| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Elipton |
Quit Hardcore
https://www.facebook.com/notes/dj-s3rl/music-change/10152047611886191 |
| versia |
rip hardcore.
|
| brodster |
Don't worry, his new track Over the Rainbow is just a S3RL track at 160 bpm. |
| warped_candykid |
So what "Genre" is he going to? |
| latininxtc |
Well that was one of the most stupidest shit I've ever read from a UK/upfront hardcore producer on his style of music. |
| wong |
Never read so much bollox |
| Impulse_Response |
Sucks to see him go. I really liked his style, and Pretty Rave Girl was the first hardcore song I ever heard. Hopefully his new stuff is good. |
| silver |
Did you actually read it? He not changing his music he is changing the name of the music he makes :) |
| The drunken scotsman |
Hold on to your hats folks. We're about to embark on a magical journey into the world of Fast Dance Music, can barely contain myself. |
| Samination |
silver: do you actually read? :P He said he'd change his BPM aswell |
| Audio Warfare |
Fair enough, best of luck to him. Should be free to do what he wants. I imagine he will end up sounding a bit Hands Up at lower BPM's tbh as it's essentially slow Hardcore. :P No escaping the pigeon holes. |
| GrahamC |
My fav bit from the statement
'Another reason is that by taking it back to 'jogging speed' it'll make it much better to dance to for longer.'
WTF? Possibly the most moronic thing in the world to say!
At least Breeze will be happy tho. |
| don_simon3000 |
noooo :((((
bad news. he and hixxy and brisk are me fokin heroezzz. |
| Captain Triceps |
Why doesn't he just make this new style of music without making a huge deal of not making faster stuff? Surely he can still make 170+bpm music if he wanted to, no one is going to tell him not to make slower stuff.
Not going to lose any sleep over it like, just seems more for the attention then anything. |
| don_simon3000 |
why shud he adapt? the new style is shit and about 90% of users here will agree with me. got loadsa deal more respect to lads quitting instead of adapting. |
| djDMS |
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Triceps:
Why doesn't he just make this new style of music without making a huge deal of not making faster stuff?
That's what he should have done.
Saying that the expected 300 'OMG wot is dis lyk' comments on soundcloud for his next tune might have made him think twice. |
| Karthy |
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Triceps:
Why doesn't he just make this new style of music without making a huge deal of not making faster stuff?
Definately agree with this. I think he could have and would've gotten away with just changing it up and not making a big deal / announcing it all. Because really, the difference is minimal. If you like S3rl I imagine it's because you like his style of production, I don't see that changing, he's just dropping a few BPM's.
Personally I'm not too fussed, I'd hate to get stuck producing to a specific ruleset. I see why he's done it and I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing. And as long as people to blow this completely out of context I doubt he'll have any problems coming from it either.
|
| arpz |
"Why a different BPM? I still like fast beats but don't want to be in the BPM range of hardcore for a few reasons; The main being that half my listeners put me the category they think suits (like Happy or UK Hardcore) and the other half complain because I've been put in a category they don't agree with. I've also had people tell me that I don't sound like UK or Happy Hardcore, so...? This way I'm in a relatively untouched genre/BMP range and can avoid all that."
My response: You're a moron, seriously wtf. The MAIN reason of wanting to do this is because you don't know what category you're in? You act like you want to be individual but are concerning yourself with other peoples opinions enough to change the tempo that you produce at.
--
I honestly can't see the point of this, he's talking about producing the SAME sound just about 10bpm slower? Weird |
| Bad Corey |
You guys realize that for the point of mixing hardcore, this makes basically no difference right?
160 pitched up to 170 is as close as makes no difference to one semitone higher. So basically, if he writes a song in A Minor at 160, it can basically be mixed as a song that's A# Minor at 170 (which are pretty much the only keys he writes in anyways). It just means you can utilize his songs in different ways now.
I do think the post was a bit dramatic though. |
| Mortis |
Who cares. |
| versia |
quote:
Originally posted by Mortis:
Who cares.
Pretty sure 44K facebook followers care. |
| Mortis |
Really? I'm sure almost all of them will still like his music at the slightly slower bpm.
The whole thing is ridiculous. It's just another person doing a "I'm leaving (insert scene here)" just for attention. Why do that rather than just go ahead and do it. His fans will still listen to his music as they're fans of his style. Hardcore fans will listen on regardless of if he's making it or not. |
| DJ Hellfury |
quote:
Originally posted by Mortis:
Really? I'm sure almost all of them will still like his music at the slightly slower bpm.
