Guest nick Posted September 20, 2002 Share Posted September 20, 2002 simple question - whos got the answer????? why do you like psychedelic trance music? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nighthawk Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 For myself, it's the next step... I have always enjoyed trippy music that challenged me to think and not to be a sponge. Mainstream music is made for TV sponge's... (Your mind is more active when you sleep than when you watch TV) PsyTrance is also challenging me to be more creative when I make music. But then, I've always lived for challenges!! Peace... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Blissdrop Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Galacticmindexpandingstretchysplashypulsingcrashinggroovingsliding-love Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AMP Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Makes me feel happy Plur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GEE Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Psy is what u can create with your mind.... Any music style belongs to this eg: infected mushroom : messenger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blink Posted September 22, 2002 Share Posted September 22, 2002 psy is classless, cultureless, timeless, without boundaries, owned by no nation, and subject to no rules (other than the intense four four thump). it takes from the heart and gives to the soul. its underground, its beyond space, its profound and silly int he same breath. it allows the mind to wander but demands attention. ahhh, the feeling of a track when it hits you to the heart is a drug unto its self. viva la psy! rock on psychedelic freedom fighters, blink re-worked track by me!!! http://organicparadox.com/01blink_tracks/o...dox-grimmel.mp3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GEE Posted September 22, 2002 Share Posted September 22, 2002 Where all source of beings come from... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ODE Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 i love the Blissdrop answer : Galacticmindexpandingstretchysplashypulsingcrashinggroovingsliding-love bom mat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Slidingtrancer Posted September 24, 2002 Share Posted September 24, 2002 It's music for freaks and I applied for the job Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest moongol Posted September 24, 2002 Share Posted September 24, 2002 as for me, i think it takes really fast into huxley´s MIND ANTIPODES... and the scenarios i encounter, as blink said, belong to no one, they drink from heart-mind sympathy. all the best Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest E.T. Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 I listen to psytrance because it's cool, and lacks of senseless, stupid lyrics. But at the same time it's a limited genre. Limited by the beat, basslines and danceability. That's why it's still far from the true art. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bodhisattva Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 I like psy because it has more soul and complexitie then anything else available ! Bodhi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blink Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 and what is tue art? blink www.organicparadox.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Late Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 It is kickass music for the 21st century and beyond! :> Seriousy, good psy in party environment (spelling?) is the best you can get I feel as If in the eye of a hurricane, sounds here and there, hell breaking loose all over me and I dance, dance and dance, I lose myself in whirlwind of sensory stimulation...It`s a great feeling! that is why IMO finnish and australian trance rules, It`s totally out of control, a myriad of sounds, melodies , etc. .. with noting to hold them together exept the booming drums, and a real bootyshaking bassline when the music ends, you start to realise your surroundings once again. It`s a total experience, when compared to any other dance music, although I`m also partial towards drum`n bass, It doesn`t have the same amount of immersiveness And a psygoa party is a party like no other, especially outdoors! And when compared to the "club" scene, there are no "posers" everybody is just having a honest good time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest moongol Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 well, and what is art? i myself am a musician... although without any music classes i have been making music with sampler and a synth. I have going from genre to genre... and i used to think that house and trance (both emerge from repetitive percurssions] was kind of easy, too simple. HOWEVER to create a pattern that does not wear out easily, seems to me a pretty hard... ... the loop carries the vortice. the stonger and deeper, the more one dives into TRANCE... lending us the strings to pull whatever we feell... is not art a manifestation of expressiveness? Psytrance festivals are an amazing celebration of life... why does so many