What do you hate about trance?

[Config85]

Your getting very angry. Calm down:grinning:. Everybody hears things differently. What sounds great to one sounds terrible to another. Thats the way we are.

Personally I hate anything techy in trance such as synth sounds that sound like a drill or scraping knives. And I don't like that squelchy base sound that appears in somany songs and most male vocals are a turn off too.

why would i be getting angry ? I was just argueing What sounds great to one sounds terrible to another, that is true. But seeing something as bleep blop garbage is quite different.. stuff like that is more measurable and more objective. That's why i came up with examples that are clearly not 'bleep blop' , just to show my point
I never get mad on internet forums, it's not worth it, since i know i'm always right

 

[90degrees]

2 pence

...

edit, since this isn't about AH: in fact such music has no place in any set of any dj that calls himself "trance" dj, IMO.

in a way it is.
looking at thread title, looking at AH's motto and looking what a lot of peeps are unhappy with.

Some statements here reflect exactly what's up (or what isn't) with the trance of today.
rarely are new elements introduced into the genre and it all sounds same, nicking some things of successful tracks or lines that are currently kinda en vogue. no original breakdowns anymore, just slight variations of what one knows already.
let's not forget the ways and the speed at which music is distributed today, far quicker far easier and far less expensive, so stuff that wouldn't have passed the board of a major label (or even small and indie but with a reputation) because it's simply not good enough nowadays still finds a way into the wild.

so stop ranting and listening, branch out.

as for AH, a bit more diversification would give the site more - content and maturity. still support it with no regrets as i hope for the return but let's face it, trance as we know it had it's day and moment.

I for my part have bought less "pure" trance tracks (however one will classify that) this year than I have fingers (no I don't work in the timber yard and have lost any yet...). it's just not interesting at the moment...but I still have hope.

 

[SUNNY TOMORROW]

why would i be getting angry ? I was just argueing What sounds great to one sounds terrible to another, that is true. But seeing something as bleep blop garbage is quite different.. stuff like that is more measurable and more objective. That's why i came up with examples that are clearly not 'bleep blop' , just to show my point
I never get mad on internet forums, it's not worth it, since i know i'm always right

I was joking ofcause, shhhhhhhhhh...

 

[t4e]

Your getting very angry. Calm down:grinning:. Everybody hears things differently. What sounds great to one sounds terrible to another. Thats the way we are.

Personally I hate anything techy in trance such as synth sounds that sound like a drill or scraping knives. And I don't like that squelchy base sound that appears in somany songs and most male vocals are a turn off too.

i agree 100%

right now i am reading: This Is Your Brain on Music: The Science of a Human Obsession by Daniel Levitin.

Publisher Comments:

Whether you load your iPod with Bach or Bono, music has a significant role in your life — even if you never realized it. Why does music evoke such powerful moods? The answers are at last becoming clear, thanks to revolutionary neuroscience and the emerging field of evolutionary psychology. Both a cutting-edge study and a tribute to the beauty of music itself, This Is Your Brain on Music unravels a host of mysteries that affect everything from pop culture to our understanding of human nature, including:

• Are our musical preferences shaped in utero?
• Is there a cutoff point for acquiring new tastes in music?
• What do PET scans and MRIs reveal about the brainï's response to music?
• Is musical pleasure different from other kinds of pleasure?

This Is Your Brain on Music explores cultures in which singing is considered an essential human function, patients who have a rare disorder that prevents them from making sense of music, and scientists studying why two people may not have the same definition of pitch. At every turn, this provocative work unlocks deep secrets about how nature and nurture forge a uniquely human obsession.

 

[dfx]

If you can still consider a Rank 1 set as a trance set, if you consider a Duderstadt set as one, ...

not really, some (most?) of their sets are just as much bleep blop.

... then Jonas' sets easily are trancesets too, they are just full of melodies. Why can't a dj play a wonderful melodic track in a tranceset, considering the fact that the track isn't seen as a trancetrack? No one should have problems with melodies, that's what it was all about..

you're talking about "wonderful melodic tracks that aren't trance". well, there surely has to be a difference between those tracks and trance tracks, otherwise they would be trance as well, right? in fact, that difference has to be quite big, as trance isn't a genre by itself just for the sake of having that name around - it's a rather clearly defined sound. and even if your tracks are "wonderful melodic", they apparently deviate from that trance sound (that's why they aren't trance), and thus have no place in a trance set, on a trance radio or being played by a trance dj. for the simple reason that even though some people (such as yourself maybe) might like that sound in addition to the trance sound, the majority (probably) does not. which is why we have this thread - some djs apparently think it's ok to put those tracks into trance sets (even if it's just for the sake of being different or original), but it obviously isn't for a lot of people here.

