|
Trance is fading, My take on things (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| HeLLScreaM |
i can see where this guy is coming from with his post. he's clearly not a regular poster here...and he enjoys trance. so he probably thought it would be a good idea to post his opinion on trance on the tranceaddict forum. surely enough, most of you don't fall under a trance addict classification.
that's fine. but i'm with him on this one. after listening to many other genres including mainstream hip-hop, rock, all the different types of edm, i think trance is probably the most genuinely versatile. of course, i speak of all "subgenres" within trance in combination. which is another topic that pisses me off as well but i'll save that when someone makes a good thread on that to post about.
fact of the matter is - trance still does speak to some of us. and though some of you may have "grown out" of trance, some of us still enjoy the music and don't bash on it. please, stop effectively sucking that enjoyment out of us :tongue2 |
|
|
| elFreak |
| quote: | Originally posted by mehta
Not a fan of kompakt?
I will hit you up with a list of names & some mixes to check out soon. Promise. You might call it melodic techno or something. Who knows. |
i am a fan of kompakt, but i have heard the argument of minimal trance used in respect to it before, and the argument has always been false.
i look forward to seeing if you can prove me wrong. |
|
|
| mehta |
cool. let's try just one track at first and see what you'd call it.
Alex Millan - Arpegia |
|
|
| nefardec |
| quote: | Originally posted by mehta
|
mehta,
dub's biggest influence is the revolution that came with the use of the studio console mixer as an instrument. this is the backbone of all electronic music we have today.
the processing and production techniques are the most important aspect of electronic music, not the form.
also all looping can basically be traced back to early dub tape experiments. (cage notwithstanding)
again i'm not talking about musical form, i'm talking purely in terms of technique, because the history of electronic music is at its core a history of technology
dub is a verb, it is a technique! even in terms of reggae it only refers to the processed b-sides and versions of records, it's not a real genre. there's no dub techno, there is techno with dub production techniques and aesthetics |
|
|
| mehta |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
mehta,
dub's biggest influence is the revolution that came with the use of the studio console mixer as an instrument. this is the backbone of all electronic music we have today.
the processing and production techniques are the most important aspect of electronic music, not the form.
also all looping can basically be traced back to early dub tape experiments. (cage notwithstanding)
again i'm not talking about musical form, i'm talking purely in terms of technique, because the history of electronic music is at its core a history of technology
dub is a verb, it is a technique! even in terms of reggae it only refers to the processed b-sides and versions of records, it's not a real genre. there's no dub techno, there is techno with dub production techniques and aesthetics |
Cool. I'll admit that I troll a bit in order to get people to post meaty tidbits like this.
I actually disagree that the production techniques are more important than the forms and grooves when we are making dance music. |
|
|
| elFreak |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
mehta,
dub's biggest influence is the revolution that came with the use of the studio console mixer as an instrument. this is the backbone of all electronic music we have today.
the processing and production techniques are the most important aspect of electronic music, not the form.
also all looping can basically be traced back to early dub tape experiments. (cage notwithstanding)
again i'm not talking about musical form, i'm talking purely in terms of technique, because the history of electronic music is at its core a history of technology
dub is a verb, it is a technique! even in terms of reggae it only refers to the processed b-sides and versions of records, it's not a real genre. there's no dub techno, there is techno with dub production techniques and aesthetics |
mash up respekt brap! Zaggazaw. |
|
|
| elFreak |
| quote: | Originally posted by mehta
Cool. I'll admit that I troll a bit in order to get people to post meaty tidbits like this.
I actually disagree that the production techniques are more important than the forms and grooves when we are making dance music. |
without the technique there would be no grooves to be had;)
chicken or the egg?
edit: there is nothing remotely trance about the track you posted, but then again the samples around are quite short. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by mehta
Don't worry mang, trance is pretty much the newest genre of music on the planet. It takes a while for stuff to become stable. |
Jungle is newer. Dubstep is considerably newer.
| quote: | Originally posted by mehta
what differentiates trance is that it takes from everything and doesn't give a about defining itself. |
Actually, that's progressive house. The fact you said progressive could fit into many other genres is proof of this- progressive has always been about genre infusion. There has been progressive at every tempo from 120 to 135+, and it has at one point or another taken from almost every other style going. By comparison, trance hardly takes from anything.
| quote: | Originally posted by Darkarbiter
Minimal 98?
Progressive 95? |
Progressive is just as old as trance- Leftfield's Not Forgotten and React 2 Rhythm's Rhythm Addiction both from 1990. Minimal is at least as old as 1993- Plastikman's first 12" came out then. |
|
|
| elFreak |
| dan bell also came out with an ep in 1992 that although was referred to as glitch, is considered one of the first "minimal" tracks...that is if you can consider having a first track in minimal because it is more of a modus operandi than a genre to me. |
|
|
| mehta |
| quote: | Originally posted by elFreak
without the technique there would be no grooves to be had;)
chicken or the egg? |
You are somewhat right in that it's impossible for humans to accurately reproduce electronic rhythms, but also wrong in the sense that the original dance grooves were always created by human drummers. It's only in the last 30 or so years that machines have replaced us in this respect.
Thanks for humouring me guys! it means a lot that you aren't totally dismissive.
and elfreak, if we don't get to it in this session I'll start a minimal trance thread in the next while with audio clips and stuff. and right on about minimal being a modus operandi more than a genre, I'm with you on that 100%
edit @ system-j: right on about jungle and dubstep, my disclaimer of "pretty much" was intentional. I tend to hyperbolize in order to attempt a point. and I agree with you about "progressive" - it's a massive genre, but it seems like a lot of people tend to pigeonhole it a bit based on current trends |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by elFreak
dan bell also came out with an ep in 1992 that although was referred to as glitch, is considered one of the first "minimal" tracks...that is if you can consider having a first track in minimal because it is more of a modus operandi than a genre to me. |
Many genre theorists would say that a genre is a modus operandi.
| quote: | Originally posted by mehta
I agree with you about "progressive" - it's a massive genre, but it seems like a lot of people tend to pigeonhole it a bit based on current trends |
This is true and it pisses me off. Because it's progressive house people see it as a sub-genre, but I'd argue that progressive has done more than enough to justify being a genre in its own right. |
|
|
| elFreak |
| let me rephrase...minimalism is not only applicable to music. To me it is still techno and i don't class it as a sub genre, that is solely my opinion. |
|
|
|
|
