Dubstepforum.com

Alex bk-bk wrote:o not this again

well done youve really added to the discussion with that comment there

boys that have just heard shake a leg need to hold it down

truth! (i do actually like shake a leg though... )

slightly OT, but why don't skepta, wiley jammer etc make any dubstep beats?? no reason they should have to of course, but those 3 in particular have all been exposed to dubstep and shown appreciation for it so i'm surprised the haven't given it a shot...

depends on what you consider dubstep or alike to dubstep i suppose. a few jammer and skeptas beats have that quality already. i like it that way to be honest, bit of variety you know? new jme 12 has a track that's supposed to be dubstep but its a bit swag.

DJ Wonder - What (Geenus Remix)

i only got thru to page 5 of this cos the cake talk started to get a bit boring, so i hope u let me off if something similiar already been said...

reading between the lines (of some of the attitudes on this thread and other shit i seen on this forum) maybe the percieved differences between grime and dubstep just boil down to the usual bigotry:

Grime = black, working-class, crude, aggressive, scary

Dubstep = white, middle-class, sophisticated, peace&love&goodvibes&tea&cake

And like pretty much every fucking musical form of the last 100 years the reality is: black working class innovate and originate, and then later white middle class 'refine' and water-down. In my opinion dubstep int grime, but sure as hell wouldnt exist if it wasnt for grime.

Just a thought

Battle Gong wrote:And like pretty much every fucking musical form of the last 100 years the reality is: black working class innovate and originate, and then later white middle class 'refine' and water-down.

Nice theory guilt boy / girl.

Battle Gong wrote:In my opinion dubstep int grime, but sure as hell wouldnt exist if it wasnt for grime.

Let me propose another scenario:

Battle Gong wrote:i only got thru to page 5 of this cos the cake talk started to get a bit boring, so i hope u let me off if something similiar already been said...

reading between the lines (of some of the attitudes on this thread and other shit i seen on this forum) maybe the percieved differences between grime and dubstep just boil down to the usual bigotry:

Grime = black, working-class, crude, aggressive, scary

Dubstep = white, middle-class, sophisticated, peace&love&goodvibes&tea&cake

And like pretty much every fucking musical form of the last 100 years the reality is: black working class innovate and originate, and then later white middle class 'refine' and water-down. In my opinion dubstep int grime, but sure as hell wouldnt exist if it wasnt for grime.

Just a thought

psssh

most of the scene pioneers aren't white....

and who cares anyway.

"most of the scene pioneers aren't white.... "

er, kind of my point. most pioneers may not be, but most followers are


"and who cares anyway."

Me, if not u.

Someone always got to place the race card. Wace.

its a tricky one but i dont think the issue should be rejected out of hand

I wish I was black so I could be an innovator too

Alex bk-bk wrote:its a tricky one but i dont think the issue should be rejected out of hand

No of course not, but it generally shows a complete lack of imagination and critical thinking.

This thread can be summed up in one word.

It's in jubscarz sig.

Alex bk-bk wrote:its a tricky one but i dont think the issue should be rejected out of hand

of course not but the presentation (in broad sweeping generalisations without appropriate accompanyment) isnt exactly conducive to a decent discussion...

And like pretty much every fucking musical form of the last 100 years the reality is: black working class innovate and originate, and then later white middle class 'refine' and water-down.

is this really the case? if you take garage as an example, which was spawned of disco and house in the US, its my understanding that that was very much a multicultural thing...and as a slight tangent, i'd be suprised if the godfathers wouldve been into such divisive statements. and then if you look at the way its developed, many of the primary innovators who were responsible for some of the key developments are white... todd edwards and dem 2 being obvious examples.

the point is its just ridiculous to present the idea in such generalised terms. it inevitably provokes poor debate, and when boiled down is little better than those making bigoted statements on the other side of the fence.

i think theres probably much more fertile ground looking at ideas about reactions against movements or trends away from music...i.e. social conflicts, oppression, poverty, cultural exclusion, or less fundamental things like a dominant scene which rejects the path someone wants to blaze...

"the point is its just ridiculous to present the idea in such generalised terms. it inevitably provokes poor debate"

Does it? Explain this theory please...