The whole thing is ridiculous. It's just another person doing a "I'm leaving (insert scene here)" just for attention. Why do that rather than just go ahead and do it. His fans will still listen to his music as they're fans of his style. Hardcore fans will listen on regardless of if he's making it or not.
this sums it up for me.
its not like he completely changed his music production, he just freed himself from genre boundaries and doesnt want to get called a hardcore producer anymore. |
| Ken Masters |
This raises a question i've asked myself for a while now. Is modern Hardcore too fast?
It seems to be the norm for djs of this era to automatically pitch Hardcore up, thinking that anything under 180bpm isn't accepted as fast enough, but in doing so I think we've lost the groove.
Part of my love for Hardcore isn't in the kickdrum but more what happens between the kicks, you should be lost in the rhythm not chasing a fast kickdrum, that's soulless. I dont think enough people quite understand that & I strongly suggest leaving your hardcore at the tempo it was intended to be played at, anything over 175bpm is excessive in my opinion.
Check out the tempo of the early happy Hardcore tracks, understand the groove they create by keeping the tempo at a reasonable speed, many dont exceed 170bpm. Another example, take the majority of Scott Brown tracks, I guarantee that a huge percentage of djs that put his tracks into mixes automatically pitch it up, why? If this is how he intended his music to be heard then he would produce it at this speed.
There's major differences when it comes to these slight changes in tempo. Retrain your ears, dont fall victim to essentially ruining the music you love. |
| latininxtc |
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
This raises a question i've asked myself for a while now. Is modern Hardcore too fast?
No. It to me sounded faster back in the day. It's not that hardcore these days is too fast, it's that there are more beats going on in one track that accompany the main riff. So there's more going on to a track now that maybe to some it sounds like there's too much going on, but honestly nothing is sped up. |
| Ken Masters |
quote:
Originally posted by latininxtc:
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
This raises a question i've asked myself for a while now. Is modern Hardcore too fast?
No. It to me sounded faster back in the day. It's not that hardcore these days is too fast, it's that there are more beats going on in one track that accompany the main riff. So there's more going on to a track now that maybe to some it sounds like there's too much going on, but honestly nothing is sped up.
I dont think its the tracks themselves that are faster but more the approach from modern djs. Endless mixes I listen to seem to be pushing 180bpm, you might get away with this with the odd track but musically it just sounds crap.
That said, I have to disagree about Hardcore being the same speed as it always has been. If you check tracks from around the mid 90's the average tempo is slower, some barely scrape the 170 mark, but they don't need too! |
| latininxtc |
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
quote:
Originally posted by latininxtc:
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
This raises a question i've asked myself for a while now. Is modern Hardcore too fast?
No. It to me sounded faster back in the day. It's not that hardcore these days is too fast, it's that there are more beats going on in one track that accompany the main riff. So there's more going on to a track now that maybe to some it sounds like there's too much going on, but honestly nothing is sped up.
I dont think its the tracks themselves that are faster but more the approach from modern djs. Endless mixes I listen to seem to be pushing 180bpm, you might get away with this with the odd track but musically it just sounds crap.
That said, I have to disagree about Hardcore being the same speed as it always has been. If you check tracks from around the mid 90's the average tempo is slower, some barely scrape the 170 mark, but they don't need too!
Yea but you see you're talking about mixes though, when a track is mixed it ALWAYS is sped up compared to its original BPM of production, that has been no different in the past or the present. I'm saying a produced track sounds faster back then than it does now, yet there aren't that many differences in BPM.
Take Joey Riot's remix of Scott Brown's Wheels of Fortune. When he released it for preview on here I told him I liked it but would have liked it to be a little faster. The track is clocked at 170BPM though lol so it was pretty fast, yet I didn't find it to sound fast. Now listening to the original, I would say that the original sounds very fast, yet it's probably the same BPM or maybe even a bit slower. There just more going on in the new one as far as riffs, sounds, beats go than the more simplistic but equally entertaining original version. |
| Ken Masters |
quote:
Originally posted by latininxtc:
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
quote:
Originally posted by latininxtc:
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
This raises a question i've asked myself for a while now. Is modern Hardcore too fast?
No. It to me sounded faster back in the day. It's not that hardcore these days is too fast, it's that there are more beats going on in one track that accompany the main riff. So there's more going on to a track now that maybe to some it sounds like there's too much going on, but honestly nothing is sped up.
I dont think its the tracks themselves that are faster but more the approach from modern djs. Endless mixes I listen to seem to be pushing 180bpm, you might get away with this with the odd track but musically it just sounds crap.
