| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
song_of_copper 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 20 2008
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 1065
|
 Posted: July 29 2008 at 05:46 |
 sleeper wrote:
May I start by saying that this is an impressive blog and has got me truly thinking like few things have in recent weeks.
Thank you very much!  It sure is an interesting, if confusing, topic! Thanks for responding. 
I guess a round of disembleing (spelling isnt one of my strong points, I think this may become apparent today ) on my own history is called for which will tie in to say latter in the post and may give a better perspective of where my musical habbits come from.
<deep breath>
Before I was 16 I can honestly say that music was very much a non-entity for me, the only times I listened to it was when a good friend of mine would bring his cheap stereo round and we'ed listen to the radio whilst playing on the PlayStation (thoughs days that we stayed in, anyway). Unfortunatly, the radio station we always had on was Galaxy ( , its a wonder I wasnt turned off from music altogether). I wouldnt say I hated it at the time, just didnt pay it any attention, I was 16 when I bought my first album, Red Hot Chili Peppers By the Way. I can remember that for about the next two years after this I was mildely into the realm of the then indy scene until a mate of mine lent me Dream Theaters Images and Words, closely followed by Scenes from a Memory and Symphony X'sThe Divine Wings of Tragedy and V: The New Mythology Suite. I was, without doubt, blown away on first listening to them as it was far and away very different and on first impression obviously far more complex than anything Coldplay was doing. Since then I've been on a bit of a quest to find more and more prog to listen to to the point where I am now buying about 3-5 albums per week, many of which I havnt heard a note of and am eagely anticipating the first listen. (Unserprisingly, this really seemed to kick off when I discovered this site, as my sig would attest to. Funny that )
Galaxy, eh... if it's the one I'm aware of, your is spot on!!
Yet another person to feel that immediate 'click' on a first listen - very interesting phenomenon, that. Now I'm beginning to wonder about 'liking' v. 'understanding' (for want of better words)... is it possible to like somewhat complex music without at least some understanding of it, or can those things be separate? Oh well, I'd have to define 'understanding' to answer that one... 
As to the main question, the short answer is both, but again a bit more detail on me to give a betterview of my musical habits is needed. I may be about the only persson here that will say that the PS2 and GT3/4 have been instrumental in helpping me along with my prog appreciation, and no, its not for the sound track supplied by Feeder. I have distinct memories of spending time playing this game whilst having, in particular, The Mars Volta's De- Loused in the Comatorium on (around early 2005 then). Over those few months I became increasingly aware that my ability to concentrate on the minutae of the music as well as effectively play the game was increasing to the point that I can now do other thigs whilst listning to and concentrating a fair bit, though not totally, on the music (as I write this, I am listening to Dark Suns Existence and, hopefully, making something resembaling sense here).
Well, what I'm about to write is going to throw a spanner in the works of my original ramblings, but I've probably contradicted myself enough already for that not to matter! Sometimes, it is easier to 'get' something that is more complicated than you are used to if you don't necessarily give it your full attention. If it's weird or unfamiliar, trying to unpick it mentally just seems to confuse you more. But put it on in the room and do something else with your conscious mind (playing a video game would be a good one!), and the music kind of sneaks past your mental censor - the thing that wants to say "that's not music, that's noise!", like an aggrieved Dad disapproving of your taste! So I guess what I mean is, *not* actively listening (at least the first few times you hear something) can help you concentrate on complex music better later on. Well, that's what I've found with some things, anyway... 
The point of my rambalings was to show that my ability to pick up on very different music to the norm, whether I have been exposed to something even remotly like it or not before, and like or at least appreciate is inate but my skill for detailed listening was something built up over time (and entirely by accident).
The more you listen (and it looks like you're a pretty experienced listener), the easier it gets, I'm sure.
Right, as for the seperate, and very interesting, points you've made:
1a. I wouldnt go so far to call my self a musician but I do attempt to play the bass (for as long as I've been into music I've seemed to focus on the rhythm section the most, whch might in part explain why it was Chili's that were the first band I ever bought a CD of) from time to time. I picked it up, really, in an attempt to emulate my favourite bands but it has since expanded to encompass a desire to have a better understanding of what it is I'm listening to beyond "that was interesting". In this regards I'm definitely with TGM:Orb and Dean in that prog can inspire people to take up musicianship to help them understand what their heroes are playing, though I doubt this would be the first and main consideration when picking up that axe for the first time, but I'd be surprised if it didnt creep in quickly. Conversly, prog by its very nature would garner at least some proffesional interest from musicians and those that have even some small exerience of plonking a piano or picking a guitar may find it more imediatly attractive than those that dont have any musical experience.
