| Author |
Thread |
|
Warnman
Advanced Member
Germany
2,676 posts
Joined: Jun, 2010
|
 Posted - 2012/07/05 : 23:14:53
Tmo, Hardcore is a fast electronic music with a very uplifting (slightly childish) sound that immediately urges you to totally freak out, dance around and causes a bright smile on your face automatically. BPM can reach from 160 up to 220 (because I personally dislike to divide as much between Happy/UK Hardcore, Freeform Hardcore/Trancecore and other styles of Hardcore music as others usually do). Gabba is Hardcore, too, but there is a true difference between both genres.
Non-hardcore are tracks that drop in the main part and the big majority of all Minimal, Electro and Dubstep influenced tracks do it. For me it's simply paced up Minimal, Electro and Dubstep. Destroy the uplifting main part and you'll receive what I really enjoy to call "coitus interruptus".
Hardcore is meant to rave around, freak around: being crazy, but the above named genres are making a fool out of this genre, because they sound slow, "relaxing" and are killing the atmosphere.
I really mean it! Do you love the feeling when someone jacks you off close to the point of no return and than smash your balls between two bricks? In this case you must be a masochist, but "Rave" truely is the wrong community for you. Read a f**king dictionary to understand the definition of Rave; myself rarely understands it, but I think I have experienced enough to react as emotional as I do atm.
I'm truely sorry, if I have hurt someone's feelings. It's 1 am over here, I'm close to be drunk and my only wish is to listen to Hard Hitters for the next 2 hours.
Love me, hate me! I don't mind!
__________________________________
Ravers unite!
"Happy Hardcore: Love it... hate it... it's fun!" (Matt Stokes)
Alert moderator 
|
Smoogie
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
6,480 posts
Joined: Mar, 2006
|
Posted - 2012/07/06 : 01:04:38
Dont even get me started. As someone pointed out, the 'Clubland' Series and anything else to do with Raverbaby AATW and copycat labels to be avoided. I like hard kicks, hoover, breaks. Listen to any Fantasia set from 91-92 or Rez set from 93-96 or Dutch stuff from 91-97 for a taste of Hardcore. Different styles all hard. Some Freeform is hard also but all those pop songs are not.
__________________________________
.
Alert moderator
|
jenks
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
3,682 posts
Joined: Feb, 2003
19 hardcore releases
|
Posted - 2012/07/06 : 07:54:32
quote:
Originally posted by danielsomma:
quote:
Originally posted by jenks:
I think at this point the defining feature of hardcore is pretty much just the BPM.
So even the Eurobeat stuff that's over 170 BPM can be called hardcore? I don't think so.
Examples? I'd say so though yeah, to be fair.
Alert moderator
|
Samination
Advanced Member
Sweden
13,072 posts
Joined: Jul, 2004
195 hardcore releases
|
Posted - 2012/07/06 : 08:52:30
quote:
Originally posted by Smoogie:
Dont even get me started. As someone pointed out, the 'Clubland' Series and anything else to do with Raverbaby AATW and copycat labels to be avoided. I like hard kicks, hoover, breaks. Listen to any Fantasia set from 91-92 or Rez set from 93-96 or Dutch stuff from 91-97 for a taste of Hardcore. Different styles all hard. Some Freeform is hard also but all those pop songs are not.
why would i listen to something so painfully slow?
__________________________________
---------------------------------------------
Samination, Swedish Hardcore DJ
Happy, UK Hardcore, Freeform, Makina and Gabber
http://samination.se/
---------------------------------------------
Alert moderator
|
Breakbeat Jon
Average Member
United Kingdom
223 posts
Joined: Dec, 2011
|
Posted - 2012/07/06 : 17:38:09
quote:
why would i listen to something so painfully slow?
I wouldn't say 140bpm is painfully slow, although I can appreciate kids into the new styles of hardcore thinking it is. I remember as a nipper buying the Prodidgy Experience album when it came out, and thinking my god, I can't believe how fast this is. And for the time it was.
The great thing about hardcore is during it's 20 odd year existence it has constantly evolved, meaning hardcore is a lot of different things to a lot of people.
I quite like Simon Reynolds 'Hardcore Continuum theory' which is more along the lines of the people into the original hardcore sound moved onto Jungle - DnB - Garage - Dub-Step, along with obviously hardcore. And I can see his point. I think if a lot of the original hardcore ravers were 17/18 now, they would be raving to dubstep. It's an interesting theory, and well worth picking up a copy of his Energy Flash Book. Or just read a bit about it here http://www.kmag.co.uk/editorial/features/enter-the-nuum.html
__________________________________
http://soundcloud.com/ruined-jon
Alert moderator
|
Hard2Get
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
12,837 posts
Joined: Jun, 2001
|
Posted - 2012/07/06 : 17:45:37
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by Smoogie:
Dont even get me started. As someone pointed out, the 'Clubland' Series and anything else to do with Raverbaby AATW and copycat labels to be avoided. I like hard kicks, hoover, breaks. Listen to any Fantasia set from 91-92 or Rez set from 93-96 or Dutch stuff from 91-97 for a taste of Hardcore. Different styles all hard. Some Freeform is hard also but all those pop songs are not.
why would i listen to something so painfully slow?
