The other day someone used the term 'cutting edge dance music'
I'm just curious, examples please? What's the most state of the art (
Nice... thread de-railed on the first postDoug1978 wrote:
I don't understand this one either. Can you explain what you like about this song? The sounds, the rhythm, the buildup, the punch of the drums, the "lyrics"?ghettosynth wrote:While I'm not sure that most of the list would be my list, this is hot.
Yes.bmanic wrote:I don't understand this one either. Can you explain what you like about this song? The sounds,ghettosynth wrote:While I'm not sure that most of the list would be my list, this is hot.
It's house, there's not much that stands out in the rhythm, except, it's disciplined sparsity. That said, the feel is great.the rhythm,
So, I do like when the bass drops as well as the interesting sound that drops just before that. But, when I'm playing this record those may not get heard because they will come in under another record. So, while it's a nice aspect of this record, I'd say that the lack of giant buildups while still remaining interesting is key.the buildup,
Yes, and yes. Or, really, the sparse cleanness of the production and the simple rhythmic and tonal qualities of the "lyric." It's easy to fill up the space with noise, it takes a sense of restraint to allow the space to breathe and still keep a listener engaged.the punch of the drums, the "lyrics"?
And yet it held my attention all the way though. Let me be clear though, it's non-trivial to do so and if I could tell you the secret I'd probably be selling a lot of records.To me these kind of songs just don't have any point.. there's no real buildup, there are no exciting sounds and the beat is very docile and laid back.
So, I think that you're a little out of touch here. Exciting, well, ok, if you're looking for sounds that are "obviously" exciting. But stylish, I beg to differ. It's quite hip, tech-house is all the rage among the underground set these days.Everything stays in the same key throughout the song (well this is quite common for dance music so I can't really fault it).
To me there are no exciting elements here. Nothing "stylish".. everything is rather bland. It's like the composers take no risks and stick to the very basics.
So we've talked about this sort of thing quite a bit in the "melody in dance music thread." This is good minimal underground dance music, in part, because it exercises restraint in melody.Is it possible to do an analysis or a dissection of the interesting elements of the track? Or just simply tell us what makes it good in your opinion? This interests me a lot as a sound designer as I'm always keen on learning what people want for interesting, usable sounds.. and it also interests me as a composer to understand the motivations for the choice of tonality, harmony, melody and rhythm.
Well, if you don't like it you don't like it. I will point out that while I don't completely dislike the trance track discussed above, it's quite dull to my ears. It's like the difference between Stevie Ray Vaughn and Buddy Guy. Flashy loud obvious changes don't impress me at all. They're just distracting. I was watching a discussion of Clyde Stublefield and what makes James Brown's music so great, it's as much about the space between the notes as it is the notes themselves.It's very possible that I just don't get it though.. and I fully accept that. It is after all how we all end up. Stuck in our ways and not understanding the new stuff.
This is really from 2013 ?? Sounds like 89' house to me... And not one I would remember or would like to hear...ghettosynth wrote:While I'm not sure that most of the list would be my list, this is hot.
You can get it on beatport.
http://www.beatport.com/track/they-fron ... ix/4057000
Beatport charts are a great way to get familiar with what is current in dance music trends.
Submit: News, Plugins, Hosts & Apps | Advertise @ KVR | Developer Account | About KVR / Contact Us | Privacy Statement
© KVR Audio, Inc. 2000-2026