Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - The most musically complex prog band(s)?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

The most musically complex prog band(s)?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 10111213>
Author
Message
presdoug View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 24 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6679
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote presdoug Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 25 2010 at 15:38
Originally posted by progressive progressive wrote:

Deathspell Omega is nice, but not a complex band.

I mean, of course they are complex, but so is many other metal bands, and there's other chaotic bands. I like the chaos and heaviness! It's like noise and determined structure together. I have "Si Monumentum Requires, Circumspice" and "Fas - Ite, Maledicti, in Ignem" and monumentum is more straightforward black metal and not complex, but ignem is more like post-jazz-sludgenoisecore or something like that lol, and it's a great album.

And thanks for presdoug
I was feeling kind of rotten today,but then read this post for the first time, and it made me feel a heckuva  lot better-thanks  for the nice complimentary reference!
If you have nothing, you have everything.
Back to Top
avalanchemaster View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 02 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 730
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote avalanchemaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 25 2010 at 16:31
Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by presdoug presdoug wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by presdoug presdoug wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

It is correct that some classical is more complex than a lot of prog.  For instance, Iannis Xenakis used fractal math and other advanced mathematics for his compositions.  Plus they usually aren't as rigid in their song structures.... way more "free" than a lot of prog with more shifting rhythms... well that is at least most 20th century avant garde composers.  Once I got into them, prog took a backseat...
complexity is pretty important to me, in terms of appreciating music-i very much love complex classical music, the best for me being the world of the symphony, the most complex symphonic music being that of the late romantics Mahler and Bruckner-the ultimate in musical depth-to quote the late conductor Bruno Walter-"I could not live my life without the music of Bruckner and Mahler"

well then, give me some recommendations of which compositions/conductors/cd companies to start with(for these two composers)... Do they have any of those super cheap Naxos discs?
there are Mahler and Bruckner symphonies on Naxos-stay away from the Naxos Bruckner-they are not worth it-as far as Mahler symphonies on Naxos-go for the 5th Symphony conducted by Bruno Walter-(historical Naxos)-also would recommend Mahler's 4th Symphony also conducted by Bruno Walter with singer Kathleen Ferrier(historical Naxos)
    As far as the best performances of Bruckner and Mahler symphonies-conductor Bruno Walter is at the top of both mountain peaks-essential Bruckner from him are symphonies 4,7, and 9 with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra, sym. 8 with the New York Phil. from 1941-(Music and Arts CD), and his Mahler sym. 1 and 2 with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra and New York Philharmonic Orchestras respectively, and his stereo recording of Mahler's 9th with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra.
              Also great Bruckner is available from conductor Oswald Kabasta (sym. 4,7 and 9-Munich Phil.)
          the  Bruckner's are on Sony (Walter) and Music and Arts(Walter sym. 8)and Music and Arts(Kabasta)
            the non Naxos Mahler's are on Sony


Thanks!  That is a very lengthy list to choose from.. Clap

I consider Johann Sebastian Bach to be a lot more complex than Mahler and definitely more complex than Bruckner with his quite simple triads. I love Mahler, but Bruckner leaves me absolutely cold
 
I don't consider Bach to be all that complex.  Yes there is nice counterpoint going on, but overall his material is pretty straight time (never heard much metric variation within a song) flurry-of-notes type classical with way, way, way too much symmetry.  Nice for people with OCD, but for those of us who like a little more adventure, less predictability, and more novelty, there are other "complex" composers.  But that's just me.  Don't get me wrong, I understand the historical impact and relevance of Bach, and his mastery of music theory, but when the dadaists and 20th century (experimental/avant garde) composers came along, Bach seemed relegated to a sort of classed-up vanilla flavor.
Back to Top
boo boo View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: June 28 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 905
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote boo boo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 25 2010 at 16:34
Mahavishnu Orchestra are probably the most technically tight band I've ever heard.
 
