Labels that release Goa

[Elysium]

Well it's seems this debate about producers 'trying to hard to sound oldschool' is going on some time here...

Only thing i can say is, both from a listeners and an artist point of view: let artists friggin' do what they want! Music making should be for the fun of making music, and well, if someone enjoys making music that was already made 10+ years ago, he should make that kind of music. Don't try to push in the direction you want, because music is always better when it is made from the heart.

and frankly, just because you don't like the sound and don't think it's innovative, well that doesn't mean everybody does.

And it seems that people think it is obligatory for artist to experiment, to be innovative and push their own boundaries... Well I can imagine that alot of artists don't think the same way, and just make the sound they now and like because it makes them happy.

Just listen to music you like, and let artist make the music they like

For me it is more important that an artist makes music to express him/herself, and makes it from the heart, then wether I like it or not..

 

So according to you we should just stop debating music all together? Releasing whatever is being made and never tell a single soul they should use their time on something else? How boring

 

P.S! I was once told I could not sing and I am thankful for that advice.

[Antares]

So according to you we should just stop debating music all together? How boring

 

No, I mean that artist should make music they like, period. And well debate about music can be fun, but is extremely subjective. If you say an artist isn't innovative, i can say he is and we both are right The thing I do find rather pointless, and i read A LOT lately on this forum, are things like 'artist should be more innovative', 'artist should stop trying to create the old sound, they fail at it'. Those things are subjective and personal. There even was a thread that tried to show artists 'how it should be done', and 'draw inpiration from' Maybe I have a naïve point of view about what music is, but for me music is all about expressing yourself, and get the things you have in your head out, wheter it's innovative, or has been done a thousand times before. And well, if people love it, fantastic! But you shouldn't be led by the fact that they might not..

[Antares]

And about your PS: hell if singing makes you happy, you should sing man

[Penzoline]

Fair enough. You find my reasons stupid. I find it utterly stupid that some people here get personal offended or let's say "annoyed" if their favorite music or artists are being debated

 

I do follow what's going on and listen to the music so you assume wrong (very wrong) And I do believe I am competent enough to have an opinion that's not "stupid" or less important than yours because you, a die hard fan, have a hard time dealing with criticism when it come to your favorite music. As I said before in this debate and many others it's nothing personal. I merely speak my mind as others do too and try to be constructive in my criticism (I explain why I feel the music should not be released). No I do not tell people how they should make the music. That would be nonsense and there are no "right or wrong". But I do say what's on my mind regarding the music and where I think some of the artists get it wrong (according to my taste).

 

So like my criticism or not. It's fine with me. But don't tell me my reasons are stupid just because you don't see eye to eye with my opinion.

 

I don't have hard time dealing with criticism, I actually wish to encourage it for artist to get better. I may have hard time giving it (Through my reviews), though I am trying to improve upon that. What I am saying is I can clearly separate an artist from another, and so can others, and you argued it's not possible. I don't see how that is possible when others manage to make the distinction no matter how good or bad the music could be. Artists have their own sound even if it's similar to another, I don't see how it ever blends/merges with another so well that you can't separate the two.

[Procyon]

No, I mean that artist should make music they like, period. And well debate about music can be fun, but is extremely subjective. If you say an artist isn't innovative, i can say he is and we both are right The thing I do find rather pointless, and i read A LOT lately on this forum, are things like 'artist should be more innovative', 'artist should stop trying to create the old sound, they fail at it'. Those things are subjective and personal. There even was a thread that tried to show artists 'how it should be done', and 'draw inpiration from' Maybe I have a naïve point of view about what music is, but for me music is all about expressing yourself, and get the things you have in your head out, wheter it's innovative, or has been done a thousand times before. And well, if people love it, fantastic! But you shouldn't be led by the fact that they might not..

 

I agree music is about expressing yourself, but if you don't want to read "pointless, personal and subjective" opinions, then keep it inside your bedroom. Never release it. The same works for book writers, painters, moviemakers...

[Otto Matta]

I agree music is about expressing yourself, but if you don't want to read "pointless, personal and subjective" opinions, then keep it inside your bedroom. Never release it. The same works for book writers, painters, moviemakers...

 

Very true. And FWIW I agree entirely with Antares. Music from the heart is the best music. Hell, people are still interpreting music by people who died centuries ago.

 

Being an aspiring artist can be really tricky. No one wants to tell someone their music is shitty, or answer difficult technical questions in laymen's terms that noobs can understand. So it becomes a steep, frustrating, lonely climb. I think people should be more honest and informative with aspiring artists, especially those who are asking for it.

