Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: November 03 2006
Location: Rockpommelland
Status: Offline
Points: 1578
Posted: October 02 2017 at 04:26
Cristi wrote:
I wonder how it can be called innovative when most of it relies on sampling...
false.
A lot of stellar rapbands, use instruments and rely on funk and jazz music. Just listen to Common, The Roots, Talib Kweli, RH Factor, Guru's Jazzamatazz.
I also love that a lot of old jazzcats work with rappers, like Miles Davis' Doo-Wop. If Miles wouldn;t have died, he would have continued working with rappers.
Joined: August 29 2011
Location: Troy
Status: Offline
Points: 7251
Posted: October 01 2017 at 21:55
I've heard nothing new since the late 90s and the new electronic music of the end of that decade. But don't worry, it will come. When it happens, it will not remain a secret reserved for the purists. Everybody will know.
Joined: June 18 2009
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 12608
Posted: October 01 2017 at 20:53
HackettFan wrote:
jude111 wrote:
HackettFan wrote:
I read page 1 and page 5 of this thread. Is it spelled out on pages 2, 3 or 4 what the innovations are?, because I must have missed something. Was it innovative sound? That's the only thing I can think of, but it wasn't that innovative. Impactful, yes. As for the challenge of modern innovative Prog since 2010, I'd say anything recently put out by Henry Kaiser would qualify.
Innovative doesn't mean 'musical complexity'. Kraftwerk were very innovative, yet Genesis played circles around them. I think most critics today would say that Kraftwerk was the more innovative band. (And I think Peter Gabriel himself believed he was moving in a more innovative direction when he left the band.)
Sampling as an art form was a technological innovation that wasn't possible (or easy to pull off) until relatively recently (in terms of decades). Anyone may be able to do it - just like anyone can play guitar or keyboards - but to do it in a way that resonates with people requires skill and creativity.
At one time, the composer was all. But then with jazz & rock, it was less about the composers then the musicians who were interpreting the compositions ("It's the singer not the song"). With the advent of the studio and the increasing complexity and technical skills required to master this technology, producers were increasingly important to the artistic process. There has now been a shift, and the producer has replaced the musicians as the forefront and author, and uses samples and instruments to create her/his vision. There's been some truly innovative and visionary stuff made with this shift:)
Kids used to want to play an instrument. Now they want to rap, DJ, or produce:)
Why should I accept the premise that innovation is not musical complexity? Why is your claim that sampling is a better indicator of innovation philosophically superior? This relates strongly to the thread I opened up 'How do you measure innovation?' Nevertheless, I would like to point out that you are factually incorrect. Sampling has been used for a long time. It was used extensively by Peter Gabriel on Security (sorry, I forget the name of the device he used). It also actually began with the mellotron I might add. Genesis used samples. Sampling has been used extensively in movies too. I'm quite pro sampling, but it's not remotely new, certainly older than the 2010 marker that the OP laid down, so I don't understand what actual innovation is being referred to in the vid posted by the OP. Is there something more specific about the sound, sampling or otherwise, that has seldom been done before. I honestly don't know what it is. As for the shift to the importance of producers, the visionary there would be Brian Eno. Actually, in quite the opposite direction from what you've described are musicians who are now empowered as one man bands. Although he also works with other musicians, Henry Kaiser, who I mentioned often plays by himself using a long digital delay with one or two shorter delays in a fashion somewhat like a looper to create complex layered sound that feels like more than one guitar. Less innovative?b Doubtful. Listen and compare.
About the one-man bands, I understand even in the 70's that already existed. At least I know of Mike Oldfield doing mostly such a thing... even with Tubular Bells being when he was 19 years old (he did have a few extra musicians for some drums and choirs and flutes).
Sure they use samples but also instrumentation. One thing doesn't take away from the other. Hell 'samples' or the concept of samples (using prefabricated bits) are used in all kinds of music. Nothing new there.
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”
Joined: July 27 2006
Location: wonderland
Status: Offline
Points: 41376
Posted: October 01 2017 at 02:09
Guldbamsen wrote:
It is rather pointless to discuss rap or hip hop with people who still think it's comprised of samples. There are just as many hip hop artists who either are real musicians themselves or have a real band behind them.
can you name a few, I would honestly give them a try/a listen. :)
It is rather pointless to discuss rap or hip hop with people who still think it's comprised of samples. There are just as many hip hop artists who either are real musicians themselves or have a real band behind them. But sure it is much easier to categorise an entire style of music, one doesn't know squat about, simply by sticking to clichés. After all prog is always about elves and wizards and it also always utilises mellotron. Just like all country music features the banjo. It is quite alright to dislike a genre but tearing it to pieces whilst being completely ignorant about the very same is just poor argumentation and lazy.
I do happen to agree with Steven on this if only because hip hop is far younger with much more ground to cover + the genre's willingness to play around with every other genre out there (reminds me of something). It's experimental fans also (perhaps a tad ironic) seem much more open to experimentation than most prog fans I see. Prog fans are among the most fickle of audiences out there.
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7946
Posted: October 01 2017 at 01:08
jude111 wrote:
HackettFan wrote:
I read page 1 and page 5 of this thread. Is it spelled out on pages 2, 3 or 4 what the innovations are?, because I must have missed something. Was it innovative sound? That's the only thing I can think of, but it wasn't that innovative. Impactful, yes. As for the challenge of modern innovative Prog since 2010, I'd say anything recently put out by Henry Kaiser would qualify.
