Gutterbound Notions wrote:
...to discover you like Skrillex?

Yes. Because Aphex Twin was making the exact same music 20 years ago.

California Girls Skate wrote:

Yes. Because Apex Twin was making the exact same music 20 years ago.

And THEY copied Aphex Twin!

DivaEroticus wrote:
I don't know what dubstep is,

It's the best thing ever. Seriously.

I'm not sure I have EVER been into music with this level of obsession before.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOVjBQZ1zTM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyiUgXaCp2U

This is Skrillex. Song makes me nuts ZOMG ZOMG ZOMG: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJVmu6yttiw

California Girls Skate wrote:

Yes. Because Aphex Twin was making the exact same music 20 years ago.

So? I listen to Skrillex, Katy B et al. just like the kids that were toddlers when I listened to Aphex Twin back in the day.


This argument reminds me of the purists that deny any development of electronic music beyond Kraftwerk in the good old days.

Koryn Locke wrote:
This shit kicks Aphex Twins' ass any day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68-0CJUvHG4

I also enjoy dubstep's capacity to generate awesome remixes.

Take this adaption of the Dexter theme for instance - "surprise motherfucker", indeed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeRrMg0xbjs

Russian Katarina wrote:

I also enjoy dubstep's capacity to generate awesome remixes.

Take this adaption of the Dexter theme for instance - "surprise motherfucker", indeed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeRrMg0xbjs

oh my god awesome!

Koryn Locke wrote:
I think the Skrillex sound is more like the Prodigy.


Dubstep music is more heavily influenced by hip-hop beats.  I can't really dance to most electronic dance music, unless there's hard bass in there.

House and trance music always bored me shitless. I had friends who liked going out to places focusing on house music. It was like the DJs couldn't drop a fucking beat to save their lives.

Like they were all constipated or something.

House was the mainstream electronic music for hipsters back in the day, only they weren't called hipsters in the 90ies.

I miss the huge Techno Raves of the 90ies. Berlin was dirt cheap to live in back then and new clubs popped up literally every week. Plus, the Love Parade...

Koryn Locke wrote:
It's the best thing ever. Seriously.

I'm not sure I have EVER been into music with this level of obsession before.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOVjBQZ1zTM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyiUgXaCp2U

This is Skrillex. Song makes me nuts ZOMG ZOMG ZOMG: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJVmu6yttiw

So it's like electronica meets hip hop.  I can dig that, and I can dance to it. 

I shall do more research!

ETA:  And you said that in a later post, which I didn't see because I had mine open still to type.

Russian Katarina wrote:

House was the mainstream electronic music for hipsters back in the day, only they weren't called hipsters in the 90ies.

I miss the huge Techno Raves of the 90ies. Berlin was dirt cheap to live in back then and new clubs popped up literally every week. Plus, the Love Parade...

There weren't raves where I grew up; there were mudslings, half-assed rodeos, and target practice with empty beer cans in the woods. That's what hellions did where I grew up.

I went to a few raves in my early 20s, which was after all that stuff peaked. I did have fun though, and probably would have enjoyed rave culture a lot. I went to one that was a huge warehouse loft, set up with all these tents to look like a weird circus.

DivaEroticus wrote:

So it's like electronica meets hip hop.  I can dig that, and I can dance to it. 

Not all of it, but that general idea...

I also like Drum and Bass music, which tends to be more spastic and "heady." They are kind of related though, I guess, depending...

Koryn Locke wrote:

oh my god awesome!

He makes even crying babies sound bloody awesome:
http://youtu.be/wuYCVLg8QJM

That track borrows a bit from Deadmau5's "Ghosts N Stuff" though, which is pretty epic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gb3faOzvBk

If you are into snowboarding I recommend checking out the documentary "The art of flight", it's part of the OST among some pretty cool artists like M83 and besides...there are some insane sequences in that movie!

Koryn Locke wrote:

There weren't raves where I grew up; there were mudslings, half-assed rodeos, and target practice with empty beer cans in the woods. That's what hellions did where I grew up.

