|
Has anyone noticed that prog house is so dead for the past half decade. (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Innocence Lost |
| ^ sounds good to me |
|
|
| sumergible |
Yeah progressive house is pretty much dead. We all know this already. The best years in my opinion were 2000-2003. Some of the stuff in the 90s was pretty good too however most of it sounds pretty raw to me.
I think what killed it is the lack of variety of styles. Back then each producer had their own signature sound, each track was unique in it's own way. Today it's more like everybody is copying whoever is the forefront producer of a given style. It's boring, not to mention the modern styles suck.
The best substitutes to the old progressive would probably be some techno and deep house that have similar characteristics to what was produced back then. |
|
|
| Paradox Lost |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Calling that period a "golden age" can only be nostalgia talking. |
I don't see why that couldn't just as easily be a quality-based assessment, especially considering how I've had ten years to contrast against it. There was just an abundance of quality coming from seemingly everywhere and everyone, notably distinct from its musical predecessors, and especially distinct from the uninspired filler of the same name that would follow (of what little there is of even that). It was its own thing and in its own way, and considering that there's not even a progressive house scene left makes me comfortable in going back and calling out a 'golden age.' I'm not going to deny my own sense of nostalgia, as great music and the great producers who made it is certainly worth getting nostalgic over. |
|
|
| Johan (DJ Irish) |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
It feels like "progressive" is dissolving a bit these days, and overlapping with both deep house and melodic techno. The return of melody to dance music has resulted in all kinds of deep-prog-tech hybrid tunes that don't sit in any particular camp. |
That's how I see it as well. The prog channel on DI is somewhat focused on those kind of sounds these days |
|
|
| Dj Pluviose |
| I thought many consider Deadmau5 to be the chosen one for taking progressive house to the next level? |
|
|
| Mr.Mystery |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dj Pluviose
I thought many consider Deadmau5 to be the chosen one for taking progressive house to the next level? |
:stongue:
He is the chosen one for wearing foam heads. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Paradox Lost
I don't see why that couldn't just as easily be a quality-based assessment, especially considering how I've had ten years to contrast against it. |
A novel riposte to accusations of nostalgia. I must, however, note that your "golden age" doesn't really fit in with a historical perspective of when progressive was at its apex of either fashion, popularity, profusion or arguably quality. It does, however, line up quite neatly to the period when you personally started listening to progressive.
Granted, prog was still in better health than it is now, but by its own standards it was ailing badly in those years as producers and DJs jumped ship en masse and other scenes and sounds rapidly replaced it. Everyone knew the writing was on the wall, and to unironically dub a period of slow, painful demise a "golden age" is either cruel humour or serotonin-laced good times nostalgia. |
|
|
| AlphaStarred |
Nothing wrong with nostalgia as you long as you accept it for what it is. For me personally, nostalgia was a period of my early High School years (14-15 years old), which is why I generally wax nostalgic about early '00 Trance. I also used to dig the '03 era of Prog House, but it was more "groovy" music for dancing and nodding one's head to, rather than being excellent per se.
I didn't explore much early '90s Prog House, but from the tracks I did hear, there certainly was more "feeling" and general creativity about it than '00 era Prog. The same goes for virtually all other EM, but no point in beating a dead horse. |
|
|
| Salegon |
Concerning recent times, deep house with progressive elements seems to be the better alternative for me than "pure" progressive house or at least tracks which are labeled "progressive house".
Random find of some rather nice tracks put together:
|
|
|
| Dykes_on_Jay |
| Has anyone cared? |
|
|
| Paradox Lost |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
A novel riposte to accusations of nostalgia. I must, however, note that your "golden age" doesn't really fit in with a historical perspective of when progressive was at its apex of either fashion, popularity, profusion or arguably quality. |
That you've spent your post referring to 'progressive' in response to a post that's discussing 'progressive house' represents to me the same lack of common ground that has made this type of discussion so incredibly tedious in the past (or any other discussion lacking in terminological agreement). I take that your use of progressive to mean a genre or to be nearly synonymous with one, and at the risk of being mistaken and in so beginning an entirely irrelevant diatribe, I feel it necessary to lay out in no uncertain terms that I completely disagree. 'Progressive' is not a thing, it's a way of doing things, and while I apologize for splicing into this discussion an unrelated one, it makes your comment...
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
It feels like "progressive" is dissolving a bit these days, and overlapping with both deep house and melodic techno. The return of melody to dance music has resulted in all kinds of deep-prog-tech hybrid tunes that don't sit in any particular camp. |
...really just reaffirm what progressive has always been in the first place, rather than define a new (and in this case, dissolving) direction that progressive as genre has taken. I know you're an enthusiast of epic house, and the way you refer to progressive makes about as much sense if I were to use the term 'epic' in the same way.
That said, the biggest problem with reading a genre into the word 'progressive' is that it forces you into the ridiculous position of having to view entirely disparate musical ideas and styles as being evolutionary outgrowths of each other. There is, for instance, no meaningful connection between the McSchulz variety of progressive trance and the late 90's variety that seems be the subject of the only kinds of threads where people seem to agree around here. They're not part of some nonexistent progressive family, it's just that some people decided to adapt a 'progressive' take- with all its loosely codified presets- to trance, and the result was the result. I think your (implied) definition of 'progressive' results in a less coherent and more convoluted historical timeline, as opposed to one that would follow from simply looking at progressive as an adaptive prefix that can apply to any genre.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Granted, prog was still in better health than it is now, but by its own standards it was ailing badly in those years as producers and DJs jumped ship en masse and other scenes and sounds rapidly replaced it. |
I just don't see this as correct, at least insofar as the progressive movement I'm referring to. Progressive house in the early-mid 2000's was not anywhere close to being replaced or abandoned, on the contrary, it was doing the replacing. Granted, it also coincided with the mass exodus from the progressive trance of the late 90's, which was all but dead by the end of 2002, but many notable producers, DJ's, and record labels from that derelict genre snap-migrated right over to progressive house, not to mention the influx of fresh faces who would go on to highlight the genre. I'm not qualified to contrast this with progressive house of the early 90's, or if prog house saw any action in the interim between these two periods, but the easiest way to determine if progressive house was hot is to remember this: Dave Seaman was playing it.
Finally, I normally address responses in the order in which they're made, though I'm going to break from tradition because I just had to save this for last:
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
It does, however, line up quite neatly to the period when you personally started listening to progressive. |
...the , J'? I respect your opinion more than most, but the only thing that lines up neatly here is how this assumption allows you to tie this all together into your apparent belief that anyone enthusiastic about anything from the past is either enjoying it for the first time or harking back to the time they first enjoyed it. |
|
|
|
|
