There has been a bit of discussion in the classics section (This thread to be exact) regarding posting tracks released after 2010. Is it an idea to make a separate section to post tracks that aren't new, but are not considered classics either?
Separate (classics) section for posting post-2010 tracks
- Thread starter Gijs
- Start date
- Status
Bluemoon
Senior Member
- Jul 8, 2020
- 277 Posts
- 193 Thanked
I think this would be a great idea. Not referring to you now Gagi but i often see that the answer is that we just have a thread for it. A thread is a lot less user friendly than a browsable forumsection and i dont understand (again not referring to you) why there is fear for adding more sections. Yes way too many sections is too many sections but we have very few here and adding a few in my eyes is win win.
Its like this. If we didnt have a section for classics as we do now, and we just had a thread for it, then most of us would miss out on a lot of the tracks. But now when its a forumsection for it, it takes just a few minutes to browse through a few pages to see what has been posted. Browsing a 50 pages + thread is not the same and it will never be.
Also i think a forum section where we could post golden tracks that you cant really class as classics yet because its not aged enough yet would be used a lot more than you think. I know i would use it ^^
Its like this. If we didnt have a section for classics as we do now, and we just had a thread for it, then most of us would miss out on a lot of the tracks. But now when its a forumsection for it, it takes just a few minutes to browse through a few pages to see what has been posted. Browsing a 50 pages + thread is not the same and it will never be.
Also i think a forum section where we could post golden tracks that you cant really class as classics yet because its not aged enough yet would be used a lot more than you think. I know i would use it ^^
- Jun 27, 2020
- 4,120 Posts
- 2,994 Thanked
I'm not against it either, let's see what others have to say about it.
With a section, we'll avoid cluttering a single thread, but we'll clutter up the whole forum, so it's hard to find a balance. Plus, individual threads for tracks never get as much discussion as more general threads. Upcoming releases (and classics, to some extent) sections are in at least 90% of the cases devoid of proper discussion (partly because there are just so many threads!), and a more general thread in the music discussion section will get more replies.
It's a trade-off. I'm not for or against the proposed idea, and making a section is at most 5 minutes of work. I'd rather we get all the facts and decide together.
Plus, ~2010-era trance gets a bad rep sometimes, even though there were some stunning tracks then and after. Less of them surely (compared to the earlier eras of trance), but still.
With a section, we'll avoid cluttering a single thread, but we'll clutter up the whole forum, so it's hard to find a balance. Plus, individual threads for tracks never get as much discussion as more general threads. Upcoming releases (and classics, to some extent) sections are in at least 90% of the cases devoid of proper discussion (partly because there are just so many threads!), and a more general thread in the music discussion section will get more replies.
It's a trade-off. I'm not for or against the proposed idea, and making a section is at most 5 minutes of work. I'd rather we get all the facts and decide together.
Plus, ~2010-era trance gets a bad rep sometimes, even though there were some stunning tracks then and after. Less of them surely (compared to the earlier eras of trance), but still.
DazTC
Member
What does and doesn't qualify as 'classic' is of course completely personal, we've naturally all got our own sets of rules, and this is what makes Trance Classics a bit of a minefield.
For some of us it's simply down to age, and when a track hits a certain age (e.g 10 years) it instantly qualifies.
Others have more complex sets of rules, taking into consideration the sounds themselves, the era, and possibly the memories attached back when Trance was at it's peak.
Also, a lot of us no longer keep up with the genre (and you could say Trance did kinda die) feeling that it evolved into something we no longer enjoy or even consider Trance in the main, and it's for this reason that we opted with a 2008 cut off date in our own Trance Classics Facebook group. Tbh even 2008 is pushing it by some way.
For us, (or at least myself) I felt Trance was on a rapid decline from 2006 when this far more generic, noisy 'steroidy' sound began to filter into many productions from the likes of Sean Tyas etc. etc. and as the years went on...releases also got less original, less memorable to the extent it all began to sound the same.
1-2 hour long sets where it just sounded like a single long track (kinda like an Aly & Fila Essential Mix), where you couldn't tell the track had transitioned at all and you were 40 mins in.
Of course there will be younger fans on Trancefix though as well as us older 'stuck in the past' types, but it's genuinely painful scrolling through and seeing these modern era type productions begin to filter in.
Is it difficult to scroll on past them, not really...but it does grate a bit seeing this stuff in amongst genuine massive anthems from Trance music's greatest days.
Kinda went off on one here haha, but I suppose in short....yes if it keeps those sounds out of Classic Releases area then I'm certainly all for it.
For some of us it's simply down to age, and when a track hits a certain age (e.g 10 years) it instantly qualifies.
Others have more complex sets of rules, taking into consideration the sounds themselves, the era, and possibly the memories attached back when Trance was at it's peak.
Also, a lot of us no longer keep up with the genre (and you could say Trance did kinda die) feeling that it evolved into something we no longer enjoy or even consider Trance in the main, and it's for this reason that we opted with a 2008 cut off date in our own Trance Classics Facebook group. Tbh even 2008 is pushing it by some way.
