Guest Mescalinium Posted March 31, 2002 Share Posted March 31, 2002 I think many of the arguments above are predicated on the assumption that listeners, in addition to "psy" music itself, are now divided into two distinct camps: "minimal" and "melodic" (or "old school" or "full on" or any number of labels, it doesn't matter). Personally I find this thought to be rather repugnant. I think there is a relatively small but vocal minority of minimal listeners who unequivocally eschew melodic or older artists often to the point of disparagement (e.g. those who begin or end their reviews with "astral lovers @!#$ off"). However conspicuous these types of reviews are, to assume they represent the views of the majority of people listening to the music in question is clearly erroneous and overly simplistic. (I doubt you'll find phrases like that above in mine or Setsuko's reviews, for example). There are many, MANY people, those who frequent this site and otherwise, who fell in love with the goa scene early on, but nonetheless have also come to embrace the newer progressions of this music. To provide a personal example, I started listening to Juno Reactor, Hallucinogen, Pleiadians, Astral Projection, et. al., back in 98. Though I still listen to many of the same artists/albums today, I equally love and respect artists like Son Kite/Filur, Beat Bizarre, Atmos, Noma, Vibrasphere, Ticon, Bigwigs... etc. I don't think we need this dichotomy between old and new, minimal and melodic, goa and psy, young and old. This only serves to divide our scene, not unite it. If division is what you seek, then by all means chop up, restructure, and relabel the review section. I for one will remain opposed... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Setsuko Posted March 31, 2002 Share Posted March 31, 2002 fully agree with mescalinium . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pranaspace Posted March 31, 2002 Share Posted March 31, 2002 agreed.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bugbread Posted March 31, 2002 Share Posted March 31, 2002 Agreed...kinda. First off, I don't favor splitting up the review section, or fractioning the site. I do notice that the title "psy", though, is increasingly becoming less useful as it is used to describe a feeling and not a sound. I think of it in terms of DnB/Happy, in which case no one should assume that if someone likes one, they dislike the other. And I do agree that they are both within the same family of psy. I just have a hard time reconciling the Delta and Infected as the same genre of music. Yes, they evolved from the same point, and, yes, they still share more in common with eachother than, say, the Delta and LTJ Bukem, but they are far enough apart that calling them the same thing just seems...silly. To give you an example, until recently "psy trance" and "epic trance" were just called trance in Japan. That means that the Delta and Tiesto were considered the same genre. Though they are related, and many people who like Tiesto like The Delta and vice versa, in the end it just led to confusion, with people going to a "Trance" party not knowing what the hell was going to play unless the DJ was very famous, and constant misunderstanding. Now that people call them "psy-trance" and "cyber-trance" (or "epic"), things have become much more managable in daily life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bugbread Posted March 31, 2002 Share Posted March 31, 2002 Damndamndamn!! Now I'm using the word evolve! Sorry about the hypocrisy there. -me Damn bad habits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chong Posted April 1, 2002 Share Posted April 1, 2002 I agree with Chong :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest peaceful warrior Posted April 1, 2002 Share Posted April 1, 2002 I agree with Mescalinium and Phaeton and I understand where Bugbread and Elysium Project are comming from. I am one of those people that in the beggining started listening to the more melodic "Goa" style psy-trance but has also accepted and enjoyed the newer expressions of psy-trance. So I agree with you Bugbread that there are important differences between the various sub-genres and I don't think anybody should automatically be expected to like all of them just because they are related. On the other hand I fully agree with Mescalinium in that the assumtion that the whole psy-trance scene is neatly divided into two opposing camps is false. I think that despite the way it seems, most people can and do enjoy the full spectrum of musical expression that this scene offers. Personally I thrive on the variety. So I am definitely opposed to the splitting of the scene. For one thing it seems to me that there are not two uniquely different sounds in psy-trance but rather a continuum with extreme minimalism at one extreme and full on melodic at the other extreme. In my opinion this formula bending, genre blending is the rule in psy-trance and not the exception. So any attempt to divide the scene neatly would be impossible. Another thing to think about is the fact that at many parties the sub-genres are equally represented. There is a progression in sound that necessarily relies on the variety of sound that is characteristic of psy-trance. For me the most important thing about psy-trance is that it is deep, original, and psychedelic. Psychedelic means mind expanding and there are many different ways to achieve this. There is an essence to the spirit of psy-trance and I can't believe that it can be reduced to a formula. Psy-trance lives and breathes and evolves so long as it is free. So lets' keep it free; without borders, binding formulas or preconcieved expectations. We can then be confident that there will always be at least some artists whose music speak to us in that special way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Triplex Posted April 2, 2002 Share Posted April 2, 2002 I am listening to your discussions, they are very interesting. I like what you have to say Chong you make some good sense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bugbread Posted April 2, 2002 Share Posted April 2, 2002 True, peaceful warrior. It's an awkward boat to be in to like the extreme end of the spectrum. It seems that the other end is a million miles away. But for a centrist, melodic and minimal are just one step left and one step right. I'll shut up now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Red Headed Stepchild Posted April 3, 2002 Share Posted April 3, 2002 I agree that there is a definitely a difference between total FULL-ON and MINIMAL but both psychedelic. Full-on usually make me fly away in the melodies. It has this level of complexity that is truly mind-bending. Minimal on the other hand is obviously more spacious and tends set a feeling. With minimal I have had a lot more visions. I quess it's like this. Our minds have a dual nature. We are a species that seeks to advance into new area that are complex and at the same time we seek to understand that part of us that is very primitive. The nature of a Pyschedelic experience is that it gives you new insight. There is much to learn from that which has an efficiently primal quality as well that which is truly complex. I think it makes sense the way alot of parties use these two styles. Using the primal Minimal sound to brake away the constructs of modern society and rebuild it with a new structure through the use of Full-on sounds. Enough said PEACE ALL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.