|
Is Progressive House The new Trance? (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| kadomony |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
Still though, there is one Producer i hardly ever see mentioned that actually makes Progressive House as we know it, and thats Jerome Isma-Ae, his tracks are true Progressive House in my opinion.
Visit his myspace:
http://www.myspace.com/jeromejeeproductions
The track Five Five Zero really rocks this world. |
 |
|
|
| IpLaYWiTLiGhTs |
| quote: | Originally posted by PETRAN
"Progressive" the new "Trance"? Yeah thats what they were saying in 2001, 7 years ago! |
+1. Done and over with, sadly. |
|
|
| Paradox Lost |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
Well then hook me up with some examples. Most of what people on here seem to think is a shift in a producer's style seems more to me like them just adding a few in vogue sounds to their usual fare. I aint fooled. |
Ok- Shiloh?
I haven't been paying terribly close attention to their discography as of late, but I recall a more than subtle involvement with Electro House compared to the style of their output before around 2006 or so.
...plus, I remember someone on these forums making some remarks concerning how the TA forums played a large role in circulating their material well before they took up 'Electro garbage' (or something to that effct)...was that you? |
|
|
| Beat Blog |
| quote: | Originally posted by PETRAN
I don't understand this "prog" is the "new trance", "techno" is the new "prog" thing, what do we mean by that, that prog sounds like (older i guess?) trance and techno sounds like (older i guess?) prog? these new "pseudo-evolutions" are in peoples minds seriously. its just that people discover a Detroit-Techno producer such as Joris Voorn and probably say "wow, this is like the older proggy stuff i used t listen, OMG techno is so incredible right-now it must be the new progressive!" whereas the truth is that Joris Voorn plays the traditional early-90s Detroit sound albeit with modern production and has nothing to do with Sasha or Holden. People get bored, discover something that they like in a new genre (and this new genre may share some characteristics that they used to like in their older prefered genre, e.g. similar tempo or synth-lines)an baptize it as the "new something", incapable of understanding that it is their minds and not the music (genre) that perceives the "new" something.
Techno is always techno, Trance is always trance, and prog is...well...always prog, although "progressive" is over-used these says, and depending on the time period, this genre could actually refer to a lot of different things. Its just that when something in EDM becomes a "fashion", such as retro-electronic sounds, metallic glitches, farty basslines and whatever, then many producers-be it progressive, techno, house or even trance,are trying to integrate these "trendy" sounds to their own, more traditional sound. |
Well said. |
|
|
| n0bben |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
Well then hook me up with some examples. Most of what people on here seem to think is a shift in a producer's style seems more to me like them just adding a few in vogue sounds to their usual fare. I aint fooled.
|
Someone mentioned Luke Chable? Phil K? Vance Musgrove? Pretty much the entire Aussie prog crew really... |
|
|
| Shade |
| quote: | Originally posted by PETRAN
I don't understand this "prog" is the "new trance", "techno" is the new "prog" thing, what do we mean by that, that prog sounds like (older i guess?) trance and techno sounds like (older i guess?) prog? these new "pseudo-evolutions" are in peoples minds seriously. its just that people discover a Detroit-Techno producer such as Joris Voorn and probably say "wow, this is like the older proggy stuff i used t listen, OMG techno is so incredible right-now it must be the new progressive!" whereas the truth is that Joris Voorn plays the traditional early-90s Detroit sound albeit with modern production and has nothing to do with Sasha or Holden. People get bored, discover something that they like in a new genre (and this new genre may share some characteristics that they used to like in their older prefered genre, e.g. similar tempo or synth-lines)an baptize it as the "new something", incapable of understanding that it is their minds and not the music (genre) that perceives the "new" something.
Techno is always techno, Trance is always trance, and prog is...well...always prog, although "progressive" is over-used these says, and depending on the time period, this genre could actually refer to a lot of different things. Its just that when something in EDM becomes a "fashion", such as retro-electronic sounds, metallic glitches, farty basslines and whatever, then many producers-be it progressive, techno, house or even trance,are trying to integrate these "trendy" sounds to their own, more traditional sound. |
[/thread] |
|
|
| david.michael |
| quote: | Originally posted by PETRAN
I don't understand this "prog" is the "new trance", "techno" is the new "prog" thing, what do we mean by that, that prog sounds like (older i guess?) trance and techno sounds like (older i guess?) prog? these new "pseudo-evolutions" are in peoples minds seriously. its just that people discover a Detroit-Techno producer such as Joris Voorn and probably say "wow, this is like the older proggy stuff i used t listen, OMG techno is so incredible right-now it must be the new progressive!" whereas the truth is that Joris Voorn plays the traditional early-90s Detroit sound albeit with modern production and has nothing to do with Sasha or Holden. People get bored, discover something that they like in a new genre (and this new genre may share some characteristics that they used to like in their older prefered genre, e.g. similar tempo or synth-lines)an baptize it as the "new something", incapable of understanding that it is their minds and not the music (genre) that perceives the "new" something.
Techno is always techno, Trance is always trance, and prog is...well...always prog, although "progressive" is over-used these says, and depending on the time period, this genre could actually refer to a lot of different things. Its just that when something in EDM becomes a "fashion", such as retro-electronic sounds, metallic glitches, farty basslines and whatever, then many producers-be it progressive, techno, house or even trance,are trying to integrate these "trendy" sounds to their own, more traditional sound. |
u win thraed |
|
|
| Light The Fuse |
| i disagree with petran on this. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by PETRAN
Techno is always techno, Trance is always trance, and prog is...well...always prog, although "progressive" is over-used these says, and depending on the time period, this genre could actually refer to a lot of different things. |
That's because progressive house has actually progressed throughout its life-span. Depending on what year it was made, "progressive house" can sound very different. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
That's because progressive house has actually progressed throughout its life-span. Depending on what year it was made, "progressive house" can sound very different. |
If it doesnt sound different its not progressive. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
If it doesnt sound different its not progressive. |
Pretty much. |
|
|
| Kinezi |
| quote: | Originally posted by david.michael
u win thraed |
+1
I think PETRAN should join trancecritics.com crew.. I always like his recommendations and posts.. he is humble too and not a fake elitist prick like most of users in here. |
|
|
|
|