For us, (or at least myself) I felt Trance was on a rapid decline from 2006 when this far more generic, noisy 'steroidy' sound began to filter into many productions from the likes of Sean Tyas etc. etc. and as the years went on...releases also got less original, less memorable to the extent it all began to sound the same.
1-2 hour long sets where it just sounded like a single long track (kinda like an Aly & Fila Essential Mix), where you couldn't tell the track had transitioned at all and you were 40 mins in.
Of course there will be younger fans on Trancefix though as well as us older 'stuck in the past' types, but it's genuinely painful scrolling through and seeing these modern era type productions begin to filter in.
Is it difficult to scroll on past them, not really...but it does grate a bit seeing this stuff in amongst genuine massive anthems from Trance music's greatest days.
Kinda went off on one here haha, but I suppose in short....yes if it keeps those sounds out of Classic Releases area then I'm certainly all for it.
Last edited:
- Jun 27, 2020
- 4,120 Posts
- 2,994 Thanked
Yeah, and the style changing very slowly (or not at all), we're used to the same kinds of trance for like 10-14 years. So it's hard to promote some tracks from that period as classics because we can hear a track similar to it that could be 5 years younger or older... If you can understand my train of thought here.
A track being a classic isn't down to just age. I've seen a lot of trance tracks posted in the classics section on the old forum that (IMO) are objectively undeserving of such status.
A track being a classic isn't down to just age. I've seen a lot of trance tracks posted in the classics section on the old forum that (IMO) are objectively undeserving of such status.
The one thing I definitely agree with you here is that I don't want to see generic 2010s tracks in the same section as 2000s anthems, which was also a reason why I asked this. I did say that I was fine with people posting tracks they considered classics even if they were from the '10s, but I can see as well that it would make the section way more messy and less valuable.
About whether a post or section should be made: I think that it's likely that more 2010 era tracks will be posted on this new site. There are more people online than there used to be on the original forum, of which, as DazTC stated too, potentially more younger members who have way more memories with post-2010 tracks and probably weren't even born in the 90's (like me). Therefore, my preference would go to a section, it's way more friendly towards them than just a thread.
About whether a post or section should be made: I think that it's likely that more 2010 era tracks will be posted on this new site. There are more people online than there used to be on the original forum, of which, as DazTC stated too, potentially more younger members who have way more memories with post-2010 tracks and probably weren't even born in the 90's (like me). Therefore, my preference would go to a section, it's way more friendly towards them than just a thread.
BS_BlackScout
Senior Member
I don't oppose keeping post 2010 tracks separate, but it has to make sense...
If enough people want this to be a rule, then so be it. However, some sort of guideline has to be clearly defined.
Although, how does one classify a 'Classic'? For many Sun & Moon from A&B is a classic even though it's a post 2010 track.
For some it's too commercial sounding and doesn't remind them of the good ole Trance they know.
I have no biases towards old or new sound since I started listening to Electronic Music in 2010 and Trance (mostly classics like DJ Taucher, Ayla, Jam & Spoon, Nalin & Kane, old school A&B...) in late 2016 and I mostly prefer mid 2000s trance.
The only problem I have with the current state of things is:
Where do I post a track from 2014 (that sounds good to my ears) that has no place in the Upcoming Releases section?
I probably wouldn't consider it a classic but seeing 2014 is 6 years away from today, I have no idea...
_
Thread vs Section?
I think section is better as a single thread might not drive enough attention to certain tracks.
If enough people want this to be a rule, then so be it. However, some sort of guideline has to be clearly defined.
Although, how does one classify a 'Classic'? For many Sun & Moon from A&B is a classic even though it's a post 2010 track.
For some it's too commercial sounding and doesn't remind them of the good ole Trance they know.
I have no biases towards old or new sound since I started listening to Electronic Music in 2010 and Trance (mostly classics like DJ Taucher, Ayla, Jam & Spoon, Nalin & Kane, old school A&B...) in late 2016 and I mostly prefer mid 2000s trance.
The only problem I have with the current state of things is:
Where do I post a track from 2014 (that sounds good to my ears) that has no place in the Upcoming Releases section?
I probably wouldn't consider it a classic but seeing 2014 is 6 years away from today, I have no idea...
_
Thread vs Section?
I think section is better as a single thread might not drive enough attention to certain tracks.
Last edited:
Bluemoon
Senior Member
- Jul 8, 2020
- 277 Posts
- 193 Thanked
The thing i like about the trance classics section is that i find songs that maybe i didnt hear before. Maybe thats me being selfish haha but i dont really care so much about the discussion. Its like browsing anything i guess, even the news, you click what you like, or you click what looks appealing. Some artists i will never check even if the thread have a lot of replies. But if its an artist that i miraculously never heard about and it has 4-5-6-7 whatever replies then ill open the thread and check it out. Also you learn the others users taste so if i see its a user that has similar taste to me i will check it out as well.
Ofcourse the discussion and everything is cool, but like i said earlier im mostly here to discover music, and from a discovering new music point of view it would be better with a subforum than a thread.
And yes i totally agree about trance declining and all of that and that its very individual what is a classic but what does that matter? Its the same for the current classic section we have. It all boils down to taste. Yes some tracks we can all agree are classics. But if i have a song that i liked for 10 years and and i never got tired of it, but Gagi hates this song, then to me its still a classic.
