Tyrannus
Verified Account
Knowledge is Night
Posts: 806
|
Post by Tyrannus on Nov 29, 2017 9:42:21 GMT -5
Hello, here’s another thread about my dungeon musings. This one is inspired by this recent discussion of Thangorodrim’s output as well as conversations I’ve had recently regarding the huge volume of DS being made today.
The topic of this thread is essentially “what makes for a modern classic in dungeon synth?” OR “can there be a modern classic in dungeon synth?”
Many highly anticipated or well-regarded releases seem to come and go from the group consciousness in just a few weeks, so what does it take for a modern dungeon synth album to endure, and withstand the test of time? Obviously we can’t predict which releases will still be discussed for years to come, but one can sort of tell when a release makes a particularly large impact.
Are any modern albums “important” or “game-changing” enough to even endure as classics? Is modern DS an “in one ear and out the other” kind of genre? How can you tell when a real gem comes out? What are the signifiers to you?
Many past albums can be said to be part of a “canon” in the sense that they were formative to the genre’s development or progression, and are integral to understanding the genre. For instance you can’t really omit Burzum or Mortiis and hope to understand what the origins of the genre were about. Alternatively it could be said that ignorance of Abandoned Places is a surefire way to misunderstand DS in the internet age. Much like black metal, DS had a developmental path and ultimately has diversified tremendously. For both genres there’s also this lack of clarity about how to endure in the scene, and artists often find themselves treading a line between reverence of the past and trying to push forward into new and unique territorities. What does a “modern classic” in DS look like to you guys?
|
|
|
Post by nahadoth on Nov 29, 2017 10:01:38 GMT -5
i say this a little flippantly, but what it seems to take is people continuously bringing an album up to remind the community that it exists.
But you're right, it seems like a lot of artists would rather release a new short EP even if the tracks are forgettable, in order to end up back in the public consciousness. That certainly does contribute to the feeling like an artist is ephemeral. Hell, at this point a classic feels like anything that I feel the desire to listen to more than twice.
Just trying to reflect on this year alone, most of the classic releases that come to mind without having to scroll through my Bc collection are ones that were innovative or subversive in some way. Trogool, maybe, just for including a bunch of weird tonality and video game references in a fully hi fi context, or Alder Deep or Black Sun in Dungeon noise and black ambient respectively. Very few of the self consciously old school projects, no matter how well they do it, have made a profound impact this year.
|
|
|
Post by thekeeper on Nov 29, 2017 10:49:43 GMT -5
It's difficult to say what makes a contemporary release a 'modern classic'. Different modern classics get their status for varying reasons. The majority of albums that are deemed modern classics have physical releases, sometimes multiple versions or re-releases, and many are quite of differing DS styles, so articulating the attributes that constitute a modern classic will likely result in some kind of discussion of the feeling they instill as the most important factor (or perhaps something synesthetic), physical legacy being more symptomatic than creating a compounding causational popularity. It's probably worth naming some albums that are deemed modern classics in order to look at what they share, ones that we can generally agree are often returned to by listeners/DS fans and are nameable as important albums without having to look at a list or your BC collection: Murgrind's Inheritor of the Forest Throne, Old Tower's The Rise of the Specter, Hedge Wizard's More True than Time Thought, Lord Lovidicus' Kyndill Og Steinn. Those are just a few, and they're each different types of albums between fidelity, composition, presentation, and physical history, but what about these granted them the status they currently hold? I think whatever is shared between modern classics will be in spirit, with whatever else which elevates them being less weighted. For example, Inheritor has had, what, four releases now? I think it would still hold its status if it only had one physical release, even with none, but having four may have further cemented it a little bit by bringing it back into consciousness multiple times, though to a far lesser degree than the music itself. Modern classics would have to retain their popularity and impact despite physical form to truly be 'classic'.
Worth looking through this thread, or again if you have before, as it pertains to a similar discussion but concerning 90s and 00s releases and the criteria that makes some essential : dungeonsynth.proboards.com/thread/223/recommended-essential-listening
|
|
Tyrannus
Verified Account
Knowledge is Night
Posts: 806
|
Post by Tyrannus on Nov 29, 2017 11:27:07 GMT -5
Ah yes I suspected there’d be a bit of overlap. I guess maybe focusing this thread in a bit more on the modern end might pre don’t too much repetition of ideas.
Also it’s interesting you bring up physical releases, since I feel like they were almost less essential to instill that feeling of being a “classic” in the past but it for some reason feels more necessary now. Does anyone agree? Of course there are exceptions but I feel like a lot of digital only stuff gets quickly dismissed.
Is this “trend” or “fad” or “boom” that was fearfully discussed earlier this year still happening? Will that die down, do you think?
Also sort of tangentially related but also inspired by recent conversations I’ve had, how many labels are too many? It seems like new ones keep popping up and at what point is this just too much?
|
|
|
Post by thekeeper on Nov 29, 2017 12:50:13 GMT -5
Well, there were classics in the early BC days, one after an other to be honest, and lots of them didn't get physical releases for a while. Abandoned Places has classics and none of them got physically released until he ended the project. Erdstall didn't get physicals for some time either, and many consider at least the second album a modern classic. I still entirely think things can become classics without a physical release, but people love tapes and they're cheap so the demand creates the product sooner or later.
