|
My Progressive Trance Retrospective 1997-2000 (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| SPANIARD |
Listened to part 2 and it kicked me bum  |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
I listened to these while working on a corpus linguistics project, so my attention was not fully on them, which should be kept in mind regarding these comments.
I enjoyed this as much as I expected to. I think you did a very good job of avoiding the Sasha & Diggers progressive sound which tends to dominate retrospectives of this era. Not that there's anything wrong with the Sasha & Diggers sound, but it was nice to hear a set from this era that didn't sound like it wanted to be in Twilo.
What I didn't really get was a sense of structure. As I've said, I wasn't listening closely, but aside from the second part feeling a bit more energetic than the first part I didn't feel like the set went from a start to a finish or built up to anything. An example is how you used the Tilt track early in the second half. This is probably the definitive monstrous breakdown in all of progressive trance, and such a massive build and pay-off, for me, wants to be more of a climactic moment. You dropped this very early in the set, after only about 12 minutes of groove, which isn't very much over a 140 minute set.
That said, I don't think a lack of structure (if that's actually the case) harmed the set very much. It was still great stuff to listen to, and aside from the occasional error the mixing did the job perfectly well. |
|
|
| Sand Leaper |
Firstly, thanks to all of you for listening and giving me feedback. It is much appreciated, as I put quite a bit of effort into this one.
| quote: | Originally posted by montana
i think the only transition that bugged me was the mix out of the big c remix of floribunda, it worked but also not, it killed alot of the vibe building with it. |
I agree with this. I wanted to wind down the set after Floribunda, but following it up with Crash makes it wind down a bit too quickly.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
What I didn't really get was a sense of structure. As I've said, I wasn't listening closely, but aside from the second part feeling a bit more energetic than the first part I didn't feel like the set went from a start to a finish or built up to anything. An example is how you used the Tilt track early in the second half. This is probably the definitive monstrous breakdown in all of progressive trance, and such a massive build and pay-off, for me, wants to be more of a climactic moment. You dropped this very early in the set, after only about 12 minutes of groove, which isn't very much over a 140 minute set.
|
This, however, I have to say I disagree with. The main reason for that is that I don't see I Dream as a climactic track at all, despite its mega breakdown (especially when you compare it to tunes I DID use for the climax in this set). The way I see it, the tune can only really be used in two ways without flatlining your whole set: either at the very end as a firm period (like Sasha did on GU San Francisco), or at the very beginning to mark the start of a phase in the set, which is what I did.
Otherwise, I personally felt that the structure is quite well defined, getting gradually lighter and more driving before hitting its peak with Air and Take Me Up. But if the general sentiment from people who download the set is the same as yours, I guess I'd better get back to the drawing board. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| As I say, I was working while listening so my attention wasn't rapt. I have personally used I Dream as an opening track, starting it in the breakdown along with some moody ambient as an intro, so I understand what you're saying, but I think the use of a fairly long intro track before it lessened the effect of using it as a piece of punctuation or grand opening. |
|
|
| Sand Leaper |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I have personally used I Dream as an opening track, starting it in the breakdown along with some moody ambient as an intro, so I understand what you're saying, but I think the use of a fairly long intro track before it lessened the effect of using it as a piece of punctuation or grand opening. |
Yeah, I can't argue with that. Using both Z2 and I Dream to achieve that effect is definitely a bit too much.
The perfectionist part of me wants to just redo the whole set now, but I think the set ultimately doesn't suffer too much from the two issues brought up so far. |
|
|
| Unique2701 |
| I mainly listened to the 2nd part, which won't be a surprise to you I guess. Really enjoyed that one a lot :) What is the intro track? I love that one. I do agree with Montana on Floribunda though it's one of my favorite tracks. Mixing is good, with a few exceptions. Not much to add, just good ! |
|
|
| Sand Leaper |
| quote: | Originally posted by Unique2701
I mainly listened to the 2nd part, which won't be a surprise to you I guess. Really enjoyed that one a lot :) What is the intro track? I love that one. |
Thanks. That's the second half of Frontside - Dammerung. I split the set in the middle of it. You really should give part 1 a go as well, though. It gives part 2 a lot more context. |
|
|
| sunsurge |
Yep, this looks great, yep.
Will let you know my thoughts, but can't fault the tracklist really! |
|
|
| Sand Leaper |
| quote: | Originally posted by palm
thought i bump this. been listening on repeat a few days as my music library is on an external disk and not connected beacuse im fixing my livingroom, with this two sets in the background. its ing awesome. alot of stuff i havent heard before and it sounds fresh! one bad transition and one bad pitching (too much too fast so it sounds false), rest ispure class. u from norway btw?
does this set exists as one file only btw? i like both parts especialy late part1 and early part2 so like the mid part of everything is class. |
Cheers, glad you liked it.
The set does exist as one file. I have a feeling that listening to the entire set in one go will make the issue SYSTEM-J pointed out seem a lot less prevalent, as it provides a lot more context than putting on Part 2 straight away.
I'll try to upload the whole big file when I get home, but I can't promise anything. The wireless connection I have in my current apartment is ridiculously poor. If it doesn't work, you'll have to wait until I move back home next week.
And yes, I am from Norway (Kristiansand to be exact). I'm currently taking my internship in NYC, hence my location. |
|
|
| Sand Leaper |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sand Leaper
I'll try to upload the whole big file when I get home, but I can't promise anything. The wireless connection I have in my current apartment is ridiculously poor. If it doesn't work, you'll have to wait until I move back home next week. |
Voila: http://www.zshare.net/audio/593687435b022295/ |
|
|
| Sand Leaper |
| quote: | Originally posted by palm
think about pitching issues next time though, i have to skip those two tracks each time. |
Which two tracks? |
|
|
| Sand Leaper |
| quote: | Originally posted by palm
in pt2 at 34-35 mins and the next track 39-40. its REALLY terrible, i hate pitch shifting, ud be better of doing that in a track with less melody if u absolutely have to do it. |
I presume you're talking about Rush and Talkin'.
While I agree that the shifting is noticeable if you pay close enough attention, I cannot for the life of me see how you could find it so disturbing that you have to SKIP the tunes altogether. Firstly, neither Rush nor Talkin' are particularly melodic tracks. Secondly, the shifting is done in short bursts spread out over a short period of time during the intro of both tracks, not in big and glaringly obvious pitch bends during the busiest part of the tunes, which is what you're making it sound like.
But either way, if more people have as big an issue as you have with this, I will take it into account. |
|
|
|
|
