regime. |
old alt? or old dolt? |
|
|
| IntoTrance |
Absolutely incredible.
Wordy? No.
I use words to express my ideas to a perfect T.
Go to school, learn how to express yourself. After that, we'll talk.
I'm still interested in hearing "CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS" against or for my points with regard to the material within, outside of my apparent "character."
Apparently that is too hard for most of the people that have come under "attack" by my points to comprehend and handle. |
|
|
| ToxicGreenWaste |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
Who is to determine between "dimwitted public" and "knowledgeable private"? |
Well, the "dimwitted public" is us and the "knowledgeable private" is you! Isn't that obvious? |
|
|
| IntoTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by ToxicGreenWaste
Well, the "dimwitted public" is us and the "knowledgeable private" is you! Isn't that obvious? |
I'm glad we agree.
Take your sarcasm elsewhere. It is ineffective and unwanted here. |
|
|
| IntoTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by Paradox Lost
Into, in the spirit of illustrating the various ad hominem arguments leveraged against you, you have succumbed to what a number of others do in this type of scenario and commit them yourself.
That said, I feel a number of people have advanced thoughtful responses to the contentions your formally laid out at the beginning of this thread, and I don't quite see how you dismantled System-J's arguments regarding his position that Trance simply doesn't sell on a significant enough scale. After some apparent misunderstandings, he provided and extensively substantiated explication of what he was attempting to say, of which I have yet to see you respond to.
On that note, you have also yet to respond to my initial response to your arguments. Although I may have done an effective job of summarizing one of your premises, I was nevertheless attacking it, which has thus far remained unanswered.
There are some additional points I would like to respond to, but considering the level of activity that has occurred thus far, I will content myself with just that one. |
What, specifically, are you asking or pointing out? |
|
|
| ToxicGreenWaste |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
Absolutely incredible.
Wordy? No.
I use words to express my ideas to a perfect T.
Go to school, learn how to express yourself. After that, we'll talk.
I'm still interested in hearing "CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS" against or for my points with regard to the material within, outside of my apparent "character."
Apparently that is too hard for most of the people that have come under "attack" by my points to comprehend and handle. |
Didn't you start off by saying that most of the people on TA are ridiculous?
Hey, wow, I can tell you've had you some education. College? Fancy. |
|
|
| Paradox Lost |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
What, specifically, are you asking or pointing out? |
I would imagine that my points and requests are quite apparent, but here's the nuts and bolts:
I made some arguments- you remarked upon them, but didn't actually respond to the points that were made.
You claim to have 'dismantled' System-J's arguments, despite being silent upon his having laid them out fully. I'm not saying you need to respond, but it would certainly add some credibility to your purported 'dismantling.'
You also produce an across the board accusation concerning a stated lack of constructive arguments that have come your way, but there are a number of them that are certainly worth mentioning, which makes your reactions throughout the past couple of pages somewhat curious. |
|
|
| IntoTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by Paradox Lost
Into, in the spirit of illustrating the various ad hominem arguments leveraged against you, you have succumbed to what a number of others do in this type of scenario and commit them yourself.
That said, I feel a number of people have advanced thoughtful responses to the contentions your formally laid out at the beginning of this thread, and I don't quite see how you dismantled System-J's arguments regarding his position that Trance simply doesn't sell on a significant enough scale. After some apparent misunderstandings, he provided and extensively substantiated explication of what he was attempting to say, of which I have yet to see you respond to.
On that note, you have also yet to respond to my initial response to your arguments. Although I may have done an effective job of summarizing one of your premises, I was nevertheless attacking it, which has thus far remained unanswered.
There are some additional points I would like to respond to, but considering the level of activity that has occurred thus far, I will content myself with just that one. |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
In respons to SYSTEM-J's final response up until now:
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 |
I guess you missed this?
| 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. |
|
|
|
|
|