That said, I have to disagree about Hardcore being the same speed as it always has been. If you check tracks from around the mid 90's the average tempo is slower, some barely scrape the 170 mark, but they don't need too!
Yea but you see you're talking about mixes though, when a track is mixed it ALWAYS is sped up compared to its original BPM of production, that has been no different in the past or the present. I'm saying a produced track sounds faster back then than it does now, yet there aren't that many differences in BPM.
Take Joey Riot's remix of Scott Brown's Wheels of Fortune. When he released it for preview on here I told him I liked it but would have liked it to be a little faster. The track is clocked at 170BPM though lol so it was pretty fast, yet I didn't find it to sound fast. Now listening to the original, I would say that the original sounds very fast, yet it's probably the same BPM or maybe even a bit slower. There just more going on in the new one as far as riffs, sounds, beats go than the more simplistic but equally entertaining original version.
You may be right there, more going on in the track may well give the illusion of a faster track. I decided to do a very random test of tracks throughout the era's. I will stress, this is pretty ruff & i'm about to go to bed haha but this clearly shows the progression of BPM's throughout the years.
I opened folders & randomly grabbed tracks that I felt best represented the era's then checked each tempo. This is not to say that some hardcore didn't exceed 180bpm in the 90's, far from it! but as an average...
90's-
Sy & Unknown - Cape Fear - 170bpm
Eruption & Seduction - Bust the new Jam - 164bpm
DJ Chewy - Rock this place - 170bpm
El Bruto - Hypnotising - 170bpm
Kinetic Pleasure - Higher - 166bpm
Brisk & Trixxy - Back to the top - 174bpm
Bang the Future - Body Slam (gbt inc another level remix) - 170bpm
Scott Brown & Rab S - Now is the time - 160bpm
Alchemist & Fade - Keep on trying (slipmatt remix) - 174bpm
Demo - Your mine ( slipmatt remix) - 170bpm
= 168.8bpm
2000's-
Scott Brown - I Became Hardcore - 170bpm
Fergus Mayhem - Take Control (CLSM Remix) - 170bpm
Scott Brown - Life as We Know It - 172bpm
Scott Brown - Gods Child - 170bpm
CLSM feat Ant Johnson - Sensory Vision Pt 2 - 170bpm
Marc Smith & Gammer Building Shaker - 176bpm
Duncan Oatham - Rock The Disco (K Complex Remix) - 170bpm
Fracus & Darwin - Realms & Rough Cuts (Original Mix) - 172bpm
Lumin8 ? Rivers Flow In You - 175bpm
Makio - Crush - 176bpm
= 172.1bpm
2010's
Marc Smith - Drumbeatz - 176bpm
Marc Smith - Marc Smith & Gammer Crank - 176bpm
Kevin Energy & Douglas - Chop Suey (Original Mix) - 170bpm
Gammer_-_Nostalgia - 170bpm
Nick 235 & Solution - Feeling Kinda Strange (Kevin Energy's Strange Dark Remix) - 172bpm
Ready For War - Joey Riot vs DJ Ganah - 170bpm
Scott Brown - Don't Doubt - 170bpm
Marc Smith - **** It! - 176bpm
Scott Brown - Enchantment - 170bpm
Transcend - Mind Glow - 172bpm
= 172.2bpm
It's clear to see that the average tempo certainly has been raised over the years, however this test also backs up my original point, why in the hell are we pushing tempo's of these tracks past 180bpm? Even Scott Brown's newest tracks don't exceed 170bpm, surely such a drastic change in tempo is taking something away from the vision he has for the track?
Latin - You rightly said that it's not the tracks that are intended to reach these sort's of tempo's but the DJs that are playing them. Why do they feel the need to pitch it up? I've heard plenty of mixes from the 90's era that are guilty of doing the same, but in general, this type of thing is rife now. Uneducated people that have got into the scene due to the fast tempo completely missing the fact that when they over pitch everything they are killing the rhythm. Again, just to be clear, that's not to say that Hardcore can't work at this tempo but it will be produced to work at higher tempos. When you have a track that's produced by someone as talented as Scott Brown being pushed +10bpm over it's original tempo, your just ruining it for yourself & anyone else who listens.
Retrain your ears.
In trying not to detour from the topic too much.....S3rl isn't making 'Fast Dance music', he's basically taking it back to how it began, i'm not sure if this is intentional but that's basically what hes doing. Just look at the tempo of the original 'Now Is The Time'......160bpm. It was cool to see that Gammer's Nostalgia doesn't exceed 170bpm either, these tracks just shouldn't reach 180bpm.
|
| skankineddie666 |
S3RL is one of my favorite but that post was pretty pointless.
