[Giant Hamster]

I saw this question posted on another forum recently...

There really weren't any opinions...just, "omg, trance will b huge!" and "DnB 4eva!"

My few:

I believe we're gonna get so ****ed up it's not even funny...

All boy band members will be under 6+

A mixing of Goth rock and Ska will result in the new genre, Skoth

EMO will get stuck in it's own sweater and cry itself to death.

Progressive trance will only become regressive trance seeing as trance won't ever progress anywhere.

Britney Spears will become the first female president and then assasinated immediately.

Dr.Dre will be the ONLY person producing hip hop after Missy E. dies of a fat related heart attack, P. Diddy is beaten up and killed for his lunch money, and Busta Rhymes ODs on Mountain Dew

"Dear Punk, You can only play those same 3 chords so many times...I have decided that it is time for you to move on. You will need to turn in your resignation by 5:00 tonight and never return. Thank you, - The truth"

Hopefully all the Pearl Jam vocal-alikes(matchbox20, creed, dave mathews, puddle of mudd, etc...) will spontaniously combust.

What do you think?

[balistic]

Do you mean to ask what's going to get popular? Where music is heading versus what people en masse are listening to are two entirely different things.

Trance will probably pick up a substantial following in the US. Its the bastard child of techno that went to Europe, had its funk removed, and came back as something that wouldn't scare white middle-American kids. Its got most of the requirements of pop . . . no confusing funk, easily identifiable, you can lay whatever trite lyrics you want on top of it, and as a bonus you've got a lot of people who think its "new" and "underground". Trance is already the dance music money maker . . . it wouldn't surprise me if it ends up as big as disco for a year or two.

On the techno front, there is a general movement away from the drum-dominated 1990s towards more melodic, emotional songs. Its not a huge renaissance yet, but one by one, labels are popping up to fight the monotone loop infestation. Witness:

Digital Soul

[Giant Hamster]

Plantman: They have a show on KWOD(106.5) here called The Alternative Beat where they do that and every Friday night it's broadcast live out of The Rage(a club). It's pretty cool sometimes...but most of the time the guest DJ is tone-deaf and can't hear that it's all out of tune(or he really just doesn't care.).

Balistic: I'm talking about mostly the mainstream, but if you want to comment on the not-so-mainstream go right ahead =)

Trance has already been cut up so much it's not even funny...

Formulaic trance(aka: MTV trance) has exploded here already...I hope it dies...and soon.

Yes, Drum and bass will have it's death

[MoleculeMan]

I think that emo will become the new alternative, trance will become the new club music (isn't it already though?). I think eventually UK Garage will be the new club music. Pop Punk will become popier and popier, and boy bands will get bigger and bigger. This kinda sucks but thats how i think its heading.

jake

[Dr. Bang]

I'm thinking music will be very different to categories in the future. I predict rap mixed together with country, techno mixed with classic ...and such.

edit: drunk.

[ April 02, 2002: Message edited by: Dr. Bang ]

[[Shizo]]

MTV will produce more Hip-Hop and Pop singers.
People like me and Hamster will get pissed off. We'll ask my uncle to supply us with some weapons and we'll over TRL with Carson Daly and screaming girls as hostages.
Then we'll rape girls live. People will like this and come over.
At the end NYC will be leveled and only good music prevail :)

[Rat]

Hm. If pop makes its uprising (again) and gets more popular than it already is - straight to hell.

On the other hand, if good music (a mix of what people actually like, rather than listen to mindlessly) rises - along a more or less straight line (or maybe a gradual slope upward).

If I start producing my own music - might as well blow up the planet now. Luckily, that won't happen any time soon.

[Jucas]

Been lurking lately. I am scared of what may come of music in the future. But to say Dave Mathews is a "Pearl Jam vocal alike" prompts a reply on my part. Dave Mathews has more talent in his left testicle than every member of pearl jam and all of the look, rather "sound alikes", do combined. I wouldn't mind if Britney was assasinated. Skoth *shudder*.

[Coaster]

Rat, that reminded me of part of the hitch hikers guide the the galaxy.. what was that band called?