Focus are also up there, as well as the obvious choices like Yes.
Back to Top
TheLastBaron View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 07 2009
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 206
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TheLastBaron Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 25 2010 at 17:32
The issue with this, which I'm sure was mentioned earlier is that it is a matter of taste. Do you mean complex in lyrics, instrumentation, concepts? There can be various meanings and degrees of complexity, and  sometimes things can get over indulgent and not be very enjoyable to hear. There are bands that I like that are as complex as other bands that I like but I may enjoy them more at sometimes than others. and then there's bands that are complex in ways that are different than what one usually thinks. i enjoy Coheed and Cambria and feel that though there are a lot of other bands i like that are more skilled, technical, etc, I still enjoy most of their catalog. I am a huge fan of The Mars Volta and feel that they are very technically skilled and complex in their arrangements and concepts, but I have to be in the mood to listen to them.
" Men are not prisoners of fate, but prisoners of their own minds." - FDR
Back to Top
BaldJean View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 28 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 6970
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BaldJean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 25 2010 at 20:27
Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by presdoug presdoug wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by presdoug presdoug wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

It is correct that some classical is more complex than a lot of prog.  For instance, Iannis Xenakis used fractal math and other advanced mathematics for his compositions.  Plus they usually aren't as rigid in their song structures.... way more "free" than a lot of prog with more shifting rhythms... well that is at least most 20th century avant garde composers.  Once I got into them, prog took a backseat...
complexity is pretty important to me, in terms of appreciating music-i very much love complex classical music, the best for me being the world of the symphony, the most complex symphonic music being that of the late romantics Mahler and Bruckner-the ultimate in musical depth-to quote the late conductor Bruno Walter-"I could not live my life without the music of Bruckner and Mahler"

well then, give me some recommendations of which compositions/conductors/cd companies to start with(for these two composers)... Do they have any of those super cheap Naxos discs?
there are Mahler and Bruckner symphonies on Naxos-stay away from the Naxos Bruckner-they are not worth it-as far as Mahler symphonies on Naxos-go for the 5th Symphony conducted by Bruno Walter-(historical Naxos)-also would recommend Mahler's 4th Symphony also conducted by Bruno Walter with singer Kathleen Ferrier(historical Naxos)
    As far as the best performances of Bruckner and Mahler symphonies-conductor Bruno Walter is at the top of both mountain peaks-essential Bruckner from him are symphonies 4,7, and 9 with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra, sym. 8 with the New York Phil. from 1941-(Music and Arts CD), and his Mahler sym. 1 and 2 with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra and New York Philharmonic Orchestras respectively, and his stereo recording of Mahler's 9th with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra.
              Also great Bruckner is available from conductor Oswald Kabasta (sym. 4,7 and 9-Munich Phil.)
          the  Bruckner's are on Sony (Walter) and Music and Arts(Walter sym. 8)and Music and Arts(Kabasta)
            the non Naxos Mahler's are on Sony


Thanks!  That is a very lengthy list to choose from.. Clap

I consider Johann Sebastian Bach to be a lot more complex than Mahler and definitely more complex than Bruckner with his quite simple triads. I love Mahler, but Bruckner leaves me absolutely cold
 
I don't consider Bach to be all that complex.  Yes there is nice counterpoint going on, but overall his material is pretty straight time (never heard much metric variation within a song) flurry-of-notes type classical with way, way, way too much symmetry.  Nice for people with OCD, but for those of us who like a little more adventure, less predictability, and more novelty, there are other "complex" composers.  But that's just me.  Don't get me wrong, I understand the historical impact and relevance of Bach, and his mastery of music theory, but when the dadaists and 20th century (experimental/avant garde) composers came along, Bach seemed relegated to a sort of classed-up vanilla flavor.

excuse me, but that "little bit of counterpoint" is extremely complex. and you are doing Bach an injustice; he was, like everybody, caught in his time. no-one fiddled with meters at his time.  he may not have fiddled with metric asymmetries,  but he fiddled around with the tempo a lot, playing a melody at half speed while at the same time playing it at normal speed, playing it backwards, upside down, and sometimes all of this at once, in several voices.  you sound like someone who complains that Newton is not the genius he is because he never discovered the theory of relativity.
try writing a fugue,,then you will see with what difficulties you are being faced and how complex it really is. . and else take Einstein's advice when it comes to the music of Bach: " Hören, spielen, lieben, verehren und - das Maul halten!" ("Listening, playing, loving, revering and - shutting up".


