 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| It's late and I'm kinda drunk posting on a Tuesday night by Fullofkittens 03/26/2013, 10:17pm PDT | ||||
 |
 |
|||
| On the one hand:
As an electronic musician, it's exciting that the mainstream picked up on a musical genre mainly because of its emphasis on sound design and not because of super hot girls in videos. If you're an electronic musician and you heard Scatta in 2010-2011 and you say you didn't go "holy shit, what is that" then you're just lying. That bass sound is powerful stuff. On the other hand: It's billed as dance music, but nobody can dance to it. It took me a while to figure out the difference between house and techno, but here's what limited insight I have: techno is supposed to create a technological future on a dance floor where everybody feels cutting edge, and house music is designed so that everybody looks hot while they're dancing in a club. Dubstep makes everybody on the dancefloor look like a goddamn moron. Let's say that there's a DJ, and ten girls are on the dancefloor. If house is playing, they all look like a friggin' Time Out New York pictorial. If dubstep is playing, they all look like idiots. The people that seem to enjoy it the most think that the DJ is Limp Bizkit and that they should start moshing. Lately, dubstep has been superseded by "trap" ("Harlem Shake" is trap) which seems to prove the point that people are enjoying this stuff ironically. Dance music is ideally something that you can get lost in, over an evening, but dubstep is a short term high. I've enjoyed some dubstep tracks (Feed Me is good, this video by Kill The Noise is solid) but the idea behind dance music is that you can chain tunes together indefinitely, and I get tired of dubstep pretty quickly. |
||||
 |
 |
|||
|
