Guest Loopfreaks Posted December 17, 2005 Share Posted December 17, 2005 Edit: this means people stopped seeing me as "moni the psynewser" and now i'm just "moni the psymod" :| 399675[/snapback] No not at all. But when you become a moderator things will change a little. It's normal since you as a moderator (NOT the person Moni) at times will moderate in ways that some people disagree with and by that be the target of critisism for your moderator actions. It should never be about you - the person Moni. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moni Posted December 17, 2005 Share Posted December 17, 2005 k, i edited my post. i'm sorry. i was already angry when i red radi's post. i'm only human after all, even mods can get angry. *gets back on topic* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radi6404 Posted December 17, 2005 Share Posted December 17, 2005 k, i edited my post. i'm sorry. i was already angry when i red radi's post. i'm only human after all, even mods can get angry. *gets back on topic* 399678[/snapback] That´s the point monica, i´am only a human, too and i´am really SICK that near all my favourite old artists now do fullon instead of psychedelic trance. Hey, all artstis that i loved now make shit, do you know how pissed off i´am because this? Astral projection, spacetribe, psychaos, electric universe and much other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moni Posted December 17, 2005 Share Posted December 17, 2005 That´s the point monica, i´am only a human, too and i´am really SICK that near all my favourite old artists now do fullon instead of psychedelic trance. Hey, all artstis that i loved now make shit, do you know how pissed off i´am because this? Astral projection, spacetribe, psychaos, electric universe and much other. 399756[/snapback] so move on. that's what i do. people evolve, grow up, change paths. go and experience, see what you might discover. there's a lot of music out there. you don't need to get angry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manuser Posted December 17, 2005 Share Posted December 17, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted December 17, 2005 Share Posted December 17, 2005 i don't think there is a formula to follow in order to obtain good music. 399424[/snapback] Indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devious Posted December 17, 2005 Share Posted December 17, 2005 Wow, I've never been to a forum where everyone seemed to be married? This is awesome. Can I get a piece? =]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] Anyways, hoping I can get a piece of this psynews ass, I want to contribute: I have no true opinion on full on today other than metamorphisis techno, as with dark psy i refer to as "dark metamorphisis techno." I've heard it all at one party, in the United States. I however prefer to stay with the oldskool sound. It's preference and if you hate my oldskool because I hate your full-on, kiss off :-D Otherwise, I love you all! *HUGS AND KISSES* HEHE! And a hohoho, merry x-mas. Geeze, I hope my girlfriend acquired some kickass CDs for me. :-D:-D:-D Aaron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Watcher Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time_Trap Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 But now this terms' use is a free-for-all. Anything with any kind of bassline released after 2004 will eventually get called "full-on" by well personally i wouldnt call Droidlock - Elefantronika {2005} full-on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sherlockalien Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 For me the term "FULL-ON" has basically lost its meaning. Its used so loosely in this forum and abroad to describe such a wide variety of styles and sounds that it doesn't even describe anything anymore. Can anyone hear define "Full-on"? I sure as hell can't. It orginally used to mean a style of psytrance where all these different synths where going at once and the resonance and filters keep climbing until a point where everything is fully ON; hence, FULL-ON. Then the genre kind of evovled into that psy with the trade mark "Full-on" bassline and climax of sounds style. But now this terms' use is a free-for-all. Anything with any kind of bassline released after 2004 will eventually get called "full-on" by someone, and then it will be inherently bashed by that full-on-hating collective, which by the way has a right to exist, Mr. Rain. However I disagree entirely with their sentiments. As a genre: Full-On is in my personal opinion a wealth of well-produced electronic music. More loosely you can call this music psytrance and that is, after all, what we're all here to appreciate and talk about. Sometimes a good bashing is critcal on message boards, both for its comedic value and its abilty to sway would be listeners away from something aweful (Bamboo Forest - Revival, which I thoroughly bashed, for instance). I agree that too much is TOO GODDAMN MUCH sometimes and those type of posts aren't fun to read. 399921[/snapback] I dont know exactly how to define full on, but I sure know when there´s full on playing.. I disagree, I think tt doesnt have any bassline released after 2004.. I listen to a lot of progressive where each track has very different bassline from each other, many new and older basslines... Some are ´skipping´, some are ´straight´, some are more ´fat and funky´, others ´continuous´... Full on, on the other hand, it all sounds a lot of the same.. The bassline is always that typical rolling bassline.. You know it will be about 145bpm... It´s very predictable most of the times, you know when there´s going to be a break, a drug/alien sample, when the low frequencies are going to be shut off and then come full power again, when the annoying synths will appear, etc... btw, yeah sure there are times when you cant really define properly what genre a certain track is.. but that happens with any genre, there are these crossover tracks which are not specifically following a certain genre´s pattern... but that doesnt mean that there isnt a ´stereotype´ of full on that fits quite many tracks and that when one talks about it, even if its hard to define perfectly (like any genre), the others wont know what the person is talking about.