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo pricipiis obsta
Back to Top
avalanchemaster View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 02 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 730
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote avalanchemaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 25 2010 at 21:02
Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by presdoug presdoug wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by presdoug presdoug wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

It is correct that some classical is more complex than a lot of prog.  For instance, Iannis Xenakis used fractal math and other advanced mathematics for his compositions.  Plus they usually aren't as rigid in their song structures.... way more "free" than a lot of prog with more shifting rhythms... well that is at least most 20th century avant garde composers.  Once I got into them, prog took a backseat...
complexity is pretty important to me, in terms of appreciating music-i very much love complex classical music, the best for me being the world of the symphony, the most complex symphonic music being that of the late romantics Mahler and Bruckner-the ultimate in musical depth-to quote the late conductor Bruno Walter-"I could not live my life without the music of Bruckner and Mahler"

well then, give me some recommendations of which compositions/conductors/cd companies to start with(for these two composers)... Do they have any of those super cheap Naxos discs?
there are Mahler and Bruckner symphonies on Naxos-stay away from the Naxos Bruckner-they are not worth it-as far as Mahler symphonies on Naxos-go for the 5th Symphony conducted by Bruno Walter-(historical Naxos)-also would recommend Mahler's 4th Symphony also conducted by Bruno Walter with singer Kathleen Ferrier(historical Naxos)
    As far as the best performances of Bruckner and Mahler symphonies-conductor Bruno Walter is at the top of both mountain peaks-essential Bruckner from him are symphonies 4,7, and 9 with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra, sym. 8 with the New York Phil. from 1941-(Music and Arts CD), and his Mahler sym. 1 and 2 with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra and New York Philharmonic Orchestras respectively, and his stereo recording of Mahler's 9th with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra.
              Also great Bruckner is available from conductor Oswald Kabasta (sym. 4,7 and 9-Munich Phil.)
          the  Bruckner's are on Sony (Walter) and Music and Arts(Walter sym. 8)and Music and Arts(Kabasta)
            the non Naxos Mahler's are on Sony


Thanks!  That is a very lengthy list to choose from.. Clap

I consider Johann Sebastian Bach to be a lot more complex than Mahler and definitely more complex than Bruckner with his quite simple triads. I love Mahler, but Bruckner leaves me absolutely cold
 
I don't consider Bach to be all that complex.  Yes there is nice counterpoint going on, but overall his material is pretty straight time (never heard much metric variation within a song) flurry-of-notes type classical with way, way, way too much symmetry.  Nice for people with OCD, but for those of us who like a little more adventure, less predictability, and more novelty, there are other "complex" composers.  But that's just me.  Don't get me wrong, I understand the historical impact and relevance of Bach, and his mastery of music theory, but when the dadaists and 20th century (experimental/avant garde) composers came along, Bach seemed relegated to a sort of classed-up vanilla flavor.

excuse me, but that "little bit of counterpoint" is extremely complex. and you are doing Bach an injustice; he was, like everybody, caught in his time. no-one fiddled with meters at his time.  he may not have fiddled with metric asymmetries,  but he fiddled around with the tempo a lot, playing a melody at half speed while at the same time playing it at normal speed, playing it backwards, upside down, and sometimes all of this at once, in several voices.  you sound like someone who complains that Newton is not the genius he is because he never discovered the theory of relativity.
try writing a fugue,,then you will see with what difficulties you are being faced and how complex it really is. . and else take Einstein's advice when it comes to the music of Bach: " Hören, spielen, lieben, verehren und - das Maul halten!" ("Listening, playing, loving, revering and - shutting up".
 
Wow.  you act like I pissed in your mother's mouth.
It is an opinion.  I do NOT find him complex.  You are acting rather trollish and need to settle down.  Threads like this are worthless anyway, because sooner or later, someone gets all butt-hurt about someone else's opinion and responds like you just did.  in fact, most forums are only as useful as the factual information you can gleen from them, otherwise they usually consist of just a bunch of huffing, puffing, and egotistical showboating.  I'm happy for you that you find Bach so complex.  Different minds think differently.  That, my friend is a FACT.   Wink
Back to Top
BaldJean View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 28 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 6970
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BaldJean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 25 2010 at 21:31
Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by presdoug presdoug wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by presdoug presdoug wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

