Elitism in Prog?

Elitism could be inarticulate too and provocation is elitism 100%.

Now, those Punk articles are elitist and close minded... just because the guy who wrote them doesn't like prog artists doesn't mean it's stupid and awful and whatever he chose to insult the musicians.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: thellama73 wrote: I see a lot of elitism on these boards (and I have been guilty of it myself) mainly in the form of putting down fans of other styles of music as unsophisticated or closed-minded. I admit to being a music snob, but just because someone likes Pop or Punk doesn't make them an idiot.   Honestly, this is one of the few forums in which we discuss other genres,.............How can that be elitist?   This is elitism (Always mention this site):   http://www.punk77.co.uk/punkhistory/whendinosaursromaedtheearth.htm http://www.punk77.co.uk/punkhistory/dinosaurspart2.htm http://www.punk77.co.uk/punkhistory/youshouldneverhaveopendthat.htm   I have seen people that doesn't like Punk here, but to waste full pages of the main site to insult other genres in order to feel superior...That's elitism and could use another adjectives.   Now, I hardly know any member that likes exclusively Prog, yes of course I listen more Prog than other genres, but I have at least 300 albums from Pop, Classic Rock, Metal, Jazz and Classical, even 5 salsa albums (all by Ruben Blades) and Cuban Nueva Trova (Despite being anti-communist).   Now, if somebody believes that not liking Rap or Hip Hop is elitism, I don't agree, it's simply that we have a defined taste, and there is music I don't like, starting with most King Crimson and Gentle Giant.   Iván   Thank you Ivan now i know what bias really mean in the bad sense: Taking side dumbly for an easy digestible lie.   These Punks....

boo boo wrote: Yeah I can't stand it when prog fans write off guitarists for not being as technically skilled as what they consider the elite players, Gilmour gets a lot of crap for this.   Hackett might not be part of the "elite" but he's no amateur either, who cares if he doesn't have as much chops as Akkerman or Latimer or McLaughlin? Or John "Captain Boring Pants" Petrucci. Chops isn't what guitar playing (or prog) is all about.   Hackett is the most reserved guitarist in prog, and the fact that he waits for the right moment instead of trying to dominate the song is part of what makes him special.   I do like Howe more, but not simply because he has more chops, which I'm not even sure is true to begin with, then again I've never been too good at measuring one's skill level, which is pointless anyway.

I don't really know if Latimer has employed tapping anywhere, haven't heard where if he has. Hackett was using it from Nursery Cryme onwards.  He is certainly better than Latimer on acoustic.  And Gilmour's bends are hard to match.  I found Petrucci didn't quite nail them when they covered Time, though maybe he simply intended to treat the solo differently.  Looking at technical proficiency on guitar solely through the prism of speed (or singing through the prism of range) is immature but unfortunately it is a much prevalent tendency in rock discussions.  You are right, Hackett doesn't try to show off, he just follows Fripp's words, "A great guitarist is one who is true to the moment he finds himself in".

EDIT: And I'd much prefer listening to Hackett than McLaughlin on the Mahavishnu albums.  It is a little sloppy and overall leaves much to be desired for me. He is probably not too comfortable with the overdriven electric because he absolutely rips on clean electric or acoustic with Shakti. 


Edited by rogerthat - May 13 2010 at 20:16

...  don't know, maybe Howe is better than Hackett and even DT is the best band ever (Don't agree with neither, even when I  allow the posibility),  but if both statements are true, complexity has very little to do, it's only one of many elements that could make them the best.

Edited by moshkito - May 13 2010 at 17:41

Look Dudes, hell yes i'm a Elitist!!!

rogerthat wrote: Actually, Hackett's technique is smoother and more beautiful, he exudes so much effortlessness. In singing or playing, it's not enough to just hit the notes, you should be able to play them the way the musician has played it on the song, which is not easy. Sure, there are some things Howe did on acoustic that Hackett didn't in the 70s (haven't heard his acoustic albums) but I don't know how people talk about it like it's so clear cut that Howe is better.

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - May 12 2010 at 21:44

rogerthat wrote: Ha ha ha, well, the vehement "For God's sake" and all sounded like you felt offended ...good to know you agree.

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - May 12 2010 at 21:09

rogerthat wrote: Ivan, every post in this thread is not directed at you so please don't take needless offence.  There are many prog fans and not just on this forum but across this net who give this "most complex and technical" line.  I was referring to them.

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - May 12 2010 at 21:02

rogerthat wrote: No, I don't think considering one genre the best for you is elitism, that's simply describing your tastes. What I do find elitist in prog appreciation is the "I listen to prog because it's the most technical and complex music in the world" business.  No, that it is not.  It may often be more technical and/or complex than run of the mill pop/rock, that's all.  You do find technically accomplished guitarists in prog metal but this is because, as Cert1fied put it, prog metal is an extension of technical metal really.  Barring that, I don't see how Roine Stolt is more technical than Guthrie Govan and that's just one example.

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - May 12 2010 at 20:52