[ runagate ] electro dance

[Chris Walton]

Sorry, but I just don't get it.

There are cool sounds there, the break is interesting, but where's the song? It seems to me like it's really just a bunch of sounds together, doing some thing. It's not electro and it certainly isn't dance either (IDM is a misnomer). There is a sort of intro, there's no outro, and it's just the same thing with some variation throughout. There's no unifying theme, no story, nothing that would give me goosebumps (the good kind).

Maybe it's the future. Maybe I'm a parent and you are the Beatles back in the 60s. I just can't get myself to like it, sorry. But I don't think that's how it is, because I like to think I have a very wide and diverse range of music I like. I like various flavors of Country, Rock, Metal, Trance, House, Funk, Disco, IDM (which is what I'd classify this as), DnB, VGM, Goa/Psy, and Ambient.

What I'm trying to illustrate is that there's no objective right/wrong when it comes to Music. I've gotten the impression that you think liking "techno" is wrong and liking rachmiel songs is right. That's not the truth though. The truth is that it's a subjective thing. You scream in joy whenever a rachmiel song is released - that's fine. I scream in joy whenever a blaster78 song is released, and you probably do too. I also scream in joy when a zircon song is released, but you'd probably complain you got ear cancer or something from it.

No offense meant, of course.

-- Chris

[botkiller]

Very cool. I always enjoy your work. Kinda creepy as with many, would be a cool soundtrack to a robot factory or something. I dunno that I'd specifically call it electro dance, but I'm not really a genre snob, so I won't go off on that

Either way, very cool, very aphex twin, I'd like to hear some nutty drum breaks over it all.

I didn't realize that "electro dance" is the name of a genre. To me this sounds like Gorillaz, not Aphex. Nothing I've ever made sounds the slightest thing like Aphex to me, though I wish I could make songs like that. Intensely clean Platonic space filled with intricate bouncing rhythms, all small little electronic machines skittering about. Almost the opposite of my oftentimes sarcastically wooden rhythms that betray the expectations of the next bar having another downbeat (quite pusposefully, then justifying it later with a different resolution).

It's dancable, it's electronic, that was the only thought behind it.

Drum breaks take longer to mouse-in than making this whole song would take. I got my Trigger Finger back from the MC I lent it to for a little while (cuz my VX keyboard died in a firmware update) and being that I'm working on my band's live set *that* will be rhythmic with actual breaks, fills, spaces between events. Programming with a Trigger Finger is a freakin dream; I love it. Too bad I can't play it live reliably.

Weird, you always like my music, eh? I just went to your site and liked yours (I'm blind to sig links for some reason) and befriended you. Not what I expected, but very cool. Reminds me of what I danced to with my white girls as a teen.

I think that when I think "electro dance" I think of stuff like Justice or Daft Punk, I guess - then again that's more "electro house", and genres get so muddled anyway, so I usually refrain from getting into them. When people ask me what kind of music I make, I just tell them electronic music, or progressive - that's enough for me.

I agree, I do hear a lot of Gorillaz in this song. I think I tend to hear more of the Aphex Twin/IDM sound in a lot of your work as it is, but I do enjoy what you do - I can tell that you spend a lot of time programming it all and paying attention to the sound, which I really appreciate.

Thanks for hitting me up. I am lame about friend requests on myspace. My stuff is definitely kinda old school in many ways, mostly because it derives from my influences, all of which are pretty much from the late 80's/early 90's

[jancivil]

Sorry, but I just don't get it.

...where's the song? It seems to me like it's really just a bunch of sounds together, doing some thing. It's not electro and it certainly isn't dance either (IDM is a misnomer). There is a sort of intro, there's no outro, and it's just the same thing with some variation throughout. There's no unifying theme, no story, nothing...