I went to a few raves in my early 20s, which was after all that stuff peaked. I did have fun though, and probably would have enjoyed rave culture a lot. I went to one that was a huge warehouse loft, set up with all these tents to look like a weird circus.

There's nothing like a Love Parade with 1.5 million people. There probably never will be again.





The centre of Techno back in those days was probably the Bunker, a huge building whose four floors were all used for hardcore Techno parties.

Koryn Locke wrote:
This is Skrillex. Song makes me nuts ZOMG ZOMG ZOMG: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJVmu6yttiw

Swagga and Equinox are better.

Jay Pegg wrote:

Swagga and Equinox are better.

I really like pretty much anything from Skrillex.

The one I posted just really appeals to my body, physically.

Compass Rose Studios wrote:
41 here.  Still listen to and seek out new music in virtually every genre.

I'm 49 and I do this.  I've been turned on to some great music, recently.

Compass Rose Studios wrote:
41 here.  Still listen to and seek out new music in virtually every genre.

DivaEroticus wrote:
I'm 49 and I do this.  I've been turned on to some great music, recently.

I never really understood why some (probably most actually) people just hit a point where they stop caring to discover new music.

All the sudden, they just decide everything new sucks, and they listen to the same shit, over and over and over again, until they get old and die.

That mystifies me.

Koryn Locke wrote:

Compass Rose Studios wrote:
41 here.  Still listen to and seek out new music in virtually every genre.

I never really understood why some (probably most actually) people just hit a point where they stop caring to discover new music.

All the sudden, they just decide everything new sucks, and they listen to the same shit, over and over and over again, until they get old and die.

That mystifies me.

It's not just music either.  It's like they come to a dead stop with music, technology, fashion, culture...and their worldview in general. 

Usually when they start complaining about today's younger generations that's your cue you're talking to a dinosaur.

Russian Katarina wrote:

California Girls Skate wrote:
Yes. Because Aphex Twin was making the exact same music 20 years ago.

So? I listen to Skrillex, Katy B et al. just like the kids that were toddlers when I listened to Aphex Twin back in the day.

This argument reminds me of the purists that deny any development of electronic music beyond Kraftwerk in the good old days.

Now, now. To be clear...

The original question was, "Is 41 too too old to discover that you like Skrillex?"

Key word to me is "discover". My point being, at 41 years of age, those who are always listening to new music and discovering new music would hear Skrillex and say, "I recognize this sound from stuff 20 years ago." So, yes, at 41, I would hope Skrillex isn't a "discovery" but rather a familiarity.

Koryn Locke wrote:
All the sudden, they just decide everything new sucks, and they listen to the same shit, over and over and over again, until they get old and die.

That mystifies me.

To me, it depends on the reasoning behind it. Those who just think new stuff sucks for no reason, that's kind of lame. I agree. I've always loved new music.

1940's swing. 1950's rock-n-roll. 1960's pop. 1970's disco. 1980's punkrock and new wave. 1990's industrial and techno. 2000's... um... see that's the problem. No truly new genres are created anymore. I'm not ashamed to admit I like new artists such as Lady Gaga and Katy Perry, but I am bummed that they are just Madonna in a new package. There isn't much truly new and innovative in music anymore. We had about 50 years of new genres being created every decade, and then for the last 20 years... nothing. Now everything is just recycled. That doesn't mean I only listen to older music, but I am disappointed in the current lack of innovation.

Koryn Locke wrote:

It's the best thing ever. Seriously.

I'm not sure I have EVER been into music with this level of obsession before.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOVjBQZ1zTM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyiUgXaCp2U

This is Skrillex. Song makes me nuts ZOMG ZOMG ZOMG: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJVmu6yttiw

You might like Bar 9, basenectar, pantyraid, and an-ten-ae

California Girls Skate wrote:
1940's swing. 1950's rock-n-roll. 1960's pop. 1970's disco. 1980's punkrock and new wave. 1990's industrial and techno. 2000's... um... see that's the problem. No truly new genres are created anymore. I'm not ashamed to admit I like new artists such as Lady Gaga and Katy Perry, but I am bummed that they are just Madonna in a new package. There isn't much truly new and innovative in music anymore. We had about 50 years of new genres being created every decade, and then for the last 20 years... nothing. Now everything is just recycled. That doesn't mean I only listen to older music, but I am disappointed in the current lack of innovation.