Its just like when Modulate said he was quitting hardcore and focusing on his Rocket Pimp project....Same music different Speed.... |
| wong |
'these tracks just shouldn't reach 180bpm'
Bollocks, they sound fine at that speed. And no i dont need to retrain my ears. There's no right or wrong |
| Samination |
most of the mixes I have heard by big time DJ's (which is ofcourse only a few) have been like 180+ ****ing hell alot of the happy hardcore stuff wher almost 190. So no, not alot DJ's I know of play them at original speeds. And to be honest, I can't listen to hardcore unless it's 180 or above. I exclude Dopeman tho, his stuff is just way to quick :P |
| Ken Masters |
quote:
Originally posted by wong:
'these tracks just shouldn't reach 180bpm'
Bollocks, they sound fine at that speed. And no i dont need to retrain my ears. There's no right or wrong
My point is, why should they reach this kind of speed. Surely if the producer has released a track at 170bpm then they intend it to be listened too around that type of tempo give or take a few bpm. To raise it +10 is surely excessive.
The point is, this seems normal to most djs now, a force of habit with anything less sounding slow. What I'm saying is, if we all give it time listening to the tracks as the producer intended then it wouldn't sound slow, it would sound normal. |
| wong |
I really don't think it matters at all tbh. Some peope just prefer it a bit faster, like me :) |
| Ken Masters |
quote:
Originally posted by wong:
I really don't think it matters at all tbh. Some peope just prefer it a bit faster, like me :)
Fair enough mate, I rarely leave my tracks at the original tempo either, wether tbeir over or under, I usually settle at around 175/176. I'm not saying that because Scott Brown releases a track at 170 then everyone has to listen to it that way but I just think pushing a track like that to 180bpm is a bit excessive, your ears adjust & it sounds normal but I think the groove of the track is lost slightly. |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
quote:
Originally posted by wong:
I really don't think it matters at all tbh. Some peope just prefer it a bit faster, like me :)
Fair enough mate, I rarely leave my tracks at the original tempo either, wether tbeir over or under, I usually settle at around 175/176. I'm not saying that because Scott Brown releases a track at 170 then everyone has to listen to it that way but I just think pushing a track like that to 180bpm is a bit excessive, your ears adjust & it sounds normal but I think the groove of the track is lost slightly.
SAY WHAT? I CAN HEAR YOU FROM THE THUMPING OF THIS 185BPM TRACK!
|
| versia |
Fun fact: S3RL's first release was 180bpm. |
| Captain Triceps |
I prefer playing them faster. I remember finding some of Dougal's late 90's sets horrible to listen to as he played them at virtually 0 pitch - shouldn't sound odd but when every other DJ played much faster it sounded terrible to me. It might have been fine if I'd listened to him first but if I'd just listened to Brisk or Hixxy or someone, Dougal next was out of the question! |
| CDJay |
This is why most hu stuff is 175; it only needs mild pitching up.
CDJay |
| djscavenger |
I couldnt give two shits if stays or goes tbh. Most of his music is utter shite. I have no idea why people rate him so much. His stuff is so poorly produced, have you heard that over the rainbow track he's just released? Christ its awful. |
| Ken Masters |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
quote:
Originally posted by wong:
I really don't think it matters at all tbh. Some peope just prefer it a bit faster, like me :)
Fair enough mate, I rarely leave my tracks at the original tempo either, wether tbeir over or under, I usually settle at around 175/176. I'm not saying that because Scott Brown releases a track at 170 then everyone has to listen to it that way but I just think pushing a track like that to 180bpm is a bit excessive, your ears adjust & it sounds normal but I think the groove of the track is lost slightly.
SAY WHAT? I CAN HEAR YOU FROM THE THUMPING OF THIS 185BPM TRACK!
aha! So use of the pitch also makes the track more thumping!? Sorry, I didn't realise. I really am out of touch with this Hardcore malarkey ;) |
| Impulse_Response |
quote:
I couldnt give two shits if stays or goes tbh. Most of his music is utter shite. I have no idea why people rate him so much. His stuff is so poorly produced, have you heard that over the rainbow track he's just released? Christ its awful.
