New track made with Pulsar :)

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Sat Dec 01, 2001 10:16 am

Sorry for posting this here, but I really hate having to upload my track to ten different places so I have uploaded it to vitaminic instead of the PlanetZ music section.
It's a sort of layered techno epic with lots of percussion bits and a classical choir in it

All the mixing, fx and compression was done on pulsar. The bassline is the Saturn, the choir comes from the STS3000 and the high pitched string/pad sound that comes in in the breakdown is the Juno008 synth.
All the other sounds are either samples sequenced in Cubase, or coming from reBirth and my XL-1.
Of course I would love to hear what you lot think of it!
You can listen to/download it at http://stage.vitaminic.com/main/sputnikk/

_________________

[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2001-12-01 10:17 ]

algorhythm · Post by **algorhythm** » Sat Dec 01, 2001 2:27 pm

nice and epic.

sophisticated techno to be sure, but maybe a little cold and detached(?) - it lacks the 'soul' this type of track sometimes has - maybe it is the 'classicallness' of the choir and the lack of an expressive lead-line.
the percussion at the begining is good.
a bit more volume on the choir?
the handclaps fit well too - i have never managed to fit claps in anywhere, they always sound cheezy - not here though.

good work

BTW - you know that you can just post a link in the music forum. that is, you could have put your thread there and have the "song" button linked to vit C.

peace

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Sun Dec 02, 2001 7:03 am

Oh, ok I didn't know that, will remember the next time.
Thanks for the comments!

JoeKa · Post by **JoeKa** » Sun Dec 02, 2001 7:25 am

Techno?!? No way, that´s Trance, not Techno.
But it´s nice, anyway. I just find this 4note arpeggio is too stiff, you should modulate, filter, funk it up a bit, know what I mean?

Just 2 give U a hint what *really* is Techno, check this 70 min liveset by NicoGrubert...

Klick me!

Blast your brain!

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Sun Dec 02, 2001 8:03 am

Trance?? No way! Well, maybe a little bit, and the breakdown was trancy for sure

(was so fed up with trying to finish this track I couldn't think of anything more original)
I think it's somewhere in between tracne and techno actually.

"Just 2 give U a hint what *really* is Techno"

Haha, don't even try that on me!
Techno just has such a wide meaning, it can really be anything, I mean if you listen to that liveset you posted, then a record from Laurent Garnier, then a liveset from Richie Hawtin, you hear three completely different things, so which one is the REAL techno then eh? (I personally like techno for it's diversity)

_________________

[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2001-12-02 08:07 ]

JoeKa · Post by **JoeKa** » Sun Dec 02, 2001 9:17 am

But I´m quite sure that Djs like, say, Gayle San, Rush or Jeff Mills would *never* place your track among "techno"... and those are "real" techno DJs, no?

Ok, you´re right, let´s not turn this topic into a basic style discussion, but anyway I DO say your track is MUCH more trance than techno. And I´ll keep up that opinion till I die.

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Sun Dec 02, 2001 11:20 am

Well, that's just what I'm saying is DJ Rush a REAL techno DJ, or is Laurent Garnier a REAL techno DJ? They both play very different types of techno, and I love them both, but for different reasons.
Rush, Jeff Mills etc play/produce the more minimal style, and no, my music definitely is not like that, but that's just one of many forms of techno. their tastes do not define what techno is!
There's a lot of techno dj's who play different styles, including stuff like my tracks, (more melodic/atmospheric/trancy) one is not more real than the other.
(and I'll keep THAT opinion untill I die

)

In the end it doesn't really matter, you shouldn't try to pigeonhole music too much and draw lines like "this is techno/this is trance" because in most cases it's not so easy to define, and it may be better not to.

![ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2001-12-02 11:23 ]

[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2001-12-02 11:32 ]

djody · Post by **djody** » Sun Dec 02, 2001 3:54 pm

It's defenatly TRANCE, because.

1) kick is high ( defenatly not 808909ish )
2) Tecno and arpeggio's don't live in the same room. Techno is only stepsequencing
3) No agression, it trancy, spacy, lush, etc..

Don't worry it sounded good, needs some work but he thats why we do it.

I was a techno freak 3 years ago, but left it cos it got me bored ( only stepseq. )
Now i'm more into Psy-trance. this Goa & techno melted together.

I think its very importent to know and discribe your style.
Below a little style history of house music.

House - acid
- techno
- club house
- garrage
- trance
- wat the future may bring ( psy-trance )

for psytrance go to http://goablaze.org/playlist.shtml

I'm not working at psy-trance ( hehe )

I hope you take this well cos it's not ment as an attack or flam or anything, ijust want to share my views on this matter.

laterz

at0m · Post by **at0m** » Sun Dec 02, 2001 5:31 pm

I use techno as my 'trancer'

The pseudo-monotone percussion tunes from the old skool (as most explicit) Detroit underground have the same effect on me as let's say Paul Van Dyck's 'For An Angel'.

I like to float on the music, and get carried away on the dancefloor, close my eyes and become the music... both minimal techno and early ninetees float trance have that effect on me.
Got out of the trance, because of bad clubs, and back into the detroit underground, or what's left of it. ;(

Anywayz, stop the talking, i'm going back to do some 'minimal' attempt

the atom.