Maybe it's the future. Maybe I'm a parent and you are the Beatles back in the 60s. I just can't get myself to like it, sorry. But I don't think that's how it is, because I like to think I have a very wide and diverse range of music I like. I like various flavors of Country, Rock, Metal, Trance, House, Funk, Disco, IDM (which is what I'd classify this as), DnB, VGM, Goa/Psy, and Ambient.

What I'm trying to illustrate is that there's no objective right/wrong when it comes to Music.

you have mentioned NOTHING by way of objective criteria. You have cited this and that and the other genre, as if genre expectation being met is some kind of requirement. I THINK I know what is meant by 'funk' or 'rock' or a couple other tags, but even there, I'd wager our view on what makes it differ widely; a lot of what you call ambient you might even listen to at greater than ambient levels, which linguistically would be meaningless.

Then there is this disconnect with your own language:

I've gotten the impression that liking "techno" is wrong and liking rachmiel songs is right. That's not the truth though. The truth is that it's an objective thing.

an objective thing looks at a work as an OBJECT; in the case of music, an object vibrating in the aurally detectable realm in spacetime. IE: just some 'sounds together, doing some thing'. the other thing, which appears to be your basis for a critique, is entirely subjective.

[Chris Walton]

Aiee, I should review what I write before I post it --- I meant it the other way around. I Edited

[jancivil]

Aiee, I should review what I write before I post it --- I meant it the other way around. I Edited

heh
yer funny

well, if it's a purely subjective criterion, it's just taste, isn't it?

I totally don't know from electro or techno or any of that stuff, this, to me, if I have to image a genre, is a jingle for fast acting nasal spray on tv, only in this case with a sort of discoteque beat.

which is kind of a wide-open field, compared to say, disco per se

(which btw is the same to me a 'DnB', or 'House', or any dance club sound)

[Chris Walton]

well, if it's a purely subjective criterion, it's just taste, isn't it?

My point.

[jancivil]

well, if it's a purely subjective criterion, it's just taste, isn't it?

My point.

heh

which is why I don't go into musics I have no taste for with a critique of any kind. (I understand why a person who has seen poor runagate's attacks on one o'them electronica genres on here, and has some skin in that particular game, would follow suit, though.)

[TraiT]

It's kind of funny reading all this because I was saying something similar to what chris said, about Six Blind Months. I feel as if there are different plateaus or levels of musical "freedom" that one has, a more open kind of creativity. You look at brittney spears or even mozart which is very formulated, you see music that isn't very "openly" creative, as I would put it. Meanwhile you look at Blaspheromone (which by the way I just had to look up on my playlist to spell correctly =P), which in my opinion falls on a lower level of "open creativity" than Six Blind Months.

Now, being more "openly" creative doesn't necessarily mean something is better or worse, for me personally it's a system of categorization. I personally wasn't too into Six Blind Months- for me personally there's a level of openness that just doesn't suite my tastes. I posted earlier that I very much like this song (or piece, whatever you'd like to call it, sometimes people get offended from the word "song").

Again this isn't a critique it's just my two cents on how I view the subject.

[runagate]

The only objections I have to Chris's post (which is an obvious troll move of his, but he should know by now the only things that'll get me riled up are techno and fascism, though I'm not trying to link those 2 things) are:

1) I will fight to my dying breath against the attempts of techno people trying to appropriate the exclusive definition of terms they didn't even make up or use first: "dance" music is not the exclusive domain of techno, but techno people use it as though it is. Also, while on the subject, acid jazz is not jazz in any way shape or form (at least the ton of it I've heard, though most of it is to easy listening to even bother me, and some I've liked). If you can't dance to this classic dance-music drum pattern, don't blame me. It's not like I invented that drum riff.

I'll let you in on a secret: speed the track up to 140 bpm and it's recognizably the exact drumbeat used in several "electronic dance" genres (as you'd define them, though I'm not sure of the specific names for them). I've no objection to electronic dance music that isn't cheesy, actually has syncopated and varying rhythms and isn't full of lame cliches over and over and over. I consider much of 3am's music to be electronic dance music. I also love a rather large cross-section of dancable music: James Brown, George Clinton, Herbie Hancock, Obo Addy, well shit I'm not going to get into that.