"... and when boiled down is little better than those making bigoted statements on the other side of the fence."

Actually, its NO better than those making bigoted statements, its just an opinion, as their's is. But its my opinion, so i wrote. No one is forcing u to agree. So thanx 4 telling me (a bit of) why u disagree.

And yeah, of course there's plenty of exceptions, nothing in this world is clear cut (or black n white for that matter), but i was just voicing an opinion in a few lines, not writing a fucking thesis, so yeah its gonna be reduced to a stylised extreme.

But I stand by the basic argument: whites or elites (I aint just talking about race here, I'm talking about class, that seems to have been forgotten) act snobby/scared about new, prodominantly black, musical styles in the begining, and then claim it as there own once they find a way to neutralise the threat.

But if it makes u happier, I'll put aside the historical generalisations, get back on topic, and rephrase things: grime is frequently portrayed as unsophisticated and threatening compared to dubstep cos the grime scene is predominantly black.

I reckon anyone who followed DnB over the years (in the UK) and noticed the changing fanbase (both white and black working-class in the begining, white students now) will have an idea what i talking about.

as cliché as it sounds, music is music. don't care about the ethnicity of the person who made it. don't care about the ethnicity of those who follow it. if it sounds good, then whatever!

out of curiosity, what class/racial group do you fall into battle gong

Bedward wrote:techno is house made properly?

jazz is rhythm & blues made properly?

Balinese gamelan is Javanese gamelan made properly?

George Bush is an idiot made properly.

i know exactly what battle gong is saying and i agree with him, however, u could say the use of melody in black music as well as drums and rythm comes as a reaction to living in western/white dominated society???

"as cliché as it sounds, music is music. don't care about the ethnicity of the person who made it. don't care about the ethnicity of those who follow it. if it sounds good, then whatever! "

pleased to hear it. can u be sure its true?

anyway, i aint convinced thats the case for everyone. The amount of kids i met growing up with who would spit lines from a KRS1 flow about opression or whatever, and then drop some fucking 'wog' joke in the next breath. And more than that, i dont think most people are even honest with themselves, we all got class/race prejudice in there somewhere (i'm including myslef in that b4 anyone kicks off) but dont always like to admit it.

Anyway, the post wasnt directed at u, it was a statement of what i think is a common perception, whether u fall into this category or not is kind of irrelevant, u r one of many and the statement was about the many, not the one...but i'm interested to know if u agree or disagree with what i'm saying in general tho, and the reasons why.

"out of curiosity, what class/racial group do you fall into battle gong":

middle class , caucasian, not all british, who grew up with friends of all classes/races and is still trying to work out how come the rest of the world dunt look like the one i knew as a kid.

Someone already used the word 'guilt' on here, tho they dint go as far as to say 'white liberal guilt' or 'post-colonial guilt' i'm assuming thats what they meant. And u hear plenty of talk about that shit, but where is it? I dont see much evidence of this guilt in the world, just excuses.

ozols man wrote: however, u could say the use of melody in black music as well as drums and rythm comes as a reaction to living in western/white dominated society???

If your talking about the origins of 20th century popular music and the amalgamation of african and european classical styles in southern usa that sounds much more interesting than 10+ pages of bickering about the intracies of grime and dubstep , anyone want to start a thread on it?

elgato wrote:the point is its just ridiculous to present the idea in such generalised terms.

Yes elgato.

Battle Gong wrote:And like pretty much every fucking musical form of the last 100 years the reality is: black working class innovate and originate, and then later white middle class 'refine' and water-down.

This is such an absurd statement I can only assume you are trying to provoke a reaction. Even apart from the divisive and reductive nature of trying to split things like musical innovation along class / race lines it's just wrong. Maybe if you'd said 'like pretty much every form of working class black dance music...' you might have some kind of case, almost. And 'refine' is more or less the opposite of 'water-down'.

Things develop in parallel and from all kinds of directions, causality isn't so simple, especially in the case of distributed 'scenes'. You will also tend to see the trends that you look for. Have we learned nothing from quantum physics?

Yes people can read between the lines of what you've written but if you want to make a point why should others have to do the work of deciphering your meaning?