Separate (classics) section for posting post-2010 tracks

[Bluemoon]

Gijs - Positive about doing some changes
Bluemoon - Positive about doing some changes
Gagi - On the fence, not for or against
DazTc - Wants it and explained very detailed why he wants it
Bs_Blackout - Positive about it
Dmgtz96 - Positive about it
Peenuts - Positive about new section for 2010+ songs
Magedelayna - Positive about it

And then comes Magnevi calling the whole discussion weird. While the other moderators are replying that they like suggestions and its something the mods could have a talk about then Magnevi he just calls the whole discussion stupid eventhough many here explained very detailed why they want what they want. Magnevi he dont really know what the people are talking about its a complete non issue, we can just post everything in the classic section, including my favourite track from last year. And then if im bored one day and want to post some random song i will post it in the upcoming trance section instead of the currently listening thread because i want it to give it some more attention and clutter up that section as well.

The truth is that only one person has been negative about this until now and that is you Magnevi. And then we have Gagi who is both against and for it.

 

[Hensmon]

Yeah I think having a cut-off date in the classic section is a good idea. Personally I would choose 2006, but could live with 2008

Classic refers not only to taste, but objectively it implies a period in time, and no doubt that period is the 15+ years around 90 - 2006.

In my opinion this section should define itself on the latter. I've found many tracks in this section which do not have any form of commercial success (rare niche sounds from unknown artists), so by subjective definition this is not really a classic for anyone, yet it absolutely deserves to be in this section. Thats why shifting the definition of this forum section to a time period, rather than the tracks hypothetical impact/quality is easier and more relevant in my opinion.

I would also be down for another section where people can share releases 2006 to (Inset date), however it does require some thinking about how that works with the Upcoming Release section.

 

[DazTC]

Well I could type a big reply, but I don't think it's worth it. We're not going to try and stop you from leaving. Good luck with the Youtube channel.

People have different opinions about music. So yes, sometimes music you don't like WILL be liked by somebody else. If you can't handle that, then a forum is not your cup of tea I suppose.

Lol I don't think you understand at all.

Yeah a post 2010 section sounds good - i wouldnt have them all in the exisitng classics section as it would just clog it up.

In contrary to what Darren said qualifies as a classic,i disagree - im a '99 Trancer,love all the old skool classics - BUT i also have modern classics - for example the insrumental of 'Richard Durand - The Air I Breathe' is a Trance classic to me......and its from 2018.

Modern Classics is a bit of a funny terminology to me, but I certainly never said people shouldn’t enjoy Trance after these years or a certain cut off.

I’m simply saying what you say yourself in the first part of your post mate and would like to see that implemented asap.

These new age productions just don't really belong in there.

 

[dmgtz96]

I'm sure most people disagree already. The golden era for trance obviously was not 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996. No.

Ah shit, now I replied again.

The golden era was in fact 2004.
FIGHT ME

rawr

 

[Magdelayna]

I hate any cut off year...just have decade sub forums and be done with it...90s,00s and 10s.

 

[dmgtz96]

I hate any cut off year...just have decade sub forums and be done with it...90s,00s and 10s.

I'd rather have the classics section as it is and then a different section for 2010/post-2010 trance. Ultimately it's up to what the community and mods want, though, and I'm going to agree with whatever decision ends up being made.

I don't think trancefix has to look at what other trance communities (ex. classics facebook groups) are doing, or be governed by the same rules/preferences.

 

[DazTC]

@dmgtz96 I'd be quite happy with your suggestion too in terms of sections.

I don't think trancefix has to look at what other trance communities (ex. classics facebook groups) are doing, or be governed by the same rules/preferences.

Yeah mate, I was simply saying how it is on those groups in terms of rules and posting, but of course they don't have to follow the same as anywhere else. Just really throwing the cut off thing into the hat.

 

[Archon]

Gijs - Positive about doing some changes
Bluemoon - Positive about doing some changes
Gagi - On the fence, not for or against
DazTc - Wants it and explained very detailed why he wants it
Bs_Blackout - Positive about it
Dmgtz96 - Positive about it
Peenuts - Positive about new section for 2010+ songs
Magedelayna - Positive about it

And then comes Magnevi calling the whole discussion weird. While the other moderators are replying that they like suggestions and its something the mods could have a talk about then Magnevi he just calls the whole discussion stupid eventhough many here explained very detailed why they want what they want. Magnevi he dont really know what the people are talking about its a complete non issue, we can just post everything in the classic section, including my favourite track from last year. And then if im bored one day and want to post some random song i will post it in the upcoming trance section instead of the currently listening thread because i want it to give it some more attention and clutter up that section as well.

The truth is that only one person has been negative about this until now and that is you Magnevi. And then we have Gagi who is both against and for it.

We hear you.

As for me, I'm for discussing it properly, first and foremost. I'm still gathering some perspectives and hearing opinions.

This has been made into a much bigger issue than it really is, especially with overreactions on everyone's side. It's still a bit early to start being passive-aggressive about it, because a day or two more won't change much for us users. It wasn't even an issue on the old forum - not exactly the same, I agree, but we are being pushed for a solution like there's no other opinion and there's no tomorrow.

Personally, I'm currently leaning towards what @Peenuts and @dmgtz96 have written. That is, keep the Classics section as-is, and add another section for the post-2010 (although I could live with 2006). I'm also ok on splitting/differing them completely, but no more than that. Names - Classic trance (for the pre-2010/2006/whatever) and Modern trance (or something similar for other).

