untalented garbage, UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TISUN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TISUN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TISUN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS BASH UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS UN TIS BASH
repeat for rest of the song
@jatup techno has not become a umbrella term, just because many many many many people are using techno to say electronic music, it has not become a umbrella term, the same goes to electronica, and electro.
Exactly, classification makes it much easier to discover music similar to what you already like or it can help you avoid artists similar to what you don't like. I was referring to your statement about techno "not existing". Underground Resistance and related projects are genuine techno. And even though you are right, it has become an umbrella term, saying it doesn't exist just because of that is a little ignorant. Same thing is slowly happening with trance, but fortunately on a smaller scale.
words are important, it's how we communicate. are there words in songs? do they mean something? do you listen to them? this is a lame movie reference but in "Music and Lyrics", Drew Barrymore's character says that the music is like sex with someone, and the lyrics are like getting to know the person's inner feelings. completely besides the point. but yea. go lyrics!
music media in the US coined the 2nd wave of electronic pop music in the 90s 'electronica', the 1st wave was called 'techno'. for some reasons they didn't perpetuate this wording. funny, we all (or most people) perceive & discriminate triggered by media decisions, relax. it's a mind's game. what do we really discover & understand in music ? 20 years ago i was dancing techno, and i wasn't even thinking about "electronic", it just was fast (120-150 bpm) synthesizer disco music, four-on-the floor beats, trance-like, repetitive, loud, monotonic, long tracks with no vocals. and as i was living in germany, kraftwerk was somehow the proto-techno musical act. at last.fm, people tend to tag a lot of EDM as 'house'. that today, 'techno' is not identical to electronic dance music, is only a matter of sociolinguistic and media-influences development, and not an inherent matter of the music. it's only words, but words seem to touch people heavily. get detached, listen to the music not the words.
i'd like to apologize to anyone i've offended in this section of the site. a friend recently opened my mind to something: yes, perhaps the general consensus of the word by majority is "encompassing all genres of electronic music", but the fact that people (informed, unlike me) have complained about the definite meaning of the word contributes to the overall subjective meaning of it. therefore, i aquiesce. something i rarely do. may your skies be blue and your dreams be pink. love, angus :)
Why are people getting so het up! Quite bluntly Techno is not, Scooter, Cascada or the Prodigy for that matter but i suppose the name has been used to such an extent we should just get over it!...although genre labels can get a bit over the top, in this case all we need to say is:
Search for Juan Atkins, Derrick May, DJ Rolando, Jeff Mills, Ben Sims, Plastikman, Basic Channel, Adam Beyer or Luke Slater and youll ge ta better idea of some of the different angles
sry 4 awful logic. Here's: [track artist=Baskyl]Check the Tags of the Sky[/track]! I built this one on the fly. Enjoy! [i]*notice: Don't tag this as "Techno" tho 158bpm is pretty technoid* thank you[/i]
no-one's suggesting tat, sebington. you're right however about not being removed from your own reality. relativity and subjectivity _is_ important, and if your view is that the techno tag should be strict and refined then that's your view, and it's perfectly valid. for -any- argument in the world there is a counter-argument. i think we're on the same page but looking at it through, yes, that's right... our own perception. haha philosophy man we could debate this endlessly. but i'd like to put one thing to you... inspecting photons using a spectrometer is definitely removed from reality. we can't see it directly, people say that atoms are this and photons are that and that's how the world works. when really... the world works differently for every single person in the universe. i view it like intersecting circles of experience that look like venn-diagrams, each circle being a completely seperate reality that can overlap with someone else's producing a different "set" of reality.
"the very fact that you use the term "check the tags of the sky", no matter how metaphorical it was, shows how removed from reality you are. a person can only ever base their descriptions and perceptions on personal experience." 1. Its a thought experiment, it doesnt have to conform to our world just as long as the example remains logically sound.. 2. according to you peoples perceptions breed their own reality. So how can I possibly be removed from my own reality?
I appreciate that music is a subjective experience and what sounds like techno to one person may not do so to another. How ever to suggest that any piece of music can become techno if enough people think its techno, is in my veiw completely ludicrous..
"no, _that_ is a load of crap. if someone sees the sky as pink then it is pink to them."