Speaking purely from personal experience here... I think what attracts me to this sort of music is the knowledge (or at least, the fair suspicion) that I could never do that myself. I could never be that good. There is a certain amount of awe, and a certain amount of mystery, too. "How can a human being create that?!" With really basic music, I get that feeling of "Huh, well, I could have done that!" Making a pop song - even a good one - is quite easy. It's down to fashion and marketing as to whether it turns out to be successful or not. There is not much mystery in that.
1b. I am, without doubt, a usless singer who can not keep in tune, but I at least seem to have a half decent ear for things like this. Not sure whether thats actualy related, I think it would have more to do with how sensitive your hearing is and just how honest/ self critical you are.
Those links that Certif1ed posted would appear to support that. There are people who can keep in tune, people who can't but know it, and people who can't and don't know it! The people who are aware of not being in tune might be able to learn to sing, with enough training...
2. Like you, my musical taste definitely runs to the darker side of prog far more than the lighter, nicer side (cant stand Yes, not too keen on the Flower Kings but love Van der Graaf Generator and King Crimson) but there are many, many prog listeners who are definitely the other way round. As to the general masses, I'd say that those that dont follow music as closely as most of us here do would much prefer "happier" music than something that was melencholic, doom laden or disturbing, though aggressive might be a different matter (thinks of "Gangsta rap", but not too hard). I think that in the end it comes down to two things, the way they treat music listening and the personality of the indavidual. Thats two variables but each with a massive range of atributes that will be the determaning factors here.
That's another really interesting topic. Why do some people like 'happy' music and some like 'dark' music? I might have to come back to that at some point!  But for now I'll say that 'happy' music often... weirdly enough... depresses me. But: I am weird (allegedly). I also prefer dark Winter nights to long Summer evenings, and a good thunderstorm with torrential rain to a baking hot day with blue sky.  The really odd thing is how these apparently dark and melancholy things actually make me feel cheerful.
3. With film/TV scores I get the feeling that people either take little notice of it or they associate it directly with something that is happening on screen, but may not care too much for it if is played on its own. For my part, I tend to ignore it almost all of the time, but then I think music in films is so overused and saturated that the only way I would notice it is when its not there. Ring is one of my favourite films in part because there is so little music. In fact, the only time I hafe taken more than a passing notice of a score is in the TV series Battlestar Galactica (the new one), which uses minimalism to stunning effect, but I'm rambeling now.
Some film music is indeed incredibly cheesy and insincere-sounding. I particularly dislike that rampantly predictable 'romcom' soundtrack stuff.
What bores me is the lack of a point to what is going on in music. Simple can be intersting if done in a clever way and with a clear goal, Pink Floyd were masters of this IMO but electronic bands are the complete oposite (generalisation here, I havnt explored the electronic genre much and been given little desire to do so from what I've heard).The opposite is true of complex music, which can get lost in its own technique and forget that clinical technique isnt the only aspect of music. In general, though, I would much rather listen to complex music than simple. I'll take this furthar and say that listening to music that I find simplistic to a fault (pop, R&B, rap, a lot of indie, nu metal, "emo") is depressing for me to the point where I find it difficult to work more than 4 or 5 hours at work (where its on all the time) and not leave in a thouroghly sh*tty mood.
Personally, I can't stand Pink Floyd, but that's because for some reason I find their music really creepy and unsettling. <shallow> Also... t-shirts tucked into jeans. </shallow>
The best combination is when the musicians have excellent technique that is so excellent it becomes pretty much subliminal/instinctive - they are not there posturing and thinking, "Oh yes, I'm going to impress everyone by playing this really fast bit. Golly, I am such a virtuoso! I am now making the Guitar Face! Go me!!" Instead, they are just playing naturally, magically.
In the end, I think I was always more predisposed to listen to prog, and by extent jazz and classical of which I am now beginning to explore, than pop from the beginning and probably has a lot more to do with nature rather than nurture as my dad's jazz days were long past by my earliest coherent memories and music actually played a near non existent role in my life before that first CD.
