|
1999 Trance [Re-creation] (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Subtle |
There are tons of 1999 trance sounding tracks still being made and has been the last ten years, its just that nobody cares much about them.
The trance from 1999 was a NEW sound at the time, which everyone remembers and those who listened to it back then will feel a certain nostalgia about the tracks.
The sound is dated, and the time of trance classics are over.. hardly any track will ever really get that status anymore, trance 10 years ago was about invention, none of the producers knew exactly what music to make, they just made music they thought was good or whatever,
THAT is the big difference between then and now, producers had a totally open mind when making new music, while now producers almost always has a reference sound in their mind that they want make.
Which leads to alot of tracks sounding like good or bad copies of each other.. and add the fact that tracks needs to be "club worthy" for a DJ to even touch them, makes it all more trickier to get a certain old school sound out there. |
|
|
| Floorfiller |
what do you notice when you listen to each of these tracks? they all have their own personality. they don't all have super saws or similar breakdowns. all you have to do to make music like this is start with interesting sounds and don't follow other people's "production tips"...
i'll give you a perfect example.
since you were looking for feedback on tracks in that other thread, i took a look at your label site because i was too lazy to download the set haha :p.
i can hear the time and effort in all of the productions...there are some beautiful sounds in there, but all of the productions have this really polished sheen over them that kind of detracts from them. it takes away their individuality.
also listen to a lot of the key elements of the tracks like percussion, bassline, etc. i really don't hear significant differences from track to track again contributing to a samey feel. check out these old school examples:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nuvwCzeJ7E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQcx1gWOhmM
is there anything similar about these two tracks other than they are both great? not really. They are both very distinctive, the second you hear one most people that are familiar with these years will be able to identify them...
you can tell listening to the samples on olympik records that all of these people have a very similar approach to music, not just style, but the actual production techniques. because we all like to discuss production and talk about making that "ideal kick" or "perfect hi hats" we end up doing the same things where the real beauty in music is the variety.
each track needs to have it's own identity, it's own characteristic sound and you can't do that if you approach mastering or general production the same everytime. every song is a new project and has it's own challenges, you can't apply the same formula time and time again.
i really think that is a downside to forums like this sometimes. people expect to learn some mystical secret like use this compression setting or sidechain your bassline bla bla bla. if we all approach production the same then we all make the same sounding tracks. i believe the seasoned pros don't give out more advice because they realize that there isn't that formula and that it varies. it may be frustrating for people that are trying to learn, but that's the way it is...
i really hope this post is recieved the right way and isn't taken as putting down your work. i really admire people that are out there trying to make their dreams happen. i hope to start a little label of my own someday. i'm just trying to give a nice solid opinion on what i think is hurting that chance at making a really special song. i would give the same advice to anyone that wants to make music. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| ^ Great post. I love those tracks, too, especially "Netherworld." |
|
|
| jupiterone |
| quote: | Originally posted by flutlicht junky
All aboard who's coming aboard!!!
Next stop Crasher when PVD first drops For An Angel :toothless
 |
looks like my new midi controller for ableton |
|
|
| SGL |
| Stephen, check your pm |
|
|
| Stephen Wiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by Floorfiller
what do you notice when you listen to each of these tracks? they all have their own personality. they don't all have super saws or similar breakdowns. all you have to do to make music like this is start with interesting sounds and don't follow other people's "production tips"...
i'll give you a perfect example.
since you were looking for feedback on tracks in that other thread, i took a look at your label site because i was too lazy to download the set haha :p.
i can hear the time and effort in all of the productions...there are some beautiful sounds in there, but all of the productions have this really polished sheen over them that kind of detracts from them. it takes away their individuality.
also listen to a lot of the key elements of the tracks like percussion, bassline, etc. i really don't hear significant differences from track to track again contributing to a samey feel. check out these old school examples:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nuvwCzeJ7E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQcx1gWOhmM
is there anything similar about these two tracks other than they are both great? not really. They are both very distinctive, the second you hear one most people that are familiar with these years will be able to identify them...
you can tell listening to the samples on olympik records that all of these people have a very similar approach to music, not just style, but the actual production techniques. because we all like to discuss production and talk about making that "ideal kick" or "perfect hi hats" we end up doing the same things where the real beauty in music is the variety.
each track needs to have it's own identity, it's own characteristic sound and you can't do that if you approach mastering or general production the same everytime. every song is a new project and has it's own challenges, you can't apply the same formula time and time again.
i really think that is a downside to forums like this sometimes. people expect to learn some mystical secret like use this compression setting or sidechain your bassline bla bla bla. if we all approach production the same then we all make the same sounding tracks. i believe the seasoned pros don't give out more advice because they realize that there isn't that formula and that it varies. it may be frustrating for people that are trying to learn, but that's the way it is...
i really hope this post is recieved the right way and isn't taken as putting down your work. i really admire people that are out there trying to make their dreams happen. i hope to start a little label of my own someday. i'm just trying to give a nice solid opinion on what i think is hurting that chance at making a really special song. i would give the same advice to anyone that wants to make music. |
I appreciate the opinion and agree with most of it. I've used the term "formulaic" for years and usually in a negative context when describing the current "State of Trance!" (thanks Armin). I do think you're doing Olympik's music a bit of unjust by painting a broad brush after hearing only MySpace clips. You have to realize that I'm working with what is available to me (and working hard might I add), and considering where dance music is I'm extremely pleased with every single track I have signed. I'm even more pleased when I take a step back and look at what I have (or don't have...*A pile of money and tradition* ) to work with.