2) As you well know what I object to is repetetive and funkless techno. Making 2 drums that hit the same beat over and over for minutes on end isn't even really making a song: how would you like to sit through some folkie strumming the same 2 guitar chords for 7 minutes? Some of them do it, too, I've seen it. At least they have the possibility of keeping it aesthetically pleasing with lyrics or emotion of performance or something (though it ain't my cup of tea). But that's subjective. The fact that there's scads of people who make the same beat and the press one key and let an arp run for a whole track is not subjective, it's lazy, it's annoying to the point of stultifaction and rage, and the fact that someon would voluntarily listen to it pretty much invalidates their opinion to the whole rest of the music-making world. When I first came to KVR people tried to pretend I was just prejudiced against electronically-produced music! They've got their bag of pointless arguments they apparently all receive in club music hazing rituals and then never listen to anyone's opinion ever again, they just go cry to one another and say that people just don't understand why they love their music. I do understand and that's why I hate it. At least I still treat ya'll like people. All you guys can offer most of the time is 2-line dissmisiveness and grammar school insults.

One can get away with quite a bit of repetition but only if it's actually good music. Your wishy-washy defense of trance would mean that I'm supposed to accept the Starland Vocal Band as a legitimate form of art and that I've no right to insult it. I've already explained away that ridiculous falacy. At least I still talk to trance people and try to help them sometimes, too, but I can't see any reason I should stop denouncing them. I'd think they're all used to it by now cuz that's what other musicians think of it, everywhere you go and there's a reason for it.

No, I do not think that liking rachMiel's music is "good" - if anything I'm baffled by the fact that so many people do. The reason: very few people are confortable with unexpectedness in any form, let alone in music. My music entirely consciously constantly plays with expectation, defeats it, and deceives the listener into expecting things that they've been lead to expect from previous musical experiences - and then, try to create a wholeness in an alternate way. I am quite conscious of the fact that most people would not care to hear these things, and I've no particular reaction to that fact at all. I certainly am not the type of person to consider myself misunderstood and unappreciated!

As to zircon: huh? I can't recall. It's been way too long since I've had the time to listen to every cafe song like I used to, and I am certain I'm missing out on tracks I'd like because I'm terrible at remembering names.

Also, as to a "story" in a song, I'm afraid that the people whose music seems to get your intense inferiority complex all ruffled up would object to the idea that there should be a story in a song. There seems to be a bias against "conceptual" art in people who go to college for music, and I'm not sure why and haven't really had it explained to me. I personally don't have that bias and make some thematic or program music and some that's not and don't differentiate between them on a qualitative level.

It's you that constantly thinks we're belittling you and others, even though I can't think of a single person here who you get all defensive about who does so, except me and my anti-trance crusade which I share in common with almost every single non-electronic musician I've ever met and that's hundreds of my personal friends irl). You basically just decided we're all a bunch of abstract music snobs. I've barely ever met any irl and certianly have no time for them, and I'm sure they'd hate my music a lot more than they would trance.

Really all this carrying on is more revealing of your self-esteem than anything else. All these points you and the other pro-trance people make are more based on your own set of assumptions and only about 10% of what I actually say. Which happens here a lot: the sudden accusations that people are software pirates out of nowhere, the weird jingoism that crops up sometimes, the ridiculous fights about DAWs from people who barely use them at all and a bunch of other things I basically ignore. I simply don't have the whyterabbyt-like patience to point out all the ludicrous flaws and prolepses, nor the egotism to nuffink them until they concede. I do hope that they'll eventually learn to leave all the other musicians alone and go talk about the same drum machine and the virus and all the other trend-chasing b.s. that most of them don't even understand wtf they're talking about.