I guess at the end of the day, there has to be some sort of instant appeal (whether it's the music itself, or some idea about it) to give you the impetus to start and continue listening, and the experience/learning you acquire can only deepen your enjoyment and understanding. 
|
|
 |
song_of_copper
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 20 2008
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 1065
|
Posted: July 29 2008 at 06:09 |
James wrote:
I'm actually appreciating classical music a lot more now, than I did in the past. It is partly due to wanting to discover where the music I listen to comes from and partly because my ears are more finely tuned to that style of music, due mostly to my experience with chamber prog and klezmer.
I've never managed to get into classical music, thus far. But similarly to you I am curious about some of the classical influences on my favourite music. I've got a box set of Stravinksy that I really need to get listening to. Good old Igor seems to have influenced pretty much everything! (And very profoundly my two favourites, Zappa and Magma. The universe is telling me to listen to Stravinksy. )
This is one of the reasons I do not write reviews as much as I could... because I like to know the influences. I could review an album I love and then find out that something else sounds like it and from an earlier era and that could affect my overall vote for the album. Discovering the influences of a band/artist you appreciate, goes a long way to appreciating them more, I believe.
Indeed, indeed! This is a tricky conundrum. I have tons of stuff I'd like to review but I can't imagine myself doing so without hearing a lot more. Present needs a review from me but not without hearing more of their stuff and Univers Zero's too. Guapo will get some reviews but I need to hear the whole trilogy first (and much more Present/UZ/Magma listening will probably be relevant there too! ). I feel so weirdly au fait with Magma that I've done a number of reviews for them.
What I like is when you find something you love that is itself very influential. It's a great way to expand your musical time frame, for one thing. I've finally made it out of the 1970s (whilst still liking that musical decade more than any other)!
So I can certainly see my tastes changing... I just hope I never move away completely from my current musical loves. I can see myself listening to more and more jazz and classical music in the future and perhaps moving away from the noisier stuff.
One of the best things about this type of music is the wide ranging combination of different ingredients and antecedents. You can just bet that there is someone out there playing cathartically noisy and yet pastorally peaceful, 20th C. classical influenced, chamber prog with a dash of jazz and a soupçon of [insert attribute of choice here]!
|
|
|
sleeper
Prog Reviewer
Joined: October 09 2005
Location: Entropia
Status: Offline
Points: 16449
|
Posted: July 29 2008 at 13:58 |
song_of_copper wrote:
Galaxy, eh... if it's the one I'm aware of, your is spot on!!
Yet another person to feel that immediate 'click' on a first listen - very interesting phenomenon, that. Now I'm beginning to wonder about 'liking' v. 'understanding' (for want of better words)... is it possible to like somewhat complex music without at least some understanding of it, or can those things be separate? Oh well, I'd have to define 'understanding' to answer that one...
I'd say yes on that one, I never had any understanding of complex music but it was quite plain to these ears that what I was listening to was a bit more than the average pop song and I liked it.
And yes, it is that Galaxy.
Well, what I'm about to write is going to throw a spanner in the works of my original ramblings, but I've probably contradicted myself enough already for that not to matter! Sometimes, it is easier to 'get' something that is more complicated than you are used to if you don't necessarily give it your full attention. If it's weird or unfamiliar, trying to unpick it mentally just seems to confuse you more. But put it on in the room and do something else with your conscious mind (playing a video game would be a good one!), and the music kind of sneaks past your mental censor - the thing that wants to say "that's not music, that's noise!", like an aggrieved Dad disapproving of your taste! So I guess what I mean is, *not* actively listening (at least the first few times you hear something) can help you concentrate on complex music better later on. Well, that's what I've found with some things, anyway...
I think you might have something there. With the example I used (The Mars Volta) I liked it pretty quickly (maybe first listen, I cant remember, but it didnt take long either way) but it was never an "easy listening" album and my ear certainly wasnt "trained" to pick up any nuances in music, it was just built up with improved familiarity I think.
Speaking purely from personal experience here... I think what attracts me to this sort of music is the knowledge (or at least, the fair suspicion) that I could never do that myself. I could never be that good. There is a certain amount of awe, and a certain amount of mystery, too. "How can a human being create that?!" With really basic music, I get that feeling of "Huh, well, I could have done that!" Making a pop song - even a good one - is quite easy. It's down to fashion and marketing as to whether it turns out to be successful or not. There is not much mystery in that.
