|
Is Deep House really Tech House? (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| julien2 |
| Nope (To the deep house question, not the pinocchio one, although I don't know) |
|
|
| denys envy |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
No, it isn't. |
|
|
|
| denys envy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ben Brown
does pinocchio have wooden balls? |
he doesn't have any balls until he becomes a real boy imo. |
|
|
| Project-K |
| It's just common sense. tech house is going to have a stronger techno influence. |
|
|
| denys envy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Project-K
It's just common sense. tech house is going to have a stronger techno influence. |
you're going to find songs with elements and influences of both.
but strictly speaking there is a line between deep and tech... there's a line between everything, no matter how vague.
one is capable of playing tech and deep house and making it work well together. |
|
|
| Guest |
| quote: | Originally posted by Project-K
It's just common sense. tech house is going to have a stronger techno influence. |
that's what I always thought. |
|
|
| PETRAN |
I think that, what is refered as "tech-house" today is not the same as to what was refered as "tech-house" a few years back. I mean go to beatport and half of the releases are called "Tech-house". Today, if a house tune has a bleep or some mechanical sound it automatically becomes "Tech". It maybe is. Genres are very relative and with all this "minimal", "electro" and whatever else there is out there, sometimes it is difficult to diferrentiate. i remember though, that,in 2002, for example many of the artists that made "tech-house", were also categorized as "deep-house" as well. Jay Tripwire, Eddie Richards, the stuff Terry Francis played, The F-Communication label, Alexi Delano, Circulation, The Timewriter, Harris, Gideon Jackson and many others actually used to make-and play- both.
In reality,the "deep/tech house" coming from the end of 90s and first quarter of 00s was nothing more than house music inspired by the original Chicago house and Detroit techno of the 80s and 90s, albeit-with modern production techniques. Both used deep off-chords, heavy low-end, tribal and funky drums, pianos, the characteristic detroit strings, stabs of distorted and echoed soulfull vocals etc...From that point of view, both "Genres" were quantitavily and not qualitatively different. As a result, deep house represented the more chilled, groovy and full sound appropriate for lounge-bars, whereas tech-house represented the more up-beat, fast and stripped-down version of this sound suitable for small, dark, sweaty clubs. That of course doesn't mean that "Deep" and "tech-house" artists were always the one and the same, but in many cases were.
Genre names are made by people though and music itself evolves very fast (between genre-diffusion). Hence, in the same way that trance today has nothing to do with the 93 trance, today's (or tomorrows) "tech-house" may have nothing to do with the older (deep/)"Tech-house" sound. |
|
|
| denys envy |
genre differentiations/arguments will really get us (anyone really) nowhere.
there's too much crossover to account for. |
|
|
| Kris G |
| Petran, best post i have read in 08, well done |
|
|
| bas |
| I think they can be pretty interchangeable. |
|
|
| denys envy |
| quote: | Originally posted by bas
I think they can be pretty interchangeable. |
ahh there's the word i'm looking for. nice one bas. |
|
|
| Ted Promo |
| No. Deep house doesn't have much if any techno-sounding elements. It's more funk/groove based. |
|
|
|
|