 

[Config85]

you're talking about "wonderful melodic tracks that aren't trance". well, there surely has to be a difference between those tracks and trance tracks, otherwise they would be trance as well, right? in fact, that difference has to be quite big, as trance isn't a genre by itself just for the sake of having that name around - it's a rather clearly defined sound. and even if your tracks are "wonderful melodic", they apparently deviate from that trance sound (that's why they aren't trance), and thus have no place in a trance set, on a trance radio or being played by a trance dj. for the simple reason that even though some people (such as yourself maybe) might like that sound in addition to the trance sound, the majority (probably) does not. which is why we have this thread - some djs apparently think it's ok to put those tracks into trance sets (even if it's just for the sake of being different or original), but it obviously isn't for a lot of people here.

I think your answer is a bit near the matter, but ok, i appreciate your reply.
I don't say melodic techno is trance. But it could as well be. People don't consider it trance because it's not made by trance artists and runs under 128 bpm. They think it's not trance because melodic techno is all about the deeper melodies, not the happy wiiii uplifting tracks we hear these days. But in fact, trance IS about those deeper melodies, and not about the happy tunes. In the nineties trance never was happy, it was emotional and dark edged. That was the real trance. Now melodic techno works with those kinds of melodies too, that's why i say it's closer to trance than the average trance anthem these days

And about me, i don't play melodic techno on AH.FM, just because of the fact that i know that a lot of people on here are having a way too onesided look on trance; they joined after the beginning of 2000 and don't know what real trance was like. I'm not pointing to anyone btw. So in respect to that, i play progressive house / trance over here. Those tracks are a bit more chilled and also have more happy melodylines in it

But ok, this discussion was about bleep blop garbage. It seems you think melodic techno is bleep blop garbage. Now i tell you, listen to Aril Brikha - Winter. It's a melodic technotrack. Is that bleep blop garbage?

Btw, the reason why this thread is here is not because of the fact that some dj's play melodic techno in their sets It clearly says, what do you hate in trance? and most of the answers are referring to uplifting and poptrance nowadays.



pff, that's quite the wall of text

 

[SUNNY TOMORROW]

The thing is I think trance as it was in the begining is really just a memory now. it evolved into something very different and perhaps a little more accesable than the deeper stuff. I don't dislike the deeper old stuff because i have a couple of old albums i still occasionally play. But trance today with those big melodies and thumping kicks is much better for me. as for the slower more proggy stuff if it has melody and is not all clanking and synth lines sounding like drills and stuff its good for me too.

 

[piccoli]

just 2 or 3 words from me Config, you talked about progressive house, so i say that genre of music, house or anything related to that should be forbidden to be played here at AH.FM, really. Yeah seems a bit radical from my side, but it's the way i think about that crappy kind of music house and stuff like that.

Let's face the reality we see when some Dj plays a set with a crappy music like sometimes i hear, the listeners drops like flies and AH is all about trance and i don't agree with who says trance is not like before, yes it is and still be, just sometimes the fault is from labels that sometimes take months to release a production of some guy out there made. That's because people says there is nothing new out there. I still thinking there is a lot of good trance productions out there.

And don't call me narrow minded just because i only like trance, it's the way i am and it's what i like.

And please people, don't call uplifting trance or trance, happy trance, please, i really never understood why people call it happy trance, i never heard call house, shity house right?

 

[a'ndY]

Another thing that just crossed my mind: What I absolutely can't stand is that lots of labels have no fu****g clue of how to master a track... :thumbsdown:

Best example: Anjunabeats Their tracks clip like hell and are over compressed, no dynamics at all. Another good example is Armada (+ Sublabels, A State of Trance, Coldharbour Recordings, ...), but at least you have a 50 / 50 chance of getting good audio quality, some of their tracks sound quite good actually, some others like crap.