I kind of agree with you. I absolutely love quite a few of his tunes, and then there are some that I would NEVER want to hear. I wonder how his new stuff will sound. |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by Advather:
quote:
I couldnt give two shits if stays or goes tbh. Most of his music is utter shite. I have no idea why people rate him so much. His stuff is so poorly produced, have you heard that over the rainbow track he's just released? Christ its awful.
I kind of agree with you. I absolutely love quite a few of his tunes, and then there are some that I would NEVER want to hear. I wonder how his new stuff will sound.
If you remove his "raver girl" or "daddy dj" songs, I can say I like 99% of his stuff... the 1% is the updated version of Transformers which sucked |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
aha! So use of the pitch also makes the track more thumping!? Sorry, I didn't realise. I really am out of touch with this Hardcore malarkey ;)
Was actually not refering to a pitched up track, but I dont know about thumping, but I can say neck problems while headbanging to 185BPM ;) |
| Charger |
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
quote:
Originally posted by latininxtc:
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
quote:
Originally posted by latininxtc:
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
This raises a question i've asked myself for a while now. Is modern Hardcore too fast?
No. It to me sounded faster back in the day. It's not that hardcore these days is too fast, it's that there are more beats going on in one track that accompany the main riff. So there's more going on to a track now that maybe to some it sounds like there's too much going on, but honestly nothing is sped up.
I dont think its the tracks themselves that are faster but more the approach from modern djs. Endless mixes I listen to seem to be pushing 180bpm, you might get away with this with the odd track but musically it just sounds crap.
That said, I have to disagree about Hardcore being the same speed as it always has been. If you check tracks from around the mid 90's the average tempo is slower, some barely scrape the 170 mark, but they don't need too!
Yea but you see you're talking about mixes though, when a track is mixed it ALWAYS is sped up compared to its original BPM of production, that has been no different in the past or the present. I'm saying a produced track sounds faster back then than it does now, yet there aren't that many differences in BPM.
Take Joey Riot's remix of Scott Brown's Wheels of Fortune. When he released it for preview on here I told him I liked it but would have liked it to be a little faster. The track is clocked at 170BPM though lol so it was pretty fast, yet I didn't find it to sound fast. Now listening to the original, I would say that the original sounds very fast, yet it's probably the same BPM or maybe even a bit slower. There just more going on in the new one as far as riffs, sounds, beats go than the more simplistic but equally entertaining original version.
You may be right there, more going on in the track may well give the illusion of a faster track. I decided to do a very random test of tracks throughout the era's. I will stress, this is pretty ruff & i'm about to go to bed haha but this clearly shows the progression of BPM's throughout the years.
I opened folders & randomly grabbed tracks that I felt best represented the era's then checked each tempo. This is not to say that some hardcore didn't exceed 180bpm in the 90's, far from it! but as an average...
90's-
Sy & Unknown - Cape Fear - 170bpm
Eruption & Seduction - Bust the new Jam - 164bpm
DJ Chewy - Rock this place - 170bpm
El Bruto - Hypnotising - 170bpm
Kinetic Pleasure - Higher - 166bpm
Brisk & Trixxy - Back to the top - 174bpm
Bang the Future - Body Slam (gbt inc another level remix) - 170bpm
Scott Brown & Rab S - Now is the time - 160bpm
Alchemist & Fade - Keep on trying (slipmatt remix) - 174bpm
Demo - Your mine ( slipmatt remix) - 170bpm
= 168.8bpm
2000's-
Scott Brown - I Became Hardcore - 170bpm
Fergus Mayhem - Take Control (CLSM Remix) - 170bpm
Scott Brown - Life as We Know It - 172bpm
Scott Brown - Gods Child - 170bpm
CLSM feat Ant Johnson - Sensory Vision Pt 2 - 170bpm
Marc Smith & Gammer Building Shaker - 176bpm
Duncan Oatham - Rock The Disco (K Complex Remix) - 170bpm
Fracus & Darwin - Realms & Rough Cuts (Original Mix) - 172bpm
Lumin8 ? Rivers Flow In You - 175bpm
Makio - Crush - 176bpm
= 172.1bpm
2010's
Marc Smith - Drumbeatz - 176bpm
Marc Smith - Marc Smith & Gammer Crank - 176bpm
Kevin Energy & Douglas - Chop Suey (Original Mix) - 170bpm
Gammer_-_Nostalgia - 170bpm
Nick 235 & Solution - Feeling Kinda Strange (Kevin Energy's Strange Dark Remix) - 172bpm
Ready For War - Joey Riot vs DJ Ganah - 170bpm
Scott Brown - Don't Doubt - 170bpm
Marc Smith - **** It! - 176bpm
Scott Brown - Enchantment - 170bpm
Transcend - Mind Glow - 172bpm
= 172.2bpm
It's clear to see that the average tempo certainly has been raised over the years, however this test also backs up my original point, why in the hell are we pushing tempo's of these tracks past 180bpm? Even Scott Brown's newest tracks don't exceed 170bpm, surely such a drastic change in tempo is taking something away from the vision he has for the track?
