“sophisticated in texture but harmonically uninteresting” is a good summary of modern electronic music IMHO. Which is NOT to say it’s not great for other reasons.
Careful though, any suggestion that there might be some use in the traditions of music theory tends to start a flame war.
This thread needs a sibling thread “techniques we should hear more of”
Not to totally bum out the thread but is there a “simple” theory-concept that you would find stimulating in electronic music?
5 Likes
That’s a great point/question, we can easily paint ourselves into a corner with this sort of thinking of what you cannot or should not do.
I suppose nothing (no technique or process) in particular needs to be singled out and eliminated. It’s worth considering that a lot of those mentioned in this thread and shown in a negative sort of light can of course be tastefully used regardless.
I think it has very much to do with context. Music is so vast and anything can have its place in it. Especially when it’s electronic music, imho.
1 Like
I feel this way at times as well.
Achieving harmonic complexity is a unique challenge in elecronic music I think. The nature of (often) one individual controllling several electronic components simultaneously shifts musical priorities.
It’s one thing if you compose interesting, more harmonically rich chord progressions, program them, sample them and then just play your samples in a performance, but in terms of pulling off this sort of complexity in a live setting while controlling an array of synthesizers, or a modular rig is, let’s face it, usually not feasible. Not impossible of course, but a much taller order than doing it with a band or at the piano.
In any case, more chord inversions, voice leading, interesting key changes…all that good stuff I would love to hear more of…and I don’t mean just playing back samples of Keith Jarrett or something…that doesn’t count.
Yeah, interesting.
As well as the problem of ‘controllability’ for a (usually solo) performer, I think there’s another complexity problem. Part of the appeal of electronic music is really interesting, harmonically rich and modulated sounds. Those sounds, with their emphasised overtones and implied chords from filters, their modulating pitch, just don’t respond well to being stacked harmonically by their nature. They’re too rich, it gets muddy or dissonant (in an unwanted way). Complex chords sound great on piano because it’s a relatively simple sound.
So maybe what we should focus on is how those overtones and implied harmonies can be manipulated in a more deliberate way, beyond LFOs and envelopes; retaining the low polyphony/high timbral complexity of electronic music but having more precise and deliberate harmonic control.
4 Likes
You need place in music to do that.
Modern music is often too dense and loud and people often forget that sometimes space is important too - me included. Stacking and layering tons of instruments does the rest in this aspect. It blows you away with a wall of frequencies, but each element in its own is relatively simple.
3 Likes
Techno Kick Rumble with reverb ect. ! Sounds good on speakers that don’t move a lot of air and headphones but on a big Club PA just make everything muddy . I keep my kicks dry most of the time
4 Likes
misuse of the ROLL on the PTracker…rrrrrrrr
4 kicks or 4 claps? If the former…
This was me 30 years ago, after a decade of mostly doing 4 to the floor stuff, I got to a point where I hated it, then I realised I was just being a knobhead and got over it.
Still hate with a passion 4 to floor kick with off beat bass lines though, so monotonous.
2 Likes
Y’all just go get a ukulele or something 
3 Likes
I actually don’t mind just the 4 on the floor… it can be a really great way to add intensity to a track (if applied late in a song).
But I associate the 4 on the floor with monotonous hardware jams and that does not tickle my fancy…
1 Like
Yeah it depends on what else is happening in the track doesn’t it, if everything else is robotic and monotonous it can get very boring very quickly.
Here’s a six and a half hour explaination of why you’re wrong.
6 Likes
I think you just described a lot of the tresor compilation 
( just my opinion )
Very fine line between techno tracks that are interesting and tracks that sound the same for 10 minutes and instantly get deleted , despite the music world tagging them ‘classics’
3 Likes
I’m sorry, but this comes across a bit like the kids at school who bully other kids for reading.
And I say this as someone who generally likes your posts.
2 Likes
Challenge F00kin´ accepted!
im not gonna listen to all 6 hours, but ill give it a good 30 minutes at least
1 Like
Migh want to skip the first 30 minutes or so, it takes a while to heat up, maybe start at the 2 hour mark, it’s banging around there
1 Like
haha… tbh this is exactly 4-on-the-floor that mehs me out 
but the visuals make it a nice performance all in all! Btw is that this Surgeon dude? I always found he makes super boring techno. Okay enough bashing 
I’m a bit too young anyways and listen to that new overproduced melodic deep house stuff.
1 Like
30 odd years of using and still not bored of them, I don’t use them exclusively and enjoy synthesizing drum sounds myself, but I have to say those Roland engineers knew what they were doing, some of the sounds are simply genius.
I am yet to hear any modern analog drum sounds that better them, and this has little to do with nostalgia, some of the sounds simply hit the right frequencies to be so effective that they sit very well in a mix, and they also react well to processing too.
6 Likes
Your not too young, you just haven’t found the right drugs yet.
2 Likes