You think what I say about trance is bad? You should see me verbally abuse an emo band at a show in my town! Or an ICP fan: I don't even talk to them, I'd just high-kick them in the face if they didn't walk away when I tell them to f**k off. Now that music reaaaallly pissed me off.

Have a nice day.

[ edit }

@TraiT: I am passionate about music and like to argue about it and am not the slightest bit ashamed of it.

However, I'd never, ever, ever call a song of mine a "piece" and in no way consider what I do artsy.

[TraiT]

I see things in there I definitely agree with. I like your presentation but because I haven't been here long enough I can't really say if it's justified to be so riled up (at whom you're talking about, not your points, I agree, in part at least, about the whole trance thing, about being lazy. Also it's good to recignize the different times to listen to those different "genres"- trance sure seems amazing when you're rolling on e and dancing but sitting in a room and trying to enjoy it? Maybe not so much. That isn't to say that it's laziness, unless you look at Infected Mushroom which isn't -as- lazy, in my opinion, but I also don't know if one would categorize that as trance and I also haven't sampled -all- their music). I don't know points chris has made in the past so it really isn't my place to agree with how you're saying what you're saying, if that makes sense.

I was trained classically which is why I brought up the whole song / piece thing. One doesn't call something beethoven has written a "song". When I think "song" I think someone picking up a guitar and singing, maybe even a drummer, whatever- when I think piece I think of nuances, subtle and sophisticated things done to make a piece (sorry) come alive. I've almost used the two words to define two levels of quality.

Honestly, I could drop it like it's hot but that's just why I brought it up =P.

And just in case that anything is misunderstood, I do enjoy arguing points but I enjoy doing so with a completely impersonal method of discussion- I don't necessarily judge anyone as I'm arguing against their ideas or points (or maybe I am but I would never use it <i>in</i> the actual discussion or let it be involved).

I think.

Cheers.

[Chris Walton]

(1) not a troll move, or at least not intended to be one

(2) and you're doing it again - you're blatantly discounting not only an entire genre, but an entire class of genres. That's what pisses me off. I don't care if you like it, you're entitled to your opinion. I don't like Hip Hop but I don't do things like posting "I would know the answer to your question but I see you make Hip Hop so I'm not gonna bother", I don't discredit that there is (some) musical value in it, and I don't doubt that there are a few Hip Hop songs among the million that I like (I can think of one off the top of my head).

(3) Please, don't put Trance, House, and real Techno into the "Techno" category. You wouldn't call Death Metal a form of Rock'n'Roll - they're both a form of Rock, maybe, but that's about as much as they're related. As a rule - if it's groovy and soulful, it's probably House. If it's uplifting and cheesy, it's probably Trance. If it's hard and machine-like, it's probably Techno. (that's a very, very general approximation though).

(4) I've got plenty of self-esteem, but I do think you're trying to belittle those that happen to like Trance, Techno, House, etc.. Just let people like the music they like.

(5) Yes, I do think alot of KVRers are abstract music snobs. If you genuinely like it then that's cool (I get that impression from your post, although I did think otherwise at some point), but avant-garde just for the sake of being avant-garde is just silly, and it seems to me like ALOT of KVRers are.

(6) I'm not "pro-trance". I'm not pro anything, except pro-good music. And if it happens to be a good Trance song, then I like it. I don't have prejudices. It just happens to be that there are many trance songs that I like, and equally many that I despise, for reasons very similar to yours. Same with any other genre, really. You couldn't get me to listen to Jeff Mills or Sisters of Mercy without offering at least a thousand dollars and a blowjob.

(7) "techno" didn't invent "dance music", it's a form of "dance music". Nobody claims that "techno" is the only or original form of dance music either. The origin of dance music? Ugha-ugha Caveman of 100000 years ago, banging with a stick on a rock while the other cavemen and cavewomen jump to it. Techno, Trance, House etc. are classified as dance music because they are danceable. They originated in Classic House which came (in part) from -- *gasp* Disco (I'm serious - listen to the drums on many old disco songs and you'll realize why), and Disco certainly is dance music as well.