Latin - You rightly said that it's not the tracks that are intended to reach these sort's of tempo's but the DJs that are playing them. Why do they feel the need to pitch it up? I've heard plenty of mixes from the 90's era that are guilty of doing the same, but in general, this type of thing is rife now. Uneducated people that have got into the scene due to the fast tempo completely missing the fact that when they over pitch everything they are killing the rhythm. Again, just to be clear, that's not to say that Hardcore can't work at this tempo but it will be produced to work at higher tempos. When you have a track that's produced by someone as talented as Scott Brown being pushed +10bpm over it's original tempo, your just ruining it for yourself & anyone else who listens.
Retrain your ears.
In trying not to detour from the topic too much.....S3rl isn't making 'Fast Dance music', he's basically taking it back to how it began, i'm not sure if this is intentional but that's basically what hes doing. Just look at the tempo of the original 'Now Is The Time'......160bpm. It was cool to see that Gammer's Nostalgia doesn't exceed 170bpm either, these tracks just shouldn't reach 180bpm.
The real reason why most hardcore tracks in the 90's have lower BPM is because there's lots of amen breaks and piano fills in the tracks which give a shuffling drive to the track, which already provides enough energy and vibe to keep one interested.
As compared to the tracks now, the freeform tracks with arpeggiated chords and basses and riffs sound alright even produced at lower BPM (although most freeform tracks are produced at odd BPM) than those EDM-core sounding subby kick hardcore (Hardcore Rave) at 175 BPM. It's just a matter of setting the BPM to fill up the energy of sparse tracks.
I don't see a point setting rules for track BPM. You can make a track which starts at 170 BPM & gradually increases until 230 BPM at the end and woah that's gonna be a real test of the DJ to see how he adjust the tempo knob mixing in & out. xD
Fun fact: I prefer hardcore at 200+ BPM. At least that really brings out the true meaning of hardcore as an extreme genre. |
| Ken Masters |
quote:
Originally posted by Charger:
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
quote:
Originally posted by latininxtc:
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
quote:
Originally posted by latininxtc:
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Masters:
This raises a question i've asked myself for a while now. Is modern Hardcore too fast?
No. It to me sounded faster back in the day. It's not that hardcore these days is too fast, it's that there are more beats going on in one track that accompany the main riff. So there's more going on to a track now that maybe to some it sounds like there's too much going on, but honestly nothing is sped up.
I dont think its the tracks themselves that are faster but more the approach from modern djs. Endless mixes I listen to seem to be pushing 180bpm, you might get away with this with the odd track but musically it just sounds crap.
That said, I have to disagree about Hardcore being the same speed as it always has been. If you check tracks from around the mid 90's the average tempo is slower, some barely scrape the 170 mark, but they don't need too!
Yea but you see you're talking about mixes though, when a track is mixed it ALWAYS is sped up compared to its original BPM of production, that has been no different in the past or the present. I'm saying a produced track sounds faster back then than it does now, yet there aren't that many differences in BPM.
Take Joey Riot's remix of Scott Brown's Wheels of Fortune. When he released it for preview on here I told him I liked it but would have liked it to be a little faster. The track is clocked at 170BPM though lol so it was pretty fast, yet I didn't find it to sound fast. Now listening to the original, I would say that the original sounds very fast, yet it's probably the same BPM or maybe even a bit slower. There just more going on in the new one as far as riffs, sounds, beats go than the more simplistic but equally entertaining original version.
You may be right there, more going on in the track may well give the illusion of a faster track. I decided to do a very random test of tracks throughout the era's. I will stress, this is pretty ruff & i'm about to go to bed haha but this clearly shows the progression of BPM's throughout the years.
I opened folders & randomly grabbed tracks that I felt best represented the era's then checked each tempo. This is not to say that some hardcore didn't exceed 180bpm in the 90's, far from it! but as an average...
