I can see it two ways. Why would a credible techno producer want to go out of their way to associate themselves with the trance scene ten years after it became its own codified collection of crap? Or why should the techno scene let the trance scece have dominion over a term that came about as a (good) description for techno like Stardancer and Sun Electric, when the codified variety does not so much induce trance as sleep? I dunno. I can't be arsed with the labels that much. It's marketing schpeel. They have their descriptive function within reason, but I think 'neotrance' may be too much effort and not enough description. Then again, if it sells proper techno to trance kiddies it's prolly a good thing. Gotta keep the new blood flowing in somehow!
All that said, when I think of some of the better Michael Mayer sets floating around from a couple of years ago, I'd be hard pressed to think of a better description than 'trance' - in a good way. And what would you call some of that trancey Hiroshi Watanabe stuff? Some of this stuff shares more in common with old trance than old techno. Maybe it should be "benetrance"! Tristan ======= http://www.phonopsia.co.uk [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.14.6/536 - Release Date: 16/11/2006 15:51
