|
Electronic music: enjoyment by comparative perception?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Domesticated |
Nerfadec, JiveBoJingles, System-J, this one may interest you. It kind of follows on from the "auditory illusions" and "perceived complexity and polyrhythm" threads that were active recently.
I was listening to a mix I did today and came to a transition between two tracks later in the set where I had purposely switched the bass line quickly instead of slowly blending it, so as to achieve a sudden jump in energy.
It occurred the me that without the song preceding it, the track suddenly playing sounds rather sedate, but in this context seemed positively charged with energy. It was the comparison between the two that caused this. This "comparative perception" means things can appear vastly different from their true nature directly after hearing something else.
Then it occurred to me: isn't this what ALL electronic music is based on?
Consider these examples:
- Big breakdowns and soft melodies changing instantly to harsh, bass heavy beats to make a song feel energetic.
- Sudden element introduction after extremely repetitive periods to increase the impact of this element (you mentioned this the other day nerfardec, and I couldn't agree more)
- Sudden bass line change in a mix transition.
- Elements and basic structure of a song remain essentially the same the whole way through; interest is generated mostly through the way the elements sound in tandem with (or compared to) one another, rather than as stand alone elements such as in pop or rock music.
System-J, you mentioned the other day about electronica being composed "vertically" rather than "horizontally" and this ties in with the above statement very much. Again, I strongly agree with you.
- In a broader sense of "comparison", certain over-used sounds (i.e trance's "supersaw") become extremely tired after a while, and by comparison, newer sounds that have not been heard before sound amazing, even if six months down the track that sound has been done to death and to re-visit the original track you liked so much bores you to tears!
So, is electronic music's appeal generated almost wholly by comparative perception of different sounds, both within songs and between two different songs, to create a bigger impact?
Discuss. |
|
|
| Domesticated |
| p.s has anyone ever seen one of those DJs where every single bass line seems literally twice as big as the last? Stacey Pullen for me. |
|
|
| Whirloop |
Dymamic changes creates a reaction - principle.
Still there are limits how much 'appeal' you can get out of the changes depending on what you do. The reviecers expectations are a complex thing you know. Human beings. |
|
|
| PETRAN |
| Yeah but doesn't this happen with a lot of music anyway? I mean, a lot of music is based on these temporal comparisons between various elements (and within the elements themselves e.g. the same organ could increases in volume and speed). |
|
|
| SMC |
| Dynamics and contrast have been around for a few hundred years. ;) |
|
|
| david.michael |
I thought it was fairly obvious that this is how things work. It's the whole idea of a DJ set, to me. A standalone track that may not do anything for me, can make a world of difference used in-context in a set.
That doesn't mean that music has to contrast against particular elements to be good music. But, the "comparative perception" thing definitely occurs, and I feel that it is a huge part of the appeal of EDM. |
|
|
| Whirloop |
| Or pop a pill and forget everything. |
|
|
| Surfmorworkless |
| Bump. Just because this is interesting. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
I was listening to a mix I did today and came to a transition between two tracks later in the set where I had purposely switched the bass line quickly instead of slowly blending it, so as to achieve a sudden jump in energy.
It occurred the me that without the song preceding it, the track suddenly playing sounds rather sedate, but in this context seemed positively charged with energy. It was the comparison between the two that caused this. This "comparative perception" means things can appear vastly different from their true nature directly after hearing something else.
Then it occurred to me: isn't this what ALL electronic music is based on? |
I'd say yes, but as others have pointed out you can make the case for almost all music as well. At the end of a day, there's nothing special about the notes in a melody, it's their position relative to the other notes that give them worth.
Certainly though, it's a crucial aspect of DJing which is perhaps overlooked by some people, especially bad DJs. Bad DJs will think that cramming as much good music into a set as possible is the end of it, but it's not so much about the track's quality as its properties relative to those around it. I'm sure everyone can think of a time they heard a track in a DJ set, a track that previously hadn't impressed them, and were blown away how much better it sounded in context. |
|
|
| daphunky1 |
Well often when I'm shopping for music, I can't justify purchasing a track that sounds rather boring, even if it sounds like it might interest me for a minute. This being because I do not DJ, and if I'm purchasing a full length track I want it to be a stand alone great track that I will get much value out of.
Techno tracks usually give me no stand alone value. But when mixed properly can give me that comparative perception that I can enjoy. Or is it just that I'm hearing it out louder and I'm not sober???
I have nothing else to say, except you're right. Yes, this is fundamentally how all music works, but especially in edm and that's why dj's create sets and transitions in many different ways. Don't dj's often raise the low's on the current track during a transition so that they can suddenly drop the low of the new track, causing that much more impact?
And about your comment "Sudden element introduction after extremely repetitive periods to increase the impact of this element" This is the exact reason why I have loved to many simple prog house tracks. After being hypnotized by some basic percussion and almost to the point of being bored, a little lead comes in, and the new simple melody comes with such impact and force, regardless of the fact that it's a small addition to the track. |
|
|
| diggerz |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
Nerfadec, JiveBoJingles, System-J, this one may interest you. It kind of follows on from the "auditory illusions" and "perceived complexity and polyrhythm" threads that were active recently.
I was listening to a mix I did today and came to a transition between two tracks later in the set where I had purposely switched the bass line quickly instead of slowly blending it, so as to achieve a sudden jump in energy.
It occurred the me that without the song preceding it, the track suddenly playing sounds rather sedate, but in this context seemed positively charged with energy. It was the comparison between the two that caused this. This "comparative perception" means things can appear vastly different from their true nature directly after hearing something else.
Then it occurred to me: isn't this what ALL electronic music is based on?
Consider these examples:
- Big breakdowns and soft melodies changing instantly to harsh, bass heavy beats to make a song feel energetic.
- Sudden element introduction after extremely repetitive periods to increase the impact of this element (you mentioned this the other day nerfardec, and I couldn't agree more)
- Sudden bass line change in a mix transition.
- Elements and basic structure of a song remain essentially the same the whole way through; interest is generated mostly through the way the elements sound in tandem with (or compared to) one another, rather than as stand alone elements such as in pop or rock music.
System-J, you mentioned the other day about electronica being composed "vertically" rather than "horizontally" and this ties in with the above statement very much. Again, I strongly agree with you.
- In a broader sense of "comparison", certain over-used sounds (i.e trance's "supersaw") become extremely tired after a while, and by comparison, newer sounds that have not been heard before sound amazing, even if six months down the track that sound has been done to death and to re-visit the original track you liked so much bores you to tears!
So, is electronic music's appeal generated almost wholly by comparative perception of different sounds, both within songs and between two different songs, to create a bigger impact?
Discuss. |
conclusion: too much time in your hands! |
|
|
| palm |
| simple: we wouldnt know good if there werent evil. |
|
|
|
|
