A lot of this talk of Drumcode, Adam Beyer and so forth has put me in
mind of when trance completely split off from techno.

I remember that, for a while, the snare rolls, big breakdowns, 303 lines
and druggy chords that later came to characterise trance had permeated
deeply into more "pure" techno. That "Access" track would get played at
proper techno nights and, for the first few months at least, no-one
would particularly bat an eyelid.

Now these techniques were all very effective on the dancefloor, and
after a while audiences were demanding to hear that sort of stuff all
the time. Some techno DJs I know pretty much capitulated, with snare
rolls every five minutes, but they still saw themselves as being
"techno". "Because this works better on the floor and is more popular
with club audiences", said some of these guys, "this is the stuff that
will stick around. That noodly stuff you play isn't really techno at
all!"

What are these guys now? They're trance DJs. What started out as a kind
of tendency among techno producers eventually hived off into its own
sound, and a newly reinvigorated and purified techno scene went on to
drop a number of bombs, such as Minimal Nation, in which those "trancey"
techniques were rejected outright.

Today, we have a similar situation. The Samuel L Sessions-style records
all employ a limited range of tricks and techniques to maintain this
continual flow of pounding rhythm and half-bar loops. Because it works
better on the dancefloor than, say, that Delsin record or this Keith
Tucker record, spw feels that *it* is the stuff that will stick around,
the stuff that now represents what "techno" truly is.

But I'm saying that we've been here before. A more populist variant of
techno becomes successful; its advocates eventually perceive themselves
as being the true agents of progress and start to direct their criticism
at the "old guard", the pure techno scene. It happened in the early
1990s and it's happening again now.

Brendan

Reply via email to