Grendel is not Apocalypse in 9/8

Certif1ed wrote: BaldFriede wrote: Whether a note is an 1/8 or a 1/4 note depends on the general tempo of a piece. Of two notes of the same length one can be an 1/8 note, because it is used in a piece that is a largo, while in another piece that is an allegro the same note is a 1/4. Could you explain then? I must have mis-read it.

Isn't it self-explanatory? One piece is a largo, which means that its tempo is slower; an 1/8 note in it will be slower than an 1/8 note in an allegro; in fact the length of an 1/8 note in a largo is the same (more or less, because, as you can see from the metronome scale I added in my first post, there is still quite a range about the tempo of a largo) as the length of a 1/4 note in an allegro (provided all other musical parameters are the same).

Edited by BaldFriede

Have a look here for the explanation of "tempo giusto": http://www.tempogiusto.de/ (there is a button on the left named "English site" side where you can get the explanation in English).

Biggles wrote: The only thing I have to say about Marillion is that if I want to listen to Genesis, then I will listen to Genesis.

I thought you were going to say something about Marillion...

Certif1ed wrote: BaldFriede wrote: Whether a note is an 1/8 or a 1/4 note depends on the general tempo of a piece. Of two notes of the same length one can be an 1/8 note, because it is used in a piece that is a largo, while in another piece that is an allegro the same note is a 1/4. Most classical composers give a bpm at the beginning of the piece, like 112 (which does not keep conductors from choosing their own tempo for it ; to make things more complicated there also is a theory by a German musicologist that the classical composers actually counted a backward and forward swing of the metronome as one single beat, which means their music music is being played double as fast today as was their intention; she has recorded some pieces like the Waldstein sonata in their "real" tempo; listening to them in comparison to the fast versions is a strange experience. ) So to say the rhythm in "Apocalypse in 9/8" is actually 9/4 only makes sense if you know what tempo the piece of music is in.   Sorry, BF - that isn't true. Time signatures have nothing to do with tempo, and nor do notes. A 1/8 note is always a 1/8 note. A Semibreve (4 crotchets) is considered a "whole" note. For example, in 4/4, we have 4 1/4 notes to the bar. If an Adagio or a Lento is in 4/4, then all beats are 1/4 beats. If an Allegro or a Presto is in 4/4, then all beats are still 1/4 beats - the tempo indicates that the base time for the beats has changed, not the proportion. I hope this clarifies it!   I've never read that theory about the metronome swing - it sounds interesting. Could you tell me where you read it?

Sorry, but you seem to have misunderstood me, Certif1ed. This is not what I said. I never doubted that being an 1/8 note has nothing to do with the tempo; in fact this is what I wanted to point out. But whether it is a 9/4 measure or a 9/8 has very much to do with the given tempo, and this is simply because the set tempo defines how many bars there are within a given time. (Actually it is mathematically a little more complicated, but I'll skip that).

As to the metronome swing theory: I didn't read about it, I heard a radio feature about it. It was first postulated by musicologist Willem Retze Talsma; Grete Wehmeyer and Clemens von Gleich are two other musicologists who are of the same opinion. They call their theory "Tempo Giusto", "Right Tempo".

Edited by BaldFriede

Well, ya know I LOVE Grendel and Suppers Ready, both wonderful songs,

BUT

Yes, Grendel is an utter Suppers ready rip off, which the band are mildy embarrassed about now.

Still a good song, however.

Cygnus X-2 wrote: CandyAppleRed wrote: I was taken aback many years ago when I bought a Genesis song book, and the time signature for Apocalypse in 9/8 was given as 9/4 Because if you count it out while listening to that part, it is in 9/4. Genesis must have made a mistake (but I will admit 9/8 sounds better than 9/4).

Whether a note is an 1/8 or a 1/4 note depends on the general tempo of a piece. Of two notes of the same length one can be an 1/8 note, because it is used in a piece that is a largo, while in another piece that is an allegro the same note is a 1/4. Most classical composers give a bpm at the beginning of the piece, like 112 (which does not keep conductors from choosing their own tempo for it ; to make things more complicated there also is a theory by a German musicologist that the classical composers actually counted a backward and forward swing of the metronome as one single beat, which means their music music is being played double as fast today as was their intention; she has recorded some pieces like the Waldstein sonata in their "real" tempo; listening to them in comparison to the fast versions is a strange experience. )

So to say the rhythm in "Apocalypse in 9/8" is actually 9/4 only makes sense if you know what tempo the piece of music is in.