(8) Here's a zircon song: http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=172650 ... It's trance but it doesn't have the 4/4 kick you hate so much. Listen, you might just like it. Personally, it makes me cream.

[TraiT]

(8) zircon: http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=172650 ... It's trance but it doesn't have the 4/4 kick you hate so much. Listen, you might just like it. Personally, it makes me cream.

Didn't Zircon post that? You're talking about "breathing you in" right? Or maybe I read wrong?

[Chris Walton]

eh, I should have said "here's a zircon song:" or something .... gah

To the editmobile again

[runagate]

A very thoughtful post.

For the record I like Chris, and I like him enough to have not listened to most of his music, but what I listened to I liked.

I try not to infect the trance threads in the Cafe with my harumphing.

It is essentially impossible to offend me with your opinion of my music, or what you call it, I was actually just pointing out that I'm the least touchy about it of anyone around here. Which kind of sucks, it makes me feel bad about ranting about someone else's love.

I.M.'s sound design is wicked superb. Their rhythms are pretty good, too. Programming drums is hard for me, it takes 1000x longer than the polyrhythmic lead/solo parts like in this song, since that's my bread and butter having been a sax/woodwind person for a long time (and similarly untutored, I might add just for background). Not so many soloist (in the jazz sense) people messing with DAWs. I rarely bother including a lead part since my taste in them is weird as hell and I could just pick up a horn... kind of like how being classically trained making cadence and chords is easy as hell for you I bet. For me I can only hear it in my head then I literally have to "sound it out" in the piano roll til I get the chord I am "hearing" lmao. Time-consuming as hell. Whereas modal/scalar on-the-fly transpotiion against a harmonic background for a sax soloist is so intervalic that it takes me no time to score violin arpeggios or whatever. It's weird - I can hear 3am's drum time tricks, the polyrhythm or say 7 against 4 aspects of a fill or something like that, and I can think those things in my head but damn if it's not a terrible terrible fight for me to actually score/record (or whatever one might call it in a DAW, we still don't have a word for it), it takes forever. I guess that's what I get for refusing to learn notation.

Things that'd be easy with physical instruments are hard for me in midi, and things are easy in midi that would be nearly impossible for me with acoustic arranging. In fact, I orignally only got into DAWs to sketch song structure and use it to teach the appropriate instrumentalist how to play my compositions aurally!

I love that the piano roll visuall shows me tempo changes, allows me to "score" knob twiddles, patch recall, chordal arrangement (something hard to demonstrate on a horn! that's why we jazzbos scat ). There's no best of both worlds for me yet, but I'm working at it.

At least most posters here know not to bother to audition my songs. I used to feel obligated to always warn something like, "unlistenable noise terrorism" or somesuch I obviously like the music I make - I'm my target audience, but I'm not trying to trick the unsuspecting into liking it for some theoretical reason. There's a vast musical universe and I'm always happy to see people fulfilling an unlikely and amazing corner of the uninstantiated possibilities.

[ eidt ] I'll bbiab. I'm carrying on like 3 RL conversations and apparently hit post after a bunch of stuff I missed.

[TraiT]

Yea, working out chords and cadences is relatively easy for me. I started off on violin back in the day but I got much more interested in composing and even conducting. Naturally I took all the theory classes I could and I started learning how to conduct. It makes things very convenient- I spent years writing four part harmonies, sometimes I like to sit in a crowd and write them out like puzzles almost, so I feel pretty at home on a piano roll.

I think writing with yourself as the target audience is a great thing to do- I've learned throughout my relatively short amount of years (20, if you're curious) that doing what you want to do in the most relaxed and confident manner you can will almost -always- go well. No one rejects freedom and if they do they're obviously not free or of concern. That's just my outlook, it seems we share it =).