The decades approach doesn't work and I'll tell you why. Not because it would mean more sections, but because there are a lot of outliers - tracks from '99 and '00 that sound pretty much the same. So why split them? I mean, the same is gonna happen whatever year we set as a cutoff point. Also, you have to count in that some styles span more years, some only a few. So splitting them by decades seems unnatural to me. Just arbitrary, doesn't accomplish much as far as making a difference, just splits them by a number. Eras also don't work for pretty much the same reasons. Splitting by style, that's even crazier.

Hopefully, in the future we'll be able to implement some proper filtering (such as by "release year" field you have to put in when you create a thread - which is why it's important you do), so things will be easier to find, and further splitting won't be necessary.

Again, thank you all and please be patient. Nobody has said no to anything yet.

 

[Gijs]

This has been made into a much bigger issue than it really is, especially with overreactions on everyone's side. It's still a bit early to start being passive-aggressive about it, because a day or two more won't change much for us users. It wasn't even an issue on the old forum - not exactly the same, I agree, but we are being pushed for a solution like there's no other opinion and there's no tomorrow.

Yeah, sorry about that. I was only active on the upcoming releases section, so I don't really know what went down in the classics section. I just agreed with people here that some tracks would fit better in a separate section.

Personally, I'm currently leaning towards what Peenuts and dmgtz96 have written. That is, keep the Classics section as-is, and add another section for the post-2010 (although I could live with 2006). I'm also ok on splitting/differing them completely, but no more than that. Names - Classic trance (for the pre-2010/2006/whatever) and Modern trance (or something similar for other).
The decades approach doesn't work and I'll tell you why. Not because it would mean more sections, but because there are a lot of outliers - tracks from '99 and '00 that sound pretty much the same. So why split them? I mean, the same is gonna happen whatever year we set as a cutoff point. Also, you have to count in that some styles span more years, some only a few. So splitting them by decades seems unnatural to me. Just arbitrary, doesn't accomplish much as far as making a difference, just splits them by a number. Eras also don't work for pretty much the same reasons. Splitting by style, that's even crazier.

I understand your problems with splitting tracks by decade and I agree with the idea that tracks released after a specific year should go into another section (although I'm not sure which year I'd want to see).

 

[DazTC]

This has been made into a much bigger issue than it really is, especially with overreactions on everyone's side.

It may well seem like an overreaction from a few of us (myself included...or maybe mainly me lol) but the simple truth of it all is that this is the single most important area in the forum for me. The initial excitement of joining up has been dampened somewhat with some of these recent postings and certain moderators sarcastic attitude toward feedback.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, I'd also really hope for more specific areas to discuss particular topics within Trance rather than less than before. Everything being thrown into Music Discussion isn't great.

I'd love to share Trancefix to our FB page which I'm sure would see a few signing up (probably a good number of like minded fans) and would really like the classic discussion area to return for all of us to chat in.

We've also been over the fact it was barely active on the old forum, but to repeat it doesn't mean the same will happen here.

Better to have it available initially then if it pans out the same way consider dropping it. I feel limited and put off from posting in music discussion where my chosen subject can be found nested in between "Any Bon Jovi fans, or I see Adam Ellis is back" *examples*

Anyway, I probably did overreact (just a little lol) and at the end of the day I just want this place to succeed rather than fade into obscurity with only a small hardcore following from the old boards.

 

[Julian Del Agranda]

Well this is turning into our first classic thread, thats for sure

We spent much money and time to get a new site. And just weeks later 1 topic of a 2011-track results in this mess.

 

[Julian Del Agranda]

And Bluemoon, I have no idea what your point is with that long reply. Like everybody, I also have an opinion. I don’t see the need for your attempt to personally attack me.

Calling it a ‘strange debate’ (these are the words I used) is in my opinion justified when only 1 of 150 threads are “the issue” you are all pointing to.

I prefer having an actual issue before solving it. If there really are tons of 2017-ish tracks posted in the classics area, yes, then perhaps something doesnt work.

But you want change based on what you think could happen. I just disagree with that. Thats my personal opinion.

What you dont know is that yesterday we had a great chat, and I’m actually voting for adding a ‘Trance Classics (post-2010) section, renaming the current one to ‘Trance Classics (pre-2010).

So you see, I can have my opinion, just like you. They all count when deciding on something.

Hopefully you agree on that at least.

 

[DazTC]

I prefer having an actual issue before solving it. If there really are tons of 2017-ish tracks posted in the classics area, yes, then perhaps something doesnt work.

But you want change based on what you think could happen. I just disagree with that. Thats my personal opinion.

What you dont know is that yesterday we had a great chat, and I’m actually voting for adding a ‘Trance Classics (post-2010) section, renaming the current one to ‘Trance Classics (pre-2010).

So you see, I can have my opinion, just like you. They all count when deciding on something.

Hopefully you agree on that at least.

Better to 'nip it in the bud' quick, than to wait until 5 pages of 2010 onward tunes are sat in there IMO. Pro-active I think they call it. There are also double the 2010 onward threads now since yesterday too.....a whole 50% more!

 

[Archon]

 

[Hensmon]

The golden era was in fact 2004.

This might be my favourite year too!

 

[DazTC]

View attachment 77

Perfectly split too! Thanks for listening to the feedback

 

[Hensmon]

We had quite the debate in discord about which year to cut, it was glorious.

 

[Gijs]

We had quite the debate in discord about which year to cut, it was glorious.

Well, I can say for sure that this most likely would've been my pick, too. It looks fantastic!

 

[marcopm]

The big question is: will the tracks that now fall under the "modern" (2008- ) section be considered for the voucher contest as well? Or only those in the pre-2008 one?

 

[Hensmon]

The big question is: will the tracks that now fall under the "modern" (2008- ) section be considered for the voucher contest as well? Or only those in the pre-2008 one?

Haha good point, I will most likely just keep it to the (old) 1988-2007 section