Some common tempo markings, from slow to fast (for more information go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempo ):

Largo - slowly and broadly
Adagio - slowly
Lento - "slow" but usually only moderately so
Andante - at a walking pace
Moderato - at a moderate tempo
Allegretto - "a little allegro", understood to be not quite as fast as allegro
Allegro - quickly
Presto - fast
Prestissimo - very fast 

I would estimate that Marillion "stole" probably no more than 10% of their ideas from Genesis, if that.

The famous section in Grendel is quite obviously based on "Apocalypse in 9/8", no matter what the time signature - the point is that the two sections map onto each other in terms of telling the particular story. Marillion's musical treatment of it is quite different - and it is the only time they "steal" an idea directly.

There are other times where homage is paid - but the overall style, particularly of Fish-era Marillion, is so very different to 1970s Genesis that I'm surprised that anyone believes all the old guff about them being some kind of "tribute band". If you think that, you've obviously never heard PFM or IQ, or a shedload of other bands that are far closer in sound.

Let's be honest here - which Marillion songs sound like which Genesis songs?

That'll be none of them.

Except, maybe, that bit in Grendel.

Edited by Certif1ed

Green and Funky wrote: I was saying the GRENDEL section is in 8/8, not 9/8. Apocalypse is quite obviously in 9/8. Therefore, they DON'T have the same rhythm, only the notes from the bass line are the same. And Marillion does not get 99% of their ideas from Genesis, that's ridiculous and you should be ashamed of yourself for making such a blatant hyperbole. I'm tired of hearing all this sh*t about how Marillion are ripoffs of Genesis. Genesis were a big influence on Marillion. Yes. But who cares? Marillion made good music, so why does it matter? When almost every band was selling out to record companies, Marillion kept prog alive in the 80's. Would it have been better if Marillion didn't exist in the 80's and all music was just pop sh*t? Marilion kept the prog flame alive. Genesis was a great band and Marillion was good too. We can leave it at that.

Hey, calm down a little. Maybe I exaggerated a little. Marillion probably
stole 95% of their ideas from Genesis.

In all honesty I am not saying that Marillion is a bad band because they
are far from it. The only thing I'm talking about is the obvious Genesis
sound that they have tried to emulate. There's really no sense in arguing
it, since it is well known. And I would have to go by saying that King
Crimson kept the prog flame alive.

Cygnus X-2 wrote: CandyAppleRed wrote: I was taken aback many years ago when I bought a Genesis song book, and the time signature for Apocalypse in 9/8 was given as 9/4 Because if you count it out while listening to that part, it is in 9/4. Genesis must have made a mistake (but I will admit 9/8 sounds better than 9/4).

Thanks Cygnus - I can manage to count the 9 bit, but still can't work out how to count 4 or 8 in bar anyway !

 

yargh wrote: Without getting into bashing Marillion too much more than I already have, I would like to point out the problem of claiming that they "kept progressive going in the '80s."  They didn't -- they kept elements of the '70s alive in the '80s.  Real progressive music kept progressing -- King Crimson, for example, kept progressive going.  Univers Zero, Art Zoyd, This Heat, Art Bears and an emerging Japanese progressive scene kept progressive alive in the '80s.  Not Marillion or Pallas or Pendragon -- they were about paying homage to progressive's surface elements and not really making progressive music.

I think this is a very correct assesment in retrospect> This point is valid nowadays when most prog rock fans are now aware that groups like Univers Zero and Art Zoyd, and other RIO acts actually kept the progressive music spirits alive or even existed , but the public was not aware of this (outside a few nutcases and there were fewer active prog fans in the 80's then there are today). As A belgian (although I was in a Canadian exile from the early 70's onwards) , I was not even aware of Univers Zero until 88 date of which I got back across the pond. So this tells you a bit how osbcure those progressive musos were.

To the public eye watching rock music evolution through commercial radios , there was only Marillion and consorts. I had to wait until the mid-90's to discover Japanese mid-80's neo-prog groups because they were completely absent from the public eye. In a way , bravo to Marillion (I loved their debut album, although I thought it too derivative) just for being present in the public eye.  But is that enough to have kept the prog spirit alive? Or were Marillion simply not riding a nostalgic wave and filling a void that all essential prog bands of the golden era had left!

This is where honesty must come in consideration (beyond the feeling factors): Marillion came to fill a void (even if they were completely honest in doing their music , believing it and not thinking of a financial move) and consumers actually were happy with the acetate instead of nothing! So Marillion got such a following because there was nothing else in that "market niche" among other reasons. This is why I believe that they are way over-rated!

Especially compared to Univers Zero and Von Zamla!!