Originally posted by nefardec
bands aren't genres.
that track was pop. obviously not everything that band does is pop.
That is a ing looped bagpipe sample, what is your point?
And either way, the only thing you would be proving is that one trance song out of thousands has a looped bagpipe sample.
Yeh, maybe it sounds commercial, but U2 also, even the Beatles sound like that.
quote:
Musicologists often identify the following characteristics as typical of the pop music genre:
-a focus on the individual song or singles, rather than on extended works or albums
-an aim of appealing to a general audience, rather than to a particular sub-culture or ideology
-an emphasis on craftsmanship rather than formal "artistic" qualities
-an emphasis on recording, production, and technology, over live performance
-a tendency to reflect existing trends rather than progressive developments
In that case you will need to look better at a band you don't know, cause the characteristics above cannot be concluded by listening one track I think.
Actually it doesn't say a lot about a track but more how they do their stuff.
The bagpipe is for sure not a trance element and defenitely borrowed.
By the way, you even didn't hear the second pipebags chord sample!!
Now you're gonna tell me this isn't trance, maybe that's true, but think away the vocals and listen closely....cheesy but...
nefardec
quote:
Originally posted by Trance-MB
Yeh, maybe it sounds commercial, but U2 also, even the Beatles sound like that.
I'm sorry, but you are so incredibly dense. I've explained my point quite clearly a few times now:
Bands are not genres.
I have never argued that 'kane' is a pop band, just that the track you posted was a pop track.
Bands can and do work with many different genres. For example, the Beatles wrote a ton of pop, but also rock and psychedelic rock. Genres are also not exclusive. Pop Rock is a fusion of pop and rock. (imagine that)
To prove your argument that ALL TRANCE MUSIC incorporates many genres, you post a youtube clip of ONE POP SONG, done by a band who makes a lot of rock music (as well as pop), and a clip of looped bagpipes overlaid onto a generic acid trance track.
So all you have actually proved is that it is possible to make a fusion pop-trance song, and to overlay bagpipes onto a trance song.
This says NOTHING of the trance genre as a whole.
saluyamo
quote:
Originally posted by paulandrews
That's weird because she also said this:
quote:
Originally said by Lady Gaga When you listen to a song like "LoveGame", is it communicating my soul to you? No. My music isn't me jerking my dick off all over a piano trying to feel something. I make soulless electronic pop. But when you're on Ecstasy in a nightclub grinding up against someone and my music comes on, you'll feel soul.
Thats great.
"I make soulless music, but if you're rolling it will have soul!" :stongue:
couch-potato
quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
you totally bought into her marketing ploy.
:p
avante garde art will never be accessible to the masses by definition. (that's what the phrase itself means.) Avant garde art is never 'normally' considered.
any claim to avant garde as a 'tradition' is also inherently disingenuous and meta-referential.
You are confusing 'avant-garde art' with 'pop' art. She is much more a warhol than a manzoni. And pop art was never concerned with 'highbrow', it was concerned with soup cans.
She may well truly believe that what she does is 'avant garde'. That's not for her to decide, but for history. What she is doing is using a postmodern idea of 'avant garde' as a marketing device and artistic license to suck.
Cmdr
quote:
Originally posted by StalkerElmo
So, I was wondering, how many of you people out there have the same type of disorder I do? I can't help but to listen to trance out of all the times I listen to music, which is pretty much 24/7.
I find it that, listeners of another genre tend to have more than just one favorite genre.
But for me, I can't seem to listen to anything else but trance. I don't know if only occurs with me, but I sure hope not! I do listen to other genres here and there, but for the most part, my iPod is 95% trance and I can't stop listening to it sometimes.. gees, what did I do to myself!?
I think trance in particular is an acquired taste, what I mean is I don't think most people will like trance for the very first time they hear it. But after enough treatments of the best songs that strongly represent our genre or whatnot, in the end it pulls through but the mark it leaves on the listener is tremendous I think.
Anyway, I want your thoughts on this. Now.
I am exactly like this. I've been into Trance for 10 years now. I have looked over the fence at other EDM genres, went to a PsyTrance event... didn't like it. Been to some House events and to Stereo... didn't really like it except when they had Trance artistes there like Markus Schultz. I experienced Carl Cox at SONA back in the day... it wasn't my kind of music but I was surprised... he made me dance still. I don't even like Progressive Trance too much.