It's been like that throughout the entire history of western music.  Evolution/stagnation/evolution/stagnation.  But while the possibilities of harmonic combinations are boundless, the ways to put them together are not as clear cut.  You mention the 40s through the current era, but what came before that was jazz, and before that was atonal (12-tone), and before that the various genres of classical (romantic/classical/baroque), and on back.  Historically, there were periods of stagnation, and when that happened, someone thought up a new way to combine harmonics.

I hope that makes sense.  It did in my mind...LOL.

DivaEroticus wrote:
It's been like that throughout the entire history of western music.  Evolution/stagnation/evolution/stagnation.  But while the possibilities of harmonic combinations are boundless, the ways to put them together are not as clear cut.  You mention the 40s through the current era, but what came before that was jazz, and before that was atonal (12-tone), and before that the various genres of classical (romantic/classical/baroque), and on back.  Historically, there were periods of stagnation, and when that happened, someone thought up a new way to combine harmonics.

I hope that makes sense.  It did in my mind...LOL.

Yes, it makes sense. And I totally agree with you. I know the stagnation won't last forever. As someone who does love new music and keeps up with music, I'm just bummed that we hit this period of stagnation during my lifetime. I was hoping we'd keep getting truly "new" stuff all my life.

California Girls Skate wrote:

Yes, it makes sense. And I totally agree with you. I know the stagnation won't last forever. As someone who does love new music and keeps up with music, I'm just bummed that we hit this period of stagnation during my lifetime. I was hoping we'd keep getting truly "new" stuff all my life.

I think on a staff.  A MUSICAL STAFF, YOU PERVERTS!  I relate just about everything to music.

I agree that the stagnation seems to have hit, and in my lifetime (ugh), but at least I'm young enough to hopefully see the next period of evolution.

California Girls Skate wrote:
1940's swing. 1950's rock-n-roll. 1960's pop. 1970's disco. 1980's punkrock and new wave. 1990's industrial and techno. 2000's... um... see that's the problem. No truly new genres are created anymore. I'm not ashamed to admit I like new artists such as Lady Gaga and Katy Perry, but I am bummed that they are just Madonna in a new package.

I listen to all that stuff. Everything from Bluegrass, to Billie Holiday, to Jefferson Airplane, to Skrillex.

I don't feel that anything new is recycled, despite having a fairly wide range of musical knowledge. Actually, the more I learn about different genres of music, the more different everything sounds to me. Sure, I hear -for example- how Madonna influenced the sound of Lady Gaga, but  they are both unique artists. Lady Gaga doesn't *sound* like Madonna, just influenced by Madonna.

I KNOW for a fact that people accused Elvis of "recycling" the styles of blues musicians, and established African American musicians. People have always been accusing newer artists of creating nothing new.

The fact is, it's all new. If you take one old thing, and sing it over, it your own voice, you're "making it new" -- to steal the words of Ezra Pound -- all over again.

California Girls Skate wrote:
We had about 50 years of new genres being created every decade, and then for the last 20 years... nothing. Now everything is just recycled.

Sorry, hun. I love you and everything, but this here's ^^^ "get off my lawn" talk.

Compass Rose Studios wrote:

It's not just music either.  It's like they come to a dead stop with music, technology, fashion, culture...and their worldview in general. 

Usually when they start complaining about today's younger generations that's your cue you're talking to a dinosaur.

I enjoy a healthy genre mix.

I can listen to Rachmaninov, then dig some Skrillex to dance, then Miles Davis when I'm in the office working.

I also know people who kind of never left the 70ies in their musicial evolution.

Koryn Locke wrote:

California Girls Skate wrote:
We had about 50 years of new genres being created every decade, and then for the last 20 years... nothing. Now everything is just recycled.

Sorry, hun. I love you and everything, but this here's ^^^ "get off my lawn" talk.