I'll just stick with my own music likings now, while taking the occasional time to make fun of the bad bands.

So many ways in which I could add Weird Al onto hampsters list, but still finding the best..

Oh great, now I can't stop trying the recall the name of the band from HGTG

[travis travis]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Giant Hamster:


Hopefully all the Pearl Jam vocal-alikes(matchbox20, creed, dave mathews, puddle of mudd, etc...) will spontaniously combust.

---

Ha! Hilarious skit on MadTV along those lines, anyone seen it?

Jucas says

quote

Quote:

Dave Mathews has more talent in his left testicle...

Dave Mathews IS a left testicle.


And lastly... what the fuck is emo? Never fucking mind actually, I find the modern ascribing of new genres to be so ridiculous and unwarranted that I don't really want to know the answers

[MoleculeMan]

Emo is a type of post punk that is more emotional, ie emo. If you want some good examples of some, The Get Up Kids and Braid are the closest to the real stuff in my opinion. Its typically applied way too generally these days. It used to be underground, now its getting popular. A lot of the stuff on the Vagrant label is Emo.
www.allmusic.com if you don't know a lot about music this is where you should go. they have EVERYTHING (almost heh).

jake

[atomicmonkey]

I seriously believe a lot of this garbage may stop soon. By garbage I'm talking about the huge current wave of popular music (not only 'pop' like boy bands and the like, but any hip/hop, rock, or electronica that is popular) that follow the same formula. All this pop-rap is a prime example... Have a bunch of fake thugs show off some bling bling and talk about money and hoes, and you gotta platinum record. I'm not sure if you know what I mean, but to me, all the music I am hearing on the radio the last few years seems manufactured to death. The rock I hear now on New Rock Edge 102 (Toronto radio station) is NOTHING like the great stuff it played in the 90's. Even the bands I liked in the 90's seem to loosing their touch and just going with the flow. Current popular music, no matter what the genre, all seems to be produced by a single person, it would seem, because there's nothing new anymore. I mean, when I listen to some Puddle of Mud, or Linken Park, or Staind (ok, Mudshovel was a great song, but now...) - where's the edge? It's rock music, right, isn't it supposed to have an edge? But they're all doing the same damn thing.

Ah well, I'm not really getting anywhere, just ranting here. Currently I'm listening to what I consider the new wave of rock - Strokes, The Hives, The Shins, Spoon, International Noise Conspiracy, ect. Most of them are relying on old rock to get their sound across. Sure, it sounds new right now, because no one else is doing it. But recently I listened to some old Iggy and the Stooges, and my God, I almost heard the Strokes. So of course some of these new rock bands are not original, but at least they're getting their influences from older, great rock music, rather than Limp Bizkit.

Back to my point, if I had one. I think people may be getting tired of it. Too many people are being fed music right now instead of listening to what they want to hear, if they want to hear it. Music isn't even music anymore, it's marketing, and even though it's sad many haven't realized it yet, they will soon.

But hell, who am I to judge what people listen to. I guess this 'garbage' music I refer to does sound 'good' to people, otherwise it wouldn't be popular. Only problem is, what many consider good, I consider plain.

[Lunatique]

Man, I almost don't give a shit what goes on in the mainstream music scene anymore. I only get pissed when I turn on the radio, so I don't listen to radio at all. I just find cool music by browsing the internet.

The music I care about will always remain obscure, and that's sad. Idealistically, I would love to see the following music styles get mixed up in the future:

Progressive house
Middle Eastern music
Industrial
Trip-Hop
Drum n Bass
Jazz
Film Score
Goth
Hard rock
New age
Shoegaze

But, in reality, we have fucking R&B and mindless hip-hop taking over everything, with corporate rock and country close behind. *sigh*

[elam]

If you take record sales as any measure of future music tastes, then the future in America is Country and Christian Rock.
Those two categories are the fastest growing album sellers.

I can't imagine Techno, in it's current incarnation, ever catching on in America.
In fact, I can't believe it's caught on anywhere. It's so awful.
Am I the only one that thinks techno is to music as 3d graphics is to art? Anyone can do it?