But Trance is my true love. Melodic, Vocal, Euphoric and Epic... that's my variety right there. And I don't do drugs. I went to Trance Energy in Holland last year (OMG Wow!).
I even considered moving to Europe because there is so much House in North America. But I love Montreal too much and they have started to bring more Trance DJs here. I'll always support Trance.
Marcel Woods Friday night at Opera 22:00 - 03:00 :happy2:
So, the moral of the story is... you are not alone. And I won't even descend into debates about 'You have to move on... explore other genres, don't limit yourself blah blah'. I did try them out... and I don't like them. Have you ever tried to argue with someone about why they like red? Ah.. no, there are many colours out there... you need to try them out blah blah... it's pointless.
A preference is a preference.
Lews
The moral of the story is: you're pathetic.
Cmdr
quote:
Originally posted by Lews
The moral of the story is: you're pathetic.
The guy asked a question. I gave my response/opinion.
I attacked no one.
So Off.
Barachem
quote:
Originally posted by Lews
The moral of the story is:I think you're pathetic.
Correction.
And i think you're an ass.
paulandrews
quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I don't think your avatar is your statement, but in a discussion about how we define pop music you plonked down a very large version of the same .gif. If that wasn't a statement, I'm not sure what is.
Oh right, now I see how you could think that. I didn't want to stir up a serious debate about it, it was a part of this silly Gagafan act I was trying to pull here. It was an excuse for me to post something regarding Gaga. Hell, I even used a line from one of her songs to praise Sand Leaper's new trance mix. :p
I'm glad there is discussion, after all; it broadens my outlook.
I don't think anyone can say that "pop will never be low brow" and really mean it. It's people who then pick it apart and start to intellectualize it, who bring something highbrow into it - and Gaga provokes such debates.
quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
You are confusing 'avant-garde art' with 'pop' art. She is much more a warhol than a manzoni. And pop art was never concerned with 'highbrow', it was concerned with soup cans.
That Warhol comparison is actually very apt.
I'm under no illusion that what Gaga does is in any way avant-garde art. She does take inspiration from it, though. When she dresses as a character from The Night Porter, it's not just because she thinks it's a cool costume, it's also because that movie deals with collision of sex and authority - something Gaga herself embodies. It makes perfect sense in context of her video.
It's these little things that make me appreciate what she's doing; she opens my eyes for some great art I would have otherwise missed.
floyd741
quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
She may well truly believe that what she does is 'avant garde'. That's not for her to decide, but for history. What she is doing is using a postmodern idea of 'avant garde' as a marketing device and artistic license to suck.
QFT
Trance-MB
quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
I'm sorry, but you are so incredibly dense. I've explained my point quite clearly a few times now:
Bands are not genres.
I have never argued that 'kane' is a pop band, just that the track you posted was a pop track.
Bands can and do work with many different genres. For example, the Beatles wrote a ton of pop, but also rock and psychedelic rock. Genres are also not exclusive. Pop Rock is a fusion of pop and rock. (imagine that)
To prove your argument that ALL TRANCE MUSIC incorporates many genres, you post a youtube clip of ONE POP SONG, done by a band who makes a lot of rock music (as well as pop), and a clip of looped bagpipes overlaid onto a generic acid trance track.
So all you have actually proved is that it is possible to make a fusion pop-trance song, and to overlay bagpipes onto a trance song.
This says NOTHING of the trance genre as a whole.
I was waiting to hear you say Pop Rock, cause that's what you can call it. Pop really is too general. To me pop more is like London Beat, Pet Shop Boys, A-ha. Compared to those Rain On Me is much closer to Rock.
I did't say ALL trance incorperates many genres, or I must be suffering of multi personality disorder. I said you can hear elements of many gernes in trance tracks, which doesn't mean at all that every trance track uses elements of other genres, that's ridiculous.
My argument was that you can hear elements of other genres in Trance, which makes it that more people like it. These elements can vary be e.g. pipebags, electrical guitars, violins, piano plays, opera singing, vocals, pan flute etc.
I don't think you can deny there is a not typical trance element in this track:
