what is techno/house?

[oblioblioblio]

i think that was the algorithm for the beatport sorting machine.

[dirddey_iddler]

dear lord gearslutz what a load of bollox

sorry i dont mean to insult anyone, but that generic categorization just means nothing to me as a minimal techno producer.

in the ears of the beholder only

yes, yes as i wrote it depends from the understanding

i know and you guys too, that you cant find a tutorial for techno and house, it is what came out of your mix and head

or do you say, i`m now a minimal producer and make only reduced beats?!

btw. analysing an artist is results often in copy or remake his sounds, artist often dont know exactly what they do, they do what they like often with out a analytic system, mostly they are bad producers without a big knowledge (basics for sure), what makes their unique sound

[ao_xk]

i know and you guys too, that you cant find a tutorial for techno and house, it is what came out of your mix and head

or do you say, i`m now a minimal producer and make only reduced beats?!

btw. analysing an artist is results often in copy or remake his sounds, artist often dont know exactly what they do, they do what they like often with out a analytic system, mostly they are bad producers without a big knowledge (basics for sure), what makes their unique sound

One thing that I think needs to be understood is that artforms in general are not disconnected at all from broader critical discussions. The discussions may be implicit or explicit, but they're always there. And they don't consist that much of statements like "minimal techno in general has repetitive arpeggios". That's pretty useless. A much better level at which to analyse is trying to reach for the actual premises of the aesthetic doctrine that the artform succeeds in conveying.

Consider this: for each and every element in that list (albeit, admittedly, it's one of the more comprehensive ones I've seen), there are songs which fall into that category, but don't satisfy the description. To actually understand art genres, it helps to study the artists who defined the genres, for example through their speeches, or their lives, in order to understand how they think (i.e what their doctrine is).

Donald Judd was a great and accessible minimalist, who also wrote and spoke a lot, as well as studied philosophy in his youth. And there's art critics (like Richard Shiff) who wrote essays about his work – very insightful stuff and imo helpful if you want to understand the "inner working" of miniamlism. Also, Richie Hawtin inspired much of his take on minimalism from Rothko's paintings. So, you see, the music we like is definitely part of a network

Basically, and to return to the list, you want to understand what drove the artist's choice for the bubbly bass; if you just know he/she chose a bubbly bass, that's just facts, you haven't really understood much

[steevio]

some interesting philosophical points made, but we all see reality from such different perspectives.

i dont need to study the guys who defined the genres to know that generic classification is mostly nothing more than a marketing tool.

minimalism has been an aesthetic choice for many thousands of years, its not some modern phenomena.

my choice of a minimalistic approach to sound design or any design for that matter needs no analysis, i just prefer simplicity and clean lines.

the gearslutz classification is absurd. can anyone tell me if i'm a minimal or minimal techno producer from this ridiculously simplified information ?

1. sometimes a soft round boomy kick, sometimes a harder kick, sometimes 4/4, sometimes broken, sometimes 2 -step, usually 122-128 bpm, but have made music 113 to 143 bpm
2. sometimes stabbing synths, sometimes soft synths, sometimes no synths, sometimes just tones, no samples.
3. sometimes clicky snappy percussion, sometimes polyrhythmic tribal percussion, sometimes jazz percussion.
4. neither snare nor clap as emphasis, sometimes jazzy loose snare patterns as syncopation
5. bassline funky and deep, sometimes no bassline

it appears to me that gearslutz has simply taken a couple of producers and described their music in an oversimplfied way, the second one is probably Robert Hood, but minimal techno has moved on since the mid 1990s.

i dont want to sound like an arse, but pidgeon-holing like this is bad for electronic music, you have so many tools at your disposal, there's absolutely no need for anyone to sound like anyone else. If you're just starting out, just about the worst thing you could do is read sh!t like that Gearslutz list and set off to fulfill all those requirements. by the time you've perfected even half of them, the music will have moved on, and the true young bloods will be shaking the scene with fresh sounds.

now i'm just ranting, sorry guys

[NoAffiliation]

just about the worst thing you could do is read sh!t like that Gearslutz list and set off to fulfill all those requirements. by the time you've perfected even half of them, the music will have moved on

that's really good advice and probably because it's true.

i went through something like that for awhile. not from reading about it but there were definitely certain novel sonic aesthetics at the time minimal was big which consumed alot of my focus. you don't hear many of those sounds anymore for better or worse.

that being said i was chasing those sounds not to sound like anyone else but because i really loved the sounds. there's also been a few cases in history where people have haphazardly "invented" new genres from attempting to copy something else and not doing it right

it's all a cycle anyway. you could date the sexiest woman in the world and inevitably lose interest if you overdo it, only to be drawn to something novel that's very different. of course in time you would probably regret this and be drawn back again. luckily with music you can always go back!

[ao_xk]

I'd put it this way: an artist needs to genuinely try to reinvent the wheel. If he/she does that, the result will be authentic.

[steevio]

I'd put it this way: an artist needs to genuinely try to reinvent the wheel. If he/she does that, the result will be authentic.

agreed

without that my car would be bumping around on cartwheels

[tone-def]

some interesting philosophical points made, but we all see reality from such different perspectives.

i dont need to study the guys who defined the genres to know that generic classification is mostly nothing more than a marketing tool.

minimalism has been an aesthetic choice for many thousands of years, its not some modern phenomena.

my choice of a minimalistic approach to sound design or any design for that matter needs no analysis, i just prefer simplicity and clean lines.

the gearslutz classification is absurd. can anyone tell me if i'm a minimal or minimal techno producer from this ridiculously simplified information ?

1. sometimes a soft round boomy kick, sometimes a harder kick, sometimes 4/4, sometimes broken, sometimes 2 -step, usually 122-128 bpm, but have made music 113 to 143 bpm
2. sometimes stabbing synths, sometimes soft synths, sometimes no synths, sometimes just tones, no samples.
3. sometimes clicky snappy percussion, sometimes polyrhythmic tribal percussion, sometimes jazz percussion.
4. neither snare nor clap as emphasis, sometimes jazzy loose snare patterns as syncopation
5. bassline funky and deep, sometimes no bassline

it appears to me that gearslutz has simply taken a couple of producers and described their music in an oversimplfied way, the second one is probably Robert Hood, but minimal techno has moved on since the mid 1990s.

i dont want to sound like an arse, but pidgeon-holing like this is bad for electronic music, you have so many tools at your disposal, there's absolutely no need for anyone to sound like anyone else. If you're just starting out, just about the worst thing you could do is read sh!t like that Gearslutz list and set off to fulfill all those requirements. by the time you've perfected even half of them, the music will have moved on, and the true young bloods will be shaking the scene with fresh sounds.

now i'm just ranting, sorry guys

just to point out that its not the views of Gearslutz. it's just one posters idea of what minimal is. if i was to say all techno was 2-step with trumpet stabs on the 2 and 4, it wouldn't make it mnml.nl classification of techno.