My thoughts exactly.
Those links that Certif1ed posted would appear to support that. There are people who can keep in tune, people who can't but know it, and people who can't and don't know it! The people who are aware of not being in tune might be able to learn to sing, with enough training...
If someone puts their mind to it and some effort into it then anyone can learn to sing in tune but that wont improve the quality of their voice. I'd bet I would still have a very low range and sound dreadful, I'd just be on the notes properly now.
That's another really interesting topic. Why do some people like 'happy' music and some like 'dark' music? I might have to come back to that at some point! But for now I'll say that 'happy' music often... weirdly enough... depresses me. But: I am weird (allegedly). I also prefer dark Winter nights to long Summer evenings, and a good thunderstorm with torrential rain to a baking hot day with blue sky. The really odd thing is how these apparently dark and melancholy things actually make me feel cheerful.
Nothing raises the spirits like a nice melencholic piece, eh. I actually have no answer to why I prefer darker or more melencholic pieces to nicer, lighter ones but I'm able to connect with them better thats for sure.
Some film music is indeed incredibly cheesy and insincere-sounding. I particularly dislike that rampantly predictable 'romcom' soundtrack stuff.
Worse still, the lazies that just lift songs of albums for the length of the film with only samll pieces of original music.
Personally, I can't stand Pink Floyd, but that's because for some reason I find their music really creepy and unsettling. <shallow> Also... t-shirts tucked into jeans. </shallow>
I would have thought you liked creepy and unsettling.
The best combination is when the musicians have excellent technique that is so excellent it becomes pretty much subliminal/instinctive - they are not there posturing and thinking, "Oh yes, I'm going to impress everyone by playing this really fast bit. Golly, I am such a virtuoso! I am now making the Guitar Face! Go me!!" Instead, they are just playing naturally, magically.
Ah yes, trying too hard is not a good thing.
I guess at the end of the day, there has to be some sort of instant appeal (whether it's the music itself, or some idea about it) to give you the impetus to start and continue listening, and the experience/learning you acquire can only deepen your enjoyment and understanding.
Agreed
|
I've cut my previous post out to avoid creating a monster. You mentioned in your original post empathy. I think this can be a major part of enjoying music, personally its one of the biggest reasons why Pain of Salvations The Perfect Element is my favourite album, I empathise with the charecters in the concept a lot and the music works to bring this out. In fact, I've just had a thought (does happen occasionally). Empathy might be part of the reason that I (we?) like darker and more melencholic music (lets ignore aggressive dark music as it requires different emotions) because it is a response that this type of music is trying to bring out in the listener and some people are more readily capable to empathise in this way. (The end of that sentence is badly worded, I seem to be missing a word or two from my vocabulary, so I'm not sure if I'm gettting my point across.) This might be partially or even totally wrong, but it might at least offer a starting point.
|
Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005 
|
|
song_of_copper
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 20 2008
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 1065
|
Posted: July 29 2008 at 17:25 |
sleeper wrote:
song_of_copper wrote:
Personally, I can't stand Pink Floyd, but that's because for some reason I find their music really creepy and unsettling. <shallow> Also... t-shirts tucked into jeans. </shallow>
I would have thought you liked creepy and unsettling.
|
I know, it's very peculiar! It just seems kind of desolate, shiny and emotionally unavailable to me, somehow. I know millions of people love Pink Floyd, and I'm not maligning their taste, but it just makes me feel unpleasant.
You mentioned in your original post empathy. I think this can be a major part of enjoying music, personally its one of the biggest reasons why Pain of Salvations The Perfect Element is my favourite album, I empathise with the charecters in the concept a lot and the music works to bring this out. In fact, I've just had a thought (does happen occasionally). Empathy might be part of the reason that I (we?) like darker and more melencholic music (lets ignore aggressive dark music as it requires different emotions) because it is a response that this type of music is trying to bring out in the listener and some people are more readily capable to empathise in this way. (The end of that sentence is badly worded, I seem to be missing a word or two from my vocabulary, so I'm not sure if I'm gettting my point across.) This might be partially or even totally wrong, but it might at least offer a starting point.
I'm sure this is an important factor, and it's actually alerted me to a weird paradox. Many things that I like are often described as 'dark' or 'sinister', but I don't always feel as though they are particularly dark or sinister... to me, anyway. I guess the thing is that not many things are just dark - there are other elements in there too. Music that has a streak of humour amongst the darkness is always fun. Sort of... with an evil smile on its face. 