 

P.S. It looks like Elysium is open to advice.

[(OM)Open_Mind]

Antares, I got your point.

 

Will describe my view. As artist, I am always glad to hear critic. It can give me new goals, so I can have more fun to achieve it. Not to copy, but try that element, that and that and see what's happen. That's why I am always try different genres, not only goa. It's expression of myself too and it's freaking interesting.

 

Without any critic and with only good opinions around, you can relax and stop improving your weak sides.

 

As listener, I can feel strong difference between best examples of oldchool and new goa trance. And I can do nothing to stop feel it. But I can enjoy new school on some level. Oldschool just give me more, and it's pretty normal. There was a lot of shit released in old days, but overall releases per year was much more. So there was more good and different stuff around.

 

Anyway, if you take it personally and feel bad about it, just ignore and don't read. If it can brake your inspiration and slow down your producing, just screw this forum, It's your right! Nobody can command you, how to make your music!

[Antares]

Yeah, i agree, i really don't mean that artists shouldn't be critisised. Constructive criticism can be very helpfull! I was refering to the fact that people seem to try pushing artists in the direction they want... Because if you move a certain direction, you will please some and dissapoint others.. So mainly it is about making the music YOU want, not what other people want you to make.

If one of my favourite artists starts evolving towards a style I don't like, hell he should if he wants to, I'll just listen to other artists i do like. For me there is no point in commenting on that artists newer work as in : 'man, his new sound sucks balls, his old work was tons better, stop making this new crap and go back to your old sound!'

My main point was that critisism CAN be really helpfull, but that artists shouldn't met that decide waht they make.

[Time_Trap]

And Elysium, to take it further: Do you think it's possible to create an original bassline that doesn't resemble anything made during a period of around 20 years of goa trance, AND the track still remaining goa trance? You might make innovative basslines in suomi or darkpsy(psykovsky's latest, regardless of whether I like it or not, nothing to do with my point), but if you want to make something sound like goa , vast amounts of originality are impossible or really,really,really hard. I bet that even someone with lots of producing experience like you can't make a goa bassline that doesn't resemble anything made in the past (and of course, as I said, the music still being Goa trance). If you can, let us know.

 

 

Too bad I didn't get a reply to that.

And Procyon, I agree, one shouldn't limit his creativity only to Goa, but my point is something different: If you want to create Goa, it's really hard to innovate.

[Elysium]

And Elysium, to take it further: Do you think it's possible to create an original bassline that doesn't resemble anything made during a period of around 20 years of goa trance, AND the track still remaining goa trance? You might make innovative basslines in suomi or darkpsy(psykovsky's latest, regardless of whether I like it or not, nothing to do with my point), but if you want to make something sound like goa , vast amounts of originality are impossible or really,really,really hard. I bet that even someone with lots of producing experience like you can't make a goa bassline that doesn't resemble anything made in the past (and of course, as I said, the music still being Goa trance). If you can, let us know.

 

 

I did not see your post so don't worry you'll get your answer

 

Yes of course I think it is possible to create new basslines just as it's possible to create something unique and fresh. And of course there will always be some sort of recognition in what you do in reference to music made earlier. That's how things are in any genre. BUT when I hear track after track copying basslines and melodies etc. directly from artists from the 90's then I wonder if these new artists at all have any intention to do their own thing? Not speaking in general as I am sure there are some, but not many, who seek their own sound and direction.

 

And Who said Goa trance has to sound exactly like it did 10 years ago? Why not go new ways, experiment, create something new´, set your mind free and remove the chains of the past? Something that is yours and not just another copy?

 

Nothing is impossible but if that is yours and especially the new artists opinion then I predict you'll run out of steam pretty soon and never evolve.

 

The problem is that you people narrow Goatrance down to one small grope of artists within a big wide Goa movement that actually contained a lot of diversity. Goatrance is so much more than Transwave, Etnica and Astral Projection!!!!

 

P.S! I experiment with basslines every single day (as well with other parts in the music) but use them in other projects. And I do not think I copy other artists sound or basslines as I pretty much think Elysium has it's own unique sound. So I do not have to prove I can make different bassline. I know I can The point is also that it's not just that the bassline has to be different. It's all about the final result and making it your own instead of making it into someone else did before you.

 

 

P.S. It looks like Elysium is open to advice.

 

I'm always open to advice if it's an advice made from common sense and not based on arrogance. Are you open to advice or just out to stir up things as usual?