Damn loudness war

 

[dfx]

I don't say melodic techno is trance. But it could as well be. People don't consider it trance because it's not made by trance artists and runs under 128 bpm. They think it's not trance because melodic techno is all about the deeper melodies, not the happy wiiii uplifting tracks we hear these days.

i'm not sure i know what you're talking about. happy? the vast majority of trance tunes are made in minor keys, which are hardly (by definition) happy. "uplifting" isn't the same as "happy".

and bpm or whoever made a track is pretty much irrelevant. only that uplifting trance is usually >135 bpm and progressive trance is <135 -- give or take a few (there's some nice example of tracks having a definite uplifting touch and still be <130 bpm).

But in fact, trance IS about those deeper melodies, and not about the happy tunes. In the nineties trance never was happy, it was emotional and dark edged. That was the real trance. Now melodic techno works with those kinds of melodies too, that's why i say it's closer to trance than the average trance anthem these days

still i don't really know what you're talking about. i know old school trance as well, and in fact it's some of those tunes that i would call "happy". best example is gouryella probably, that is so totally happy and not deep at all. (which is why i don't really like it. but it does have the general trance sound.)

again, trance isn't all about uplifting. put some deep melodies into a track and down the bpm, and you get progressive trance.

It seems you think melodic techno is bleep blop garbage. Now i tell you, listen to Aril Brikha - Winter. It's a melodic technotrack. Is that bleep blop garbage?

it's quite nice actually. but i don't see how it's techno at all. techno is defined by not paying attention to the traditional rules of classic music, that is harmonics, chords, keys and such. by that, techno is defined as being rhythmic noises. i see how melodic techno would be techno with melodic elements -- however this track example of yours clearly follows the rules of classical music, it has harmonies, chords, keys, melody etc, and by that it can't be techno. so how is it techno? in my book, this is just progressive house/trance.

 

[Config85]

it's quite nice actually. but i don't see how it's techno at all. techno is defined by not paying attention to the traditional rules of classic music, that is harmonics, chords, keys and such. by that, techno is defined as being rhythmic noises. i see how melodic techno would be techno with melodic elements -- however this track example of yours clearly follows the rules of classical music, it has harmonies, chords, keys, melody etc, and by that it can't be techno. so how is it techno? in my book, this is just progressive house/trance.

Like this we can go on forever, so i only will reply on the last quote. even you might think it's not techno, it is. Even tho it goes against the rules of techno yes, but that's why it's called melodic techno. People see the name techno and bash it, even though they have no clue what could be behind it. In this case it is Winter, it's melodic techno and people will have bashed it without even hearing the track, just because they see the word 'techno' in there.
It's still techno because it totally has another depth than the most of the progressive tracks that are around. It's not easy to see the difference immediately , but when you are used to both styles you'll make the difference easily. The fact that you think it might be progressive trance just kind of shows my point that melodic techno can be very trancy. If Winter was a progressive track all mp3shops would label it progressive right? But they don't , simply because it is melodic techno. I cannot explain to you what's the difference , but there clearly is a difference, mostly in the depth of the track. But like you said, it sounds a lot like trance, that's why i say tracks like these shouldn't be banned from sets or be seen as bleep blop garbage. In this case it clearly isnt.

About the 2 other quotes. yes i shouldn't say all trance is happy, but to me most of it is coming close to it. It's so much more 'artificial' then it used to be, in the most cases trancetracks stay on the surface, where they digged deeper in the past.

Piccoli: I don't agree what you say about progressive house. People often think progressive house is house, but it is NOT. Actually most of the time progressive house is closer to trance than it is to house. Progressive house is a very broad style lately, it's so large that i think you can't just say it has to be banned. There's just to many of differences in the style to say it's all crap. Michael Cassette is mostly progressive house, Joonas Hahmo too, Jaytech, Jay Lumen.. those are artists that get hammered by a lot of trancedj's but produce progressive house.. You want to ban this too?
You ask me not to say trance is happy lately and to think trance hasn't changed, but in the same post you said progressive house has to be banned, because you think it's housy and crappy and such, you label a whole broad genre like that, while progressive house is mostly about entrancing melodies and not about some stupid electrobuzzes and hateful vocals. That doesn't really make sense to me Piccoli.

 

[Config85]

i'm sorry if i'm getting people pissed by argueing here, i just like to talk about this matter.

