Dubstepforum.com

AMIT

i yawned when i saw this thread got bumped

moldy wrote:I don't get it!

i thought dubstep was just dnb records played at 33 instead of 45 RPM's?

surely we haven't gotten this far into this discussion with out anyone bringin up the fact that there are different kinds of DnB?? I love dubstep, don't get me wrong, but what kind of DnB are we comparing it to?? Are we talkin hardstep, intelligent, liquid, darkstep, atmospheric....?? DnB is older and more evolved than Dubstep. Is it really fair to compair the two when Dubstep hasn't had the chance to mature yet?? Maybe this topic should be postponed for 5-10 years??

the problem is that we tend to forget that dnb as well is still evolving. when somebody says "today's dnb makes me yawn" i say You're not looking hard enough.

besides - it's total bullcrap to claim that there's no free space in today's sound of dnb. first people were carried away by the synthtetic aspects of dnb (ed rush & optical, all the neuro-funk, tech-step pioneers), but there has always been the socalled "natural feel" in dnb (photek, roni size). and nowadays you can find the latter in the drumfunk movement (as said before - macc, paradox, fanu, also the russian scene - cyberworm, dissident, mendalyev).

besides the drumfunk flava, there is still loads of decent beats out there - lxc, martsman, equinox, 0=0, amit, fracture & neptune, seba and so on. labels like exegene, lightless, offshore, bassbin - there's plenty of where to choose from!





+ BESIDES - this is still a bit ridiculous, tho - why can't we move to the next level by NOT camparing these two genres anymore. i mean - it's ok to disCUSS things like these, but how can we build the future for dubstep when people still are looking in wrong directions? how can genre spread its wings if it is continuously reminded of its roots.

as it was said in one of the previous threads - Grow up! DnB & Dubstep AIN'T the same!

ImpatientPiranha wrote: DnB is older and more evolved than Dubstep. Is it really fair to compair the two when Dubstep hasn't had the chance to mature yet?? Maybe this topic should be postponed for 5-10 years??

well said that man.

A lot of dubstep to me sounds simlilar in many ways to some of the earlie dnb releases on production technique and methods, take the first Virus releases espically the ed rush and optical wormhole album and compare that to something released this year, the amount of sounds and technical difficulty of those tracks show just how much dnb has developed over the years.
Dubstep will make the same sort of developments it just takes time to evolve. but for now everyone ejoys the simlicity of it, given a few more years complexity will be requested, its inevitable, if anything it allready has.

dnb has got like 10 years on dubstep, so a comparrison is difficult.

Jaime wrote:in the 21st century, there can only be one winner

OR






A battle between the 2 would make an excellent film...

Bainbridge wrote:

ImpatientPiranha wrote: DnB is older and more evolved than Dubstep. Is it really fair to compair the two when Dubstep hasn't had the chance to mature yet?? Maybe this topic should be postponed for 5-10 years??

well said that man.

A lot of dubstep to me sounds simlilar in many ways to some of the earlie dnb releases on production technique and methods, take the first Virus releases espically the ed rush and optical wormhole album and compare that to something released this year, the amount of sounds and technical difficulty of those tracks show just how much dnb has developed over the years.
Dubstep will make the same sort of developments it just takes time to evolve. but for now everyone ejoys the simlicity of it, given a few more years complexity will be requested, its inevitable, if anything it allready has.

dnb has got like 10 years on dubstep, so a comparrison is difficult.