While there has been something of an influx of DS in the past year, I feel that it's less of a trend thing than it is people realizing a genre exists that they would've liked in the first place. If they learned about DS five years ago, they would've liked it then, but only now is the scene large enough (relative) that it's more noticeable and is drawing people at a more noticeable rate than when the whole modern scene was like a few hundred with like 100 releases on BC. DS is almost always more niche than the people who say it's too trendy and popular now realize it is. If FB group members is indicative of anything, the main DS group is on par with the main harsh noise wall group, and I don't think I have to explain how outsider HNW compared nearly any other genre. It's picked up some journalistic coverage and a couple videos, but that's about as far as its gotten, and anything major really only pertains to Mortiis. I think there is an average of 3 releases added to the BC tag per day, and this often times includes releases that aren't actually DS. I guess that sounds like a lot, but the scene almost entirely exists on BC so there isn't a whole lot being made outside of BC itself. I think the pace its at right now will be its constant. It might get a little bigger with more BM labels putting out stuff, but not by much.
If people leave the scene, I think its because they're disenfranchised with how they perceive it as a whole, as too trendy or too popular (though this decreased interest due to perceived trendiness constitutes a trendiness of non-trendiness doesn't it? Leaving once something gets popular sounds like 'trend-hopping' to me..), less often is it that people who enjoy its newness ride the wave for bit for before moving onto something else, at least in my opinion. I think the starry-eyed newcomers stick around for a while and participate more, any trend-riders if they're around don't speak much and are less noticed.
I have noticed the increased prevalence of labels. I don't really mind it. I think the increase in labels will further solidify each label's individuality/identity and people will follow some labels more closely for the kinds of music they release and how they create physicals, and there will probably be more 'inner circle' styled labels like Moonworshipper and Shadow Kingdom releasing more local music, having rosters with fewer artists from all over the world. More labels carves more niches, and labels come and go. People really only create labels if they feel the need to if others aren't what they're looking for or if they have a certain artistic vision they wish to express, or if they want a platform for releasing their own music and their friends. If they're around for money, people notice, especially in smaller scenes. It's not an easy thing to create, certainly.
|
|
|
Post by Witherer on Nov 29, 2017 13:21:24 GMT -5
Many highly anticipated or well-regarded releases seem to come and go from the group consciousness in just a few weeks What is the indication of enduring group consciousness? Mentioning an album every in the weekly "I'm new to DS what's good?" post? Amount of sales/downloads? Featured in various charts and end of year lists? Hell, at this point a classic feels like anything that I feel the desire to listen to more than twice. Depending on how one engages with music this might be a substantial enough compliment. How many releases per year would you envision that you'd listen to three or more times? I would say the majority of any genre is ephemeral and the handful of albums in a year that make it to ten plays are outliers, and the truly landmark, genre-defining, perspective shifting albums are only a handful a decade. Refer to BM and compare to how few DS albums per year are coming out in comparison. Do we expect more from DS? There were two dozen DS releases this year that I thought were quite good and about five that I loved. Perhaps there is a problem if there is nothing lovable coming out at all, but maybe expecting a stream of classics is a bit optimistic. DS is also a very community oriented genre and appeals to and welcomes bedroom projects. We shouldn't forgive laziness and low effort but the bar for quality is definitely flexible and blurred. Any classic DS project should have a degree of reference to the masters' sounds or themes and a degree of innovation. The amount and balance of the two is debatable and the imbalanced projects lead the war on trve vs new.
|
|
|
Post by Witherer on Nov 29, 2017 13:26:12 GMT -5
Also sort of tangentially related but also inspired by recent conversations I’ve had, how many labels are too many? It seems like new ones keep popping up and at what point is this just too much? There does seem to be an influx, but the main ones have been keeping quite busy with full schedules. DS is very DIY and I think this growth is primarily a factor of "someone should put this out, why not me?" Especially since roughly half these labels seem to be run by an artist, the other half may just want to contribute to the community in another way.
|
|
Tyrannus
Verified Account
Knowledge is Night
Posts: 806
|
Post by Tyrannus on Nov 29, 2017 13:42:55 GMT -5
That's a good question, about the the indication of enduring group consciousness. There could be albums that no longer get discussed excitedly that will end up on a collector's shelf, only to be uploaded to or mentioned on a blog years later, claiming its status as a cult classic. It's hard to know or tell what will really retain "relevance" or for how long. There's NO way of knowing what may regain popularity years down the line.
So I know there's no need or reason to glorify physical releases, but hear me out for a second. Digital music can be easily deleted or discarded since it's just files, and hard drives can crash and things can be lost. Physical releases aren't indestructible, of course, but there seems to be this element of permanence/persistence, like this object will sit on someone's shelf until they decide to do something about it. It'll always be there as like a physical reminder of the music that was made. And of course stuff on bandcamp isn't "going anywhere" but a release can kinda get lost in the annals of time on that site. Do you think physical releases have any part in "immortalizing" an album?
Also another side note but it's almost time to talk about our favorite releases of the year! We can probably make a separate thread for that
|
|
|
Post by Witherer on Nov 29, 2017 13:52:10 GMT -5
Do you think physical releases have any part in "immortalizing" an album? Yes. Even to those who prefer digital, I would assume the fact that a physical exists bumps the status of a release in some small way. It indicates that someone thought that this was worthy of existing in the real world and was worth the effort to create and buy the object. It also means that it comes with more context in the sense of album art, jcard panels, notes and it'll likely be sold on a label or distro in the context of other albums available. If you were to isolate the music to simply music itself then perhaps all of this wouldn't matter, but I think that's inescapable. The few released on vinyl have been done so because of their importance, but I would agree that their importance has been elevated by the format as well.
|
|
Tyrannus
Verified Account
Knowledge is Night
Posts: 806
|
Post by Tyrannus on Nov 29, 2017 13:58:41 GMT -5
I've always found the idea of DS on vinyl sort of odd...I mean maybe there's DIY vinyl out there but I usually think of that format as being very NOT DIY and thus kind of at odds with the DS aesthetic
|
|