It's still jazz and blues, with a dash of hip hop for me.

[[Shizo]]

Hehe.. I learned about existance of "Christian Rock" as well as "Christian Rap" from highschool. I thought the guy was making a joke when he said he saw a Christian Rock Band yesterday.

[rubbersharkman]

moby

[PlantMan]

there was a sort of craze her recently where djs played 2 completely different songs alongside each other. No radio could play these mixes because they were against copyright but ther was a single recently that cashed in on the idea by sugerbabes (i know its shit) where they had gary numan's 'cars' in the background but they were singing the lyrics to a misc. r'n'b tune. It worked quite sexy. I also heard an album promoting a club night (in London ?) called 'electric stew' that had similar stuff, eg some nice PJ harvey and turin breaks lyrics over some electro bassy stuff (me not trendy enough to know the exact terminology

[christian cox]

Haha, I'm not sure but I'm laughing because of the punk and emo references. You rock, Hamster.

[wayfinder]

elam, did you really mean that?

about techno and 3d graphics being somthing that everyone can do?

[elam]

Yes, I meant it.
Computers have lowered the barrier for people to create, whether it be music or art. The point of 3d is to make photorealistic pieces, something 99%(my self included) of 3d artist couldn't do traditionally. The programmers are the true artist, IMO.
I suppose anybody can draw as well, but the difference between a terrible drawing and a good one is much more noticable than one between a good and bad 3d work. Computers do the work.

I view Techno, at least in the Juan Atkins and Derrick May sense, in the same light.

I'm 30, which means I was in junior high back in 83-84. I remember hearing rap for the first time.
Roxanne, by UTFO. I remember thinking it was the strangest thing I had ever heard. Incredibly simple, just a breakbeat, some dudes rapping, and some scratching.
But it was so different from anything that was playing at the time. It produced the sample and the scratch. It was revolutionary. Techno ain't. It's like disco.
But I remember people saying the same thing about rap, about how anybody could do it, blah, blah. But, unlike them, I've actually listened to techno. Lots. I believe myself to be informed.
*Everybody* is a dj. There is so much terrible shit out there, it drowns out the good. Maybe I'm just getting old.

Computers have revolutionized music though. I'm a huge fan of acid jazz, ambient and the like. I hate labels.

[balistic]

elam: I'm kind of shocked to read such ignorance from you. Tools don't determine the worth of art, the art itself does.

"I suppose anybody can draw as well, but the difference between a terrible drawing and a good one is much more noticable than one between a good and bad 3d work. Computers do the work."

What?! The exact same principles of form, composition, color, value, balance, line, and shape apply to ALL art. I don't know, maybe I've been using the wrong software all these years . . . point me to the one that automatically picks compelling color schemes, lights my scene for me, and arranges things to make compositional sense with the click of a button.

All the computer does for my 3D is cast shadows for me. All the computer does for my music is play back what I've written so that I don't have to play all the parts myself in realtime.

"The point of 3d is to make photorealistic pieces"

Says whom? I happen to think 3D has inherent qualities that are quite beautiful, and that don't need to be hidden.

"The programmers are the true artist, IMO."

Programmers using their own tools will give you a picture of a nicely-antialiased sphere in a red and blue box. An artist using those tools can give you:
http://art.net/~jeremy/cg/figure5.jpg
http://art.net/~jeremy/cg/re_tree.jpg

What uber advanced programming is going on in those two pieces exactly? Jeremy has taken an ability to build a picture out of triangles and made beautiful art with it. He picked the colors, he formed the shapes, he placed the lights, and he framed the shots.

Saying the computer does the 3D is like saying the canvas does the painting.

Is Kodak film responsible for the impact of "2001: A Space Odyssey?"

And your comparison of Detroit techno to disco only proves that you don't know what's up on that front either. Your name-dropping doesn't fool me. When Juan released his Model 500 and Cybotron stuff in 1984, there was nothing else like it. "No UFOs" from 85 is about as comparable to disco as it is to polka.