Do I wish I could wake up in the mornings and review a ton of tracks that had the 99 sound instead? Yes, but that's just not where music is right now. Maybe if I owned some empire label I could dictate and grab any 99 sounding track I want (yes, they are out there) but I don't and I can't. Again, I'm very pleased with what I have and the label is much further along at this point than I anticipated. |
|
|
| Stephen Wiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
There are tons of 1999 trance sounding tracks still being made and has been the last ten years, its just that nobody cares much about them.
The trance from 1999 was a NEW sound at the time, which everyone remembers and those who listened to it back then will feel a certain nostalgia about the tracks.
The sound is dated, and the time of trance classics are over.. hardly any track will ever really get that status anymore, trance 10 years ago was about invention, none of the producers knew exactly what music to make, they just made music they thought was good or whatever,
THAT is the big difference between then and now, producers had a totally open mind when making new music, while now producers almost always has a reference sound in their mind that they want make.
Which leads to alot of tracks sounding like good or bad copies of each other.. and add the fact that tracks needs to be "club worthy" for a DJ to even touch them, makes it all more trickier to get a certain old school sound out there. |
I agree with most of your post here except for the first line and I think that may just be a subjective opinion. Show me some tracks produced in the last 5 years that has the 99 sound to it that also is very, very good. Good enough to be blended into the tracks I posted in the original thread. I'll be shocked if you can find even one. And please don't think supersaw and snare rolls when you think 99 ;) - That's not what it was about. It was all about the blending of soul, electronica, and melody.
You are completely correct about the sound sounding "dated" - But does that really mean anything? Beyond fads, what does a songs date of creation have to do with anything? I can't speak for everybody here, but when listening to other genres that I personally like (Rock, Classical) I don't care or even know when most of it was made. Using classical as an example is unfair because it's really not made beyond film scores, but my favorite bands are the Red Hot Chili Peppers, Nirvana, and the singer Bjork. My favorite songs by them were produced long before 1999. (thank god, today's production of "rock" music is laughable) - If what came to your brain after reading my past two sentences is "EDM is different. It doesn't work like that." then that is EXACTLY the mind-set problems this genre is facing right now.
I want to go back to your post again. I agree 200% about producers not setting boundaries or having a rulebook. I'm personally very aware of not falling into this trap, and actually encourage my artists to push the envelop frequently (Ask them, they post on here.)
I think the idea of trying to establish rules and such is what has created this formulaic garbage that has just continued to recycle itself and we're now at a point where even the most faithful of Trance are starting to question it. I've always said, when discussing fads (trying to explain to my co-owners that isn't gonna last), that when you wash everything away it's house, trance, and a little dnb. I'm really starting to wonder if its not house, a little trance, and a little dnb. Been preaching this to them for years and watching the downfall of Electro has been pleasing to say the least. Now I'm just waiting for all the Justice spin offs to die :clown:
But yea, you're right about the artist approach back then. I'm not sure if I would say they didn't know what they were doing but they for sure did not start a project thinking there is no way I can complete this without side chaining my bass lines. (Yes, I know SC wasn't available then) |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Stephen Wiley
I've always said, when discussing fads (trying to explain to my co-owners that isn't gonna last), that when you wash everything away it's house, trance, and a little dnb. |
Techno is here to stay as well. Been around since the '80s. ;) |
|
|
| Stephen Wiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by SGL
Stephen, check your pm |
Nothing there....maybe email me? [email protected] |
|
|
| cronodevir |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKrKPfJIBK4
If someone made that today, people would call it atrocious. Despite the fact that this song is, in every way, better than any track commercially released in the past 5 years.
And between this track and the latest ASOT or what ever garbage there is, I see an army of amateur music.
I think people changed their outlook on producing trance because they don't like real trance. They don't like repetition or melody. And that is what trance is. If you don't have a melody that loops for 5 minutes with an lfo, without any events, breaks downs or what ever...then you don't have trance. |
|
|
| cronodevir |
I think I'm going to make a classic trance track like this. In 2009 its not the hardest thing in the world. Though I don't have access to hardware, so it will be a bit hard. I'll post it when I am done, might take me all day. :D
It will have that Spicelab or Dance2Trance feel hopefully. |
|
|
|
|