Why you not listen to something based purely on bpm? It's also not slow.
Alert moderator
|
Samination
Advanced Member
Sweden
13,072 posts
Joined: Jul, 2004
195 hardcore releases
|
Posted - 2012/07/06 : 19:59:18
Jon & Matt. Well considering I got into Hardcore in early 2000... yea it's too slow for me.
I don't listen to only fast music. I listen to Trance, **** I even listen to Jean-Michel Jarre. But oldskool Hardcore? I just can't stand it
__________________________________
---------------------------------------------
Samination, Swedish Hardcore DJ
Happy, UK Hardcore, Freeform, Makina and Gabber
http://samination.se/
---------------------------------------------
Alert moderator
|
Dante
Advanced Member
Vatican City State (Holy See)
1,185 posts
Joined: Dec, 2009
|
Posted - 2012/07/06 : 22:41:24
Old school hardcore (breaks) is so different from new school (post ~1999-2000) that you can't compare them to one another as the same genre, even though I very much consider the 91-93 sound hardcore, as well as the newer revival styles like rave breaks.
Also, eddiewould: Don't you realise that you are exactly as conceited about your music as you claim DnB fans are? You seem to be primarily concerned with hardcore's _image_ as a "fun" and silly genre.
It's worth mentioning (and might already have been) that early hardcore grew out of dark and brooding styles like acid house and Belgian new beat (some may even claim that New Beat was the first style of hardcore. I would say the early 90s breaks was the first, but I won't be too stubborn about it) rather than light hearted and silly styles. Either way I will probably always prefer the more euphoric and maybe even dreamlike aspects of hardcore (Jonny L - Hurt You So, etc. Yes, it's one of my favourites), and try to stay away from the silly shit. To each their own.
Hardcore has always been the 'jack of all trades, master of none' of dance music, borrowing elements from virtually anything that drifts by, particularly contemporary popular styles. Since this has spawned so many different sounds over the years, the boundaries of hardcore have gotten incredibly vague, and there are probably as many definitions as there are listeners. These days the only thing that can pretty safely be labelled hardcore is kick drum led music at 160-165bpm and up, but hardcore is so much more. I for one think the dubstep and electro influenced hardcore tracks are a great thing. It doesn't always make for great tracks, but it's a step in the right direction (towards diversity), and very much in keeping with the spirit of the genre.
This same merging is happening, and has been happening for a while, in other genres. This is a great thing. Hopefully in the future we can be (at least partially) rid of ridiculous and restrictive concepts like genre names, and listen to the music itself. Excluding an entire genre just because you've heard a couple tracks you don't like, is so narrowminded, I might liken it to a certain political party that rose to prominence in the 1930s in Germany. Yeah, you know what I'm talking about. God damn fucking nazis, motherfuckers.
I think it's time to wrap this rant up. Lova ya, fuckheads.
PS: For those who don't really know me (almost everyone who will read this), take this post with a cup of salt. You'll get really thirsty.
__________________________________
The "artist" formerly known as Nakk(enboro)!
-----------------------------
http://soundcloud.com/bballs
Alert moderator
|
The Doc
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
2,718 posts
Joined: Jan, 2006
|
Posted - 2012/07/06 : 23:38:21
I consider myself very lucky to know when a Hardcore track is ever played, If you don't know, unfortunately you never will!
__________________________________
Rock you in your face! stab your brain with your nose bone!
Alert moderator
|
Samination
Advanced Member
Sweden
13,072 posts
Joined: Jul, 2004
195 hardcore releases
|
Posted - 2012/07/07 : 06:59:08
I don't mind that the genre merge, but man I'd love to see someone mix a fast (170BPM) track and a slow (130BPM) track without them clanging :)
__________________________________
---------------------------------------------
Samination, Swedish Hardcore DJ
Happy, UK Hardcore, Freeform, Makina and Gabber
http://samination.se/
---------------------------------------------
Alert moderator
|
Hard2Get
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
12,837 posts
Joined: Jun, 2001
|
Posted - 2012/07/07 : 13:33:30
quote:
Originally posted by Dante:
Old school hardcore (breaks) is so different from new school (post ~1999-2000) that you can't compare them to one another as the same genre, even though I very much consider the 91-93 sound hardcore, as well as the newer revival styles like rave breaks.
