Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Tangerine Dream "Extended" Albums
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Tangerine Dream "Extended" Albums

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
Message
philipemery View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2018
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 165
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote philipemery Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 18 2018 at 12:21
I find it to be mostly just cash grab material, of the "Kilroy Was Here" and "90125" kind. Hence why they just shoved album after album out the door. I don't think any of it was particularly decent.

But I am also really stingy too, so it may just be me. But I am just not one who enjoys 45 minutes of sequencers.
But the sun is eclipsed by the moon. -- Pink Floyd
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Chris Jenkins View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: July 18 2018
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 4
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chris Jenkins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 18 2018 at 13:33
Originally posted by Modrigue Modrigue wrote:

[QUOTE=philipemery]I'd argue that no one tries to imitate their later work because it is sub-standard and not at all memorable compared to their earlier stuff.


Yes, that's their VERY late work - ie from 1990, post Paul Haslinger. I don't think anyone finds that memorable. Their 'later than Peter Baumann' work, around 1978-86, was I would argue mainly memorable stuff. 
Back to Top
philipemery View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2018
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 165
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote philipemery Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 18 2018 at 14:18
We must have very different opinions of what quantifies as memorable lol.
But the sun is eclipsed by the moon. -- Pink Floyd
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 11462
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 18 2018 at 14:21
Originally posted by Chris Jenkins Chris Jenkins wrote:

Originally posted by Modrigue Modrigue wrote:

[QUOTE=philipemery]I'd argue that no one tries to imitate their later work because it is sub-standard and not at all memorable compared to their earlier stuff.


Yes, that's their VERY late work - ie from 1990, post Paul Haslinger. I don't think anyone finds that memorable. Their 'later than Peter Baumann' work, around 1978-86, was I would argue mainly memorable stuff. 
 

Indeed, TD suffered a critical blow following the departure of Paul Haslinger. Thought Edgar was still there, and his career is replete with compositional gems, TD's decline had more to do with how much control Jerome was afforded with each successive album. There are still some nice tracks on Tyranny of Beauty, but Turn of the Tides was by and large a dud, and Melrose, the first album to feature J as a full-timer, was less than consistent. 

When Thorsten joined, things began to get back on track. 2008's Views from a Red Train was a very nice return to form, their single best offering in 20 years. No kidding. Of course, Thorsten and J didn't see eye-to-eye, what with the former's respect for the retro aesthetic and the latter's protracted fundness for danceable pap. 

But let's remember one thing: Tangerine Dream circa 1980-1985 stands out because of Johannes Schmoelling. And while's classically trained, no degree of training is automatically going to gift you with the kind of melodies that guy comes up with!
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 11462
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 18 2018 at 14:28
Originally posted by philipemery philipemery wrote:

That and half the prog bands of the 70's had classically trained musicians, particularly keyboardists.

Throw a dart and you'll find one.
 

TD's had a few conservatory-trained keyboardists: Johannes Schmoelling (1980-86) and Paul Haslinger (1986-1990), and Thorsten Quaeschning was also born into a family of classical musicians and is a multi-instrumentalist. 
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 11462
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 18 2018 at 14:35
Originally posted by philipemery philipemery wrote:

We must have very different opinions of what quantifies as memorable lol.
 

If you don't enjoy TD's output circa 1973-1987, at a minimum, meaning the albums/soundtracks/live records beginning with Phaedra and ending with Livemiles, they're not a band you'll get into. They've been Krautrock, psych, progressive electronic, prog rock, ambient...TD is a band with many hats. And yes, their discography is by no means perfect (it's too large), but it's nothing short of memorable. ;)
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 11462
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 18 2018 at 14:47
Originally posted by philipemery philipemery wrote:

Yeah actually it is rather easily emulated, because it is all just "slightly" more complicated programmed sequences. It is still not actually that hard. Those "compositions" are just programs basically. Real compositions cannot be churned out like a machine gun, at the rate that TD shot out albums. No, there wasn't actually that much complicated composing going on at all.

Its one major reason I don't even care to buy TD albums, because past the 70's, the innovative quality declined to just being sub-standard synth and sequencer work, that people now dote on as some kind of genius work of composition.