Prove me wrong. Name one legitimate new genre of music that has been created in the last 20 years. Something that is not derivative of something previous. Like I said, I have always loved new music, so believe me, I would LOVE to be proven wrong. If you can show me there is something truly unique and innovative which isn't reminiscent of something that already existed in 1990, I would be happy to eat my words.

California Girls Skate wrote:
Prove me wrong. Name one legitimate new genre of music that has been created in the last 20 years. Something that is not derivative of something previous. Like I said, I have always loved new music, so believe me, I would LOVE to be proven wrong. If you can show me there is something truly unique and innovative which isn't reminiscent of something that already existed in 1990, I would be happy to eat my words.

I approve of your appreciation for musical genres of all kinds, but beware using the word "derivative" in this context.  ALL music is a derivative of its predecessors.  The fact that something is, or is not, uniquely combined is what makes that next step on the evolutionary ladder.

California Girls Skate wrote:
Prove me wrong. Name one legitimate new genre of music that has been created in the last 20 years. Something that is not derivative of something previous. Like I said, I have always loved new music, so believe me, I would LOVE to be proven wrong. If you can show me there is something truly unique and innovative which isn't reminiscent of something that already existed in 1990, I would be happy to eat my words.

There has NEVER been any genre of music not derivative of something else.

Gangster rap? That really started taking off in the early 90s, and is a unique genre -- though it's still based in blues music rhythms (just as classic rock is also), and the tradition of people in the inner-city getting together in a "Cypher" to "rap" about stuff.

Depending on how you look at it, "Spoken Word" that is accompanied by music, and has started becoming more mainstream as a genre in the past 10-15 years (arguably, artists such as Spose, Saul Williams, and some others) is also in the process of being accepted as a new entertainment genre. It will never exactly have its own award shows, but it's an underground, well-liked subculture.

The fusion of EDM and hip-hop is what morphed into the Top 40 music we have right now, and is currently resulting in a lot of interest in dubstep. Even 20 years ago, it was pretty hard to imagine being able to mix those two VASTLY different genres together, and get something listenable out of it. Back then, EDM was "house" music and hip-hop was, well, hip-hop. They were really, really different; now, we mix them together and get new and exciting and awesome things.

Basically, what I'm saying is --- by your definition, CCR, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin -- none of those people were legit either, because they were VERY derivative. BUT they were absolutely innovative.

They were derivative - as all music is - but still managed to innovate and make something new.

DivaEroticus wrote:
ALL music is a derivative of its predecessors.

Koryn Locke wrote:
There has NEVER been any genre of music not derivative of something else.

True. I don't contend that. For me, it's more than the music. It's about cultures.

Notice the genres I have mentioned are not subgenres. Each genre has unique fashions, musicians and even slang. Those things are not derivatives. Rap and hip-hop emerged as something totally new and unique. Yes, one can argue that the music itself was derivative of blues, but the culture was not. The b-boys and fly-girls and graffiti and fashions were all new. Elvis was derivative of blues, but the whole rock-n-roll culture which Elvis was part of was unique. One can argue that techno was derivative of disco, but the rave culture that went with it was brand new in the 1990's. Nothing like it had existed before.

Like I said, I do like and appreciate new artists. I just don't see any cultural shifts around music anymore. I don't hear anyone creating something which knocks me off my feet makes me say, "Wow! I've never heard anything like this before!" I see no new genres, no big swings in fashion or slang. Hell, even Skrillex has the exact same freaking haircut I had in 1991.

Koryn Locke wrote:
The fusion of EDM and hip-hop is what morphed into the Top 40 music we have right now, and is currently resulting in a lot of interest in dubstep.

I agree with you 100%. In the last 20 years, hip-hop certainly has influenced Top 40 (and pop music has influenced country). However, the evolution of a genre is not the same as creating an entirely new genre.

Jay Pegg wrote:
I'm 44 and listen to Skrillex. Dubstep was created at a local record shop (now since closed down) on Surrey Street in Croydon.

Interesting.

Because I was listening to it on an Amiga computer with a sequencing program in 1991.  Just search for Amiga and MOD (those were the sequencer files)

There's thousands of them, and some of them sound remarkably like the dubstep of today.