It is correct that some classical is more complex than a lot of prog.  For instance, Iannis Xenakis used fractal math and other advanced mathematics for his compositions.  Plus they usually aren't as rigid in their song structures.... way more "free" than a lot of prog with more shifting rhythms... well that is at least most 20th century avant garde composers.  Once I got into them, prog took a backseat...
complexity is pretty important to me, in terms of appreciating music-i very much love complex classical music, the best for me being the world of the symphony, the most complex symphonic music being that of the late romantics Mahler and Bruckner-the ultimate in musical depth-to quote the late conductor Bruno Walter-"I could not live my life without the music of Bruckner and Mahler"

well then, give me some recommendations of which compositions/conductors/cd companies to start with(for these two composers)... Do they have any of those super cheap Naxos discs?
there are Mahler and Bruckner symphonies on Naxos-stay away from the Naxos Bruckner-they are not worth it-as far as Mahler symphonies on Naxos-go for the 5th Symphony conducted by Bruno Walter-(historical Naxos)-also would recommend Mahler's 4th Symphony also conducted by Bruno Walter with singer Kathleen Ferrier(historical Naxos)
    As far as the best performances of Bruckner and Mahler symphonies-conductor Bruno Walter is at the top of both mountain peaks-essential Bruckner from him are symphonies 4,7, and 9 with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra, sym. 8 with the New York Phil. from 1941-(Music and Arts CD), and his Mahler sym. 1 and 2 with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra and New York Philharmonic Orchestras respectively, and his stereo recording of Mahler's 9th with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra.
              Also great Bruckner is available from conductor Oswald Kabasta (sym. 4,7 and 9-Munich Phil.)
          the  Bruckner's are on Sony (Walter) and Music and Arts(Walter sym. 8)and Music and Arts(Kabasta)
            the non Naxos Mahler's are on Sony


Thanks!  That is a very lengthy list to choose from.. Clap

I consider Johann Sebastian Bach to be a lot more complex than Mahler and definitely more complex than Bruckner with his quite simple triads. I love Mahler, but Bruckner leaves me absolutely cold
 
I don't consider Bach to be all that complex.  Yes there is nice counterpoint going on, but overall his material is pretty straight time (never heard much metric variation within a song) flurry-of-notes type classical with way, way, way too much symmetry.  Nice for people with OCD, but for those of us who like a little more adventure, less predictability, and more novelty, there are other "complex" composers.  But that's just me.  Don't get me wrong, I understand the historical impact and relevance of Bach, and his mastery of music theory, but when the dadaists and 20th century (experimental/avant garde) composers came along, Bach seemed relegated to a sort of classed-up vanilla flavor.

excuse me, but that "little bit of counterpoint" is extremely complex. and you are doing Bach an injustice; he was, like everybody, caught in his time. no-one fiddled with meters at his time.  he may not have fiddled with metric asymmetries,  but he fiddled around with the tempo a lot, playing a melody at half speed while at the same time playing it at normal speed, playing it backwards, upside down, and sometimes all of this at once, in several voices.  you sound like someone who complains that Newton is not the genius he is because he never discovered the theory of relativity.
try writing a fugue,,then you will see with what difficulties you are being faced and how complex it really is. . and else take Einstein's advice when it comes to the music of Bach: " Hören, spielen, lieben, verehren und - das Maul halten!" ("Listening, playing, loving, revering and - shutting up".
 
Wow.  you act like I pissed in your mother's mouth.
It is an opinion.  I do NOT find him complex.  You are acting rather trollish and need to settle down.  Threads like this are worthless anyway, because sooner or later, someone gets all butt-hurt about someone else's opinion and responds like you just did.  in fact, most forums are only as useful as the factual information you can gleen from them, otherwise they usually consist of just a bunch of huffing, puffing, and egotistical showboating.  I'm happy for you that you find Bach so complex.  Different minds think differently.  That, my friend is a FACT.   Wink

wow, now I am really amazed. why do you react that offended? actually Western music is laughably simple when it comes to meters and rhythms, compared to Indian musidc. Western music is harmonically very complex, and Bach was the king of complexity there (ask any classical musician, and 90% of them will say so).
but Western music is rhythmically extremely simple. listen to Indian music - it is rhythmically as complexas Western music is harmonically so. harmonically though  Indian music is quite simple, as Western music is rhythmically.
I have composed myself, and I don't find it difficult at all to throw in odd meters. I have tried writing a fugue too, but failed. and I would not even dare to start with the rhythmic complexities of Indian music; you need years of training for that