You want to hear compositional complexity? Listen to Magma, Yes, Gentle Giant, Renaissance, King Crimson, ELP, or Pink Floyd. But Tangerine Dream is not where you go to hear that. That is where you go when you want to listen to non-stop analog synthesizer and sequencer instrumentals.
 

Up through 1986, it's absolutely genius level stuff. Nobody else sounds like that. Many have tried. TD consistently led the wave in new synth sounds up until they hit a wall in 1988. Johannes Schmoelling has exhaled melodies that other musicians would rehearse for weeks to stumble upon. Edgar's nuanced guitar stylings are pure pleasure. And it's the economy they often maximized to full effect, allowing rhythms, melodies and middle ground textures to interweave and perfect the overall sound they're known for. As TD's music became more complex in the '90s, it actually became less interesting, more homogenized. Their music suffered.

Nobody will argue Magma isn't a more "complex" band. But Pink Floyd? Nah, not really. Pink Floyd's always been about grooving. They never shot for complexity. Take Gilmour out of the mix and regard what is left over.

As for Gentle Giant, I've never been able to get into them. Something about their songs doesn't sit right. They'll have a splendid guitar solo dropped in the middle of a song I'll find less than engaging. Not a fan of the singing, either. 

Speaking of singing, that's why I don't listen to Magma, either. LOL.


Edited by verslibre - July 18 2018 at 14:48
Back to Top
philipemery View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2018
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 165
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote philipemery Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 18 2018 at 15:52
I don't call preprogrammed sequencer melodies complex. Time consuming yes. Edgar's guitar style isn't actually that innovative or nuanced (as a guitar player myself I can tell you). I'd say 90's TD didn't suffer from complexity, as much as mediocrity. There is a difference. Having a lot of notes and difficult arpeggios doesn't make something good. Making something deliberately complicated and flashy, just to be flashy and complicated, is bad. And that is all TD does from 1980 onwards. They are just being flashy.

I am not denying they are super influential in synth wave and all that. I'd say there is no band more influential on that front. I am just saying that what they produced after around Stratosfear (for me) is just sub par and not really interesting to me.

I am a big vocal guy myself, and have huge respect for Gentle Giant's baroque and chorale type harmonies (especially songs like "On Reflection" which is a four part fugue, and beyond complicated to sing).

Yeah... because when I listen to the Wall or Final Cut, Brahms like orchestration and complex musicianship doesn't pop out at all... Probably why it isn't being turned into an opera... oh wait.

Gentle Giant is very hard to get into. Took a long time to adjust myself, just because the music itself isn't very inviting.



Edited by philipemery - July 18 2018 at 16:00
But the sun is eclipsed by the moon. -- Pink Floyd
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 11462
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 18 2018 at 16:50
Originally posted by philipemery philipemery wrote:

I don't call preprogrammed sequencer melodies complex. Time consuming yes. Edgar's guitar style isn't actually that innovative or nuanced (as a guitar player myself I can tell you).

Sequences can e driven to enact melodies, but I was referring to those that Johannes, Edgar, Paul, Thorsten, etc., play with their right/left hands. Think "Beach Scene," "Mojave Plan," the opening of "Tangent," the great piano motif from Side A of Pergamon (aka Quichotte), the entirety of Underwater Sunlight, "Bois de Boulogne," the title suite of Force Majeure, "Hyperborea," Tiergarten," and many other pieces. Then there are the solo albums. There's a wealth of material where this band and its alumni are concerned. (:

Originally posted by philipemery philipemery wrote:

I'd say 90's TD didn't suffer from complexity, as much as mediocrity. There is a difference.

I don't disagree. If you refer to my previous post, you'll see the titles of albums I cited as being below par for what we were used to (spoiled with) as TD fans. 

Originally posted by philipemery philipemery wrote:

Having a lot of notes and difficult arpeggios doesn't make something good.

That's a given. But we're not discussing Steve Vai. 

Originally posted by philipemery philipemery wrote:

Making something deliberately complicated and flashy, just to be flashy and complicated, is bad. And that is all TD does from 1980 onwards. They are just being flashy.