Also, I'm sure many people want music that chimes in with what they're feeling. Maybe they want the music to empathise with them, in a weird way... Not sure if that makes sense...
Myself, I don't like to have those kinds of unpleasant feelings amplified (see above re. PF!!). But the 'dark and sinister' stuff I like tends to give a different feeling - uplifting in a weird way. But I think that might be the complexity, rather than the darkness... There is something strangely exhilarating about flamboyantly-precocious, sulky and sinister music.
I suppose different people have very different reactions to the same thing - or pick out different elements to focus on...
|
|
|
VanderGraafKommandöh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Malaria
Status: Offline
Points: 89372
|
Posted: July 30 2008 at 18:11 |
I was thinking yesterday (shock horror!  ), whilst listening to Shub-Niggurath's debut, that I wasn't listening to them to instill images into my brain but rather to listen to the instrumentation. It's a dark album. I like to call it Chamber Zeuhl myself. Yet I did not have images of caves or any Lovecraftian images. I did maybe a few times but that was because I was thinking about this subject matter and tried to imagine a situation that would fit the music. I was listening out for the drums, the guitar, the bass and the voices. So I guess I'm not "synesthestic" (not the correct word--not sure what the right word is here) in terms of my listening. It would be interesting to know if someone was though.
Edited by James - August 01 2008 at 17:57
|
|
|
|
song_of_copper
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 20 2008
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 1065
|
Posted: August 01 2008 at 17:32 |
James wrote:
I was thinking yesterday (shock horror! ), whilst listening to Shub-Niggurath's debut, that I wasn't listened to them to instill images into my brain but rather to listen to the instrumentation. It's a dark album. I like to call it Chamber Zeuhl myself. Yet I did not have images of caves or any Lovecraftian images. I did maybe a few times but that was because I was thinking about this subject matter and tried to imagine a situation that would fit the music. I was listening out for the drums, the guitar, the bass and the voices.
Well, that makes sense - listening to the sounds! I don't suppose many people listen for the purpose of mental images, although weirdly enough (now that you mention it) I've heard a few things recently that immediately made me think of a vivid visual ('Elixirs' for one...). That's not habitual for me either, though.
So I guess I'm not "synesthestic" (not the correct word--not sure what the right word is here) in terms of my listening. It would be interesting to know if someone was though.
'Synaesthetic'? I think that's more a case of sounds having specific colours attached, though. See this page of Wikipedia.
|
|
|
VanderGraafKommandöh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Malaria
Status: Offline
Points: 89372
|
Posted: August 01 2008 at 17:45 |
song_of_copper wrote:
James wrote:
I was thinking yesterday (shock horror! ), whilst listening to Shub-Niggurath's debut, that I wasn't listened to them to instill images into my brain but rather to listen to the instrumentation. It's a dark album. I like to call it Chamber Zeuhl myself. Yet I did not have images of caves or any Lovecraftian images. I did maybe a few times but that was because I was thinking about this subject matter and tried to imagine a situation that would fit the music. I was listening out for the drums, the guitar, the bass and the voices.
Well, that makes sense - listening to the sounds! I don't suppose many people listen for the purpose of mental images, although weirdly enough (now that you mention it) I've heard a few things recently that immediately made me think of a vivid visual ('Elixirs' for one...). That's not habitual for me either, though.
So I guess I'm not "synesthestic" (not the correct word--not sure what the right word is here) in terms of my listening. It would be interesting to know if someone was though.
'Synaesthetic'? I think that's more a case of sounds having specific colours attached, though. See this page of Wikipedia.
|
|
I always thought the purpose of Post Rock was to invoke imagary... maybe that's why I find it quite dull and aggrandising.
Oh, I know what Synaesthesia means, Melissa. An interesting phenomenon as well, actually. I was just curious if there was a verb for "imagining images to music", so to speak.
Something else of quick note: I was watching that wonderful BBC programme about British minimalism and contemporary composers and now I want to explore that as well. It seems I am going backwards in terms of my listening patterns somewhat. Trying to find out the origins of all the music I love. The more I discover some of those old contemporary gems, the more I realise how little music has moved on in 50 years (or perhaps longer).
