healium Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 I've got this theory - seems most people start out with psychedelics, and then move on to using them less frequently, or not at all, meanwhile using more of substances like alcohol or hard drugs like opiates or stimulants.. Lots of psy artists start out with really deep trippy work, and then their albums often become more and more mainstream, less deep and trippy - my theory is that they don't really use psychedelics much anymore, like most people, they move toward simpler and less inspiring substances.. Any ideas about that? Or other ideas about why it is that artists seem to put out music that is less deep/psychedelic, and more mainstream over time? There are exceptions to this obviously, but it seems people are always complaining about psy artists getting less deep as time goes on, and I agree.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imba Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 I would just say: MONEY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
needle ninja Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 I notice in all genres (styles) of music that the early productions from artists are more often then not the best. If you think about it, it makes sense; they start from the pure love of the kind of music that they make, then other things enter their lives and it becomes more confused and less spiritual and eventually family and social obligations crowd out the origional time and inpiration that made the artist want to make music in the first place. Certainly there is some truth to the idea that money gets in the way, but it is not so simple. For the most part, artists want recognition for what they make. We want to feel like someone appreciates our craft. When recognition is not realised, people try to change what they do, even if it goes agaist what they liked the best. Often, I think that recognition drives music to be a certain way, not subtle and anonimous, but boisterous and specific. Pop music is a creation over time, it didn't just happen one day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time_Trap Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 @ healium : I don't agree that much with your theory, because there are artists that have produced trippy & psychedelic music without having taken any substances in their life. MFG is a good example of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
healium Posted March 7, 2011 Author Share Posted March 7, 2011 @ healium : I don't agree that much with your theory, because there are artists that have produced trippy & psychedelic music without having taken any substances in their life. MFG is a good example of that. I agree - I'm not saying that the psychedelic substances are needed for the creativity in psy music, just that, if an artist started with those as part of their inspiration, but then phases those out and just drinks alcohol, caffeine, and does stimulants/opiates/pills, their music will be less inspired by the deep cosmic realm and will start to become more mainstream focused (mainstream culture, at least here in the USA, is extremely un-psychedelic, and psychedelics are not popular).. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imba Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Harel Prusky use cocaine almost every they and what? Now he cant make nothing. I never used drug as inspiration, also never tried stronger than skunk but i can make solid tracks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mars Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Lack of inspiration over time. Plus substances. Plus faster money if they're well known. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ziptnf Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Not all psy artists want to keep producing it. Their tastes either evolve or change completely. Some may be motivated by money, but most of the time artists don't want their sound to stagnate; rather, introduce new sounds and ideas that don't always involve psy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veracohr Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 most of the time artists don't want their sound to stagnate; rather, introduce new sounds and ideas that don't always involve psy. This. Psytrance has pretty specific and narrow aspects that make it 'psy' as opposed to some other subgenre of trance or EDM. It would be boring to make the same stuff forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elysium Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Artists that never evolve aren't artists in my book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
healium Posted March 8, 2011 Author Share Posted March 8, 2011 Well maybe "shallower" or "more mainstream" would be better descriptions than "less psychedelic" - I can understand an artist wanting to try different things, but why is it so often in the direction of less complex/deep music and more in the direction of the sort of stuff that appeals to mainstream audiences? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatsu Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Maybe because the psy people (well, some...) more or less automatically regard any non-psy style as shallow and more mainstream? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imba Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Artists that never evolve aren't artists in my book. Evolve in your own style you used as roots before, if you made old school i think you should make new school. Good example is Cosmosis, last few albums were psy and not that much atractive but see last one. Tracks like Space Siren, Beyond Five Senses and The Eternal Now are powerful. Thats evolution imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richpa Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 In my opinion some of them are just following latest trends and goes for wider audience (+better money). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatsu Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Evolve in your own style you used as roots before, if you made old school i think you should make new school. Good example is Cosmosis, last few albums were psy and not that much atractive but see last one. Tracks like Space Siren, Beyond Five Senses and The Eternal Now are powerful. Thats evolution imo. Well, a pretty limited evolution if you ask me. I mean if you are bored with the style you are making why should it be more interesting to you to switch to a style that is that close to the old thing (new-school and old-school)? I doubt this would give you a lot of inspiration for new tracks in that situation. A total switch of style imho could. Talking about Cosmosis, I like his music and imho he is still very interested in the psy thing. No wonder he does not switch thato something completely different. But expecting every artist to do the same is a bit strange imho. And setting rules what styles are appropriate follow-ups for psy even more imho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ormion Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Beside money, fame, lack of inspiration, evolution of sound etc. the biggest reason I think it's age. This is something that I have witnessed happening in the audience too. When you're young you have all this energy inside you, you want to hear something powerful, crazy, fast. When you're getting old you want to settle with something more mellow.* I'm sure everyone knows people that used to listen to psy, but now they feel too 'old' for that. That's the case with the artists too. When they first produced the just want to make something intense and crazy, but after some years they want to calm a bit. That's the only reason I can think for example that none of the old school artists evolved his sound in something more fast or crazy, but almost all of them they went to the full on/prog side which is a mellow one indeed. Of course there are more money there, but I doubt that all artists think that way. *BTW that's not the case with me. Personally the older I get the more psychedelic sound I want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pifpafpof Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 I've got this theory - seems most people start out with psychedelics, and then move on to using them less frequently, or not at all, meanwhile using more of substances like alcohol or hard drugs like opiates or stimulants.. Lots of psy artists start out with really deep trippy work, and then their albums often become more and more mainstream, less deep and trippy - my theory is that they don't really use psychedelics much anymore, like most people, they move toward simpler and less inspiring substances.. Any ideas about that? Or other ideas about why it is that artists seem to put out music that is less deep/psychedelic, and more mainstream over time? There are exceptions to this obviously, but it seems people are always complaining about psy artists getting less deep as time goes on, and I agree.. well i can just speak from my own experience with POF and i have never taken any drugs. the anwser is more simple actually the more you learn about music the less sounds you need to get your point a cross and with age you become more lazy... and also the better production you get the more restricted you are in therms of choice of sounds, etc.