people from so many different places wish to join together, forget all those media-marketing-economic-political-etc. appeals to the righteous way and just loose themselves in dance releasing tributes? This year i went to the BOOM FESTIVAL (Portugal). my first trance festival ever... i am tottally amazed all the best Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest norb-e Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 very hypnotic, meditative, and spiritual... music filled with tons of emotions... also a good challenge to make good tracks.. and there are no rules... u are not required to always write stuff in 4/4 ... there's complete freedom in this style... its all about the music... not the image.... all about the spirit and the soul.. and not the ego and the mind... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest E.T. Posted September 26, 2002 Share Posted September 26, 2002 To answer about the true art: The true art can't be limited - only if you're putting you mind in a state of absolute freedom, you could say your creations are fully artistic. No rules, no borders. The true art lives only for itself, not for money, not for people. The true artist makes his art only for his own pleasure, does not look at needs and demands of others. The true art is purposeless - everything what has a purpose, is immediatelly limited. Limiting denies the true art. Psytrance is purposed for "dancefloor" - isn't it made to let others dance to it? And this unvoidable purpose limits the genre. ">and there are no rules... u are not required to always write stuff in 4/4 ... there's complete freedom in this style... " Hehe, this is a funny sentence to me. It seems to me that the guy who wrote that, thinks that freedom to choose the rhythmics is enough to make psytrance absolutelly limitless. I don't want to disrespect you, Norbe, but it means that there are limits, but in your head. For me today (TODAY!!) the music closest to true art is ambient and experimental. There are no limits if talking about rhythmics, beats, drum samples, instrumentary, etc. You can make track without bassline, using acoustic instruments, using rhythmics like 67/23 or not using any rhythics at all. Psytrance is damn limited in comparison. I don't mean Psy is bad because. I really like this kind of music. But don't fool yourself, only because this is the psytrance site. Subjectivity leads to fanatism, splits people. And you're trying to feed your heads with a subjective bullshit (if you know what i mean). Don't lie to yourself. ExtraTerrestial "The only thruth is never spoken." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blink Posted September 26, 2002 Share Posted September 26, 2002 very misguided ExtraTerrestial, i asked that question in hopes that i just misunderstood you, but its pretty apparent you don't know what it is you are talking about. don't get me wrong, you made a lengthy reply, and threw a couple of ten dollar words in there but your analogy to help re-enforce why art must be without rules is pretty un-intelligent. i don't have alot of time to go into this with you, and you seem pretty adamant about your opinion (no sense in turning this into a flame war). but let me use some examples of true art, that are art indeed because of the limitations underwhich they were made: -jimmy hendrix. limited to the traditional 'rock band', made his guitar sing in ways that people are still trying to emulate to this day. you don't call that art? -picasso's cubism. drawn in a style that was extremely limiting in shape and texture, picasso was still able to convey smooth transistion of colour and depth to express emotion. is that not art? -otomo katsuhiro's monoke hime. limited to the medium of animation, this graphic story revolutionized how people told stories through sequential story telling. i could go on and on, i but i gotta go to work. my point is that art is not art because it is limitless. what makes true art is the perception of that subject matter through one's mind eye. in truth, the limitations underwhich someone creates often make the subject matter more a beauty to treasure (subway tagg art, sidewalk artists, ice scultures) expand, blink Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest moongol Posted September 26, 2002 Share Posted September 26, 2002 i think ET mught be mixing freedom with virtuosism or technique... with so many definitions of what art should or should not be, you are limiting art itself. I myself, think art is just a human invention, is just the human word for creativity. Creativeness defies human understanding, art (as we are thought focus on the genius-artist, who seldom performs pieces, projects that defy human understanding/perceptiveness. I think Art is overvalued. How many times have you heard someone playing extremely well and at the same time heartless? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest E.T. Posted September 26, 2002 Share Posted September 26, 2002 Blink: Ok, you gave me the examples of true art (in your opinion). But the problem is that I said that PSYTRANCE isn't a true art. Give me the example of truly artistic psy - that was my point. Here comes new theory you haven't heard: the true art variates right with human's imagination. The bigger imagination one's have, the harder for artist to match the true artism definition. You got that? It's just like with PCs: today the peak calculation power is owned by 3GHz Intel (and people say: "oh god, look at this beast..."), but in 4 years this top-notch CPU definition will change. Picasso lived in the beginning of century. People of these times weren't armed in such imagination as today. Picasso shocked them. It was far off many people's understanding. So probably it was true art. "drawn in a style that was extremely limiting in shape and texture" ------ Hehe, maybe now you want music without sounds? That would be good... I think you missed my point: you suggest that if somebody made the song I could call the true art, you could say something like: "hey, it lacks of congas and 20% shuffle!". Did I say that true art is using all invented so far instruments, techniques and somethingmore? Jimmy Henrix made with guitar tricks nobody made before. These times, for most of people it was a true art, because nobody was able to imagine something above that. Anyway you're giving me examples which are subjective, seasonal. Why Mononoke I would call a true art? Why not Akira or GitS? In this case some people consider Aliens as the state of the art of SF movies, but they're gonna be opposited of Star Wars fans. That's why the definition of the true art should be the most demanding one. The prize can't be given to everyone in the contest, only to the best, don't you think? One god, one world champion, one true art. "How many times have you heard someone playing extremely well and at the same time heartless?" ------- So, you're able to recognize if somebody plays heartless or not? The more: in your opinion it's enough to play heartful to make artistic music (or anything else)? Yesterday I was trying my best to scramble eggs with mushrooms - I've put all my heart in it, but it tasted like shit Don't pay too much attention to these poisonous theories - you have right to have your own. Entrancing Thump Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blink Posted September 26, 2002 Share Posted September 26, 2002 again, you are misleading the verbage frrom your original statement. the examples i gave were in direct reflection of your quote, "The true art can't be limited". maybe i still don't understand your viewpoint, but the examples i gave were repsectively some of the most highly regarded artists/art in their field. otomo katsuhiro works under the limitation of sequential media to tell story. jimmy's made music with his guitar, even though he was a well-versed musician. picasso limited the amount of brush work in some of his pieces in an attempt to convey a certain theme/message. your idea that , "The true art can't be limited ", is what i find so un-intelligent. not the idea that psytrance is not art. and the fact that you stand so strongly behind such an empty opinion deflates your credibilty towards the discussion of artistic expression. but don't worry, i won't stay up late worrying over the state of art because you are a subject matter expert:). your "poisonous theories" are as welcome on this post as anyones. just wish they were better thought out. expand thought et, blink ps. akira was not a great movie. it was a great manga series. the movie was an after thought for western culture. i still have the orignal six books. monoke hime played in japanese theaters for two and a half years. i must have seen it in shibuya around 15 times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest moongol Posted September 26, 2002 Share Posted September 26, 2002 E.T. Troughout history, art has had many different approaches, being the genius/artist the one setting new standards. Sometimes he would introduce a new method ( Giotto - perspective), a new technique (pollock - action painting) or a new approach (picasso-cubism). The most of the time these artists were denied the accomplishment of his doings. the people of that time would not consider their work art, therefore are u sure that psytrance cannot be a new form of art (in wich the performance connects thousands of strangers dancing)? i just think art , in a certain way is a true manifestation of the self. As Novalis putted it: art-is the expression of our subjectivity. I think that the idea of art is to produce something different as resulted in a huge amount of (in my opinion) waste. is it plain different? just to be different? or has art any goal (it has had a many pointing to different direction)? Nowadays, breaking boundaries is harddoing, i mean, the change is constant: technology keeps providing thousands of people with the possiblility to express one self. In the past 5 years the number of bands, projects, gigs, has only increased. And yet, another question... what is the frame work of art? are we talking exclusively on an Western/Ocidental basis? _____ on heartfull recognition this year at the boom festival(portugal) I was at the tent and the music had restarted around 19h (this was 23h or so. Suddenly i listen to the first notes of an Underlworld track and