Note: apologies for any spelling errors, I am forced to use Internet Explorer and it does not have the ever-so-handy spelling applet that Firefox has. Luckily my spelling is not to shabby though.
Hopefully Firefox will start working for me here again soon...
|
|
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 64338
|
Posted: August 01 2008 at 17:51 |
song_of_copper wrote:
I don't suppose many people listen for the purpose of mental images
|
and yet what a great source to draw on for review writing
|
|
song_of_copper
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 20 2008
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 1065
|
Posted: August 01 2008 at 18:31 |
James wrote:
I always thought the purpose of Post Rock was to invoke imagary... maybe that's why I find it quite dull and aggrandising.
Hehe, I never realised that! If they mean for everyone to have the same mental image at the same time, then they've got a tough job!
Oh, I know what Synaesthesia means, Melissa. An interesting phenomenon as well, actually. I was just curious if there was a verb for "imagining images to music", so to speak.
Oh, ok then! It's certainly something that fascinates me.
Hmm, you're right, there ought to be a word for that. If there isn't, I'll have to make one up. You could call it "aural mirage", perchance...?! Something else of quick note: I was watching that wonderful BBC programme about British minimalism and contemporary composers and now I want to explore that as well. It seems I am going backwards in terms of my listening patterns somewhat. Trying to find out the origins of all the music I love. The more I discover some of those old contemporary gems, the more I realise how little music has moved on in 50 years (or perhaps longer).
That's an interesting one. I guess it's taken a long while for some of these things to become accepted (even just a little bit). Those composers must've been way ahead of their time!
It seems to me as though some people are going a bit too far in an effort not to be derivative nowadays, and are alluding to all sorts of very disparate and seemingly unconnected influences. Sometimes I read people's lists of influences and wonder whether someone is pulling my leg... ("Hmm, Mozart and Tupac...?")
Note: apologies for any spelling errors, I am forced to use Internet Explorer and it does not have the ever-so-handy spelling applet that Firefox has. Luckily my spelling is not to shabby though.
Hopefully Firefox will start working for me here again soon...
Haha, I'm not going to go grammarhound on you!
|
|
|
song_of_copper
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 20 2008
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 1065
|
Posted: August 01 2008 at 18:33 |
|
|
|
VanderGraafKommandöh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Malaria
Status: Offline
Points: 89372
|
Posted: August 01 2008 at 18:40 |
song_of_copper wrote:
James wrote:
I always thought the purpose of Post Rock was to invoke imagary... maybe that's why I find it quite dull and aggrandising.
Hehe, I never realised that! If they mean for everyone to have the same mental image at the same time, then they've got a tough job! Well most of it bores me... so people must find something in post rock that makes them not want to hit a wall in frustration! I like minimalism. I like some solo piano works. I like small free jazz ensembles. Post Rock though... it does very little for me. So people must therefore listen to it because it invokes images... or maybe I just miss something.
Oh, I know what Synaesthesia means, Melissa. An interesting phenomenon as well, actually. I was just curious if there was a verb for "imagining images to music", so to speak.
Oh, ok then! It's certainly something that fascinates me.
Hmm, you're right, there ought to be a word for that. If there isn't, I'll have to make one up. You could call it "aural mirage", perchance...?!Aural eargasm. Something else of quick note: I was watching that wonderful BBC programme about British minimalism and contemporary composers and now I want to explore that as well. It seems I am going backwards in terms of my listening patterns somewhat. Trying to find out the origins of all the music I love. The more I discover some of those old contemporary gems, the more I realise how little music has moved on in 50 years (or perhaps longer).
That's an interesting one. I guess it's taken a long while for some of these things to become accepted (even just a little bit). Those composers must've been way ahead of their time!
It seems to me as though some people are going a bit too far in an effort not to be derivative nowadays, and are alluding to all sorts of very disparate and seemingly unconnected influences. Sometimes I read people's lists of influences and wonder whether someone is pulling my leg... ("Hmm, Mozart and Tupac...?")
Oh I know how you feel there. Some bands list all sorts of influences and I am left scratching my head in amusement, a lot of the time.
This minimalism I want to explore though are obvious influences for many avant-prog and avant-garde bands.
Note: apologies for any spelling errors, I am forced to use Internet Explorer and it does not have the ever-so-handy spelling applet that Firefox has. Luckily my spelling is not to shabby though.
Hopefully Firefox will start working for me here again soon...
Haha, I'm not going to go grammarhound on you!
|
|
I do not mind. I have got Firefox working again now, so all misspelled words should be underlined when I type. Except of course, my grammar can still be atrocious.
|
|
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: September 07 2008 at 03:07 |
|
It is difficult to pinpoint what makes people appreciate in a certain way that other people can't, not least because there are so many aspects to it. I have never learnt music formally and have to play keyboard with one hand as opposed to two because I was never taught how to play with both hands - something I propose to correct soon - but I have no problems in picking the tune on the keyboard flawlessly. I don't have technique, but I have an acute grasp of sound. I think it is innate because I have been doing it since I was a kid of 9 or 10. I have met people who can play sheet music beautifully but tell them to pick the tune on the keys without notes to read from and they can't. Let's get to singing. I never pursued singing seriously, I have a very limited range and my voice isn't anything special either. But when I LISTEN to music, I can spot subtle variations in the vocals that contribute to the mood that I find some people who sing seem to miss while they can reproduce the song in a technical song accurately. Ergo, the conclusion is that some part of music appreciation is necessarily innate, you either get it or you don't, training can enable you to perform music but I doubt it would help you appreciate it - the two things are not related too strongly in my opinion. On the other hand, a person with music in his/her blood would benefit greatly from formally learning music in my opinion because taking my own example again, I can never get behind the music and decipher HOW it was made. I am interested in the mood, the imagination shown in constructing and stringing together passages of music but the technicalities are alien to me beyond a point because I don't understand that side of it.
Since this is a prog forum, let's also talk about what makes one listen to progressive music. Prog means different things to different people, for me it means expansiveness, the unshackling of rock music from the verse-chorus constraint so that it can explore newer and newer frontiers. The motivation to listen to prog rather than hard rock - and I love hard rock by the way - is the same as it is when I choose to read Thomas Hardy or Somerset Maugham rather than Sydney Sheldon or James Hadley Chase. I think the latter two are excellent writers, I'd love to be able to handle English with so much confidence and to be able to write so crisply and racily. But with them, I only get a story to read, enjoy and forget, with Maugham, I get a perspective on life I ponder about for weeks. Progressive music too in the same way lends itself to explorations of life because it offers a greater scope to do so for musicians than radio-oriented music. This is not to say that radio-oriented music is necessarily always shallow and lacking in profound thoughts but it has certain limitations that prog is free from. So, if you love music and if you are interested in exploring the meaning of life, chances are you will chance upon progarchives and become an ardent follower of progressive rock - it happened to me.
|
|
song_of_copper
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 20 2008
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 1065
|
Posted: September 07 2008 at 18:58 |
rogerthat wrote:
It is difficult to pinpoint what makes people appreciate in a certain way that other people can't, not least because there are so many aspects to it. I have never learnt music formally and have to play keyboard with one hand as opposed to two because I was never taught how to play with both hands - something I propose to correct soon - but I have no problems in picking the tune on the keyboard flawlessly. I don't have technique, but I have an acute grasp of sound. I think it is innate because I have been doing it since I was a kid of 9 or 10. I have met people who can play sheet music beautifully but tell them to pick the tune on the keys without notes to read from and they can't. Let's get to singing. I never pursued singing seriously, I have a very limited range and my voice isn't anything special either. But when I LISTEN to music, I can spot subtle variations in the vocals that contribute to the mood that I find some people who sing seem to miss while they can reproduce the song in a technical song accurately. Ergo, the conclusion is that some part of music appreciation is necessarily innate, you either get it or you don't, training can enable you to perform music but I doubt it would help you appreciate it - the two things are not related too strongly in my opinion. On the other hand, a person with music in his/her blood would benefit greatly from formally learning music in my opinion because taking my own example again, I can never get behind the music and decipher HOW it was made. I am interested in the mood, the imagination shown in constructing and stringing together passages of music but the technicalities are alien to me beyond a point because I don't understand that side of it.
I completely agree with you here! Your experience is very close to mine. I haven't a clue about the technicalities of music, but I'm very definitely 'musical' and can pick out most things by ear. And that's been a lifelong thing with me. I liken it to being able to spell well without effort. Despite various people's vehemence on the matter, I believe that this is an innate attribute that cannot be learnt. You can learn to read music and to understand music theory, but that doesn't necessarily mean you have that 'unlearned feel' for music, that some people have. Probably lots of people have it, but without the musical education to go with it, it may not shine brightly enough for others to see.