Innovative doesn't mean 'musical complexity'. Kraftwerk were very innovative, yet Genesis played circles around them. I think most critics today would say that Kraftwerk was the more innovative band. (And I think Peter Gabriel himself believed he was moving in a more innovative direction when he left the band.)
Sampling as an art form was a technological innovation that wasn't possible (or easy to pull off) until relatively recently (in terms of decades). Anyone may be able to do it - just like anyone can play guitar or keyboards - but to do it in a way that resonates with people requires skill and creativity.
At one time, the composer was all. But then with jazz & rock, it was less about the composers then the musicians who were interpreting the compositions ("It's the singer not the song"). With the advent of the studio and the increasing complexity and technical skills required to master this technology, producers were increasingly important to the artistic process. There has now been a shift, and the producer has replaced the musicians as the forefront and author, and uses samples and instruments to create her/his vision. There's been some truly innovative and visionary stuff made with this shift:)
Kids used to want to play an instrument. Now they want to rap, DJ, or produce:)
Why should I accept the premise that innovation is not musical complexity? Why is your claim that sampling is a better indicator of innovation philosophically superior? This relates strongly to the thread I opened up 'How do you measure innovation?' Nevertheless, I would like to point out that you are factually incorrect. Sampling has been used for a long time. It was used extensively by Peter Gabriel on Security (sorry, I forget the name of the device he used). It also actually began with the mellotron I might add. Genesis used samples. Sampling has been used extensively in movies too. I'm quite pro sampling, but it's not remotely new, certainly older than the 2010 marker that the OP laid down, so I don't understand what actual innovation is being referred to in the vid posted by the OP. Is there something more specific about the sound, sampling or otherwise, that has seldom been done before. I honestly don't know what it is. As for the shift to the importance of producers, the visionary there would be Brian Eno. Actually, in quite the opposite direction from what you've described are musicians who are now empowered as one man bands. Although he also works with other musicians, Henry Kaiser, who I mentioned often plays by himself using a long digital delay with one or two shorter delays in a fashion somewhat like a looper to create complex layered sound that feels like more than one guitar. Less innovative?b Doubtful. Listen and compare.
Edited by HackettFan - October 01 2017 at 01:24
A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now)
Joined: October 20 2009
Location: Not Here
Status: Offline
Points: 1741
Posted: September 30 2017 at 19:34
HackettFan wrote:
I read page 1 and page 5 of this thread. Is it spelled out on pages 2, 3 or 4 what the innovations are?, because I must have missed something. Was it innovative sound? That's the only thing I can think of, but it wasn't that innovative. Impactful, yes. As for the challenge of modern innovative Prog since 2010, I'd say anything recently put out by Henry Kaiser would qualify.
Innovative doesn't mean 'musical complexity'. Kraftwerk were very innovative, yet Genesis played circles around them. I think most critics today would say that Kraftwerk was the more innovative band. (And I think Peter Gabriel himself believed he was moving in a more innovative direction when he left the band.)
Sampling as an art form was a technological innovation that wasn't possible (or easy to pull off) until relatively recently (in terms of decades). Anyone may be able to do it - just like anyone can play guitar or keyboards - but to do it in a way that resonates with people requires skill and creativity.
At one time, the composer was all. But then with jazz & rock, it was less about the composers then the musicians who were interpreting the compositions ("It's the singer not the song"). With the advent of the studio and the increasing complexity and technical skills required to master this technology, producers were increasingly important to the artistic process. There has now been a shift, and the producer has replaced the musicians as the forefront and author, and uses samples and instruments to create her/his vision. There's been some truly innovative and visionary stuff made with this shift:)
Kids used to want to play an instrument. Now they want to rap, DJ, or produce:)
Joined: January 23 2017
Location: U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 665
Posted: September 30 2017 at 18:30
Gong published Planet Gong in 2009.
How To Stay Alive is one of my favorite songs involving rap vocals. It fuses Gong's typical spacey style, prog, and instrumental music. Highly recommended, but definitely not "hip-hop".
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7946
Posted: September 30 2017 at 14:07
I read page 1 and page 5 of this thread. Is it spelled out on pages 2, 3 or 4 what the innovations are?, because I must have missed something. Was it innovative sound? That's the only thing I can think of, but it wasn't that innovative. Impactful, yes. As for the challenge of modern innovative Prog since 2010, I'd say anything recently put out by Henry Kaiser would qualify.
Edited by HackettFan - September 30 2017 at 14:18
A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now)
Joined: March 29 2013
Location: WA
Status: Offline
Points: 4591
Posted: September 30 2017 at 13:33
Not to defend his statement in the least (I hate rap/hiphop more than asparagus and this statement makes as much sense to me as that Rolling Stone moron Christgau saying disco is more harmonically rich than prog) but maybe his point isn't that rap is innovative, rather that rock is deathly stagnant and a pile of rocks is more innovative at this point?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
S.Wilson: "Rap now is more innovative than Rock"
Topic Options
Cristi wrote:
... as often is when speaking of a non-entity like SW. 
