/tunes/ - enjoyable sounds

no one listens to retrowave anymore

>>59
did it get overtaken by some other nostalgic fad? or just become too repetitious and derivative for its own good?

I always felt there was potential for 'genre revivals' (not just in music) as far as refining what was good about the past to make better things now, but too often it seems like people are backward-fixated, making works that have nothing to say other than "remember this?" and stew in some fleeting sense of wistful comfort.

I just want to listen to things that sound nice desu

>>60
Faux-80s genres (retro-, vapor-, synth- waves) indeed add nothing new. Not even a statement about modern music making or anything. I'd rather listen to authentic 80s music that has something.

>>61
>Not even a statement about modern music making or anything.
That is pretty false.

Synthwave can differ greatly from anything made during the 80s musically,
but chooses to incorporate a fresh view of the 80s sonic spectrum, by using old synths, coupled with modern production.
Listen to com truise, mitch murder or pertubator, and you will know what I mean.

Vaporwave is not even a derivative of anything really, though its definition is kind of fuzzy.
Anyway while sampling may be used heavy-handedly sometimes, the presentation and purpose of the material differs so greatly, that you can't call vaporwave a derivative genre.

I think the genre still has some gems.

>>62
However accurate calling vaporwave a derivative genre is, I think it gets the label because most vaporwave songs are unoriginal in a different sense. Most vaporwave artists just remix old music without doing much different with the structure and shit.

>>60
These days it's all about the dream tech https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBjx1kUv2iM

>>59
I do, all the time. I just love it.
Synthwave good stuff too. I have this sort of golden-age syndrome with the 80s. Not that I think they were better than now but they feel soooo dank

worth bumping

>>59
>08/18/16
Almost two years later I'm still listening and loving it.

>>65
whats the difference between retrowave and synthwave anyways?
>>61
i think whats really going on is something of a a stylistic renaissance
dont be surprised if they start going further back than the 80s in the coming years
like we already saw electroswing bring back some of that mid century stuff

>>457
OP here, I called the thread "retrowave" after a similar thread on the old site but as I understand it now that's a misnomer which actually just comes from the name of a popular youtube channel. "synthwave" is the more accepted term.

one trend I don't hugely care for is when artists try to artificially "date" their music by degrading it to sound like an old VHS recording or whatever. I get that format limitations leave more room to the imagination, but that to me feels like it should be used as a creative starting point, not as a crutch to make up for when you don't have much interesting to express. in contrast the best artists (Perturbator is probably my favourite) take the synth soundscape as given and use it to push out toward something greater. even Carpenter Brut is kind of borderline on that - his production is super tight and punchy, the best in the scene, but the compositions themselves feel a bit stuck in time without any strong sense of direction.