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo pricipiis obsta
Back to Top
presdoug View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 24 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6679
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote presdoug Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 26 2010 at 08:48
Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by presdoug presdoug wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

Originally posted by presdoug presdoug wrote:

Originally posted by avalanchemaster avalanchemaster wrote:

It is correct that some classical is more complex than a lot of prog.  For instance, Iannis Xenakis used fractal math and other advanced mathematics for his compositions.  Plus they usually aren't as rigid in their song structures.... way more "free" than a lot of prog with more shifting rhythms... well that is at least most 20th century avant garde composers.  Once I got into them, prog took a backseat...
complexity is pretty important to me, in terms of appreciating music-i very much love complex classical music, the best for me being the world of the symphony, the most complex symphonic music being that of the late romantics Mahler and Bruckner-the ultimate in musical depth-to quote the late conductor Bruno Walter-"I could not live my life without the music of Bruckner and Mahler"

well then, give me some recommendations of which compositions/conductors/cd companies to start with(for these two composers)... Do they have any of those super cheap Naxos discs?
there are Mahler and Bruckner symphonies on Naxos-stay away from the Naxos Bruckner-they are not worth it-as far as Mahler symphonies on Naxos-go for the 5th Symphony conducted by Bruno Walter-(historical Naxos)-also would recommend Mahler's 4th Symphony also conducted by Bruno Walter with singer Kathleen Ferrier(historical Naxos)
    As far as the best performances of Bruckner and Mahler symphonies-conductor Bruno Walter is at the top of both mountain peaks-essential Bruckner from him are symphonies 4,7, and 9 with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra, sym. 8 with the New York Phil. from 1941-(Music and Arts CD), and his Mahler sym. 1 and 2 with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra and New York Philharmonic Orchestras respectively, and his stereo recording of Mahler's 9th with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra.
              Also great Bruckner is available from conductor Oswald Kabasta (sym. 4,7 and 9-Munich Phil.)
          the  Bruckner's are on Sony (Walter) and Music and Arts(Walter sym. 8)and Music and Arts(Kabasta)
            the non Naxos Mahler's are on Sony


Thanks!  That is a very lengthy list to choose from.. Clap

I consider Johann Sebastian Bach to be a lot more complex than Mahler and definitely more complex than Bruckner with his quite simple triads. I love Mahler, but Bruckner leaves me absolutely cold
 
I don't consider Bach to be all that complex.  Yes there is nice counterpoint going on, but overall his material is pretty straight time (never heard much metric variation within a song) flurry-of-notes type classical with way, way, way too much symmetry.  Nice for people with OCD, but for those of us who like a little more adventure, less predictability, and more novelty, there are other "complex" composers.  But that's just me.  Don't get me wrong, I understand the historical impact and relevance of Bach, and his mastery of music theory, but when the dadaists and 20th century (experimental/avant garde) composers came along, Bach seemed relegated to a sort of classed-up vanilla flavor.

excuse me, but that "little bit of counterpoint" is extremely complex. and you are doing Bach an injustice; he was, like everybody, caught in his time. no-one fiddled with meters at his time.  he may not have fiddled with metric asymmetries,  but he fiddled around with the tempo a lot, playing a melody at half speed while at the same time playing it at normal speed, playing it backwards, upside down, and sometimes all of this at once, in several voices.  you sound like someone who complains that Newton is not the genius he is because he never discovered the theory of relativity.
try writing a fugue,,then you will see with what difficulties you are being faced and how complex it really is. . and else take Einstein's advice when it comes to the music of Bach: " Hören, spielen, lieben, verehren und - das Maul halten!" ("Listening, playing, loving, revering and - shutting up".
Interesting you mention Einstein-a famous quote from him about Mozart-"Mozart did not create music greater than anyone else, just music that was like others in a greater way"
    I also read that sometimes in the earlier part of the 20th Century, conductor Bruno Walter would sometimes see Einstein sitting in one of the front rows of his concerts.
 
