THAM
This awareness intersects with broader aesthetic changes in hard techno. Tracks have become shorter, often structured around pronounced breakdowns and high-impact drops. Tham appreciates
a well-executed
build-up, the charged silence before sub-bass returns, the way tension can thicken the air. But when every track is engineered as a climax, contrast disappears. Without space between peaks, intensity flattens.
“Techno used to be functio- nal music, built from loops with a minimum of highlights. It was made to last for hours, not to get applause every few minutes. I love a big drop when it’s done well, but if everything is a peak, it becomes numbing. Intensity isn’t about speed or aggression. A room feels intense when people stop thinking about themselves, when time doesn’t matter and the music sucks you in.”
For him, intensity is measured by dissolution rather than volume. He often recalls a closing set by Drumcell and Audio Injection at Berghain at 125 BPM as one of the most intense experiences he has witnessed. The power lay not in aggression but in sustai- ned hypnosis. Intensity emerged because the room stopped performing for itself. Time loose- ned its grip.
No-photo policies make this difference visible. In rooms whe- re filming is restricted, dancers turn inward, facing each other or the speakers. Movement flows continuously
without inte-
rruption from glowing screens. The DJ feels embedded rather than observed. In heavily filmed environments, phones rise predictably, and the outside world re-enters the dancefloor through digital mediation.
Tham recognises that some of his most significant bookings are recorded and widely circu- lated. He prepares accordingly, often bringing new material to those nights. Yet he prefers tes- ting more experimental ideas in smaller spaces where risk feels less exposed. Innovation requires room for failure. Cameras narrow that space.
Risk also defines his relationship to trends. The techno landsca- pe now moves quickly, with mi- cro-aesthetics appearing and fading within months. Tham ad- mits that he briefly adapted his sound in response to rising trends and the visibility they promised. The outcome was paradoxical. Online engagement increased, but internally he felt misaligned.
Short-term adaptation erodes continuity.
“I had a period when I saw other DJs adapting to new trends and it made me insecure. I tried to adapt too, but I only got more disconnected from my artistic self, and it was noticeable to lis- teners as well. Posts were more viral, but something essential was missing. A label recently told me about my next EP, ‘It is not the most trendy music right now, but it is really good music.’ That meant a lot.”
A recent label described his for- thcoming EP as not particularly trendy but undeniably strong, a comment he received as affir- mation. Authenticity, in his un- derstanding, does not mean re- sisting change but deepening alignment. His evolution has unfolded through refinement of texture, harmonic richness and tension-release structures rather than radical reinvention.
Structural questions matter as much as sonic ones. Rising ticket prices in Berlin have altered who can participate regularly in club culture. Students facing high rent and living costs cannot ab- sorb frequent entry fees without consequence. Spontaneity dimi- nishes. Smaller collectives stru- ggle to survive within escalating economic frameworks. Projects like ULTRASOZIAL emerged from conversations about protecting accessibility.
“Imagine being a student paying high rent and grocery costs, and then clubbing stops being a pos- sible escape if you can’t afford 25 or 30 euros just to get in every weekend. I couldn’t have done that in my early twenties. ULTRA- SOZIAL was created to protect participation. Techno will only stay socially relevant if it stays
affordable. Otherwise it becomes entertainment for elites rather than a shared culture.”
Affordability shapes atmosphe- re. When entry is accessible, the night can unfold without pressu- re to justify expense. When it is costly, expectation sharpens and consumption logic intensifies. For Tham, techno retains social relevance only if participation re- mains possible. Otherwise, it risks becoming a curated product for a narrowing demographic.
Looking forward, Tham avoids speaking of arrival. Expansion into new territories and larger rooms is natural and welcomed. Visibility does not inherently contradict integrity. What ma- tters is preservation of founda- tion. The relationship to the room must remain primary.
He wants to continue playing for those physically present rather than for an algorithmic archi- ve. He wants grooves to breathe when the room allows it, even if that choice is less conducive to viral clips. He wants to take risks that might unfold slowly, trusting that intensity does not require constant spectacle. The objec- tive is not to become a finished brand.
It is to keep holding the room.
“What needs to remain intact is the relationship to the room. I want to play for the people in front of me, not for the camera. Letting a groove breathe when the space allows it, taking risks even if something takes time to work. Visibility can grow, that’s amazing. But the foundation has to stay the same: honesty, risk, accessibility and connection.”
Andreas Thamsen became Tham within Berlin’s basements, but the essential task remains unchan- ged. To stand behind the booth and shape the architecture of a space through sound, aware of the pressures surrounding it yet grounded in the immediacy of bodies moving together in the dark.
015
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48