There are those of us more interested in what the world will be like in three hundred years . . . we're the early adopters, the ones who first start making art with any newly available media. We're the ones who spend hours adjusting the color of a light in a 3D scene, and the ones who find new, novel ways to generate sounds to use in our musical compositions. We don't use new tools because they're easy (I'd like to see you get fluent in Impulse Tracker in less than a year), we use them because they represent the future.

Listen to the audio samples at Digital Soul and tell me a keyboard is responsible for those emotions. My favorites are Splinterfactions "Ultraism" and Derek Carr's "Iceburg".

95% of anything is shit. Ignore that stuff, and appreciate what isn't.

[ April 03, 2002: Message edited by: balistic ]

[balistic]

"But my point is, if you are trying to produce a piece that mimics reality, a computer has lowered the bar for entry."

Technology /is/ reality. Cyberspace is real. It became so as soon as it started influencing our lives. Why not explore the possibilites it presents?

In terms of it lowering the bar . . . speaking as someone who knows his shit, I'd say that its just as hard to make a photorealistic environment in CG as it is to paint one . . . maybe harder. Why do you think I've embraced 2D so much over the past year?

"Could you reproduce your fabulous works without your computer, B?"

Right now? No. I don't know paint well enough. Give me a year, and then sure. All the same theory carries over, its just a different working methodology.

I could write some pretty compelling music for guitar too, if I felt like investing the time to learn how to play one.

"Your music is primarily composed of loops, no?"

No. All of my tracks are programmed, note by note, beat by beat, by myself. I've never sampled more than a single note from anyone else's music.

Using a computer, I learned how to write music. Now that knowledge is applicable anywhere, all I need is time to learn the interface.

"Without your computer, what have you?"

Composing on a computer is conceptually a lot like composing for a symphony. I suppose I could learn to read classical music notation and do that. Again, you'd have to give me some time to get familiar with the "symphonic interface." And we might have to replace some of the violins with theramins.

And maybe put some taiko drummers up front.

"You boast of difficulty of software? What does that have to do with anything?"

You made it sound easy. You applied the Acid/Fruityloops brush to all digital audio tools. Paint-by-numbers is easy too, but that doesn't invalidate real painting.

"The flipside is making those algorithms easier to use for the traditional artist, be they visual or musician."

Between Wacom tablets and MIDI keyboards, we're there already.

"If you music links are any indication of your music tastes, then you need to diversify."

My links indicate what I want to pimp at the moment.

As if I grew up listening to Detroit techno.

"Judging from your statements, your implying that what you are doing is revolutionary. Are you serious?"

I think I am participating in a couple movements, techno music and digital art, that will shape the future. They've already had profound impacts on the present.

Am I a master? Hell no. I'm 22. Engleman isn't a master. Mullins isn't a master. Techno's had a few guys with master potential (Mad Mike Banks, Carl Craig), but only future history will be able to ascertain their impact . . . but by embracing these new expressive techniques, I believe that I am at least contributing to something new and formative.

I look at it as a fight for the future . . . you've got an army firing bullets for stasis, and an army firing bullets for progress . . . I've picked my allegiance and I'm using the best weapons I can come up with right now. In ten years, maybe I'll be to the point where I'm dropping ten neophobes with a single round. In twenty years, maybe my ammo (my art and music) is high enough caliber that it'll shatter their old battle tanks.

There are sounds you will never, ever be able to make on a guitar. I want to use them in my music. I'll use whatever means necessary to generate them.

There are places that don't exist, that you could never, ever take a photograph of. But I want to take pictures of them.

EDIT: quotes bolded for legibility

[ April 03, 2002: Message edited by: balistic ]

[Lunatique]

elam-- not every musician that uses a digital setup is a "loops/sampled phrases" guy. Sure, there are lots of those, but guess what, they aren't respected by the other electronic musicians either.

There are plenty of musical heavy weights(classically trained composers)that have embraced electronic music and have composed stunning works in that genre. These guys are the true Godfathers of techno, NOT the Detroit DJ types.

Here's a list of the true electonic music Gods:

Ryuichi Sakamoto
Phillip Glass
Kraftwerk
Yello
Art of Noise
Tangerine Dream
Yellow Magic Orchestra
Steve Reich

..etc etc.

