Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 38

Thread: Structural conservatism in post-ardkore dance music

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,262

    Default

    like political revolutions can only be conceptualised as definitively revolutionary or counter-periods after things have dialectically succeeded into more a passive state. In certain respects (though don't stretcch the analogy too far) hardcore can be seen in that way.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    8,558

    Default

    Thanks for all responses! I'll read through them today at my desk instead of working for a living.

    It's struck me that, although the structure is much simpler and more repetitive, perhaps the only music that (to my knowledge) breaks with the post HC structure found in most dance music (perhaps because it wasn't dance music, though it's since been used as such) is 8 bar grime.
    Last edited by Corpsey; 29-01-2019 at 07:17 AM.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    8,558

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thirdform View Post
    hardcore wasn't really like that really, hence when the splits happened so many people went so many different ways,including the very early 89-91 crowd splitting from 92.

    .
    Yeah, I guess what happens is that one group likes X bit of a tune more than another groups like Y bit, and ultimately new subgenres form dedicated to X and Y. Again, I sort of appreciate why this happens and sympathise - you sacrifice variety for intensity, although with HC variety is intensity.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Corpsey For This Useful Post:


  5. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    22,344

    Default

    I'm sceptical of thirds historical and retrospective revisionism here!

  6. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    8,558

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droid View Post
    A lot of people didn't know what they were doing an there was no established formula so producers just did whatever they felt like.
    Reminds me of this Aphex quote from a Pitchfork interview

    I used to love jungle. I still think it's the ultimate genre, really, because the people making it weren't musicians. The best artists are people who don't consider themselves artists, and the people who do are usually the most pretentious and annoying. [laughs] They've got their priorities wrong. They're just doing it to be artists rather than because they want to do it. And a lot of jungle people were actually car mechanics and painter-and-decorator types, like, pretty hardcore blokes. I wouldn't want to get into a fight with them. I know a few people who were like that, and I don't think that really exists any more. Maybe those sort of non-musician types do some dubstep stuff, or grime. But it didn't exist in jungle for long. There was only a couple of years where people didn't know what they were doing, and you got all these samples that are just totally not related in pitch. I really hunt down those records. They've got this ridiculous mishmash of things that totally don't go with each other at all. Obviously, after they've done it for a couple of years they learn how to make chords and stuff, and it's not so interesting now.
    That's one of the reasons this tune was so influential and exciting - it was so amateurish, but only an amateur could have made something like it

    Last edited by Corpsey; 29-01-2019 at 10:18 AM.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Corpsey For This Useful Post:


  8. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    5,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Corpsey View Post
    just picking up on a couple of barty's strands; this abolition of narrative is achieved by two means really either a lack of repetitiveness or extreme repetitiveness (pedal points and drones, etc.). that's where 8 bar grime fits in.

    it's not a coincidence that lots of wayne shorter's modal compositions are based on these alternating 8 bar motifs just like early grime.
    that's great. exactly.

  9. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    8,558

    Default

    you should be called rascalbarty

  10. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    8,349

    Default

    8 bar was a platonic example of 'the loop' as a means to an end and the end itself. Obv parallels with hop hop, but also with hardcore, in which the loop was key. You have one loop to increase tension, one loop to release tension, one loop to roll out, one loop to break it down... all in one bar chunks, or maybe 4/8 max. Musical sophistication usually means looking at bigger chunks of sound, creating progressions over longer bar phrases (32/64 etc), so the discrete units increase in size and there is less granular space to change things up, and therefore less unpredictability.

    Count the loops and the length of the loops:



    All compelling sample based music has the loop at its heart. Everything else is window dressing. If you can master the loop you can do anything.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to droid For This Useful Post:


  12. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    8,558

    Default

    I'm guessing that the tech they were using to make hardcore had a big role in that the sample lengths were much shorter in those days - so you're automatically working with a lot of fairly short samples/loops, you're probably going to be looking to throw them together in combinations, that patchwork/collage effect.

    Also sampling I think opened the music up to a much wider range of sounds, cos they were using their record collections (or their parents or whatever).
    Last edited by Corpsey; 29-01-2019 at 11:22 AM.

  13. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    8,349

    Default

    yeah, the S1000 had a total sample length of 23 seconds expandable up to 90 secs in mono. Length of a bar at 130 bpm is 1.846 seconds, a 4 bar loop is 7.38 seconds - so you could have 3 of those in your tune or 12 one bar loops.

    Incidentally a 4 bar loop at 164 bpm (classic jungle speed) is 5.85 sec, so you can do more with the same sampler at a faster tempo, though by that stage most producers had moved onto the S2000, EMU E64 or newer.

  14. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,262

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luka View Post
    I'm sceptical of thirds historical and retrospective revisionism here!
    Revisionism in terms of what?

  15. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,262

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Corpsey View Post
    Reminds me of this Aphex quote from a Pitchfork interview



    That's one of the reasons this tune was so influential and exciting - it was so amateurish, but only an amateur could have made something like it

    Believe me once you've heard it almost nonstop for 13 years it really gets so fucking boring. this is like inverted crowley though isn't him, cussing out Dillinja but would probably say the same here. the problem is luca wants to think he's god but only the historical communist party which does not know votes, personalities, democracy or arbitration, (the totality of all organised proletarian activity) can correspond to that great godly rhythmical breath.

    I always prefered Pulse Y anyway in terms of sheer excitement.
    Last edited by thirdform; 30-01-2019 at 04:19 PM.

  16. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,262

    Default

    as for 8 bar.



    and all that purpose maker stuff.

    actually the most minimal dance music is the very industrial german techno on e-com from around 97. literally one bar looped over and over again.

    I think 8 bar was always dance music otherwise you'll start turning into ash sarkar corpsey and that would be a dreadful shame.

  17. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,262

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luka View Post
    I'm sceptical of thirds historical and retrospective revisionism here!
    I'm not saying the hardcore period from 90-93 didn't exist, it obviously did otherwise we wouldn't be talking about it. I'm saying that within that period when things were in flux people saw themselves putting their own takes on house, techno, dub, industrial/ebm, ragga and hip hop.

    It is that convergence that we call hardcore now (and that is correct) but I'm not so sure if people at the time actually saw that convergence as its own distinct sound let alone scene, (although of course it was.) Colin Dale and Frank Da Wulf and Lenny Dee were still playing at raves into 92, 93, 94. That's the only retrospective element to me defining it as a retrospective historical period. Don't forget that one of the hardcore labels also later became the first IDM label (in the most ironic of ironies.)

    The problem is i get a feeling you want to confine nuum to the injection of soul and acoustic values, but fine let us do that, we can all agree that techstep et al was very white and hardly qualifies, but then techstep was just a certain intensification of 93 darkcore which in turn was an inner city multiracial rebellion against 92 'plinky plonky piano' stuff, as SUAD call it. but then 93 was a recontextualisation of 91 which itself was an intensification of the machinic and trippy aspects of 87-90 to appeal to a more lumpen psychedelic audience. where do we stop? we could get caught up in knots and knots.

    Last edited by thirdform; 30-01-2019 at 04:47 PM.

  18. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,262

    Default

    for my theory not to hold you have to argue that hardcore was not deterritorialised, but then that begs the question. why was noone making old skool in 95? in all its spin offs, be that jungle, happy or hard techno. each went down their own processes of internal evolution.

    people only started making neo-oldskool when 90-93 oldskool become something to revive.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •