Maximalist music? |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | ||||
edefakiel
Forum Senior Member Joined: February 17 2013 Location: Dos hermanas Status: Offline Points: 293 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: May 15 2022 at 07:30 |
|||
I have got really interested in maximalism lately. I wonder whether do you know of any music that could fit the following description: In the arts, maximalism, a reaction against minimalism, is an aesthetic of excess. The philosophy can be summarized as "more is more", contrasting with the minimalist motto "less is more". For example: Edited by edefakiel - May 15 2022 at 07:46 |
||||
Jared
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 06 2005 Location: Hereford, UK Status: Offline Points: 19499 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Archisorcerus
Forum Senior Member Joined: February 02 2022 Location: Izmir Status: Offline Points: 2677 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Not sure if this fits but the riffage on this track is quite extreme. To the max baby, to the max; till the guitar pick melts!
|
||||
Progosopher
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 12 2009 Location: Coolwood Status: Offline Points: 6467 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
|||
Isn't this what Progressive Rock is all about?
|
||||
The world of sound is certainly capable of infinite variety and, were our sense developed, of infinite extensions. -- George Santayana, "The Sense of Beauty"
|
||||
Sacro_Porgo
Forum Senior Member Joined: July 15 2019 Location: Cygnus Status: Offline Points: 2062 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Queen
Queen is to me this mentality perfected.
|
||||
Porg for short. My love of music doesn't end with prog! Feel free to discuss all sorts of music with me. Odds are I'll give it a chance if I haven't already! :)
|
||||
Jaketejas
Forum Senior Member Joined: March 27 2018 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 1993 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
I prefer Happy Medium Design
|
||||
edefakiel
Forum Senior Member Joined: February 17 2013 Location: Dos hermanas Status: Offline Points: 293 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Despite the name of the album, I don't think I'm convinced
They are pretty good. I already have that album. They kind of remind me to this fellas: To understand it, you must see this:
I wouldn't call all progressive rock maximalist. And not all maximalist music progressive rock. Progressive rock, but not maximalist in my ears: Not progressive rock, but completely maximalist in my ears:
Beyond Bohemian Rhapsody, I don't think I hear much maximalism in them.
Edited by edefakiel - May 16 2022 at 00:45 |
||||
Awesoreno
Forum Senior Member Joined: October 07 2019 Location: Culver City, CA Status: Offline Points: 3048 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
I think Zappa and Beefheart helped to define this early on in the experimental rock scene.
|
||||
nick_h_nz
Collaborator Prog Metal / Heavy Prog Team Joined: March 01 2013 Location: Suffolk, UK Status: Offline Points: 6737 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Agreed. And anyone who thinks otherwise, probably hasn’t heard enough Queen. 👏🏻👏🏻
|
||||
Manuel
Forum Senior Member Joined: March 09 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13449 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Exactly my thoughts.
|
||||
moshkito
Forum Senior Member Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Offline Points: 17748 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
|||
Hi, I find it weird that you chose the song with Ninet to say that ... a song that is inherently EMOTIONAL and has a strong meaning ... way beyond the majority of listeners within the "progressive" market place ... specially into an area that is important and has a lot more meaning than 99% of the cheesy lyrics found in so many "progressive" materials. And something that SW himself will never be able to do again! Maximalist is a bizarre, and silly term. I guess that the best of them would be STRAVINSKY but I'm not sure that person has any idea what that means. FZ to my ears, was not a maximalist. His main desire was to see how this and that could work with something else, and he made it valuable to our listening experience with only one odd ball thing that many still don't like ... 200 Motels, which is excellent, but a satire on something totally different in classical music that rock fans will never appreciate. If you EVER bother to listen to the live performance of this at UCLA before Gayle passed away, you will understand it better ... how a choir took to this so seriously and did it magnificently without saying that they were bored with all the crap they had been singing for years in so much classical music. Sadly, I don't think this group has the appreciation for something that heavy and important.
Edited by moshkito - May 16 2022 at 06:47 |
||||
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 |
||||
edefakiel
Forum Senior Member Joined: February 17 2013 Location: Dos hermanas Status: Offline Points: 293 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Why do you find it weird? Maximalist does not equal good. That song is really good. Just not insanely busy, like the others examples I provided I believe are. I love Steven Wilson, Stravinsky and Frank Zappa, but I'm in no position to call whether someone understand something or not. I just enjoy the music.
|
||||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Offline Points: 36152 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
|||
Koenjihyakkei, I'd say, more or less or more like more is more.
|
||||
edefakiel
Forum Senior Member Joined: February 17 2013 Location: Dos hermanas Status: Offline Points: 293 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Yeah, they are pretty nice. I have 弐 (Ni) and Nivraym along with Dhorimviskha, and they are all worth listening.