Did you actually read my post? I said pretty much that.. ---> "the sky would be pink "in their reality" as you say"
Think I should have said it just appears pink... They would be wrong... they could come to see this if they took the time to educate themselves (for example by taking a photo of the sky shining a light though it and study the photons with a spectrometer and compare wavelengths and images to those of a full spectrum.. from this they must conclude that they were wrong... Put simply we should try to educate ourselves on the things that matter us rather than blindly accepting how they appear to us..
no, you fuckwit... "the sky is blue" because most of us perceive the sky as blue. look at the pretty pictures above, it might help you understand things a bit clearer, ignoramus... most people, except elitist tag nazis like yourself, have tagged all that stuff as techno. ppl have tagged baskyl as techno, and me, etc. therefore techno _is as people have used the tag_. the sky is as people see it. there is a _general consensus_ about what the word means, encompassing a broader range of music, which has evolved through communication. combinations of signs and signals, couple with the _thing they signify_ create meaning, it's called a syntagm. signs (such as tags) are arbitrary in their own right and only have meaning based on the sociological context of the signified. first year uni stuff mate. not very hard.
Interesting point, Sebington - that makes it 1:0 for gameoneterik: The sky is not blue. It's the rays of light beaming thru the atmosphere of the Earth, their reflections are captured by the retina of our eyes and human brains interpret this signal as "blue". The sky itself definetely has no colour of its own. Apart from scientific description - which you sure can't apply on "Techno" - it is personal experience, that charge words (tags, labels) with meaning, connotation and all that semantic jazz.
the very fact that you use the term "check the tags of the sky", no matter how metaphorical it was, shows how removed from reality you are. a person can only ever base their descriptions and perceptions on personal experience.
What a load of crap... If 75% of the world's population was colour blind in such a way that the sky appeared pink.. the sky would be pink "in their reality" as you say but just because there is more people who believe the sky to be pink than not, does not make the proposition that the sky is pink true. What is more if there is someone who is not colour blind and wants to know the colour of the sky, they check the tags of the colour of the sky, seeing that pink has the largest number of tags, if they choose to pay credence to the tagging system they must believe the proposition that Pink is Blue...
if i grew up in an environment where atoms were watermelons then my reality would be that atoms are watermelons. there's no argument about it, everyone's own perception breeds their own reality. everything is a self portrait and what people choose to attribute to music is based solely on their own self-portraiture, their own perception, their own reality. in a social context such as the tagging system on last.fm these differing perceptions will interact to create meaning. it's about symbiotics, the tag doesn't "belong" to any person, group, or style of music, it is something that is shared and if The Prodigy are the number one artist tagged "techno" then it reflects the way people feel about the word. It's called democracy and what you are preaching is purism, pure and simple, ie. an autocracy.
a tag is a word and words will never have the same meaning to any two people. how does it evolve? "google" is now a dictionary-certified word. words evolve. purist bullshit is just that, bullshit. unless you're a closed-minded person you should be happy that there is such variety in tagging, yes strict tagging allows you to discover certain genres but the broadening of a tag allows it to intersect with other genres and create real connection. what kind of a closed-minded idiot would type in "techno" expecting only to find "Detroit" bullshit. If you want to find that use a multi-tag search and try "detroit + techno". simple. it's called depth. tags intersect and if you wanna be specific you can narrow it down. my perception of the tag "techno" is different to yours. I grew up in an environment and social situation where it _does_ mean "all sorts of electronic music". it's different to your definition but that doesn't make it wrong. Purism is _bullshit_
You couldn't be more wrong. The word techno is a specific genre. If something doesn't fit it, why tag it that way? What's up with people saying "stop classifying music, just enjoy it" anyway? Thanks to tags/genres discovering new music is easier, but in case of techno we have a mix of artists not even close to the actual genre. Because of that I usually omit techno when I talk about my favorite music genres because people don't even know what it is. And how is it an evolution? Is tagging Scooter as rock an evolution too?
fucking trolls and tag nazis. people tag stuff based on their own perception, thus it evolves and grows in meaning. you guys are deluded. there's nothing more far-removed from reality than idealising about what a tag means. the reality is, people [b]have[/b] tagged certain music as techno therefore it's an evolution, a considered approach to how the tag can be applied to something outside of the fucking cage that some people are attempting to put music into.