Plenty of great raves still around. I don’t think the Financial Times is a great resource on free of charge illegal underground parties?
Who killed the rave?
321–330 of 854 posts
Re: Who killed the rave?
#322The smartphone imo.
Re: Who killed the rave?
#323I mostly watch 90s and 00s movies and TV shows because you know why. Same here. All new things are shit. Could House be aired today?
Re: Who killed the rave?
#324I love electronic music. Been listening to it for 30 years. Mostly drumbass, dubstep, some house. Groups like subfocus. I used to listen to tiesto, bt, etc. One, I hated the term "raving". I was thought raves were finding an abandoned house, playing music and drugs. I just like the music and don't need the dance clubs or the drugs. But with the said, I think the "club" scene has dropped off. Expensive drinks. Expensi…
Electronic underground is still well and alive. Sure there is lots of mainstream electronica now but if you look a bit you’ll find tons of new fresh stuff.
Sure you can organise raves in illegal locations but a club can still be about the music and can be a more sustainable “home” for the music.
Sure it’s a lot more expensive but then again everything is - the clubs just need to survive somehow.
Tbh I live in Berlin, where rave culture is most alive probably
Re: Who killed the rave?
#325Earlier quoted context omitted.
This exactly. I've been to "raves", they were just giant parties with $3 beers in an abandoned or semi-legal building somewhere in Brooklyn. I was surprised when I started hearing people call giant corporate venues with dancing "raves". I went out to one of those giant clubs in Brooklyn not too long ago to see a friend DJ (Brooklyn Mirage). I was on guestlist, but the cover would have been $50. I bought a round of dr…
A lot of entertainment is priced in and the powers that be lament that young people aren't falling for it anymore. You like sports? Well, you need a subscription to see their away games, a subscription to see their home games, and a separate subscription to see their games in season, and a subscription to see their off season. You want to see them in person? well..... You like music? Well, the cost of a ticket to see…
> I'm good I think I'll just stay home and jerk off
Exactly. There's a fine line between convenience and the cost of doing it yourself, like getting a decent smash burger or firing half of the devops team.
The most ridiculous thing is having venues trying to casually extort you at every possible opportunity, without the implicit advantage of a few very subtle but 'approved' dealers lurking around while making sure everybody is having a safe but very fun time.
It's like an escalator to nowhere
Re: Who killed the rave?
#326Probably a bunch of factors... Tier 1 city RE prices have made live entertainment venues harder to run profitably. GenZ studies have found a lower participation in "risky behavior" which late night clubbing may or not be considered. Mobile internet & smartphones seem to be killing all forms of live in person interaction. And finally electronic music of various forms used to be a niche, and now it's mainstream. In the…
I think we could say that covid killed a lot of these activities (some were already in decline, but covid delivered the final blow). GenZ just happened to be coming of age during the pandemic years and thus prefers to stay home as they see that as normative. Millennials are past the rave stage as they're getting into their 40s.
As a Gen Z who was a shut in long before COVID, I disagree. I knew plenty of people who loved going out before, during, and after lockdown. I'd guess only a fraction of people who liked going out before found the joy of staying home. But likewise I'm sure there were some who found it miserable at home and after lockdown vowed to be more outgoing.
Re: Who killed the rave?
#327Earlier quoted context omitted.
> China built enough homes to house its population twice over, yet it's not reflected in the prices. All because everyone and their grandma is investing in real estate. Yes, but this is reflected in China's vacancy rate: 22% by some estimates. In the US, home vacancy rates are sub-1%. Not saying people aren't treating homes as investments, but it seems clear we also have a supply issue. "Real Estate is Investment" sh…
>"Real Estate is Investment" should naturally lead to overproduction as investment-only properties get built to satisfy that demand—as we see in China China had massive home overproduction because the goddamned totalitarian government told builders to build or else . It was not market forces. How do you suppose we do that in the US? Especially with this administration? In the US, builders don't build 100 starter home…
As someone who has taken raw land with no utilities to a full house all with my own engineering and construction labor this is only half the story.
To build a starter home I not only had to go to bumfuck Egypt with the most libertarian zoning anywhere near jobs I can find, i also had to rule out the 9/10 of properties with practically irrevocable covenants made by self righteous boomers back in the 80s who already built their pig farm shithole and don't want their precious livestock living near anything but a mansion.
Then I had to find a rare loophole around code compliance and inspections so I could DIY it on weekends and not be subject to weekday inspections. Most codes want stuff like an expensive egress window even though no one living in the house is bigger than a much smaller sliding window, and it goes on infinitum.
Then I had to find a place they hadn't outlawed water yet through a grandfathered well, and finally get buddy enough with the power company to actually get them to run power without royally fucking me with arbitrary requirements. Almost the entire system is designed around grandfathered protectionism while kicking the next generation in the teeth with entirely different and constrained rules voted on by people who who live in places that don't even conform to the requirements imposed on you, which of course gives them a free artificial value boost as well.
Re: Who killed the rave?
#328On the one hand millennials are getting older so it's totally reasonable to expect they wouldn't want to party into the early AM anymore. On the other hand real raves don't happen in legal venues. I've partied in warehouses, upscale restaurants, artist studios, roller skating rinks, movie theaters, hotels, apartments. I threw parties on the lightship Nantucket (LV-112), although those were day parties. But none of th…
The article also mentions that earlier ending events made to accommodate aging millennials have seen an unexpected and huge interest from Gen Z But yeah, the decline of the nightlife and hospitality sector is what this article is about, as the regulated rave experience is very mainstream and has been for a long time now The production value is quite high now and still improving so I don't see why the illicit rave exp…
> The article also mentions that earlier ending events made to accommodate aging millennials have seen an unexpected and huge interest from Gen Z
As a millennial in Belgium, my parties started no earlier than 23:00 and ended at 05:00. But maybe it makes sense that this is disappearing? My parents started partying at 19:00
Re: Who killed the rave?
#329Thanks tiktok.
Re: Who killed the rave?
#330Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's shocking how often the answer to "How come X changed?" is either the creation of the internet or the cost of real estate. Surprisingly often, it's both.
It's interesting how the creation of the internet still hasn't caused real estate prices to plummet. Even two years of covid couldn't do it.
Companies came together to demand everyone back into work at physical locations in part to keep real estate pricing high.