p-trance v p-house semantics

Was progressive house ever actually about about 'house'. From my perspective it was, and is still, more about a subtle type of trance.

Given the chequered history of 'progressive house', whether one should lament the fact that the term 'house' stuck is an interesting question...

From my perspective, progressive house was progressive that leaned towards house while progressive trance was more trance that took elements from progressive. Which I guess is agreeing with you in that progressive house is not really house...

Hows that for a clusterfuck of a definition


One more thing I should add, if ANYBODY even considers using the word "trouse" in this thread, do so under pain of death. Because I will hunt you down and kill you.

I always viewed it as more house which leaned towards futurist style of varying sorts. E.g. In the UK more house which took on a few of the elements of rave/trance for a more peak-time/big-room vibe was progressive house. In the US however it was the stuff which took on elements of tribal or techno.

For this reason I'd say house was the starting point imo, not the later influence.

As for goddog's claim it was more about a type of trance as opposed to house. He's wrong, dead wrong. Trance was a new genre around the same time while house already existed in dozens of sub-genres - some more vocal, some inspired by disco, some by techno and some by rap/hip-hop even.

Re: "Given the chequered history of 'progressive house', whether one should lament the fact that the term 'house' stuck is an interesting question..."

Given what I said above, this is redundant. It's wrong nonetheless. The word 'prog' is the one people got scared of using... and you know when? When the music either got too deep/dark to be entertaining in most situations, or when the trance elements got too common and turned clubbers off the sound altogether.

This I certainly agree with.

Interesting you see things coming from the other direction.

One other thing that would lend credence to your argument is that technically "progressive" is an adjective describing a particular element or part of the noun that comes after it, ie progressive trance = trance that is progressive in nature. How progressive became a genre in and of itself is somewhat of a mystery to me, but none-the-less it is pretty clearly definable in it's own right these days...

"Progressive" is an abbreviation of "progressive house". They aren't different things.

The variations in what "progressive house" is depends on which direction you come from.

Personally, I was very much into the US style of prog (Tenaglia, DJ Vibe etc which later became Lawler etc) which had lots of tribal and sometimes techno influences but little from trance generally. Other kiwi prog DJs - who killed the scene by basically playing soft trance, prog based on a more cheesy ideal - came from the European/UK version which was more like Tilt, Sasha, Hooj etc. Much more synthy and overall much closer to trance. This is where prog trance spun out of imo as people in this group matured and found common ground from trance people moving towards their sound at the same time.

Interesting that the US, broader influences, sound still exists big-time (Digweed, Howells, Tenaglia etc) and even in UK with labels like Bedrock... yet the more European sound has disappeared with the advent of synthy electro/minimal etc. If you look at the DJs who played it you can see this too: Sasha etc.

I wonder if the biggest difference in dance music on the two sides of the Atlantic was in their history. The US was more about subtlety and soulfulness whereas the UK was more about in-yer-face party. Ironic that two of the most significant clubs in UK clubbing history - The Hacienda and MOS - both were very American influenced in their sound. Almost as if the people (now regarded as visionaries) could see the longevity in the US sound as opposed to the hit/anthem dominated UK style.

It could be a good lesson for clubs still imo. Here and elsewhere.

Well I guess thats one mystery solved

I've heard a lot of people (even some prog DJs no less ) differentiating between progressive and progressive house. Hence the confusion.

Still holding out hope for the NZ clubbing scene I see

good points

Alot of tribal is quite trancy. That it's called 'tribal' speaks to the historical, and present, use of membranophone instruments in various tribal contexts, where often trance states are part of the culture.

Say what? You mean some trance has bongo drums in it?

Safri Duo

I'v turned largley to psytrance (in the very broades sence)a few years ago, and youd be suprised what they incorporate into their shit

drums alone are pretty can get pretty mad - come to this and you see what I mean - all nght drum circles around the campfire styles

http://www.ecofest.co.nz/

Psytrance & Trance = two totally different genres

And yes, psytrance would take a lot of elements from tribal.

I reckon the "dark hole to nowhere" prog ie Bedrock Black label and the super minimal styles where the likes of Chris Fortier and Jimmy Van M took it for a while is what gave it the kick in the guts a few years back.

Knobbly (RobW to the lamen) is not fond of the trancey stuff so I feel his opinion is ever slightly biased. However the UK style of Progressive House (I agree completely with his observation of the regional differences) was arguably what took Progressive to its global domination in the late 90's/early 00's most notably via the GU compilation series. Yes most of this is very trancey. Its no surprise going back to Northern Exposure 1 & 2 that there early Armin Van Buuren tracks in the mix. This was the European sound and it made global superstars out of Nick Warren, Sasha, Digweed, Dave Seaman & Danny Tenaglia. Seduction of Orpheus is definitely trancey so even Tenaglia tipped his hat to it on occasion.

You can definitely split the sound off to trance and house

Its all just trouse anyway.

deny it.

I really, really hate you