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalker Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 Edit: this means people stopped seeing me as "moni the psynewser" and now i'm just "moni the psymod" :| 399675[/snapback] I still see you as "Moni" As for the topic Oldschool and Full on is the same thing Now flame my ass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sherlockalien Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 Oldschool and Full on is the same thing 399997[/snapback] they are not the same thing.. but both are very annoying and both give me headaches now flame me too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 they are not the same thing.. but both are very annoying and both give me headaches now flame me too 400039[/snapback] old school annoying? Are you into progressive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dajek Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalker Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 they are not the same thing.. 400039[/snapback] Oh yes they are! The diference is that full on is harder, modern, clear, and better then oldscholl The advantage of Oldscool against full on is that they had better acids Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest djnemo Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 Funny to see that so many people have so many diffrent views on what full on or oldschool is hehe. Im backing out of this thread by saying: good music is good music is good music is good music is good Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sherlockalien Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 old school annoying? Are you into progressive? 400040[/snapback] yes old school is very annoying imo... too fast, too many scratchy layers, noises noises and not good production.. yeah im into prog, house and electro, but only good ones like antix, chable, absolut, clubbervision, trentemoller, martinez, etc not same-old psy prog like symphonix, xibalba, newer genetic spin, newer tegma, etc... these are just boring and attempt too much to please different crowds... also not bullshit commercial house and neither soul-less electro.. but thats just my taste, just as true as anyone else´s.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reger Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 yes old school is very annoying imo... too fast, too many scratchy layers, noises noises and not good production.. yeah im into prog, house and electro, but only good ones like antix, chable, absolut, clubbervision, trentemoller, martinez, etc not same-old psy prog like symphonix, xibalba, newer genetic spin, newer tegma, etc... these are just boring and attempt too much to please different crowds... also not bullshit commercial house and neither soul-less electro.. but thats just my taste, just as true as anyone else´s.. 400095[/snapback] and it sucks !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i guess you understand that it was a joke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 good music is good music is good music is good music is good 400067[/snapback] Wise, wise words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sherlockalien Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 good music is good music is good music is good music is good 400067[/snapback] I agree with you partially.. in one hand, if I understand your criticism, indeed music is too dynamic and undefinable to try to classify them im genres. There are many aspects that are too ´fine´ to be held by the classifications, just like if we try to grab water with our hands we cant, it´s too ´thin´... So good music is not limited to a particular genre because there isnt even such a thing as objectively defined genres at all... BUT, as long as we know that the menu is not the meal, I find no problem at all using the menu itself.. If we agree on this, then the next step in my argument is: Just like notes on music or water waves on the pool, certain ´frequencies´ add up harmoniously and certain dont add harmoniously... The thing is, we are also frequencies... Outside frequencies interphere with our personal frequencies, and at times it´s harmonious, at times its not.. These outside frequencies may come in the form of any of our senses, (and even in the form of ´animal magnetism´, but this is not for this post hehe).. So in this case, it´s music Im talking about.. Certain range of sounds simply dont work with certain people, even if they try to like it.. And even if these range of sounds are kinda fluid and not exactly fixed, still they have a certain constancy in some aspects. So my whole point is that sometimes these constants in the frequencies that dont work with us are quite similar to the constants of sounds that are used in a certain genre. So if we know that the genres is not an objective fixed true classification, but a subjective and limited one, then I find no problem in using them, and if certain sounds that simply dont work with us are the sounds that fit more or less a certain genre, then I also find no problem in saying that you dont like a genre or that a genre is bad or annoying (as long as you know its subjective and that your truth isnt more true than anybody else´s) and it sucks !