 

[Altered-Mind]

its time for A-M to speak up...

no worries config, i totally agree with everything u said. Prog house is actually a very nice and enjoyable subgenre of EDM than most ppl realize. My thing with the usual uplifting trance these days is this: its lacking the creativity as well as the darker and deeper sounds it once had back in the early years when trance was just becoming popular. Now lately, its usually the same recognizable sounds u will be able to recognize from that producer/DJs tracks (most noticeably: sean tyas, daniel kandi, activa, paul miller, david newsum). This sound to me was very good for a great length of time...but as of lately, its starting to burn out fast.

Personally, i prefer to hear many different variant EDM sounds rather than the big anthem trance sounds all the time. Its the way i have always been since ever ive been into EDM since 1999 where trance wasnt the only sound that was good; The likes of rave techno, hard trance, hard house, psy/goa, etc. were big players back in those days. I also like to discover new sounds; as of lately i have been really getting into Tribal House.

Now i prolly might get attacked by Dan for this, but in all honesty and in my humble opinion, AH.fm needs to broaden its variety of EDM much more other than just sticking with the normal trance and progressive sounds. There is sooooo much more better music out there in the EDM world today than just trance. I am also quite aware of the fact that a lot of listeners here on ah like those sounds a lot. However, there are also those listeners who prefer to hear something much different than the usual music AH plays all the time. I'm willing to bet by Dan doing just this for AH, the number of listeners for this radio will surely rise like never before in many years to come. But hey, we never know what the future holds :smile1:

Just my 2 cents...

cheers everyone and let the music play! :beer:

 

[90degrees]

...as trance isn't a genre by itself just for the sake of having that name around - it's a rather clearly defined sound.
...

...which by definition makes it a genre (submerged in the basin of EDM).
I also disagree with your definition of techno some posts later.

Let's not forget that House, derived from Disco, is the mother of all, giving birth then to Acid House and Techno which then evolved into the synth and percussion lead genres Trance and DnB/Jungle.
Later thru replacing 303, 808, 909 with other characteristical instruments or replacing with same in software and the possibilities of sound manipulation other countless sub-genres formed, leaving the mess we have today with all it's uncertainties and washed out defintions, carrying marks of other styles.
so imo trance nowadays tries too hard to be an revival of the old structure, which to me seems very uninspired in effect and therefore boring and unexciting and unsuccessful.
anyone thought that some DJs who played "Trance" some years ago and now play all sorts that make for a set that carriess itself actually do that because they don't want to be defined as a Trance DJ anymore or feel that the genre doesn't give?
I also think it is hard to build a set with current tunes that can create a set structure (build, break, climax/end) which keeps me interested.
If the transitions then come on the last 8 or 16, maybe 32 bars it really bores.

As a pointer to how things go just look at the "annual" remixes of any successful track, how do they vary and reflect the current mood?
And by whom are these remixes made, original artist or flavour of the month producer?

And thanks for your post A-M, expertise comes with broad horizon and with that, respect. :grinning:

 

[dfx]

It's still techno because it totally has another depth than the most of the progressive tracks that are around. It's not easy to see the difference immediately , but when you are used to both styles you'll make the difference easily. The fact that you think it might be progressive trance just kind of shows my point that melodic techno can be very trancy. ... I cannot explain to you what's the difference , but there clearly is a difference, mostly in the depth of the track. But like you said, it sounds a lot like trance, that's why i say tracks like these shouldn't be banned from sets or be seen as bleep blop garbage. In this case it clearly isnt.

well, i'm sorry then, if you can't tell me what the difference is, and i also can't hear it by myself, then to me it simply means that there is no difference. i'm not gonna call it techno just because someone says "it's techno" - it doesn't sound like techno, so to me it isn't, period.

If Winter was a progressive track all mp3shops would label it progressive right? But they don't , simply because it is melodic techno.

no, they might label it as techno because it comes from a techno label, is created by a techno artist or for whatever other reason. i have my own ears to hear what something sounds like.