90's-
Sy & Unknown - Cape Fear - 170bpm
Eruption & Seduction - Bust the new Jam - 164bpm
DJ Chewy - Rock this place - 170bpm
El Bruto - Hypnotising - 170bpm
Kinetic Pleasure - Higher - 166bpm
Brisk & Trixxy - Back to the top - 174bpm
Bang the Future - Body Slam (gbt inc another level remix) - 170bpm
Scott Brown & Rab S - Now is the time - 160bpm
Alchemist & Fade - Keep on trying (slipmatt remix) - 174bpm
Demo - Your mine ( slipmatt remix) - 170bpm
= 168.8bpm
2000's-
Scott Brown - I Became Hardcore - 170bpm
Fergus Mayhem - Take Control (CLSM Remix) - 170bpm
Scott Brown - Life as We Know It - 172bpm
Scott Brown - Gods Child - 170bpm
CLSM feat Ant Johnson - Sensory Vision Pt 2 - 170bpm
Marc Smith & Gammer Building Shaker - 176bpm
Duncan Oatham - Rock The Disco (K Complex Remix) - 170bpm
Fracus & Darwin - Realms & Rough Cuts (Original Mix) - 172bpm
Lumin8 ?? Rivers Flow In You - 175bpm
Makio - Crush - 176bpm
= 172.1bpm
2010's
Marc Smith - Drumbeatz - 176bpm
Marc Smith - Marc Smith & Gammer Crank - 176bpm
Kevin Energy & Douglas - Chop Suey (Original Mix) - 170bpm
Gammer_-_Nostalgia - 170bpm
Nick 235 & Solution - Feeling Kinda Strange (Kevin Energy's Strange Dark Remix) - 172bpm
Ready For War - Joey Riot vs DJ Ganah - 170bpm
Scott Brown - Don't Doubt - 170bpm
Marc Smith - **** It! - 176bpm
Scott Brown - Enchantment - 170bpm
Transcend - Mind Glow - 172bpm
= 172.2bpm
It's clear to see that the average tempo certainly has been raised over the years, however this test also backs up my original point, why in the hell are we pushing tempo's of these tracks past 180bpm? Even Scott Brown's newest tracks don't exceed 170bpm, surely such a drastic change in tempo is taking something away from the vision he has for the track?
Latin - You rightly said that it's not the tracks that are intended to reach these sort's of tempo's but the DJs that are playing them. Why do they feel the need to pitch it up? I've heard plenty of mixes from the 90's era that are guilty of doing the same, but in general, this type of thing is rife now. Uneducated people that have got into the scene due to the fast tempo completely missing the fact that when they over pitch everything they are killing the rhythm. Again, just to be clear, that's not to say that Hardcore can't work at this tempo but it will be produced to work at higher tempos. When you have a track that's produced by someone as talented as Scott Brown being pushed +10bpm over it's original tempo, your just ruining it for yourself & anyone else who listens.
Retrain your ears.
In trying not to detour from the topic too much.....S3rl isn't making 'Fast Dance music', he's basically taking it back to how it began, i'm not sure if this is intentional but that's basically what hes doing. Just look at the tempo of the original 'Now Is The Time'......160bpm. It was cool to see that Gammer's Nostalgia doesn't exceed 170bpm either, these tracks just shouldn't reach 180bpm.
The real reason why most hardcore tracks in the 90's have lower BPM is because there's lots of amen breaks and piano fills in the tracks which give a shuffling drive to the track, which already provides enough energy and vibe to keep one interested.
As compared to the tracks now, the freeform tracks with arpeggiated chords and basses and riffs sound alright even produced at lower BPM (although most freeform tracks are produced at odd BPM) than those EDM-core sounding subby kick hardcore (Hardcore Rave) at 175 BPM. It's just a matter of setting the BPM to fill up the energy of sparse tracks.
I don't see a point setting rules for track BPM. You can make a track which starts at 170 BPM & gradually increases until 230 BPM at the end and woah that's gonna be a real test of the DJ to see how he adjust the tempo knob mixing in & out. xD
Fun fact: I prefer hardcore at 200+ BPM. At least that really brings out the true meaning of hardcore as an extreme genre.
Fair points, its interesting to see just how people listen to hardcore. & "shuffling" is a great term to describe 90's hardcore. There's a rhythm there that makes it great for moving too without the risk of heart attacks halfway through a set.
When you say you prefer to listen to hardcore at 200+ bpm do you mean listen to tracks produced that way or do you automatically pitch all your Hardcore to this tempo?
Its interesting to see so many people say "I only listen to hardcore at such & such a tempo", shouldn't this be decided from the sound/type of track & whether or not it actually works that fast?
