Ok, I lied. One more post.
Once Techno becomes finally defined it will cease
to matter and evolve as a progressive form of music.
Period. By asking us to define it you are asking
us to stop the music from progressing further.
I know you have no idea what I mean by that
but that's not my fault.
In the early 90's trance was born as an offshoot
from techno. When it did it was no longer considered
techno because though it may have used similar
instruments, it seemed to completely lose all the
good qualities that techno was celebrated for.
Instead of real soul it relied on cliche emotional
triggers that made the listener think they felt
a certain way--though to the techno intelligentsia,
it just made them vomit and run for the door.
Just sappy candy-coated watered-down drivel--IMO.
Now go find an appropriate list for yourself.
Dale
At 03:56 PM 6/14/00 -0400, you wrote:
>yes but the truth of the matter is that if NOONE can give an exact
>definition of techno then how can techno be an exact form of music??
>dustin
>
>==============
>
>techno is whatever i feel it is...
>also: techno has no snare rolls, big buildups and breakdowns or that heavily
>delayed goa shit.
>techno is 4/4
>techno is whatever we say it is.
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