I'm sorry, Philip, but that's not the case. It seems TD "from 1980 onwards" isn't something you're overly familiar with, particularly the following albums: Pergamon, Tangram, Exit, Thief, White Eagle, Hyperborea, Poland, Le Parc, and Underwater Sunlight (which features some of Edgar's most tasteful guitar playing ever). In fact, scattered throughout these picks are tracks that are leaner, and hence meaner, and dripping with excellent sounds (which, depending on who you talk to, can be fifty percent of the draw). 

If post-Seventies TD isn't your thing, that's perfectly okay, but the far less impressive stuff they get knocked for lands between 1990-2003.

Originally posted by philipemery philipemery wrote:

I am not denying they are super influential in synth wave and all that. I'd say there is no band more influential on that front. I am just saying that what they produced after around Stratosfear (for me) is just sub par and not really interesting to me.

Give Force Majeure (1979) one more whirl. Just in case. Smile


Edited by verslibre - July 18 2018 at 17:05
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 11462
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 18 2018 at 17:02
P.S.

Originally posted by philipemery philipemery wrote:

Edgar's guitar style isn't actually that innovative or nuanced (as a guitar player myself I can tell you).

There are many keyboardists who won't hesitate to bash Rick Wakeman because he "can't play blues like Keith Emerson."

That said, I love Edgar's guitar playing, and the level of his proficiency (which was better than many assume) has less to do with it than the sheer beauty of his compositions.


Back to Top
Davesax1965 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 23 2013
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 2781
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Davesax1965 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 19 2018 at 01:55
I'm a classically trained musician who's released a number of albums in the style of "Tangerine Dream meets early Hawkwind". I also soldered up all my own equipment. Funnily enough, I didn't have much of a problem emulating Tangerine Dream. 

But what do I know, eh ? ;-)

Alas, I am also an old dinosaur and don't really bother with Tangerine Dream from the 80's onwards. I think Hyperborea was my exit point, or even, er, Exit. The problem I had with Tangerine Dream is that they had the equipment - rare enough to find in the 70's - to be novel and unusual. When polyphonic synths came in, the technology no longer made them creative - it made them lazy. 

As for "creating sequences is easy", it is. If you know what you're doing on a modular. It's not just a case of hitting a RUN button, especially on a Moog 960 sequencer. You tend to have to patch up the entire modular first.

That's like saying "playing a flute is easy, you blow in it and wiggle your fingers around".  ;-)

Edited by Davesax1965 - July 19 2018 at 03:56

Back to Top
Modrigue View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 14 2007
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 1051
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Modrigue Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 19 2018 at 02:00
Originally posted by philipemery philipemery wrote:


I am not denying they are super influential in synth wave and all that

90's Electronica / IDM bands such as Aphex Twin, Plone or Autechre are not related to synthwave very much.


Edited by Modrigue - July 19 2018 at 02:00
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 11462
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 19 2018 at 10:33
Originally posted by Davesax1965 Davesax1965 wrote:

I'm a classically trained musician who's released a number of albums in the style of "Tangerine Dream meets early Hawkwind". I also soldered up all my own equipment. Funnily enough, I didn't have much of a problem emulating Tangerine Dream. 

But what do I know, eh ? ;-)

Alas, I am also an old dinosaur and don't really bother with Tangerine Dream from the 80's onwards. I think Hyperborea was my exit point, or even, er, Exit. The problem I had with Tangerine Dream is that they had the equipment - rare enough to find in the 70's - to be novel and unusual. When polyphonic synths came in, the technology no longer made them creative - it made them lazy. 

As for "creating sequences is easy", it is. If you know what you're doing on a modular. It's not just a case of hitting a RUN button, especially on a Moog 960 sequencer. You tend to have to patch up the entire modular first.

That's like saying "playing a flute is easy, you blow in it and wiggle your fingers around".  ;-)
 

Or playing 12-bar blues on the piano in the bar.