Also, eddiewould: Don't you realise that you are exactly as conceited about your music as you claim DnB fans are? You seem to be primarily concerned with hardcore's _image_ as a "fun" and silly genre.
It's worth mentioning (and might already have been) that early hardcore grew out of dark and brooding styles like acid house and Belgian new beat (some may even claim that New Beat was the first style of hardcore. I would say the early 90s breaks was the first, but I won't be too stubborn about it) rather than light hearted and silly styles. Either way I will probably always prefer the more euphoric and maybe even dreamlike aspects of hardcore (Jonny L - Hurt You So, etc. Yes, it's one of my favourites), and try to stay away from the silly shit. To each their own.
Hardcore has always been the 'jack of all trades, master of none' of dance music, borrowing elements from virtually anything that drifts by, particularly contemporary popular styles. Since this has spawned so many different sounds over the years, the boundaries of hardcore have gotten incredibly vague, and there are probably as many definitions as there are listeners. These days the only thing that can pretty safely be labelled hardcore is kick drum led music at 160-165bpm and up, but hardcore is so much more. I for one think the dubstep and electro influenced hardcore tracks are a great thing. It doesn't always make for great tracks, but it's a step in the right direction (towards diversity), and very much in keeping with the spirit of the genre.
This same merging is happening, and has been happening for a while, in other genres. This is a great thing. Hopefully in the future we can be (at least partially) rid of ridiculous and restrictive concepts like genre names, and listen to the music itself. Excluding an entire genre just because you've heard a couple tracks you don't like, is so narrowminded, I might liken it to a certain political party that rose to prominence in the 1930s in Germany. Yeah, you know what I'm talking about. God damn fucking nazis, motherfuckers.
I think it's time to wrap this rant up. Lova ya, fuckheads.
PS: For those who don't really know me (almost everyone who will read this), take this post with a cup of salt. You'll get really thirsty.
Great post.
Alert moderator
|
DJ Immenze
New Member
United Kingdom
56 posts
Joined: Dec, 2010
|
Posted - 2012/07/07 : 13:36:29
I believe that now a days hardcore is know for its early 2000s stuff and the clxh cds not for the early happy hardcore vibes back in the 90s. My generation has grown up with the kick-bass-kick-bass at 170bpm. To me that is hardcore.
Honestly and truthfully I think that the way hardcore is going at the minute is making the scene die out because of this dubstep influence. it's making people question, well what is hardcore now...
__________________________________
DJ Immenze
http://www.dj-immenze.co.uk
Alert moderator
|
Hard2Get
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
12,837 posts
Joined: Jun, 2001
|
Posted - 2012/07/07 : 14:31:14
quote:
Originally posted by DJ Immenze:
Honestly and truthfully I think that the way hardcore is going at the minute is making the scene die out because of this dubstep influence. it's making people question, well what is hardcore now...
To be honest, the scene went downhill in 2005 so if it can go a further 7 years while getting progressively worse without dying then i don't think you have to worry.
Alert moderator
|
snerkler
Senior Member
United Kingdom
448 posts
Joined: Aug, 2008
|
Posted - 2012/07/12 : 16:07:21
I hate these questions as everyone has an opinion (including myself). But the facts are that Hardcore is a big umbrella that encompasses a whole variety of music, ranging from oldschool, to happy hardcore, to techno, to jungle to drum n bass.
Typically any music that uses atonal beats, as well as industrial sounds and samples can be deemed to be Hardcore. So, it does not refer to a BPM as oldschool is at 130-145 bpm, happy hardcore 160-175bpm, drum n bass 175bpm+. However, hardcore can be under 100bpm.
Neither is it defined by bass, as again just the styles mentioned all have different sounding bass.
Most dance music we listen to today has spawned from Hardcore (Hardcore itself being born in the late 80's), and because it has now become so diverse we have to categorise the sub genres, eg happy hardcore, jungle, techno etc, each of which can be defined in it's own way. but it's still all hardcore.
So depending on how you view it you can argue that Happy Hardcore is not hardcore, it is purely Happy hardcore, which happens to fall under the hardcore umbrella. It depends how pedantic you want to be.
I've been around since day one (showing my age now) and I refer to the early 'rave' stuff as Hardcore (as this is what it was only known as), and the rest of the stuff as it's own sub genre. But technically to call Jungle, for example, hardcore is not wrong.
__________________________________
Say NO to BPM counters
Alert moderator
Edited by - snerkler on 2012/07/12 16:31:32 |
snerkler
Senior Member
United Kingdom
448 posts
Joined: Aug, 2008
|
Posted - 2012/07/12 : 16:20:11
edit: Done it again, clicked quote rather than edit 
__________________________________
Say NO to BPM counters
Alert moderator
Edited by - snerkler on 2012/07/12 16:31:09 |
|
When does it stop being hardcore?
Printer friendly
