|
Ishkur's Guide To Electronic Music 3.0
|
View this Thread in Original format
| djthunderbird |
| There goes my evening. |
|
|
| Mr Game+Watch |
Never thought I'd see the day!
One thing that stands out is a few pretty popular genres aren't represented- no tropical house (even your mom knows who Kygo is), nu disco, vaporwave. Not to mention not a lot of non European genres (excepting Asian Pop)- no gqom or kwaito.
Another thing is how new genres effectively dried up a few years ago, like trap and future garage are the last big ones...
The chiptune category is awesome though! |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
Waiting for Jack's take on this.......
EDIT:
it, I can't wait.
How does Anthem house come out in 1985 then give birth to Dutch House in 2006.....when I'm pretty sure Dutch house was all I heard in 1997. In Holland.
And what the is "Full On"? |
|
|
| Woony |
| Is it just me or is the site a ing mess on Chrome? |
|
|
| Hides in Shadow |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
And what the is "Full On"? |
From my interpretation, it means like like 140-144BPM non stop, for example, like full on psytrance, imo. |
|
|
| Trance-M |
| quote: | Originally posted by djthunderbird
There goes my evening. |
Mine too, but that's because I clicked at EBM :eek: |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
Waiting for Jack's take on this.......
|
I feel like I should have a look just because Sykonee and I go way back and I know he contributed a lot to this iteration. Hell, they even asked ME to contribute to the Progressive section once upon a time, although I quietly flaked out and was never chased up for anything.
But honestly, I don't even want to get into analysing this thing. I already know it's going to be missing massive areas of current dance music I listen to, because those sounds don't have any names at all. The original Guide came out at the start of the 2000s when the scene was becoming addicted to endless hair splitting (nu school breaks, tribal tech funk, etc. etc.) and it was a good satire of that silliness. But now the trend is in the opposite direction: to simplify and categorise things as just "house and techno". Trying to draw a forensic chart of that is doomed to failure, and I've got better things to do than get into the endless attritional argument that will surely follow. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I feel like I should have a look just because Sykonee and I go way back and I know he contributed a lot to this iteration. Hell, they even asked ME to contribute to the Progressive section once upon a time, although I quietly flaked out and was never chased up for anything.
But honestly, I don't even want to get into analysing this thing. I already know it's going to be missing massive areas of current dance music I listen to, because those sounds don't have any names at all. The original Guide came out at the start of the 2000s when the scene was becoming addicted to endless hair splitting (nu school breaks, tribal tech funk, etc. etc.) and it was a good satire of that silliness. But now the trend is in the opposite direction: to simplify and categorise things as just "house and techno". Trying to draw a forensic chart of that is doomed to failure, and I've got better things to do than get into the endless attritional argument that will surely follow. |
Exactly on the same page. I've always been in the camp that microgenres (or whatever someone wants to call them) are silly and have no value beyond incredibly subjective, descriptively vague indicators.
I appreciate the effort with these things but they are ultimately a completely academic endeavour about something that by it's very nature is fluid and ever evolving, so somewhat pointless. |
|
|
| Hides in Shadow |
| I'm not at all to familiar with this guide but I agree and on the same note as Jack and Rann. Their depictions of this thing is correct. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
I appreciate the effort with these things but they are ultimately a completely academic endeavour about something that by it's very nature is fluid and ever evolving, so somewhat pointless. |
The first two versions (as I remember it the second was the most popular) were very useful at that time because Youtube and Spotify didn't exist, and it wasn't as easy to go listen to something you'd read about. Having little audio clips of the genres was extremely helpful in 2002. Nowadays, not so much.
I've just had a quick browse of it, because I don't want to be That Guy who knows everything about the show without needing to watch it. A few thoughts:
1. Not as much hair-splitting as I thought. As Luke says, hardly any new style categories from the last few years. It looks as though they attempted to streamline things into core movements that run for many years, but this leads me onto observation #2...
2. ... it all seems a bit outdated, to be honest. You can tell these boys are getting long in the tooth and did their last serious clubbing ten years ago. Minor trends from the '90s through to mid-00s are over-represented, and their modern equivalents are missing.
3. The sounds I expected to be missing are, indeed, completely missing.
4. Needs more Business Techno.
5. There's at least one paragraph in there that I know was written entirely for my benefit. Cheers for that, Kent. Happy to be both the winner and a loser, simultaneously. |
|
|
|
|