Stringing notes together isn't hard. Neither is dialing a Mellotron choir sample and holding down keys. The problem is that too many, er, emulators do exactly that. For decades, it seemed like we got Rubycon II–CCL — but no Stratosfear II or Force Majeure II or Back to Le Parc. I'm still waiting for those. I think the problem is there's only one Johannes Schmoelling. Luckily, we have Loom. Wink

I think it's funny TD catches so much heat for a stylistic shift to melodic rock sensibilities with the advent of more powerful synths, while Kraftwerk, who are similarly regarded as pioneers, made (and, er, "revisit") synthtunes that tend to be repetitive and sparse. Don't get me wrong, I love Autobahn and The Man-Machine, but let's not forget it took four guys to make those records.
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 13426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 20 2018 at 08:27
Originally posted by philipemery philipemery wrote:

I don't call preprogrammed sequencer melodies complex. Time consuming yes. 
...

Easy for you to say that when today you can do it with a button, and yesterday it was all done manually, and one step at a time.

I think, that you and Dave forget that there are 40 years in between and that the equipment changed, and improved, but saying that it was easy ... IT IS with today's equipment, but it WAS NOT yesterday, when the equipment was not as advanced and controls were not as efficient.

If you really want more of this information, you really should read Edgar Froese's Autobiography ... and it goes through this stuff really well ... and the problems inherent in playing in conditions that Dave can not even conceive and appreciate, and instead thinks that what he does is superior.

I do not doubt, or consider anyone's work, TODAY, superior to TD ... mostly because they were doing it at a time that such stuff did not exist, and no one had ever heard anything like it ... but stating today, half the stuff that is stated here ... is scary ... reminds me of FILM in 1910 (or 1920 ... no matter!), when the story goes that half the theater ran out screaming when the gun shot straight into the camera eye ... 

Let's discuss who has lost the imagination, now!
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 13426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 20 2018 at 08:42
Originally posted by Davesax1965 Davesax1965 wrote:

...
Alas, I am also an old dinosaur and don't really bother with Tangerine Dream from the 80's onwards. I think Hyperborea was my exit point, or even, er, Exit. The problem I had with Tangerine Dream is that they had the equipment - rare enough to find in the 70's - to be novel and unusual. When polyphonic synths came in, the technology no longer made them creative - it made them lazy. 
...

I disagree. The main issue was that they could not include everything they did on the earlier analog materials on the polyphonic synths, and still maintain a good sense of continuity, quality and dedication to the original piece.

It was no fluke that in the 70's TD bootlegs were magnificent ... why? They were all different, which attested to the difficulty of playing what they did in different places and situations, many of which were highly difficult ... like playing in Poland in less than zero degree weather ... and somehow they managed and it even made an album! Would you even have tried? I'm not sure Dave can even consider moving that much of his equipment for a concert.

The polyphonic stuff made it easier to add different things, but by that time, they had over 10 to 12 years of really hard road experiences with the really heavy equipment, that was not only difficult to setup, but also difficult to tune properly ... not to mention that the sequencer situation with one member was very difficult to redo properly all the time, with a new machine, because it did not have the touch and individual feel that the original did. Or the player did, but it would not translate to the new machine.

It's so easy to criticize those early days ... and sad. There is no "art" that was worse in those days, than today, but we can only look at it with today's eyes and think it was awful. How many writers were NOT worse than today? How many other composers were not "worse" than today? How many other painters were not "worse" than today?

Go ahead ... try to copy Shakespeare. Go ahead ... try to copy Michelangelo. Go ahead ... try to copy Handel. You will still be second rate, because you are just a copy!

Dave's work is very nice, but for my tastes it is not great, and it lacks one thing that TD did not use for a very long time, until much later ... the dependency on the beat and drum track. The earlier material was "free" of that dependency, for the most part, and that was one of its greatest achievements ... not sounding like a top ten song. Nowadays, the more recent TD without Edgar, can not even play 3 minutes without having to resort to the beat and its control, and lack of freedom. And I'm not sure most folks can do this today, either ... everyone is so stuck to the beat and drum!

That freedom, helped define and create a lot of music ... and now we sit here and criticize and think that it isn't great anymore. Heck, nothing has changed, even when a moron somewhere in a magazine thought that it was "washing machine music", which today's material IS, by comparison. 

The hard part, is that it was not exactly washing machine music, and I have replayed many washing machines, including in some laundromat's and I can easily tell you that the reviewer that wrote that had BAD EARS, and never heard a single washing machine in his life.