at the same time i hear the crowd roaring with enthusiasm (a massive reaction that gave a funny chill down my spine), i mean everybody just freaked out with the song.... in five days of music that only happened then. I cannot explain it, yet... I have no musical background, yet 4 years ago i bought a sequencer and started making songs... am i a musician? and yet i can work the machine, i play around and have made a few nice things( some friends like it as well). The thing is i cannot say what note goes after the other, but i know when i feel it right. Some may say that Pat Matheny is the greates guitar player and i cannot object but i am not forced to like him. this is the measure i have, it´s mine, like we all have... and for me is pretty much the same with art. all the best Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest E.T. Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 Blink, youre trying to point me pseudo-limits, which for real are the fundamentals of given media (or I just don't understand your statement). Why in your opinions Picasso was limiting himself using only cubes and other simple shapes? You're trying to drive a car without an engine and wheels. They are necesary if you want to call whole thing A CAR. Mononoke is a cartoon - you consider it being a cartoon a limit? I am talking about something absollutelly different. Besides it's YOU who say Mononoke is art, you say Henrix is art. What times Jimmy was living in? 60's, 70's? I said before that MOST of people were considering it as an art, not everyone. Because there were already a group called Tangerine Dream, who reached to much higher level of art. Jimmy was a perfect guitarist, and probably loved his "job", but in comparison with TD he was just a small ant. Because his music was just a rock (and blues probably?) already made by many others before, and TD made their own style, new kind of music. Telling "the true art can't be limited" i meant not limited by "equipment", but by imagination. Btw. you're calling me unintelligent, only because my definition of true art is much tougher and more demanding than yours? "monoke hime played in japanese theaters for two and a half years. i must have seen it in shibuya around 15 times" -------- Wow, so it must be a great art if it was sooo popular. Britney S. also was a lot of months on the top of charts - it makes me reconsider isn't "her" beautiful music artistic... "As Novalis putted it: art-is the expression of our subjectivity. " -------- And Hitler said: "Kill all judes!" ( I hope you get my point). Egocentric Tentacle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest moongol Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 E.T. in your words: Art cannot be limited by one`s imagination. is it right? Because i think it is really hard to create an art concept that might emcopass all art troughout history... the problem of language and communication. In your concept i might add psy-trance to the list. Obviously, psy-trance(as the name says) is like a bomb exploding within your mind scope and taking you to the mind´s antipodes (Huxley might have added psy trance to his list (see Heaven or Hell) of Vision inducing human methods, if it was as known as is today). Is not this the the one and only imagination ground. does not this, fit into your definition? I think we are facing a real definition issue. What is purity? what is art? Art purity vs Pure Art? Art will always be constrained by equipment, and unless one constantly charges/defies imagination, one can also be limited by lack of imagination. who´s the best? right or wrong? who cares? If you pratice any kind of Martial ART (once more) you will know that in a fight, the outcome varies hugely from many different factors (mind, physicall, social, moment, focus, etc..) The search for definite things easily leads to dogmas. definitions should be more atom-like, crusing and mixing constantly... it happens to me trough trance, swirling through emotions, notions and in the end it only a few more doors that have been opened and now,the ideas float freely from compartiment to compartiment. peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blink Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 i'm really pressed for time, but i gotta comment. using jimmy and tangerine dream as a basis of argument, you should be aware the froese (the lead guy in tangerine dream) was mkaing music around the same time as jimmy. their music is no where close to comparable. 'the exit', their 1st album released in 1969 was not popular upon release. and even though they were the 'grateful dead' of europe as far as touring, they also created music under limitations. you see, from your point of view, you justify a limitation to a genre or medium. i see a medium as a set of boundaries underwhich humans can categorize and 'identify' with. no a limitation. but all said and done, you make a headstrong argument. a weak argument logically, but headstrong all the same. and again i ask, what is art? give an example of art. is star sounds orchestra art (since you like tangerine dream so much)? blink 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.