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike A Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 I would just say: MONEY NO Been doing psychedelic trance for almost 12 years now, so yes - it gets boring. Doesn't have anything to do with money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abasio Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Not all psy artists want to keep producing it. Their tastes either evolve or change completely. Some may be motivated by money, but most of the time artists don't want their sound to stagnate; rather, introduce new sounds and ideas that don't always involve psy. This! The most talented artists don't want to keep making the same music over and over again and they will delve into music of other styles that they either think will be a challenge or that they enjoy more. Yes a lot of artists make more mainstream music that is less psychedelic and more appealing for the masses. But maybe they don't care about psychedelic, not eveything has to be psychedelic for everyone. Maybe they like that style, the energy the simplicity and less pretension that goes with the more "elite" styles of music. People change and I say let them. There will always be new artists to come and take up the mantle. Look at PoF above, still fairly new and 2 fantastic albums under their belt. *BTW that's not the case with me. Personally the older I get the more psychedelic sound I want. Same here but I find psychedelia in more than I used to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elysium Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Evolve in your own style you used as roots before, if you made old school i think you should make new school. Good example is Cosmosis, last few albums were psy and not that much atractive but see last one. Tracks like Space Siren, Beyond Five Senses and The Eternal Now are powerful. Thats evolution imo. I dont agree at all. Especially not when it comes to the so-called "new Goa" which IMO try to copy what has already been made (And fail IMO). That is not evolution. I think an artists should do exactly what he or she wants to do. There is no rule that just because you made old-school Goa you have to make new school Goa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penzoline Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Change in sound is all fine and dandy for the artist but not for the listener. It's a tricky situation. What new school goa artists may not be evolving but at least it's catering for an audience that has lost what was once was, to a degree. As a listener I'm not really interested in the genre changing directions artists take and that's that. If an artists makes something I thoroughly enjoy and then switches to something completely different on the next album, there's no way I won't be disappointed. Hence negativity. Sure it may seem selfish but that's just how it is. You lose something you don't want to lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ziptnf Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Evolve in your own style you used as roots before, if you made old school i think you should make new school. Good example is Cosmosis, last few albums were psy and not that much atractive but see last one. Tracks like Space Siren, Beyond Five Senses and The Eternal Now are powerful. Thats evolution imo. Not really. Who says that artists should follow a particular pattern when they want to change their sound? When an artist wants to evolve, they can use previous influences as well as current influences to develop a new identity. If an artist makes goa, then psy, then full-on, then goes back to goa, I think that's really limited with what they want to do with their creativity. I, for one, wouldn't be upset at all if they decided to make more progressive or techno influenced stuff, just because they are getting tired of the trippy, full power nonsense that they were into in the past. Change in sound is all fine and dandy for the artist but not for the listener. It's a tricky situation. What new school goa artists may not be evolving but at least it's catering for an audience that has lost what was once was, to a degree. As a listener I'm not really interested in the genre changing directions artists take and that's that. If an artists makes something I thoroughly enjoy and then switches to something completely different on the next album, there's no way I won't be disappointed. Hence negativity. Sure it may seem selfish but that's just how it is. You lose something you don't want to lose. I think that is very closed-minded. Perhaps if PoF or Perfect Stranger starts doing more techno than psy, you may not like it, but keep in mind that there are hundreds of artists out there that are probably producing music you like. Artists produce music that they like and they hope their fans might like. If they don't, they don't have to listen, no honor lost. But dismissing it because it's not psy is very stubborn in my opinion. Don't dismiss the artist just because they don't keep making goa or psy over and over again for 8 albums straight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike A Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Imba, I would like to see your opinion in 10 years from now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penzoline Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 I think that is very closed-minded. Perhaps if PoF or Perfect Stranger starts doing more techno than psy, you may not like it, but keep in mind that there are hundreds of artists out there that are probably producing music you like. Artists produce music that they like and they hope their fans might like. If they don't, they don't have to listen, no honor lost. But dismissing it because it's not psy is very stubborn in my opinion. Don't dismiss the artist just because they don't keep making goa or psy over and over again for 8 albums straight. I know it is, like I said, it's selfish, but can you honestly say this is not the case a lot of the time? More power to the artists doing whatever they want, it just means people are not going to be happy and some can be very vocal about it. I'm just stating the facts. I'm speaking generally. Probably should have rephrased some of my post since it feels like you aim that post towards me personally lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ziptnf Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 I know it is, like I said, it's selfish, but can you honestly say this is not the case a lot of the time? More power to the artists doing whatever they want, it just means people are not going to be happy and some can be very vocal about it. I'm just stating the facts. I'm speaking generally. Probably should have rephrased some of my post since it feels like you aim that post towards me personally lol. I'm not aiming it at you at all, I'm aiming it at your mindset. The second part is exactly what you said, it is the case where a fanbase may not appreciate the new direction an artist is taking, but it seems that dismissing their new sound without giving it a chance can be closed minded. This is only for specific cases, when talented artists use their old influences to improve their sound rather than change it completely. However, sometimes, artists change their perspective so drastically that it just doesn't fit with their old crowd at all. I don't think Ticon made the right choice in going almost purely electro, but that was their decision, and they abandoned their old fanbase for a new one. That's just the way the music industry goes. The Black Eyed Peas used to do old school, Brooklyn-style hip hop, but now they're doing electro-pop for the brainless masses. That's why I said there are tons of artists out there that are making music that you would enjoy 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.