Dubstepforum.com

i speak my mind if that's what you mean
all the people with these pseudo new genres are the ones lying to themselves

deadly habit wrote:i speak my mind if that's what you mean
all the people with these pseudo new genres are the ones lying to themselves

yeah, we know… 14,000 post here, 25,000 on Dogs on Acid, and b*tching in every one. Get a life.

Ok is everything ok with your mind
As long as people are proud of what they make, and are doing it purely for the right reasons, then I don't care. But when track X is treated differently to track Y based upon genre alone then I'm annoyed.

+3 wrote:

deadly habit wrote:i speak my mind if that's what you mean
all the people with these pseudo new genres are the ones lying to themselves

yeah, we know… 14,000 post here, 25,000 on Dogs on Acid, and b*tching in every one. Get a life.

you seem more concerned with my post counts than i am

and yes my mind is fine debaser. like i said genres come naturally, james blake, mount kimbie etc didn't go about saying hey lets make a new genre. they just made a sound that was natural for them
it's the people who feel the need to be a follower of the sound, try hard to copy it without it being natural to them and give it some name is where i definitely have an issue with it, and i'm guessing i'm not the only one

it just seems like people feel the need to act like their innovating a new sound or part of some movement when all they're doing is following an established sound or formula

dfaultuzr wrote:not sure my tracks even qualify as a dubstep sub-sub-genre, but some of them have crackles in them

Soundcloud

Dude I've been really diggin this song on that Fent Plates compilation. Big ups!

JemGrover wrote:God help whoever brings the subject of genres up at the proposed DSF meet

Haha XD

Deadly speaks the truth guys. Genre definition is important in the grand scheme of things but people seem to think that a new melody or some slightly differently filtered pads makes a new genre these days 0.o people are doing the musical equivalent of picking up a clementine and going "this clearly isn't an orange so...it can't be a fruit either, gonna have to make a totally new category for it...post-fruit orange coloured zesty things" then as soon as someone points out a satsuma you'd be like "shit man, nah that can't be a post-fruit orange coloured zesty thing cos it's like totally a tiny bit different, lets make a new category called IOPF, or 'Intelligently Orange Post Fruit' yeah man, that'll make me sound real cool"

So many people these days seem to miss the point of what actually dictates a genre.

Look at the past of music, the clash and the sex pistols for example, two totally different bands but both unanimously agreed to be punk. Or Oasis and Blur, again completely different sounds but both Brit Pop. Hell fucking Jehst compared to the Fresh Prince BOTH HIP HOP!!!

13:40 - Very interesting on this subject. The whole vid is a great insight. He really talks about how Ok Computer trapped them for a while because they were labelled as a 'rock band'; he even draws comparisons to Mark Rothko.
Shows their genius that because of this classification, they did the exact opposite. Completely reinvent themselves.

I play stepstep

and there's nothing wrong with OK computer.

I'm pretty sure the OP was titled with tongue placed firmly in cheek

Didn't say there was. Im a HUGE Radiohead fan. I just love how they reinvent themselves every album. How the hell do you try to categorise radiohead?

Debaser1 wrote:Didn't say there was. Im a HUGE Radiohead fan. I just love how they reinvent themselves every album. How the hell do you try to categorise radiohead?

+1

Amazing band. Mastering on the last album made it unlistenable though in my opinion. Shame because there were some well written songs on it.

reverend wrote:I'm pretty sure the OP was titled with tongue placed firmly in cheek

Thank you. Some people on here take themselves way too seriously…

What about the future garage crew!!!

Debaser1 wrote:Didn't say there was. Im a HUGE Radiohead fan. I just love how they reinvent themselves every album. How the hell do you try to categorise radiohead?

They're radiohead, simple, really!


And, Optimistic will go down as the best song ever, in my mind.

3za wrote:What about the future garage crew!!!

I think the difference there is that most of the people involved in that seem to have been fighting against the name for ages and been repeatedly brandished with it. I still try to go out of my way to refer to it just as 'garage' though, but it often leads to confusion whereas if you say "Heard that dubstep song by James Blake" nobody except one of these wannabe teeny bop 'post-dubstep' imitators will turn around and go "huh that's not dubstep man duuuuuh it aint got no wobbly bassline duuuuh"

Debaser1 wrote:

I love how he approaches the questions he didn't agree with.

Part of this era's problem is that everyones trying to dig dirt, it should just be about the music and how the artist feels towards the music and nothing else.

Thom is brilliant.

Post-Rock, Post-Dubstep, Post-Funky, Post-Garage...

Man, the future isn't the same as it used to be.

Pre-Rock, Pre-Dubstep, Pre-Funky, Pre-Garage...

The future isn't the same as it used to be?

Speaking of Radiohead… this is how we do it in Baltimore...

Is it just me or donone of the tunes in this thread make any sense next to each other?