Mahavishnu Orchestra

TODDLER wrote:  Robert Fripp was interested in John McLaughlin's writing. This became more evident when King Crimson were touring in 73'/74'. Some of the Mahavishnu style of writing turned up on Larks Tongues In Aspic, Starless and Bible Black ..and Red. Mainly the style of a chord voice or a riff played in harmony by Robert Fripp and David Cross.

jayem wrote: TODDLER wrote:  Robert Fripp was interested in John McLaughlin's writing. This became more evident when King Crimson were touring in 73'/74'. Some of the Mahavishnu style of writing turned up on Larks Tongues In Aspic, Starless and Bible Black ..and Red. Mainly the style of a chord voice or a riff played in harmony by Robert Fripp and David Cross.   In both KC and MO we find distorted guitar + violin and odd rythmics, but the very patterns that compose their lines are far from being the same. I doubt that Fripp would borrow anything from MacLaughlin. Here's why I doubt it the more...   It's quite impressionable playing the pieces off the 3 Crimson titles and the early Mahavishnu. I often hear some of the same approach in chord structure and the voicings. For example, the guitar intro to Birds Of Fire consists of some of the same concepts Fripp has applied. I can definitely hear Fripp playing the acoustic guitar improve in "Thousand Island Park" and "Hope" has a definite Crimson feel. It's very mixed and difficult to pinpoint. It may be that McLaughlin accidently wrote a thing or 2 that was reminiscent of Bella Bartok and there lies a musical connection between King Crimson and Mahavishnu, but nevertheless...if you play an instrument..you can see clearly that there is a connection somehow because of what you are playing by Fripp that is reminding you of the note patterns you played by McLaughlin. Perhaps Fripp masked any influence and it comes across not intended.

What I often do is pick an artist and listen to their entire catalog from 1rst album to last.
It's really fascinating to do this.  It's not something that you could do back in the era the albums were created.

KC had a very interesting development from one album to the next with a lot of surprises along the way.  Same
with Mahavishnu.

Lear'sFool wrote: The only reason that they being fusion is a short answer to your question is the fact that fusion isn't symph, which is enough for some of the really close minded progheads to shun them. ...

Which is the main reason why I would like to see the rules cleaned up and updated now that we have 50 years worth of music to go with.

Sadly, we do not have the intelect to be able to put it all together and come up with something solid that makes sense, and I do not believe that enough folks that like the top ten in progressive music (at least PA), are folks that have a solid appreciation for real music all over the world, and you should have at least a sizeable portion of that.

GuruGuru never had keyboards either, and neither did Incredible String Band, and they were far more progressive in their area than anyone here is willing or capable of listening to it. Because it ain't prog and it ain't listed on PA's top list!

So, not seeing Mahavishnu, is not a surprise ... in fact it should be expected. The folks here, with their list, have locked themselves up to 3 groups and the rest is crap!

WTF are you even asking, right?       

^ Listen to Spectrum yet, Skull?

^ Eh, prog's had better.

dr prog wrote: I don't bother with Fusion these days. Prog is way better. Just click below and you will agree

Eh?

Great track. Mahavishnu, Floyd or Crimson couldn't produce these kind of melodies

I think the most plausible answer has been given by those who have put it down to the lack of vocals.  Even with KC, the more instrument-based albums like LTIA are not what made them so renowned.  Rather, it's the, yes, symphonic ITCOTCK with Lake's standout vocals.  KC, Yes, ELP, Genesis, PF, JT all have standout vocals in at least some of their albums, whether or not in a good way.  Let me further modify that.  Distinct vocals AND lyrics in English *cue micky's favourite RPI rant* .  I think Magma has a very formidable legacy too and their musicianship is outstanding.  But singing in an imaginary language just won't do when it comes to popularity.  What moshkito calls the top 10 mentality.  But it can't be helped, really, because rock music essentially is a predominantly American and British based genre with, duh, English lyrics.  Sure there are amazing bands from other countries singing in their native language but with most of it being English, most of the fans are going to be conversant in English at the very least, even if it is not their first language.  

Edited by rogerthat - January 14 2015 at 08:29

That's a different discussion altogether but it was kind of covered in an earlier thread where Dean participated.  Possibly the acceptance of varied folk/native styles of singing into British rock/pop gave the singers in that period a very unique character.  

I know for many they will view MVO as a chops band with endless showboating etc... but I don't believe that was really the intention with them.

It feels more like the frantic intensity that predominates most of the music works more like a ten finger deep tissue massage.  I find the music relaxes me.  It doesn't agitate me at all.  The compositions are very detailed and well thought out.  More complex than traditional jazz, and this lands it square in the prog genre for me.

Using odd meters as much as they do, that is a conscious intent.  There is a very complex structure that resembles classical music more than jazz that permeates the underlaying form of Mahavishnu music.  Most traditional jazz works around 3 and 4 chord progressions that then are soloed over by the lead instruments.
Mahavishnu is much more structured if you listen closely.  It's very experimental music and the true spirit of progressive experimentation is everywhere.