[Time_Trap]

As I said innovation happens in suomi,dark, tech-trance,psy-prog etc. I really insist that it's really hard to do something innovative in goa trance and it still being goa trance. Of course it's possible to innovate,as I said many times already, but then it would be no goa anymore, but something else.

[Elysium]

As I said innovation happens in suomi,dark, tech-trance,psy-prog etc. I really insist that it's really hard to do something innovative in goa trance and it still being goa trance. Of course it's possible to innovate,as I said many times already, but then it would be no goa anymore, but something else.

 

I highly disgaree. I think you see walls where there are no walls Of course if you think Goa is only a small handful of artists such as Transwave, Etnica and Astral and only want to sound exactly like them. Then you have a problem and I predict you wont evolve further as a genre;)

[Time_Trap]

I highly disgaree. I think you see walls where there are no walls Of course if you think Goa is only a small handful of artists such as Transwave, Etnica and Astral and only want to sound exactly like them. Then you have a problem and I predict you wont evolve further as a genre;)

 

I don't think "goa trance" narrows down to only these artists, so why do you put these words in my mouth ?

For me goa trance is a subgenre of psychedelic trance.

[Elysium]

I don't think "goa trance" narrows down to only these artists, so why do you put these words in my mouth ?

For me goa trance is a subgenre of psychedelic trance.

 

I do not try to put words in your mouth but it is evident listening to the new artists in the goa scene that 99.9% all want to sound like these artists. I simply feel you (after reading your opinion) look for difficulties instead of options.

[Time_Trap]

Well I would love to see some alternative option, aka, I would like to see the words innovation and goa one next to each other, but I really doubt that will happen.

If you think you can do it, go ahead though.

[abasio]

I'm so confused, I manage to agree with all oposing opinions

 

And about your PS: hell if singing makes you happy, you should sing man

 

This I definitely agree with. Go to Karaoke with some friends and belt out some of your favourite songs as badly as you can!

I recommend The Pogues as you don't need to be able to sing

[Time_Trap]

I'm so confused, I manage to agree with all oposing opinions

 

 

Speak it out

[abasio]

I definitely think that music made by people making what they want to make is usually better than those that change for what they think will be more popular however I also want the artists to make music that I like and if they don't I should be free state my opinion be it constructive or not. People don't always have to be constructive when they critise music, sure it is better to be so but if I want to say that such and such is shit because I hate it and it's shit then so be it. The opinion is not invalid because I didn't detail the ways I would make it less shit.

 

Basically I think artists should make what they want to make but to take any critism (constructive or not) on the chin. If they can't handle critism then they shouldn't release their music. Someone somewhere is always going to hate it and in our annonymous internet world they will have no fear saying it, a lot.

 

All I hope for is that I can find artists that make music that I really like, from their heart. Generally they'll make one album like that before either changing away from my taste or trying too hard to meet my taste and it's never as good. Occasionally you'll get an artist who can make more than a few albums like that but they are very rare IMO.

[Time_Trap]

Well MFG is an example of such an artist. The Prophecy, New Kind Of World, Project Genesis, The Message.

 

By the way, I thought you would also comment on the goa & innovation discussion too..

[Elysium]

Go to Karaoke with some friends and belt out some of your favourite songs as badly as you can!

I recommend The Pogues as you don't need to be able to sing

 

It's not my big passion to sing so I am fine I do sing out loud when having a great time with friends ha ha

[Procyon]

Yeah, i agree, i really don't mean that artists shouldn't be critisised. Constructive criticism can be very helpfull! I was refering to the fact that people seem to try pushing artists in the direction they want... Because if you move a certain direction, you will please some and dissapoint others.. So mainly it is about making the music YOU want, not what other people want you to make.

If one of my favourite artists starts evolving towards a style I don't like, hell he should if he wants to, I'll just listen to other artists i do like. For me there is no point in commenting on that artists newer work as in : 'man, his new sound sucks balls, his old work was tons better, stop making this new crap and go back to your old sound!'

My main point was that critisism CAN be really helpfull, but that artists shouldn't met that decide waht they make.

 

The best solution, then, is that an artist that can't stand anything other then comments like "Your music is great! You're doing the right thing! Killlarrrgh!", should stop TAKING PART IN FORUMS ABOUT HIS ART. For, I don't know a single writer, singer, moviemaker, poet, etc etc etc...whose work is an unanimity. Perhaps you should start a forum like this. If you don't mind my suggesting: POSITIVE ONLY REVIEWS PSYFORUM. Any negative opinion or members trying to push artists to different paths would not be allowed. It would be interesting to see what people would write there.

