| Author |
Thread |
|
Ken Masters
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
3,447 posts
Joined: Feb, 2007
|
 Posted - 2014/06/21 : 16:18:44
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.
__________________________________
Future State Music
Alert moderator 
|
wong
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
2,991 posts
Joined: Feb, 2006
|
Posted - 2014/06/21 : 17:29:02
I really don't think it matters at all tbh. Some peope just prefer it a bit faster, like me :)
__________________________________
intensify the treatment
Alert moderator
|
Ken Masters
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
3,447 posts
Joined: Feb, 2007
|
Posted - 2014/06/21 : 18:27:21
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.
__________________________________
Future State Music
Alert moderator
|
Samination
Advanced Member
Sweden
13,073 posts
Joined: Jul, 2004
195 hardcore releases
|
Posted - 2014/06/21 : 18:33:22
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!
__________________________________
---------------------------------------------
Samination, Swedish Hardcore DJ
Happy, UK Hardcore, Freeform, Makina and Gabber
http://samination.se/
---------------------------------------------
Alert moderator
|
versia
Average Member
Australia
180 posts
Joined: Oct, 2013
|
Posted - 2014/06/21 : 18:58:53
Fun fact: S3RL's first release was 180bpm.
Alert moderator
|
Captain Triceps
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
2,184 posts
Joined: Dec, 2011
|
Posted - 2014/06/21 : 19:55:35
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!
__________________________________
Some of my remixes, original tracks and mixes here:
https://soundcloud.com/bradders-tracks-and-remix
https://soundcloud.com/bradders1982
https://soundcloud.com/paulbradley1982
Alert moderator
|
CDJay
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
3,049 posts
Joined: Nov, 2001
|
Posted - 2014/06/21 : 20:41:10
This is why most hu stuff is 175; it only needs mild pitching up.
CDJay
__________________________________
Http://www.hardcoreunderground.co.uk
Alert moderator
|
djscavenger
Junior Member
United Kingdom
119 posts
Joined: Jan, 2014
|
Posted - 2014/06/21 : 20:56:57
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.
Alert moderator
|
Ken Masters
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
3,447 posts
Joined: Feb, 2007
|
Posted - 2014/06/21 : 21:41:47
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 ;)
__________________________________
Future State Music
Alert moderator
|
Impulse_Response
Advanced Member
United States
724 posts
Joined: Jun, 2013
|
Posted - 2014/06/22 : 02:05:03
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.
__________________________________
Producers and record labels, please stop "loudness war" mastering everything. It sounds terrible.
Alert moderator
|
Samination
Advanced Member
Sweden
13,073 posts
Joined: Jul, 2004
195 hardcore releases
|
Posted - 2014/06/22 : 06:39:07
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, Swedish Hardcore DJ
Happy, UK Hardcore, Freeform, Makina and Gabber
http://samination.se/
---------------------------------------------
Alert moderator
|
Samination
Advanced Member
Sweden
13,073 posts
Joined: Jul, 2004
195 hardcore releases
|
Posted - 2014/06/22 : 06:40:12
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 ;)
__________________________________
---------------------------------------------
Samination, Swedish Hardcore DJ
Happy, UK Hardcore, Freeform, Makina and Gabber
http://samination.se/
---------------------------------------------
Alert moderator
|
Charger
Senior Member
Singapore
278 posts
Joined: Jun, 2012
|
Posted - 2014/06/22 : 09:08:06
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.
__________________________________
For updates of my tracks & free downloads:
http://www.soundcloud.com/hedgehog-charger
Alert moderator
|
Ken Masters
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
3,447 posts
Joined: Feb, 2007
|
Posted - 2014/06/22 : 19:28:07
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?
__________________________________
Future State Music
Alert moderator
|
Captain Triceps
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
2,184 posts
Joined: Dec, 2011
|
Posted - 2014/06/22 : 21:27:27
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.
__________________________________
Some of my remixes, original tracks and mixes here:
https://soundcloud.com/bradders-tracks-and-remix
https://soundcloud.com/bradders1982
https://soundcloud.com/paulbradley1982
Alert moderator
|
|
S3RL's gone
Printer friendly