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i guess you understand that it was a joke 400109[/snapback] Be affraid!!! hahahaha of course I dont mind, you can think it sucks, its taste anyways Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radi6404 Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 yes old school is very annoying imo... too fast, too many scratchy layers, noises noises and not good production.. yeah im into prog, house and electro, but only good ones like antix, chable, absolut, clubbervision, trentemoller, martinez, etc not same-old psy prog like symphonix, xibalba, newer genetic spin, newer tegma, etc... these are just boring and attempt too much to please different crowds... also not bullshit commercial house and neither soul-less electro.. but thats just my taste, just as true as anyone else´s.. 400095[/snapback] Do you know AT ALL how difficult it is to master songs? I think no!!! I have expensive waves mastering plugins on my computer and it is damn difficult to master the song as good as the oldschool artists have mastered it, so what you say is wrong and pure noncesense. sorry that i´am rude but i get sick if i must hear this bullshit, then search oldschool with good mastering, astral projection´s songs are very well mastered for example, the stuff during 97 and newer is well mastered alzo, get something from this time if you want good mastered music. If you don´t like oldschool this can´t be a reason cause most releases are well mastered, they are muchb etter mastered than any shit fullon that demages my speakers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time_Trap Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 sherl, oldskool is usually not that fast <= 140 BMP most of the time.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reger Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 *waiting for sherlock to answer to ga-ga's post* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sherlockalien Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 Do you know AT ALL how difficult it is to master songs? I think no!!! I have expensive waves mastering plugins on my computer and it is damn difficult to master the song as good as the oldschool artists have mastered it, so what you say is wrong and pure noncesense. sorry that i´am rude but i get sick if i must hear this bullshit, then search oldschool with good mastering, astral projection´s songs are very well mastered for example, the stuff during 97 and newer is well mastered alzo, get something from this time if you want good mastered music. If you don´t like oldschool this can´t be a reason cause most releases are well mastered, they are muchb etter mastered than any shit fullon that demages my speakers. 400432[/snapback] yes I do know how hard it is to master songs, I have a friend that works for sony music and I tried making a bit of music myself so Im aware... and when did I ever say its not good mastering? I said its not good production.. you probably just dont understand the words in the same way.. Whenever I hear oldschool I dont hear the sounds so perfectly distinct and clear, I dont think it sounds clean and crispy, etc etc... and in these terms, the music I listen to in general I find much better.. why get angry? its my opinion.. just because I think your favs simon p and others are bad music? Yes they are bad music.. IN MY OPINION .. I get so annoyed, almost with headaches when I hear it.. want me to call it good music? Of course not.. Its just that those sounds dont work with me, I enjoy other things when I hear music.. I´ve been listening to this music for quite a few years now, so I know that those sounds dont work for me... and as for the reasons I dont like goa, I already said how its many reasons put together: too fast (140 is already too fast for me.. I like on the 130´s... There´s a ticon track that is 136 and I find it too fast already) not clear enough sounds too many layers (when there are too many sounds, each sound is not so important.. when there are less sounds, each sound has to be more crisp and well made cause they will be responsible for the whole feeling) ´scratchy´ sounds (I really dislike those stomach-twirling, acid, ripping, scratching sounds that goa uses.. those are the worse for me) the melodies (I nearly always dislike the melodies that goa uses.. the feeling of the melodies that goa uses is totally different than the feeling of the melodies I normally like) etc etc it just doesnt work for me... I dont like it, I find it bad music for the reasons above, and I know bad is subjective.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kai-Q Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 I think that is childish too, that many people bitching around here, like little kids, in this forum about Full On, not to mention to screw it up. It beginns if some people open a new topic to ask for some Full On tips or want to talk about an album, and out of nowhere full-on haters discuss offtopic, for example “Shit Full On”, “Hear some better music, than this fucking Full On”, “Full On sucks”, “Death to Full On”, and so on. That is really childish. That is here a Psychedelic Trance Forum, where people talk about Psychedelic Trance and Full On is a part of this genre. I must confess that this music would go in some times boring, because many tracks sound too similar, it has not much of change and I think sometimes it is the same DJ behind all the songs/projects. But I like it too, also Old School Goa Trance, but it will nothing change here if many people are bitching around here. If this music makes you so angry, why don’t you go to the source, where it comes from? Why don’t you form a group or make a petition and talk with the DJ’s, Label and with the distributors? That you want a change in the Psychedelic Music Scene, some more old oldschoolish music. 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.