I's starting to think that many folks here have the same disease ... please don't do that ... try to find something different with your equipment, but thinking that originals were bad is scary … 


Edited by moshkito - July 21 2018 at 07:57
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
Davesax1965 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 23 2013
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 2781
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Davesax1965 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 23 2018 at 06:19
Oh God, here's Mosh again.

"I think, that you and Dave forget that there are 40 years in between and that the equipment changed, and improved"

Mosh. 

In case you weren't paying attention, I have BUILT my own modular synth - component by component - over two and a half years. I am designing my own analogue modular synth from first principles. I am absolutely fully aware of what the equipment is and was and it didn't improve, it just changed. 

I think I'm a bit more highly qualified to talk about the equipment than you are, and yes, I did notice 40 years had gone past and what happened to equipment in the interim. 

So you seem to think that I "had it easy" by using modern equipment and it was much more difficult for Tangerine Dream ? Actually, I don't have modern equipment. I have vintage equipment which I built myself. Tangerine Dream just paid Bob Moog for a modular and it arrived in a crate. I spent several years with a soldering iron. 

"
and the problems inherent in playing in conditions that Dave can not even conceive and appreciate, and instead thinks that what he does is superior."

I certainly can, Mosh. I get the same ones, only less so due to better tolerance in electronic components. Shall we have a chat about that or do you actually know nothing about the subject ? 

As for superior, nope. "Different". 

Mosh. Could you do me a favour ? Go off, learn electronics, build a synthesizer (any kind), learn to actually play music to a high standard (other than chord twanging) and then come back and make some valid statements other than the usual incomprehensible, off topic, irrelevant, ill informed, irritating posts which you seem to specialise in ? 

"
like playing in Poland in less than zero degree weather ... and somehow they managed and it even made an album! Would you even have tried? I'm not sure Dave can even consider moving that much of his equipment for a concert."

Now now, Mosh, big concert in Poland, lots of people, yep, I'd do that. ;-) 


Edited by Davesax1965 - July 24 2018 at 01:37

Back to Top
Davesax1965 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 23 2013
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 2781
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Davesax1965 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 23 2018 at 06:22
"Dave's work is very nice, but for my tastes it is not great, and it lacks one thing that TD did not use for a very long time, until much later ... the dependency on the beat and drum track."

I'm NOT copying TD, Mosh. I sound LIKE TD in places. Believe it or not, I can also hit the mute button on the drum track. If you do or do not like it, I frankly couldn't give an atomic stuff as I didn't write it for you nor am I particularly interested in your opinion of it. 
 
" but saying that it was easy ... IT IS with today's equipment, but it WAS NOT yesterday, when the equipment was not as advanced and controls were not as efficient.
"

Mosh, I'm going to pull you up again for your misinformed posts. I use 10 sequencers. I built 8 of them. All of them use exactly the same technology as was used in 1974 and they are operated in exactly the same way. There is zero difference. 

There used to be a telly programme here in the 70's called "That's Life". One of the "humorous" spots occurred when they got a number of ten year old children and asked them to explain how the television worked. Mosh. 


Edited by Davesax1965 - July 23 2018 at 06:37

Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 13426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 24 2018 at 07:51
Hi,

Dave, it's very difficult to discuss music with you, since you know it all, and can not discern the good from the bad, and would rather spend your time defending the greatness of your work and development of sequencers and synthesizers. 

The main fact, still is, that it was done at a time when there was no such a thing, and no one had ever heard anything of the like. it might not be as "strong" or as "important" for you, since you have figured out most of it, however, I do think that if you sit with Christopher Franke, you will get your gonads blown off. It was not easy, at that time, to do what they did, and your constant self-important posts that your knowledge is more important than what happened at the time, is ridiculous and out of time and line.

I supposed that suggesting you to read EF's book, is a dead-loss ... but it goes over a lot of this.