About the 2 other quotes. yes i shouldn't say all trance is happy, but to me most of it is coming close to it. It's so much more 'artificial' then it used to be, in the most cases trancetracks stay on the surface, where they digged deeper in the past.

i still can't agree. uplifting trance is defined by sounding like what you are describing. you can't have uplifting and "deep" at the same time, it's a contradiction. i'm not sure how much effort artists are putting into creating deeper stuff these days, but it doesn't matter for this discussion: uplifting is uplifting and has always been uplifting, and deep/prog is deep/prog and has always been deep/prog.

that's why we have those names for the genres around, to give names to the things, so we can talk about it. genres (genre names) are being defined by going by different sounding musical styles, they don't go by artist or label or whatever. also they don't change: once a genre name is defined, it's existing in space and time - the style doesn't "change" as some people keep claiming. if one music sounds different than some other, it's a different genre and you need a new name. the only thing that might change is the definition of the genre, what we call it. however that's a linguistic problem, word defintiions shifting - the music itself doesn't change.

but it's possible that today there's much more uplift around than the deeper stuff - i can't say for sure as i don't have any statistics. the majority of uplifting releases are pretty crappy though, so if you don't take those into account, you probably end up with the same amount of releases on both sides.

still, deep/prog trance isn't bleep blop crap, that's not what we were talking about. simpkly because trance is defined is being not bleep blop.

Piccoli: I don't agree what you say about progressive house. People often think progressive house is house, but it is NOT. Actually most of the time progressive house is closer to trance than it is to house.

agreed. however this is only true for real progressive house. again there seems to be a lot of confusement about this, i keep hearing "progessive" stuff which is in fact minimal, electro or whatever else, thus bleep blop crap, but apparently some people think it's "progressive" because someone (whoever) told them so or labeled it as such, and they don't know what real progressive house is.

My thing with the usual uplifting trance these days is this: its lacking the creativity as well as the darker and deeper sounds it once had back in the early years when trance was just becoming popular.

as i said above, "uplifting" and "dark/deep" is a contradiction. you will never find them together. this has also been true in the past.

Its the way i have always been since ever ive been into EDM since 1999 where trance wasnt the only sound that was good; The likes of rave techno, hard trance, hard house, psy/goa, etc. were big players back in those days. I also like to discover new sounds; as of lately i have been really getting into Tribal House.

well, nobody's saying that trance is the only good sound (at least not objectively ). everyone has their own tastes and their own likes. which is why this:

Now i prolly might get attacked by Dan for this, but in all honesty and in my humble opinion, AH.fm needs to broaden its variety of EDM much more other than just sticking with the normal trance and progressive sounds. There is sooooo much more better music out there in the EDM world today than just trance. I am also quite aware of the fact that a lot of listeners here on ah like those sounds a lot. However, there are also those listeners who prefer to hear something much different than the usual music AH plays all the time.

is A Bad Thing[tm]. this discussion has already been made: if you want to listen to trance, you tune into AH. if you want to listen to techno, you tune into a techno radio. if you want to listen to house, you tune into a house stateion, and so on. there's nobody that just wants to listen to "something EDM", so having a radio which plays EDM variations won't work. not everyone likes the same dfiferent styles on EDM, so nobody will like all the stuff on such a radio. tuning in will mean it's a matter of luck whether you get something you like or not, or otherwise you have to keep track of schedule tightly to catch the stuff you like, but that's very tedious and hardly anyone will bother. this is why AH will always be trance/prog only (well, at least the one channel we have now): people know they get trance/prog when they tune in, not just "something". you're free to listen to other stations if you think there's better music around than trance, but other people disagree, and you can't force stuff they don't like upon them, just because you think it's good.

 

[dfx]

...which by definition makes it a genre (submerged in the basin of EDM).

yes, that's what i said.

I also disagree with your definition of techno some posts later.

well, it's not my definition:

EDM tends to be produced with the aid of instruments (synthesizer keyboards) that are designed with the Western musical tradition in mind. However, techno does not always adhere to conventional harmonic practice,[123] and such strictures are often ignored in favor of timbral manipulation alone.

 

[Config85]

About the Melodic techno thingie. It's not called melodic techno because it's made by an Techno artist. It's just the track that sounds like a melodic techno track. And like I said, melodic techno is far from being 'techno'. Another example: I'm sure you know DJ Rolando - (Knights of the) Jaguar. That track is considered as being a detroit techno track. Well there's a lot of people who think it's trance too, while actually it isnt. The difference is very small, somehow similar to the difference there is between melodic techno and progressive house/trance. The difference is in the feeling and the hearing of the track. Melodic techno also has influences from minimal, but therefor those influences doesn't immediately mean those are bleep blops. It can be a typical minimal buildup that makes it different for instance. How hard it may seem. Those tracks are techno and not progressive. All i wanted to say with all of my posts is that you can't say one genre sucks or not. Lately all styles are like a big blend of stuff.. It's hard to find 'pure' tracks these days.. That doesn't instantly mean it's a bad thing, but I think for trance it mostly is. Those electrobasslines and stuff, that all wasn't in there before, i think it's a shame..