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Mon Dec 03, 2001 2:10 am

Um, the kick IS a 909 (sample).
Please stop trying to degrede techno into
an "it's only step-sequenced, aggressive, non arpeggio, 808/909 bassdrum stuff"! That's ludicrous!
If yo really think that, you'll have to listen to some different techno artists then just the minimalist ones. Try out: Underworld, Laurent Garnier, Orbital, Secret Cinema, Junkie XL, Technasia etc, (and those are only the most well known) and you'll hear that techno can be as lush, non-stepsequenced, non-agressive etc as you like.
thanks for the comments though

[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2001-12-03 02:13 ]

cannibal · Post by **cannibal** » Mon Dec 03, 2001 6:45 am

Psytrance is already yesterday's news, it died the moment israelian trance flooded the scene

An uhm, you have good stuff going on with the track. Maybe it needs some more tightness though.

Regards,
cannibal

djody · Post by **djody** » Mon Dec 03, 2001 6:53 am

The thing i'm trying to say is that IMHO you are using the term techno incorrect.

Techno is a style of house music as is trance,
you can say that something is techno(ish), but not everyting is techno.

For example junky xl is more chemical beat then tecno but it is a form of house music.

Orbital is more ambient and so on.

I say this because i think its importent to communicate as good as possible, especialy on a bullitenboard wich is in a way static communication. (a post is static, a board as a hole isn't)

And cannibal, that's a diffent discusion.
But the same rules apply, what is the exact differance. These styles are in it self dynamic and subject to change.

I would like to know or better hear what you mean by israelian trance. then we can talk about it constructifly. Wish i would like, cos its interesting.

laterz

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Mon Dec 03, 2001 7:17 am

No, not everything is techno, but it's rediculous to say that something ISN'T techno, because it is not step-sequenced, or because it is melodic, because in that way you are really restricing yourself and the music. Yes Techno is a form of house music, within that form you can go many ways, you can have minimalist loop techno, funky techno, melodic techno, a lot of the old detroit stuff had melody, and so does a lot of the early-mid 90's stuff, but today it tends to lean more towards the hard minimalist loop style.
I'm trying to say that you often can't categorise music as trance or techno so easily, because most music takes elements from different styles. So from my point of view your definition of techno is too restricted.

But since I'm not going to convince you, and you're not going to convince me, let's just leave it at this.

Everyone can have their own opinion on what is techno and what is not, as long as it doesn't influence the way you listen to the music.

cannibal · Post by **cannibal** » Mon Dec 03, 2001 1:47 pm

Don't take my comment too seriously, I am not very much into categorizing everything into certain strict categories. But as far as I am concerned it is fine in itself; it is an efficient way to discuss music in mutual terms.

Anyway, israelian trance is usually further subcategorized into two subgroups: israelian hard trance (melodic trance like Astral Projection and everyone else) and israelian psytrance (Infected Mushroom and everyone else + a lot of others). What I meant by saying that psytrance is dead is simply the fact that that certain style exhausted itself well in the end of the '90's. What happened to hard trance even before happened to psytrance when a lot of people started shamelessly imitating Infected Mushroom and Hallucinogen. What was a novelty before suddenly become irritating. Nowadays no one "trendy" enough wants to hear another israelian psytrance tune, people are looking more into progressive forms of psytrance: minimalistic and more experimental styles which I am not very fond of myself. I am still very much into 1995-1999 stuff and not really interested into new ones. Most of the new stuff released is nothing but poor imination of the stuff released in that mentioned era, the rest is just minimalistic crap.

Although it is very difficult, if not impossible altogether, to draw any explicit lines, I can agree that there are some things which make up any give genre. But I do not think that you can separate these things into single qualities: the genre exists as a collective entitity, made up from a number of qualities.

Constructive and especially not so serious criticism is always welcome

And most importantly: make great music, whatever the genre. Genres are defined because music exists, not vice versa.

Best regards to everyone,
cannibal

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Mon Dec 03, 2001 2:23 pm

Yes. Amen!

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Mon Dec 03, 2001 2:26 pm

We should have more music-discussions on this forum!

cannibal · Post by **cannibal** » Mon Dec 03, 2001 2:34 pm

Heh, while I was writing I was thinking
"hmmm now what does this have to do with Pulsar?". Well, obviously not much, but I have to agree we should have more discussion about music, different styles and genres.

After all, Pulsar is used to make music

algorhythm · Post by **algorhythm** » Mon Dec 03, 2001 7:47 pm

Everyone knows that the track has to be *either* trance *or* techno because the nature of music is such that it is readily divisible into categories, which are mutually exclusive from one another in a precise fashion, corresponding exactly with our linguistic rules and ontological concepts. To think otherwise is sheer ignorance of the determinability of music itself and the direct correspondence of our sortal terms and concepts to the metaphysical categories of music which have been preordained by the Almighty God.

this thread almost reminds me of "my genre is better than yours" threads

[ This Message was edited by: algorhythm on 2001-12-03 19:59 ]

marcuspocus · Post by **marcuspocus** » Mon Dec 03, 2001 9:33 pm

!

I'm rolling

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Tue Dec 04, 2001 12:55 am