Just so you know, music for me is not a metric exercise like it is for you. It is a visual thing, and sometimes, things happen and sometimes they don't. There isn't a single TD piece that these things do not happen for me, unlike your music, which for me (FOR ME) lacks an inch or two of something, which of course you are not open to (shouldn't be, I agree!), even though sometimes the suggestion is not out of time, place, or line. Sometimes the suggestion is just a side street to the same place, and its inclusion does not interfere with the ends, but it creates another special little moment ... example ... KS's CD with the SW interview and his discussion with an engineer about one specific little moment in a long piece ... that is not a big deal for you and I in the middle of things, as we would not normally catch it, but there it is, and when they replay that segment, it is all of a sudden including something else that makes it better. I'm a writer, and I know well enough that suggestions, for the most part are not useful, but just as you enter the shower in the morning ... booooommmm ... that one suggestion clicked ... you don't know until you try it, but you and I are so determine to "protect" what we supposedly know ... and these "secrets" do not exist!

The way we look at yesterday's music is ridiculous. We do not know how to get out of the top ten syndromme, and take a chill down the stairway to the heavens of music, other than some kind of idealistic thought given to you on a platter with lyrics, the normal of which has nothing to do with the music at all, but one person's thoughts and ideas instead.

You are criticizing a lot of music, almost the same way that folks like Stravinsky, Orff, Schoenberg and so many others were looked at in the previous century ... and I like to say ... have we learned nothing yet? 

I seriously doubt that things were "easy" in those days, as you make it out to be ... also considering that the type of work and music was something that no one else did at the time (well, some did like Beaver and Krause and a handful of others without any public attention!), and what TD was giving you was extraordinary, and a feeling and tripping experience, that most do not show ... I believe that for you it is too much mechanics, not the experience itself or its visual contents and significance to your inside listener, appreciating some novel, or work of art, as EF did so much.

For my tastes, most electronic music did not exactly start out of the gate from "music" ... most of it started out from the "sound" of it, and developed from there, and this is the part that you forgot. I'm not as much about the nuts and buts and bolts of it all, but when it comes to the tripping side and listening side, I would say that ... is what music has been about all along ... unless we get into some fans that think that Mahler and Tchaikovsky, were just adding "filler" to make their "songs" come alive!


Edited by moshkito - July 25 2018 at 08:31
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
Davesax1965 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 23 2013
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 2781
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Davesax1965 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 24 2018 at 15:23
Well, I forgot the first rule of the internet there: never point out to those who don't have the faintest idea of a subject that they don't know what they're talking about.  Otherwise they tend to come back with pages of unbalanced personal insults. 

In the interim, I'll just go back to designing a Roland System 700 style envelope generator in Eagle CAD. With technical help from three very well regarded experts in vintage synth electronics. Apparently they're not really fussy about transistors in the switching stage (I'll get away with BC547's) but I might try 1uf / 10uf tantalum caps in the timing stage rather than electrolytics, as that's what the originals used back in 1976. 

Or I could have just asked Mosh.

(Ladies and gents, please do note that I'm not saying this to appear clever or big headed - I design and build vintage synths as a hobby and will be hopefully releasing a commercial one at some point. I'm just trying to get the point across to certain people that they honestly should perhaps shut up and listen when pulled up on things they know almost nothing about. )

In the interim, could you please note that I've never said I am better than Tangerine Dream butt have only compared myself to them as I do music somewhat similar to them on similar equipment. ) 

Moving on from the little outburst above, been thinking about it and I'd certainly listen to modern extended reinterpretations of old TD stuff, especially Ricochet. I've never quite figured out how to do some elements of Part II. It's a seminal album and I'd listen to an interpretation of it with an open mind. I'm not sure the world at large needs such an interpretation, but hey ho, why not give it a listen ? 



Edited by Davesax1965 - July 24 2018 at 15:25

Back to Top
Davesax1965 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 23 2013
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 2781
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Davesax1965 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 24 2018 at 15:47
Verslibre came up with a name a page back which I missed - Mark Shreeve. I really liked his stuff in Redshift, I think a lot of their stuff was massively influenced by Phaedra. 

Incidentally, a friend of mine who used to be in a reasonably famous analogue synth band and I keep discussing about doing early TD style stuff - but he's 40 miles away and we both work. Doing an interpretation of Phaedra / Ricochet etc is something we keep talking about. so it would be fairly wrong of me to pull someone up for doing the same "extended" version. Yep, thinking about it, I'd give it a listen. I'm converted. To the idea. 

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.172 seconds.

Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.