Take a listen to any of their music and tell me they can't compare to music made with traditional instruments.

If these guys didn't pave the road, the Detroit dudes would've never existed.

[Jucas]

quote:

---

Originally posted by travis travis:
Dave Mathews IS a left testicle.

---

LOL.

[elam]

You say ignorance, I say opinion.

Computers are a tool, as is a brush or guitar.

But my point is, if you are trying to produce a piece that mimics reality, a computer has lowered the bar for entry.

No, of course a computer will not produce the aesthetics required for a stimulating piece, but that wasn't my point.

Could you reproduce your fabulous works without your computer, B?
Could you make your music as well? Your music is primarily composed of loops, no? Which were in turn primarily created on a computer. Without your computer, what have you?

You boast of difficulty of software? What does that have to do with anything?

Revolution came to the art world when programmers figured out the algorithms to produce graphics on the screen. The flipside is making those algorithms easier to use for the traditional artist, be they visual or musician.
That's the next leap.

I'm comparing techno to disco in a historical sense, not a stylistic one.
If you music links are any indication of your music tastes, then you need to diversify.

Judging from your statements, your implying that what you are doing is revolutionary. Are you serious?

Modesty *is* a virtue.

[Giant Hamster]

Elam: It's the exact same as someone using a guitar. In your eyes, the person that actually built the guitar is the artist then. Cause could that person make the song without the guitar? well, no. So silence from you would be appreciated.

Let's be childish real quick:

"OOh, Look at me, I'm Elam!, 'baaaack in my day we didn't have all these fancy computer-comsputers! We had to do everything by hand! I remember a time when I had to walk uphill both ways in the snow with rabid dogs chasing me to get a loaf of bread! Those were the good ole days."

Less ridiculing of modern instruments please.

[Pat]

Polka.

-Pat

[wayfinder]

let me point you to this little thingie i took part in: fr-022:ein.schlag

i think it combines digital art, music and code quite well.

look at the file size before you run it

[ April 04, 2002: Message edited by: wayfinder ]

[elam]

I don't know how it's been implied that I don't like electronic music, or digitally made music, or that traditional instruments are superior in any way to anything else.

I'm a fan. But I am drawn to music that is melded electronically with traditional instruments, which, I feel, give it a much more human and emotional quality.

My point was orginally is that I didn't like Techno music. That's a personal preference.
I certainly don't expect people to enjoy what I listen to or create.
But secondly, I find that too many people create strictly on their computer, period, be it visual art or music.
In my eyes, the computer has stopped becoming a tool and more of a crutch for a lot of people.

But I am in no way saying that electronic music or Techno for that matter has any less value than any other styles of music.
It's all subjective.

[strata]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Coaster:
Rat, that reminded me of part of the hitch hikers guide the the galaxy.. what was that band called?

---

Disaster Area
Disaster Area, a plutonium rock band from the Gagrakacka Mind Zones, are generally held to be not only the loudest rock band in the Galaxy, but in fact the loudest noise of any kind at all. Regular concert goers judge that the best sound balance is usually to be heard from within large concrete bunkers some thirty-seven miles from the stage, while the musicians themselves play their instruments by remote control from within a heavily insulated spaceship which stays in orbit around the planet - or more frequently around a completely different planet.

Their songs are on the whole very simple and mostly follow the familiar theme of boy-being meets girl-being under a silvery moon which then explodes for no adequately explored reason.

Many worlds have now banned their act altogether, sometimes for artistic reasons, but most commonly because the band's public address system contravenes local strategic arms limitations treaties.

This has not, however, stopped their earnings from pushing back the boundaries of pure hypermathematics, and their chief research accountant has recently been appointed Professor of Neomathematics at the University of Maximegalon, in recognition of both his General and his Special Theories of Disaster Area Tax returns, in which he proves that the whole fabric of the space-time continuum is not merely curved, it is in fact totally bent.


yep yep!

edit: oooh I got rated?? Thank you kind person who rated me! Very kind, indeed

[ April 04, 2002: Message edited by: strata ]