To me classic is exactly that, a song that never got boring on me even after xxx amount of plays, but my neighbour might hate it.
Ofcourse the discussion and everything is cool, but like i said earlier im mostly here to discover music, and from a discovering new music point of view it would be better with a subforum than a thread.
And yes i totally agree about trance declining and all of that and that its very individual what is a classic but what does that matter? Its the same for the current classic section we have. It all boils down to taste. Yes some tracks we can all agree are classics. But if i have a song that i liked for 10 years and and i never got tired of it, but Gagi hates this song, then to me its still a classic.
To me classic is exactly that, a song that never got boring on me even after xxx amount of plays, but my neighbour might hate it.
Lol, I'm guilty of that.
I created the post-2010 thread that people are referencing, and frankly a single thread isn't worth it. It's too much of a pain too maintain. If someone just posts the embedded video, you can't really check if the track has already been posted. To be fair, I'm not aware of the search capabilities the forum has, but I doubt you could search a track in a thread if it was only posted as an embedded video and never mentioned in the post.
As the creator of that thread, I am in favor of having a separate section for post-2010 trance.
DazTC
Member
Yes, that would be my preference too. Like multiple people said here, a single thread would just get clogged. Posts are more easily missed, which also causes a track to be posted multiple times by accident.
- Jun 27, 2020
- 4,120 Posts
- 2,994 Thanked
Yeah it's sort of a gray area. Let's say user X loves early 90s trance, and think he doesn't want the section polluted by the 00s stuff because it's not pure trance to him. I mean, we can start separating and separating until it makes no sense anymore. To me, a number of pre-'06 tracks posted in the classics section are just old tracks... Just like we have nowadays, only in the style that was popular back then. Stuff you forget after a listen or two.
And that's not classics you're talking about, a classic (to me) is a widely-recognized piece of music that stood the test of time for a lot of fans...not an old track you personally like. But maybe we've just named it wrong.
But yeah, we've derailed a bit from the thread. I'd like to see what other admins have to say. @Magnevi @Hensmon @Katadunkass
Forgot to thank everyone for their thoughts. I personally love seeing members discuss how to improve the forum. This being a divisive topic, we can't guarantee that everyone will like what we decide.
If you had to find some middle-ground, what would it be?
And that's not classics you're talking about, a classic (to me) is a widely-recognized piece of music that stood the test of time for a lot of fans...not an old track you personally like. But maybe we've just named it wrong.
But yeah, we've derailed a bit from the thread. I'd like to see what other admins have to say. @Magnevi @Hensmon @Katadunkass
Forgot to thank everyone for their thoughts. I personally love seeing members discuss how to improve the forum. This being a divisive topic, we can't guarantee that everyone will like what we decide.
If you had to find some middle-ground, what would it be?
Is giving 90's, 00's and 10's tracks separate sections an idea? Or is that a bit too much maybe?
DazTC
Member
The beginning of the genre up until a cut off date of 2010 for Trance Classics (that’s a huge range of years and inclusive of so many sounds and styles), and another area for all the nonsense afterwards 
I’m not a fan of the term ‘modern classics’...it sounds a little silly to me, but something along those lines.
I think that would be straightforward enough.
I’m not a fan of the term ‘modern classics’...it sounds a little silly to me, but something along those lines.
I think that would be straightforward enough.
DazTC
Member
Bluemoon
Senior Member
- Jul 8, 2020
- 277 Posts
- 193 Thanked
The reason there isnt as many classics in recent times is for me because originality is completly gone. Its now acceptable and normal to use same melody/style for years. Take for example Gareth Emery which we can argue if trance or not but i will still use him as an example, almost every song he makes you have heard it before. Its the same melody, same style, same structure. And when its like that it can never be a classic.
Its maybe the one thing i hate the most about the current scene, that artists they have their own sound and they repeat it over and over and over.
Take Tiesto and Armin in the old days, so many original songs that didnt remind about anything you heard before. Ofcourse there was some but not to the extent it happens today.
Ive seen many artists come and go, they make a good song. And the next one sounds different but the same nonetheless and then they keep doing this until one day they dissapear because people got bored.
Well anyways, there are still some golden tracks here and there from recent times, we dont even have to call it a classic section. We can call it something else as well.
Its maybe the one thing i hate the most about the current scene, that artists they have their own sound and they repeat it over and over and over.
Take Tiesto and Armin in the old days, so many original songs that didnt remind about anything you heard before. Ofcourse there was some but not to the extent it happens today.
Ive seen many artists come and go, they make a good song. And the next one sounds different but the same nonetheless and then they keep doing this until one day they dissapear because people got bored.
Well anyways, there are still some golden tracks here and there from recent times, we dont even have to call it a classic section. We can call it something else as well.
Yeah, don't call it "modern classics." Just call it "modern trance."
I don't support the idea of creating trance classics by the decade (ex. '90s classics, '00s classics).
I don't support the idea of creating trance classics by the decade (ex. '90s classics, '00s classics).
Forget I said that.
Last edited:
- Status