Something more about the 'happy' trance case. Your example of Gouryella in 99 is not the best example, because that was the first trancetrack that had such 'happy feeling' in it. It all started some kind of revolution, trance wasn't supposed to be deeper or darker anymore at that moment, there were choices. Before Gouryella it was all darker.. You could still hear heavenly melodies yes, but those had more depth than the ones that were created in the post Gouryella era. I don't say you couldn't find a happy track before 99, but those were nothing like what trance is these days.


Btw i also don't have anything against 'happy trance' or stuff like that. In the past i used to love it too.. But as a lot of other people who listened to trance in the earlier years, i have a feeling we're dealing with too many artificial emotions. I still listen to trance a lot actually, just none of the 2008 stuff, with a few exceptions of course

 

[90degrees]

yes, that's what i said.


well, it's not my definition:

well, maybe, but that statement didn't transfer it, it seemed like trance was an undefined entity whereas it is a genre, being sub or not, apologies if I misunderstood.
I don't want an argument, esp not on the grounds of wikipedia as it isn't the body defining genres, prolly because there is none, hence this sub-discussion here.
But putting e.g. techno in the same frame as this threads topic it's noticeable that all genres change and interbreed and maybe some technoheads have same discussion on a similar forum discussing exactly that.
so what's my point, well, it is that things change, not just fonts on forums but things in general thru time, meaning some things or as in this case sounds, won't be the same just because of that and of course ones own perception.
I made memories to certain tracks that were new when releaed and now maybe regarded as classics, in certain life circumstances, so some things trance will never be the same for me anyways.
that doesn't mean I roll up and neglect everything new and cry about the old times, it's just that the bar has been raised to somewhere else for me and unless i find my longings met I will give it a break, looking for other stuff that takes me away instead of "new" tracks trying to tranfer old contents in a not so good style.
in context with this discussion it means that we can analyse the things that are and have been but it won't make trends undone or tracks unreleased.
in the end it's what we make of it and how it fits into our moods.
some get along with it well, whereas others don't. :smile1:

still interesting discussion though.

 

[dfx]

About the Melodic techno thingie. It's not called melodic techno because it's made by an Techno artist. It's just the track that sounds like a melodic techno track. ...

[replying, even though this isn't about the bleep blop]

you're still not telling me what melodic techno is supposed to sound like. you're giving examples of what trance is what isn't, and examples of what melodic techno is and what isn't. well, that doesn't tell me much really. if i take crayons and mix together blue with yellow and show it to you, and telling you "this is red", while you would say "well it looks like green to me", and me replying "it might look similar, but i'm telling you it's not, it's red". would you then also start to call it red?

Something more about the 'happy' trance case. Your example of Gouryella in 99 is not the best example, because that was the first trancetrack that had such 'happy feeling' in it. It all started some kind of revolution, trance wasn't supposed to be deeper or darker anymore at that moment, there were choices. Before Gouryella it was all darker..

i haven't researched that, so i don't know if it's actually true. if it is, that just means that at this point in time, a new subgenre came into existance. the meaning of "trance" was extended to include a new sound, and the new thing was called uplifting trance, while the old thing was called progressive trance (or whatever). however, the music itself still hasn't changed, only the meaning of the word was refined.

I don't want an argument, esp not on the grounds of wikipedia as it isn't the body defining genres, prolly because there is none, hence this sub-discussion here.

nothing is defining genres, but wikipedia merely sums up and averages the world's (or the editor's) understanding of certain terms. which is why it's a good idea to follow what it says, to make sure everyone's talking about the same things. otherwise, someone might end up using the word "cold" for high temperatures or whatever, and you couldn't even argue with them cause they would insist they are right. it's all a matter of definition.

something like exchange rates between different currencies... nothing and nobody is defining them or setting them to a certain value, they are merely an average of how much people (and banks and countries) are willing to pay for other currencies, yet everone follows those rates (plus minus a few percent), to make sure everyone gets along...

so you might insist that a certain track is techno even though it sounds like trance, but don't be surprised if you get people disagreeing...

 

[trace of trance]

African languages vocals sux so much... also Safri Duo kind of drums drives me mad