|
How was "old" progressive house produced? (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| MrJiveBoJingles |
Who does prog have now that can compare to Breeder, Bedrock, Tilt, Quivver, Oliver Lieb?
Eric Prydz? Uh huh. Right.
:stongue: |
|
|
| jupiterone |
| jbj, don't know if you remember, but do you still have that link to the youtube you posted of those trance producers filmed in their studios in the 90's, with the full mixing consoles and oldschool trackers? |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by jupiterone
jbj, don't know if you remember, but do you still have that link to the youtube you posted of those trance producers filmed in their studios in the 90's, with the full mixing consoles and oldschool trackers? |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfhVbHj4mPs |
|
|
| Sphereal |
| quote: | Originally posted by Eric J
Below is an interview with Sasha's production crew. These guys helped out Sasha create Involver. These are also a lot of the same guys that were instrumental in creating that 90's progressive house sound.
Anyway, there is a part of this interview where Charlie May and Duncan Forbes talk about trying to do everything with software and then deciding to go back to "the way we used to do it". For them, this meant digging out old analogue gear and sampling the out of it, running stuff through guitar pedals, just basically f**king up as much as possible. They talk about just hitting record and tweaking, then going back and picking out the "magic" moments. They talk about literally going through hours of audio looking for stuff.
I imagine this was pretty much par for the course back then. When I first started producing back in the mid 90's, all I had was a JV-1080, Proteus 2000 and a Virus B. Softsynths were basically a joke back then, so most of my first tracks were made by using this outboard hardware. MIDI it all up and play everything live. Multimbrality was pretty important back then, because each unit had to perform multiple parts.
http://www.solid-state-logic.com/users/all/sasha.asp |
Good info, thanks :-) |
|
|
| DjWoody |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
Those are from 2000s, not the '90s. ;) |
Yes, but the OP did say from the mid 90's to around 2002. ;) You guys probably missed that. lol Granted that Terry Grant song is from 2004-2005, but the Chilling Moments is from 2002. lol |
|
|
| palm |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
Who does prog have now that can compare to Breeder, Bedrock, Tilt, Quivver, Oliver Lieb?
Eric Prydz? Uh huh. Right.
:stongue: |
nothing wrong with eric, my number one favorit track is remixed by him (original producer Oliver Lieb of course).
Smoked - Metropolis |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
Who does prog have now that can compare to Breeder, Bedrock, Tilt, Quivver, Oliver Lieb?
Eric Prydz? Uh huh. Right.
:stongue: |
Eh... Sasha and Digweed are still around. And Breeder, Oliver Lieb and Tilt were not even remotely progressive house, they were basically trance producers. Not the force-fed epic trance sound of the time - hence why they were on the "Global Underground" labels - but the slightly older classic trance sound.
Prog today would be the likes of Steve Angello, Gui Boratto, Robert Babicz, Nic Fanciulli, Luke Fair... some of Danny Howells and Joris Voorn's stuff.
Lesser known producers - Soliquid, Nick Bugayev, Lindstrom, Chymera, etc.
And some of the DJs themselves do some great prog edits - Jody Wisternoff and Ricky Ryan to name two.
In my opinion, all every bit as good as those old-school producers (even though it's effectively a different genre). I really don't know how you can say what you just said with a straight face. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Eh... Sasha and Digweed are still around. And Breeder, Oliver Lieb and Tilt were not even remotely progressive house, they were basically trance producers. Not the force-fed epic trance sound of the time - hence why they were on the "Global Underground" labels - but the slightly older classic trance sound. |
I said "prog," not just prog house. Those guys made prog trance, which always shaded into prog house anyway in the late 1990s. Played by the same DJs as well.
;)
| quote: | | In my opinion, all every bit as good as those old-school producers (even though it's effectively a different genre). I really don't know how you can say what you just said with a straight face. |
Maybe I'm just going on a nostalgia trip, or the newer stuff is simply not to my taste. Don't get me wrong, I like the guys you listed, but to my ears they are definitely a step down. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| That sounds more like the techno-inflected prog being produced of late than the '90s stuff. Still a nice track, though. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
I said "prog," not just prog house. Those guys made prog trance, which always shaded into prog house anyway in the late 1990s. Played by the same DJs as well. |
You're confusing terms. And they are confusing, so I don't blame you, but "progressive trance" has nothing to do with "progressive house", and "prog" is a short form for "progressive", which is essentially downtempo/minimal/ambient progressive house.
I wish I were making this up, honestly, but it's the truth, so you're comparing apples and oranges here. "Progressive" or "prog" is not an umbrella term that encompasses every genre with the word "progressive" in it - that wouldn't make any sense, they are all so different. Nobody called trance "prog" during those days, in fact, nobody even called it "progressive trance", that term was coined in the very late '90s IIRC.
At the end of the day, the only really definitive thing one can say about "progressive" is that it's a bull buzzword that artists and labels have constantly misused to promote whatever music they wanted people to buy. Today, "progressive" usually means electronic music set somewhere around 120-130 BPM that isn't funky enough to sound like house.
| quote: | | Maybe I'm just going on a nostalgia trip, or the newer stuff is simply not to my taste. Don't get me wrong, I like the guys you listed, but to my ears they are definitely a step down. |
Again, comparing apples and oranges. Compared to the dark, repetitive, boring, and generally horrible prog of the early '00s, I'd say that what we have today is not just a step up, it's a few stories up. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
"prog" is a short form for "progressive", which is essentially downtempo/minimal/ambient progressive house. |
Says who? I have never even heard this before. :wtf:
| quote: | | I wish I were making this up, honestly, but it's the truth, so you're comparing apples and oranges here. "Progressive" or "prog" is not an umbrella term that encompasses every genre with the word "progressive" in it - that wouldn't make any sense, they are all so different. |
I am using it to talk about prog house and prog trance at the same time, that's it. This usage is not unusual or unique to me, it's very common, at least on this board, GU Board, and other dance music boards I have visited. Maybe you should visit MD some time?
| quote: | | Again, comparing apples and oranges. Compared to the dark, repetitive, boring, and generally horrible prog of the early '00s, I'd say that what we have today is not just a step up, it's a few stories up. |
Well, we agree, early 2000s prog house, the dark chugging style of Lawler and Digweed of the time, was not my favorite either. |
|
|
|
|