[Antares]

The best solution, then, is that an artist that can't stand anything other then comments like "Your music is great! You're doing the right thing! Killlarrrgh!", should stop TAKING PART IN FORUMS ABOUT HIS ART. For, I don't know a single writer, singer, moviemaker, poet, etc etc etc...whose work is an unanimity. Perhaps you should start a forum like this. If you don't mind my suggesting: POSITIVE ONLY REVIEWS PSYFORUM. Any negative opinion or members trying to push artists to different paths would not be allowed. It would be interesting to see what people would write there.

 

people don't seem to get my point here, i don't seem to read what i wrote I mean there is critisism, and constructive critisism. And offcourse as an artist you should be able to handle both.

But one can be really helpfull, and about the other you shouldn't care if YOU like what you make And to make things clear, i wasn't talking as an artsist, i really can handle critisism and frankly i don't care what people think as long as i'm enjoying myself. I was talking as a music-enthousiast in general. And what I consider constructive comments, are comments about the technical side of music making, or from someone who listens to things similar as the kind of things you make, and has somewhat the same taste. And those comments can be good or bad!!!

If someone who listens to R&B says that 'all he can here is that repetetive 4/4 beat, there is no debt in this music, you should add a female singer and some R&B beats', well, that isn't constructive and you shouldn't care a rats ass about what that person says But if someone whom you know shares the same taste, and knows what you try to achieve, has comments about what you do, then those can be really helpfull. But comments like 'stop trying to do what already has been done' wont help a bit, so as an artist you should not let them get to you. THAT was my point!

And i can't stress enough, I was not talking only as an artist, and i do can take critisism Otherwise i wouldn't make music

[Rotwang]

^ Well said.

[Procyon]

people don't seem to get my point here, i don't seem to read what i wrote I mean there is critisism, and constructive critisism. And offcourse as an artist you should be able to handle both.

But one can be really helpfull, and about the other you shouldn't care if YOU like what you make And to make things clear, i wasn't talking as an artsist, i really can handle critisism and frankly i don't care what people think as long as i'm enjoying myself. I was talking as a music-enthousiast in general. And what I consider constructive comments, are comments about the technical side of music making, or from someone who listens to things similar as the kind of things you make, and has somewhat the same taste. And those comments can be good or bad!!!

If someone who listens to R&B says that 'all he can here is that repetetive 4/4 beat, there is no debt in this music, you should add a female singer and some R&B beats', well, that isn't constructive and you shouldn't care a rats ass about what that person says But if someone whom you know shares the same taste, and knows what you try to achieve, has comments about what you do, then those can be really helpfull. But comments like 'stop trying to do what already has been done' wont help a bit, so as an artist you should not let them get to you. THAT was my point!

And i can't stress enough, I was not talking only as an artist, and i do can take critisism Otherwise i wouldn't make music

 

Really? From what I understood, you don't take critisism as finely as you think you do. I wonder your reaction to a real negative review to one of your works.

Good to me, a harsh reviewer, that I can't remember listening to a single track of yours.

[Basilisk]

Copying is an integral part of art. Nothing is truly original. Read this piece by one of my favourite filmmakers:

http://markmalazarte.com/jarmusch/

 

The above quotation is sourced from rule #5:

http://www.moviemaker.com/directing/article/jim_jarmusch_2972/

 

I suspect a lot of old school producers developed a distinctive sound almost by accident, possibly as a result of the limitations of the equipment available to them at the time. I don't have a source for this, but I remember it being said that MWNN was notorious for never changing the presets on his synths - and Transwave went to great lengths to imitate the MWNN sound. Hallucinogen's LSD represents Simon's attempt to write mainstream trance - and it failed brilliantly. Similar stories could probably be related for many of the old-timers. I think a lot of the music we love resulted from an inept imitation of something else entirely.

 

As for the new school guys, give 'em a break. Many are fairly new to writing music. (Think about how long Youth was involved in music before turning to trance!) What you may notice is that many new school artists begin by imitating some aspect of the old school sound... but the few artists we can describe as veterans of the movement have, by and large, moved on. Filteria is probably the best example of this: his early work is fairly derivative but his most recent productions are all Filteria as far as I'm concerned. He found his voice, influenced by his experiences of the past, and now writes music that exceeds a certain threshold of distinctiveness that would have some of us describe his work as "original" by now. Ra is another good example of a new school producer that has been at it for some time. So maybe we just need to be patient if we are searching for "originality", whatever that might be. Or we could recognize that NSG is a nostalgic movement by definition, and originality should not be the most overarching criteria by which we decide whether something is good or not.