Wow.  you act like I pissed in your mother's mouth.
It is an opinion.  I do NOT find him complex.  You are acting rather trollish and need to settle down.  Threads like this are worthless anyway, because sooner or later, someone gets all butt-hurt about someone else's opinion and responds like you just did.  in fact, most forums are only as useful as the factual information you can gleen from them, otherwise they usually consist of just a bunch of huffing, puffing, and egotistical showboating.  I'm happy for you that you find Bach so complex.  Different minds think differently.  That, my friend is a FACT.   Wink

wow, now I am really amazed. why do you react that offended? actually Western music is laughably simple when it comes to meters and rhythms, compared to Indian musidc. Western music is harmonically very complex, and Bach was the king of complexity there (ask any classical musician, and 90% of them will say so).
but Western music is rhythmically extremely simple. listen to Indian music - it is rhythmically as complexas Western music is harmonically so. harmonically though  Indian music is quite simple, as Western music is rhythmically.
I have composed myself, and I don't find it difficult at all to throw in odd meters. I have tried writing a fugue too, but failed. and I would not even dare to start with the rhythmic complexities of Indian music; you need years of training for that
If you have nothing, you have everything.
Back to Top
Killj0y View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: April 24 2010
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 4
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Killj0y Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 26 2010 at 11:12
Anyone who finds Bach´s music complex needs to listen to Stravinsky. That guy wrote stuff no prog metal band would be able to play without scratching their heads.

As to which bands are most complex, I´d say Dream Theater is high up there.
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 4994
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Negoba Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 26 2010 at 11:20
Anyone who doesn't find Bach complex is simply lacking a little in musical education. Which is no crime. You have to have a pretty sophisticated musical brain to get why Bach is the master of all masters.
 
But there are so many great complex bands out there. My most recent discovery is Animals as Leaders. Phenomenal complex metal. Take Exivious and square it.
 
 
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Angel of Death View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 82
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Angel of Death Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 26 2010 at 13:23
The Animals as Leaders album is fantastic.  If you like that, you may want to check out Tosin Abasi's previous band, Reflux. (http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=4271)

Edited by Angel of Death - April 26 2010 at 13:35
Back to Top
ProcolWho? View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: May 06 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 89
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ProcolWho? Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 27 2010 at 20:52
Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

Anyone who doesn't find Bach complex is simply lacking a little in musical education. Which is no crime. You have to have a pretty sophisticated musical brain to get why Bach is the master of all masters.


 I don't buy it. This is dogma. The emperor's clothes.

 I have no desire to listen to any more Bach because it's boring. Sounds like he used a sequencer badly (just half kidding).

 I'll take Vaughn Williams any day over Bach.

 PS I dislike RUSH and Dream Theater intensely, just in case you wanted to know.


Edited by ProcolWho? - April 27 2010 at 20:53
Back to Top
canterburystrings View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie


Joined: April 14 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 6
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote canterburystrings Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 04 2010 at 18:41
Conlon Nancarrow
Elliot Carter
Iannis Xenakis

-The above composers make some of the most complex music I have ever heard.(as far as pure musical complexity anyway)

-If you are looking for other musicians that are very talented in their fields check out Alan Holdsworth also the Italian band "Area"

The albums I would suggest from "Area" are "Crac" and "Caution Radiation Area".
Back to Top
Dorsalia View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 21 2006
Location: Cape Mola
Status: Offline
Points: 336
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dorsalia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 04 2010 at 19:17
Originally posted by ProcolWho? ProcolWho? wrote:

Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

Anyone who doesn't find Bach complex is simply lacking a little in musical education. Which is no crime. You have to have a pretty sophisticated musical brain to get why Bach is the master of all masters.


 I don't buy it. This is dogma. The emperor's clothes.

 I have no desire to listen to any more Bach because it's boring. Sounds like he used a sequencer badly (just half kidding).

 I'll take Vaughn Williams any day over Bach.

 PS I dislike RUSH and Dream Theater intensely, just in case you wanted to know.



This is not dogma. How much do you know about music theory?

Of course, just because Bach's music is complex, doesn't mean it's good.