|
||||
moshkito
Forum Senior Member Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Offline Points: 17748 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
|||
Hi, I'm not sure this is right. It's like equating the traffic in the middle of NYC to the traffic in Pointsburg, Oregon, a city with 150 folks! It's really about the totality of the music, and to me 150 instruments is not better than 3, or vice versa, however, we seem to think that just because someone added something else, it makes it ... something else. I have never met, an artist, (mostly writers for me) that added something to their poem, or work, for the sake of MAXIMALIST, or Masochistic ideas about their composition! Some times, what you see before you set out to define it in notes, or words, is difficult, and you have to describe it more, or add more notes or different this or that ... but I never found GG to have one instrument too many, or AD2 to have one instrument too many, or FX to have one note too many with the bicycle pipes or kazoos. WITH ONT EXCEPTION ... PDQ Bach adds things on purpose, regardless of composition, and this is done in concert, which kinda defeats the idea of "maximalist" altogether since the next day in Tulsa, Wisconsin the audience of 12 would laugh with or without it anyway. I think that we are getting caught in having to create stupid definitions that don't talk about the music and how it is put together. And I (specially) do not appreciate the geekery attitude towards defining "progressive" or "prog" regardless of the music and its history. And I wish that the Admins would lock this thread, because it is getting ridiculous, and half the mentions are not even close to something akin to that term! THE MUSIC IS THE MUSIC ... why does it matter to you if it has 110 instruments, or 6 with low level players that add effects to make it sound/look better than it really is? It's about the music ... not the max or the min of anything, and I wish we would wake up to that! All this really says, is that you are not man enough to create your own composition and have to compartmentalize everything else. How boring!
Edited by moshkito - May 17 2022 at 07:15 |
||||
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 |
||||
wiz_d_kidd
Forum Senior Member Joined: January 13 2018 Location: EllicottCityMD Status: Offline Points: 1423 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
|||
Nobody is saying that more is better. Some people like compositions that are dense and complex and have a lot going on. They don't care if it's 110 instruments or 6 low-level players each playing 18 instruments. The result is the same... dense and complex sounds that challenge the listener with something new each time they listen to it. There's nothing wrong with that, and no one has said it is artistically better or worse than a "minimalist" composition or any other composition. You might like a bowl of plain vanilla ice cream, while others like theirs with chocolate sauce, sprinkles, a split banana, whipped cream, and a cherry on top.
|
||||
Jaketejas
Forum Senior Member Joined: March 27 2018 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 1993 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
I do believe that what I would consider "minimalist prog" does get bounced out of the "prog" category sometimes. What is interesting about minimalist prog is the clever usage of space (rests and so forth). Edited by Jaketejas - May 17 2022 at 09:56 |
||||
moshkito
Forum Senior Member Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Offline Points: 17748 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Hi, And you are suggesting that 3 people, or even one, can not do this by themselves, and live on stage with just one instrument? I venture to think that you only listen to one kind of music ... the pop/rock kind, and thus are not aware of many other things that musicians the world over do, that we don't even know about. There are some folks out there, that are not heard that fit this btw! But they won't be discussed here is my bet!
I think you are confusing my point and idea. Sorry!
Edited by moshkito - May 18 2022 at 07:22 |
||||
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 |
||||
Boojieboy
Forum Senior Member Joined: April 02 2016 Location: Earth Status: Offline Points: 649 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
As a musician and long-time prog fan, I'm more impressed by quality and balance, rather than busyness and throwing everything at the listener. It's like that for me with food too, where a few choice ingredients is better rather than many, where you sense the nuances present, rather than being bombarded by many flavors as some cheap tactic.
I prefer to stay away from extremes (minimalism or maxi) and go with things more in the middle. But if I had to choose, I'd go with simpler, as it's more of a challenge to appreciate, but also more rewarding when you get it, and see its value. Cluttered music seems only fitting for a cluttered mind.
Edited by Boojieboy - May 19 2022 at 15:32 |
||||
edefakiel
Forum Senior Member Joined: February 17 2013 Location: Dos hermanas Status: Offline Points: 293 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Sorry, English is not my first language, I believe that by cluttered you mean: "untidy, not organized, and covered with a lot of things" And I will write with the assumption that "not organized" equals "organized by a high degree of randomness". It surprises me to find that it is possible to feel confortable doing this kind of generalizations. First of all, I don't think that the connection between maximalism and lack of organization is well established; in fact, I would argue that some maximalist pieces are in fact the result of a monumental effort to organize and systematise. For example, look at the different sections and themes of Amarok: https://tubular.net/analysis/amarok/ It is true that complexity and randomness are hard to tell apart. Cognition and Chance: The Psychology of Probabilistic Reasoning is a book that talks eloquently about this, and about everything else, by using random and not random strings of numbers to illustrate the point. If I come with a string of numbers and you have to invent a new rule for every n position to explain the reason why it has a specific observable value coming from a n-1 position, it is reasonable to guess that what defines the progression in said string is randomness. But, if after a deeper look you find out that your inference wasn't precise enough at first and that the same string can be predicted until its limit with the application of a single rule, you then must concede that randomness didn't reigned the progression at all. Generally speaking, I believe that it is somewhat acceptable under some circumstances, like when appreciating music, to say that one must condemn the subject before oneself as random if the perceived number of transformational laws that govern its evolution is equal or higher than the perceived units of outputs. If I must explain every single chord in a progression with multiple principles about modulation, poly-chords and neo-Riemannian theory, all at once, I will probably have a bad time not finding myself trying to impose meaning to randomness. But I don't think that this is the case with any of the music that I have posted. I believe that all of it shows distinct characteristics of a careful planning. Sometimes it is not immediately apparent, and that is the reason why I find it rewarding to analyze or listen: it is an auditive puzzle. To disregard the minds of us who appreciate this kind of music without knowing anything about us beyond this little musical interest of ours, I believe is very audacious; and very surprising to find inside a community of people who like a musical genre and who for that reason only have attracted all kind of unfair generalizations. An example of apparent randomness in music being eloquently explained: Edited by edefakiel - May 19 2022 at 17:35 |
||||
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions 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 |