Original
Message 1/15
Date: 02-Feb-08 @ 09:35 AM Edit: 02-Feb-08 | 10:04 AM -
Dance music in 2008
Not trying to start any negative conversation here, but this is an honest question I have. I used to listen to a lot of electronic music (anything form gabber to ambient) from the years 1993-2001 and most of the dance/electronic music I hear now still sounds the same, but only has new ways to chop, distort, or glitch out the sounds. It seems that everything is still in four on the floor whether it be breaks, downtempo, house, or whatever. Yes, I do realize that club music should remain fairly regular to dance to and/ or mix, etc.
Now, I do realize that there are many, many, many different categories/ genres that one can place each little niche type of electronic music into (I'm talking in generalities here), but it seems (all too common) like there's only a two-part counterpoint happening in songs between the melody and the bassline and a pad (or something similar) doubling the bass or the melody in octaves (*maybe* in diminution or augmentation, or exactly the same) and the beats/ percussion/ glitches are taking center stage with, for example, the loop being filtered by a HP filter as the only means for variation and variety. I used to think that Aphex Twin, Square Pusher, Fila Brazillia, Thievery Corporation, or someone similar would bleed into the other types of electronic music, but six to seven later and the material I hear now could've been a track made in '98 or '99.
Aphex Twin, Squarepusher had harmony and functional chromaticism, progressions, and yes, a lot of micro-sequencing and granular synthesis also. My point is that they had melodies that could be remembered and they modulated to other keys and dare I say it- used music theory. I know how a lot of you feel about music theory and so-called "rules" of music, but music theory isn't dogmatic or supposed to be followed exactly, it's just suggestions that help when in a bind (anyone ever had writer's block?) and something to help generate new material.
I got out of listening to the entire electronic genre in about 2001, just to take a break and I listened to a TON of classical music (Western and Eastern) and studied theory. Unfortunately, I do have to say that the return to the genre(s) is an unexpected disappointment. Maybe I'm listening to the wrong stuff (someone guide me if I am), but I wanted to know how you guys felt about it.
I also realize that a particular genre of music is going to sound like other artists in that genre, that is what makes it that genre, if it sounded like something different, it wouldn't be house, but breakcore. It bothers me when people who have *no idea* about music become critics and say things like "All house music sounds redundantly the same, how boring." That bothers me to no end, but there is evolution in music, is what I'm saying. Yes, classical music can be identified quickly be a listener, but Wagner sounds nothing like Bach, Vivaldi, or Mozart: evolution. For those savvy to classical, I know that there is a 200+ year difference between Mozart and Wagner, but you can even hear a clear distinction from Mozart's last year (1791) to Beethoven's material in 1800. They both used the same theory and language, but in that small amount of time evolution of music happened. You can hear the difference in the same genre of Classical music! Later, Wagner used a somewhat standardized language and pushed it and broke the tonal barrier: evolution. I guess what I'm not understanding/ hearing is this evolution, no?
Once again, I am not wanting to begin a "you're knocking my music/ genre/ life/ religion/ lifestyle/ breakfast cereal" type of conversation, let's be civil. Maybe I'm wrong and if so, please give me the scoop- this is exactly why I'm asking all of you wonderful people at DT. As Marvin Gaye said I just want to know "What's Goin' on?" - in music that is!
Best,
Capthook