But it is. It's the most amazing music. And not to toot my own horn, but I grew up listening to one of the largest personal collections of "classical"  music I've ever even heard of.

Of course, Bach's music is Baroque. It's hard to compare his music with Vaughan William's because they are completely different. If you don't like Bach, well, it's your right. But It does make me wonder. Maybe you haven't heard any good recordings. In that kind of music the quality of the interpretation and of the recording are essential.

Cheers.
Back to Top
Wiktor Hatif View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 09 2008
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 159
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Wiktor Hatif Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2010 at 14:05
if you're looking for complex but still melodic, not some totally atonal and/or mathemathic crap, you should dig impressionism - Debussy's "La Mer" symphony is tremendous
"Ffffaaahhh, seeko baaaaaa
Neeeeee toe, kare lo yeahhh
Sa sa sa sa saa! Fssss
Drrrrrrrrr bo ki!
Rapateeka! do go taaaam
Rapateeka! do go tchaa"

- "Atom Heart Mother" Pink Floyd/Ron Geesin
Back to Top
topographicbroadways View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 20 2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 5575
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote topographicbroadways Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2010 at 15:03
Egg had some very complex music for anyone not in the know check out 'Contrasong" and "Long Piece no.3" these actually hurt your head too listen too!!! but probably for the most complicated music you would look at Jazz Fusion or newer progressive metal bands like Dream Theater and Symphony X who try too push it as far as they can (not too say that 70s prog bands didn't)
Back to Top
topographicbroadways View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 20 2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 5575
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote topographicbroadways Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2010 at 15:08
Originally posted by Killj0y Killj0y wrote:

Anyone who finds Bach´s music complex needs to listen to Stravinsky. That guy wrote stuff no prog metal band would be able to play without scratching their heads.

As to which bands are most complex, I´d say Dream Theater is high up there.

Stravinsky is incredibly complicated i have only heard Firebird and The Rite of Spring but both of these are incredible pieces of music with more melody and complexity than any bands have been able too produce
Back to Top
presdoug View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 24 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6679
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote presdoug Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2010 at 15:49
Originally posted by Wiktor Hatif Wiktor Hatif wrote:

if you're looking for complex but still melodic, not some totally atonal and/or mathemathic crap, you should dig impressionism - Debussy's "La Mer" symphony is tremendous
La Mer is a wonderous work-i would recommend Serge Koussevitzky's recording, as well as the two by Pierre Monteux, and the studio late fifties one with Charles Munch-it is both beautifull and deeply moving
If you have nothing, you have everything.
Back to Top
Xanatos View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
Banned

Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Latin America
Status: Offline
Points: 305
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Xanatos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 06 2010 at 14:09
Planet X :D
Back to Top
avalanchemaster View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 02 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 730
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote avalanchemaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 06 2010 at 15:33
All this talk about people "lacking musical education" is a farce.  It should be mentioned that anything and everything is subjectively interpreted through each individual, hence, if one looks hard enough for something, they will find it.  i.e., if you think something is complex/not complex.... that is your right.  There is no such thing as objectivity (in anything).... because quite simply, we are not binary computers that say absolutely / not at all (even though a LOT of people do- sadly).  There is always personal bias in anything.  I have plenty of musical education and theoretical knowledge and regard most historically relevant composers as important.  Whether or not I regard them as complex is at my discretion and no insults should be hurled towards my intellectual capacity when it comes to music .  That's just myopic.  thank you.  Smile
 
One could argue that message boards and debating are entirely pointless endeavors, as they involve dichotomies and people trying so hard to convince others of their own vision (or take on things) as being the absolute epitome of truth.  But I suppose we all strive to assert our dominance over others, whether it be intellectually or size-wise, it is all muscle flexing and alpha-primate syndrome... LOLWinkSince most everything is (we should not use the word is because nothing is anything else, all appears to be comparative and metaphor and nothing IS absolute and pure truth.  All becomes a matter of interpretation) subjective... Nothing can be proven, everything can be disproven, and vice versa.  Hell, even this post has turned into- ironically- an attempt to prove something.  How contradictory?!  Ah, the absurdity of it all....  Tongue 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 10111213>
  Share Topic   

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 0.375 seconds.