That would make this



better than this



Not convinced by that argument

How about comparing dubstep to country and western or something that hasn't been done to death a million fucking times

Space for both, your opinions are subjective yada yada yada

ENOUGH ALREADY

it's like comparing apples to oranges.

stooky wrote:it's like comparing apples to oranges.

apples, man apples have been around in the UK for hundreds of years and theyve developed such a technically better taste than the foreign orange, what alcohol can you make out of oranges apart from Cointreau and who wants to drink that shit - there's always a crusty bottle in the back of everyone's liquor cabinet - plus oranges are much messier

theres no argument

forensix (mcr) wrote:

stooky wrote:it's like comparing apples to oranges.

apples, man apples have been around in the UK for hundreds of years and theyve developed such a technically better taste than the foreign orange, what alcohol can you make out of oranges apart from Cointreau and who wants to drink that shit - there's always a crusty bottle in the back of everyone's liquor cabinet - plus oranges are much messier

theres no argument

What type of apples r we talking about man?!? Are you comparing the acidity of granny smiths to the citrusness of the orange or the sweetness of the breaburn compared to the clementine, cum on bruv be more specific.

Just seeing this thread pisses me off.

DJBMC wrote:
What type of apples r we talking about man?!? Are you comparing the acidity of granny smiths to the citrusness of the orange or the sweetness of the breaburn compared to the clementine, muc on bruv be more specific.

all apples are infinitely superior to all oranges you dont have to peel an apple before you eat it - MY OPINION IS THE TRUTH AND NO OTHER OPINIONS COUNT

get me bruv

forensix (mcr) wrote:

stooky wrote:it's like comparing apples to oranges.

apples, man apples have been around in the UK for hundreds of years and theyve developed such a technically better taste than the foreign orange, what alcohol can you make out of oranges apart from Cointreau and who wants to drink that shit - there's always a crusty bottle in the back of everyone's liquor cabinet - plus oranges are much messier

theres no argument

I see your point but vodka and orange juice is a classic.

here they drink apple juice and vodka

btw im allergic to apples...

i know this topic is well played out but to me dubstep is just like d'n'b but

-at a much lower tempo.
-and with more emphasis on vibe over razor sharp production standards.
-more room for experimentation
-much harder to mix well for some reason

actually it is drum'n'bass. just a new form of it. in the early days of jungle/d'n'b people used to go on about how it was always progressing/changing etc. well, this is just another change. tempo is just an element that can change like anything else. saying dubstep is a differnt genre from d'n'b is kind of like listening to a nine inch nails record and giving every track it's own genre just because it's at a different speed from the track before it.

i know many will disagree. thats cool just try not to be a dick about it.

dubstep is like drum n bass but it has good drums and real bass.

jason burns wrote:i know this topic is well played out but to me dubstep is just like d'n'b but

-at a much lower tempo.
-and with more emphasis on vibe over razor sharp production standards.
-more room for experimentation
-much harder to mix well for some reason

actually it is drum'n'bass. just a new form of it. in the early days of jungle/d'n'b people used to go on about how it was always progressing/changing etc. well, this is just another change. tempo is just an element that can change like anything else. saying dubstep is a differnt genre from d'n'b is kind of like listening to a nine inch nails record and giving every track it's own genre just because it's at a different speed from the track before it.

i know many will disagree. thats cool just try not to be a dick about it.

Fully agreed on this. controversal? maybe, true? imo yes
p.s. sorry for ressurecting this thread!

I don't think 'Dubstep' is comparable to 'DNB', 'DNB' is still excellent on vibes, mixes and production. I listen to 'Fabio' and 'Grooverider' on 'Radio 1', and some of the tunes they play are just outstanding.

well thats true im sure. but one thing thats of importance to me is weather or not a genre can remain relevant and fresh sounding. if i wanted to today, i (and half the people who post tunes here) could make a viscious ragga jungle track that fabio definately would have played if it was 1994. but that sound has been done to death so nobody would care. even if it was better than anything ganja cru or marvolous cain or remarc or whoever did at the time. because those guys were innovators and i'd just be a copycat. just like i don't care when i hear a brand new noisia tune with amazing production and sound quality. if you would have played me any noisia tune back in 1998 i would have shit myself for sure. but now it just sounds tired. because it's already been done 50,000 times. layering 20 reece's ontop of each other may sound really big but.....