Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Who killed the rave?

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

781–790 of 854 posts

Re: Who killed the rave?

#781

Post by stefs »

bcrl wrote: post #685
anigbrowl wrote: post #660

It's not really surprising, but the article seems to conflate raves with nightclubs, with numerous remarks about the cost of being out at a club all night and paying for things like expensive bottle service. Raves are not clubs, and historically have never done that well in club environments. People who are really into staying up all night dancing to techno music aren't buying expensive alcoholic drinks, they're buyi…

In Toronto the decline of the scene in the late '90s was accelerated significantly when the city clamped down on promotors by restricting them from renting venues on city owned property. This was after gradually requiring EMTs and increased security at events after Allen Ho died in 1999. There was a huge protest at city hall, but that had no impact on the course of things. Combined with the recession and then SARS in…

"although people getting older with more obligations was certainly a contributing factor as well"

there's always the next generation of young people. the question is: why aren't they as interested in raves than the generations before them?

Re: Who killed the rave?

#782

Post by ghaff »

stefs wrote: post #781
bcrl wrote: post #685

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Toronto the decline of the scene in the late '90s was accelerated significantly when the city clamped down on promotors by restricting them from renting venues on city owned property. This was after gradually requiring EMTs and increased security at events after Allen Ho died in 1999. There was a huge protest at city hall, but that had no impact on the course of things. Combined with the recession and then SARS in…

"although people getting older with more obligations was certainly a contributing factor as well" there's always the next generation of young people. the question is: why aren't they as interested in raves than the generations before them?

The utterly lazy and unsatisfactory answer is that generations change. You mostly don't have bowling leagues or halls for groups like the Knights of Columbus any longer either. Now you can point to various societal changes that affect all those things but it's probably rarely one single answer.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#783

Post by mikepurvis »

bradlys wrote: post #681
mikepurvis wrote: post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Losing all the campus clubs for two years really impacted things, and I think there was also a big loss in mid-sized events, but hopefully things do still continue to recover. Certainly there is still loads of enthusiasm, especially in the Balboa world, where the flow aesthetics and high skill ceiling really appeal to obsessive types.

It appeals to old people. Young people aren’t coming back. It’s been on a downward trend for longer than the pandemic started.

It appealed to me as a 20 year old engineering student, eighteen years ago. And I see lots of 20s and 30s still out at big events; I wouldn't write the decline off as being about anything intrinsic to the activity.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#784

Post by geden »

coldtea wrote: post #742
geden wrote: post #732

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went to my first rave in 1991 in Sheffield City Ballroom. There was plenty of raving indoors and in clubs in Sheffield and Leeds in the early 90s.

They existed, but where they "raves" or just clubs and venues playing rave music? Proper raves where the DIY open or underground fare, secretly organized, communicated with flyers or whisper-net, etc. And when the 1994 act banned them there was a lot of (justified) anger from the rave "community"! In any case, still a British thing.

I disagree with your definition of a “proper” rave. Not inclusive enough.

There was loud rave music & ravers having a great time, ie it was a rave.

Raves happened in secret and in the open. I went to both kinds. Pros and cons to both.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#785

Post by geden »

thom wrote: post #757
coldtea wrote: post #742

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They existed, but where they "raves" or just clubs and venues playing rave music? Proper raves where the DIY open or underground fare, secretly organized, communicated with flyers or whisper-net, etc. And when the 1994 act banned them there was a lot of (justified) anger from the rave "community"! In any case, still a British thing.

Still going strong. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-647769...

Simultaneously delighted and appalled.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#786

Post by kstrauser »

block_dagger wrote: post #714
kstrauser wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What sound pollution? There are permits and everything, and woodlands are really, really big. A couple hills over you wouldn't be able to hear a thing.

Perhaps humans wouldn't be able to hear a thing, but what about birds, rodents, and other animals? 100dB is something only humans can produce. To assume that other species aren't negatively affected seems wrong to me. I don't have the data to prove it, however.

Any concert amphitheater probably has 100x the sound power. Our speakers are very loud when you’re dancing next to them, but they’re not strong enough to be ear-splitting to a seated crowd of 80,000 people.

In the scheme of things, this is nothing.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#787

Post by snek_case »

listenallyall wrote: post #540
snek_case wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having been to raves, another issue you run into if you go there to meet people is that the kind of people who will hook up at raves probably don't want anything serious. It's a super hedonistic environment. If you want more than a one night stand any other form of dating is better.

Yes - sitting at home and looking for companionship on an app is better than leaving the house, interacting with other people, dancing, laughing, singing, making lifelong memories ::eyeroll::

It's not a choice between going to raves or staying at home and using apps. There are other options.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#788

Post by MichaelZuo »

ethbr1 wrote: post #704
MichaelZuo wrote: post #692

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you assuming there must be a ‘next step’? The general population can just not care about a ‘next step’ on average…?

Typically when a core previous truth changes, society changes in response.

Only if the median person cares about it past a certain theshold…

Re: Who killed the rave?

#789

Post by buttercraft »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #532
xeromal wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because people want to live in particular areas

This is really the issue. There are plenty of places people can live and afford. But everyone wants a particular lifestyle and a certain job in their desired field and maybe proximity to certain people. That sense of entitlement has been rebranded as an affordability crisis but it isn’t that. It’s just entitlement. People should instead live within their means and make sacrifices. Not everyone gets to live in highly…

This is nonsense. Someone has to haul away the trash, police the streets, put out fires, teach the kids, ya know.... all that stuff you feel entitled to.

The people who actually take care of a community aren't "entitled" for wanting to be part of it.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#790

Post by forgetfreeman »

watwut wrote: post #745
forgetfreeman wrote: post #720

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People work minimum-wage jobs and choose to live in cities. People working minimum wage jobs have very little choice in their lives and certainly can't afford to move arbitrarily. > I think it's super disingenuous to claim that people only live in cities for work. There are tons of social options in cities, tons of civic amenities, and tons of lifestyle differences that draw people to a city. All of which is availa…

> All of which is available to people that don't live in the city. We have various forms of transportation options. Not really. It is a big difference between having mat 30 min to gym, school, whatever or whatever and not even needing a car and having to drive almost an hour to get anywhere. It is difference between "I can and will actually do it" vs "nope, cant do it". > Hell I once flew halfway across the country j…

> Not really. It is a big difference between having mat 30 min to gym, school, whatever or whatever and not even needing a car and having to drive almost an hour to get anywhere. It is difference between "I can and will actually do it" vs "nope, cant do it".

Man if you think adult humans are that helpless I really don't know what to tell you. They aren't, but apparently you'd need some convincing.

> That is definitely not something an average person would do on the regular.

Sure, it's a pretty extreme example. It's nothing for folks to drive up the eastern seaboard between Atlanta and Baltimore to catch shows though. Anyway point stands, none of the entertainment and cultural experiences that folks who are stuck in major urban areas use to tout the experience are denied to folks who don't live in the city.

Post reply on HN