When I record House I find myself leaving certain tracks out of mixes because increasing them even a couple of bpm takes something away from the track. This isn't what the producer spent an age agonising over in order to reach a certain sound. Shouldn't this be the case for Hardcore? Maybe not give or take a few bpm but when you find yourself pitching up a 175bpm track by 10bpm out of habit is this really necessary? |
| Captain Triceps |
It's just what folk prefer - you can't tell someone they absolutely must not listen to hardcore pitched up 20% if that's the way they like it. It may sound like dogshit to you but if they like it, good for them. And live? I just prefer it a bit faster, I listen to tunes at normal speed at home but when I'm out I like a bit more pace. I can't really explain why.
I notice as well (sort of on topic) that a lot of live bands play faster then normal when they play lively, upbeat music, and more often then not they play slower if it's a more mellow track. Maybe there's just something about playing live that makes a difference. |
| Elliott |
I wouldn't say I'm glad but having always regarded him as the most overrated hardcore producer going, I can't say I'm too upset either.
From his idiotic leaving statement, it sounds like you will just be able to pitch up his already overly high pitched leads to a whole new level and carry on playing them (if you're into that kind of thing).
Edit: Ultra modern hardcore with the whole snare 2nds thing actually sounds a lot slower than absolutely any preceding style. |
| _Jay_ |
quote:
Originally posted by Elliott:
Edit: Ultra modern hardcore with the whole snare 2nds thing actually sounds a lot slower than absolutely any preceding style.
Doesn't it! Seriously fcuking irritates me.
|
| Chris Core |
shame...i love his stuff...u know when you're hearing an s3rl track |
| silver |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
silver: do you actually read? :P He said he'd change his BPM aswell
Did you listen to the track :) He's basically saying people in UK hardcore say "this isn't hardcore" and other people say "I like s3rl tracks" but don't seem to like other UK hardcore artists, therefore he's decided to do his own genre music thing... which is great :)
Dropping 5-10 BPM makes it still makes it accessible to hardcore DJ sets :) |
| Elliott |
quote:
Originally posted by _Jay_:
quote:
Originally posted by Elliott:
Edit: Ultra modern hardcore with the whole snare 2nds thing actually sounds a lot slower than absolutely any preceding style.
Doesn't it! Seriously fcuking irritates me.
Yeah, I get you. I really don't like it! It just sounds somehow.. idk.. incomplete and lacking in power, I suppose. |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by silver:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
silver: do you actually read? :P He said he'd change his BPM aswell
Did you listen to the track :) He's basically saying people in UK hardcore say "this isn't hardcore" and other people say "I like s3rl tracks" but don't seem to like other UK hardcore artists, therefore he's decided to do his own genre music thing... which is great :)
Dropping 5-10 BPM makes it still makes it accessible to hardcore DJ sets :)
I didnt watch/listen since I was at work with no speakers |
| ultraskool |
Why can't he just produce quality 'Australian Happy Hardcore' music!?? FTW!??
I've always thought his stuff was for the more younger ravers who enjoy their J-Core influenced Lollipop land sounding alot like Hard Trance with a HHC spin and some 'dubstep' sounds squished in between. LOL
But I would've liked him to incorporate more D'n'B sounds into his stuff - would've been interesting to see what he came up with.
"Respect to the man in the ice-cream van!" - SCOOTER |
| paeschli |
We're now a few months later and there's absolutely 0 change in his sound. People freaked out about nothing.
Listen to Hypotoad, BFF, Genre Police and Old Stuff
(especially the last one was funny :P) |
| djscavenger |
to be honest I've always found his music to be utter dross. He can drop the BPM all he likes his music still sucks |
| Elipton |
quote:
Originally posted by djscavenger:
to be honest I've always found his music to be utter dross. He can drop the BPM all he likes his music still sucks
Great input there, very interesting stuff |
| djscavenger |
quote:
Originally posted by Elipton:
quote:
Originally posted by djscavenger:
to be honest I've always found his music to be utter dross. He can drop the BPM all he likes his music still sucks
Great input there, very interesting stuff
Well I don't understand why people care what he's doing, hardcore has lost far more talented people than him and moved on.
|
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by djscavenger:
quote:
Originally posted by Elipton:
quote:
Originally posted by djscavenger:
to be honest I've always found his music to be utter dross. He can drop the BPM all he likes his music still sucks
Great input there, very interesting stuff
Well I don't understand why people care what he's doing, hardcore has lost far more talented people than him and moved on.
Last I checked Hardcore is having problems moving on :P |
| Guest |
its why you still use facebook that just hangs around like a stale fart |