Since this is a prog forum, let's also talk about what makes one listen to progressive music. Prog means different things to different people, for me it means expansiveness, the unshackling of rock music from the verse-chorus constraint so that it can explore newer and newer frontiers. The motivation to listen to prog rather than hard rock - and I love hard rock by the way - is the same as it is when I choose to read Thomas Hardy or Somerset Maugham rather than Sydney Sheldon or James Hadley Chase. I think the latter two are excellent writers, I'd love to be able to handle English with so much confidence and to be able to write so crisply and racily. But with them, I only get a story to read, enjoy and forget, with Maugham, I get a perspective on life I ponder about for weeks. Progressive music too in the same way lends itself to explorations of life because it offers a greater scope to do so for musicians than radio-oriented music. This is not to say that radio-oriented music is necessarily always shallow and lacking in profound thoughts but it has certain limitations that prog is free from. So, if you love music and if you are interested in exploring the meaning of life, chances are you will chance upon progarchives and become an ardent follower of progressive rock - it happened to me.
Haha, I am more ardent with every passing day. Discovering music is such joy. Again, I agree with you! Complexity is the bees knees! If I want a dumb pop song, I'll write one. Music that does weird and marvellous and unique things is my very favourite kind.
Thanks for commenting! Sorry for the dull response on my part, but... yeah. "I Agree"!
|
|
|
Petrovsk Mizinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: December 24 2007
Location: Ukraine
Status: Offline
Points: 25210
|
Posted: September 08 2008 at 05:45 |
rogerthat wrote:
It is difficult to pinpoint what makes people appreciate in a certain way that other people can't, not least because there are so many aspects to it. I have never learnt music formally and have to play keyboard with one hand as opposed to two because I was never taught how to play with both hands - something I propose to correct soon - but I have no problems in picking the tune on the keyboard flawlessly. I don't have technique, but I have an acute grasp of sound. I think it is innate because I have been doing it since I was a kid of 9 or 10. I have met people who can play sheet music beautifully but tell them to pick the tune on the keys without notes to read from and they can't. Let's get to singing. I never pursued singing seriously, I have a very limited range and my voice isn't anything special either. But when I LISTEN to music, I can spot subtle variations in the vocals that contribute to the mood that I find some people who sing seem to miss while they can reproduce the song in a technical song accurately. Ergo, the conclusion is that some part of music appreciation is necessarily innate, you either get it or you don't, training can enable you to perform music but I doubt it would help you appreciate it - the two things are not related too strongly in my opinion. On the other hand, a person with music in his/her blood would benefit greatly from formally learning music in my opinion because taking my own example again, I can never get behind the music and decipher HOW it was made. I am interested in the mood, the imagination shown in constructing and stringing together passages of music but the technicalities are alien to me beyond a point because I don't understand that side of it.
To be completely honest, the whole "music is either in your blood or not" is normally just a load of garbage, unless your speaking of perhaps someone born with perfect, who will then usually have an inherent advantage over the people without it in the field of music.
I don't really understand how people believe that sort of crap to be honest (no offense to you on my part, I mean in general). I guarantee you there are people out there that went from "not having music in their blood" to being virtuoso musicians.
I spent most of my life knowing nothing about music really.
How do you explain that I now possess a good sense of relative pitch and can sometimes tell what an arpeggio is from just by hearing it?
I wasn't born with any of these abilities, nor do I believe I was born with an "innate musical sense".
Taking from your examples, if I hear a vocalist, I listen to spaces, vocal phrases etc, but I guess it makes more sense to speak as a guitarist (which I am), and that I know how to apply subtle nuances in my playing, have a sense of phrasing (which all came from learning technique). It was all developed from playing, and then from ear training, listening to other musicians and how their make their approach.
Anyone with a reasonable level of intelligence, any able body, and the drive could learn to play guitar as I did, learn to here the phrases, have a sense of relative pitch and compose music.
After spending much time studying music theory, a lot of things really "come into the light" so to speak and it can really help you to break through limitations like not having perfect pitch for eg.
It also really helped me from not really appreciating complex, technical music, to absolutely loving it.
"but I have no problems in picking the tune on the keyboard flawlessly"
What do you mean by this? Being able to hear the key signature? Being able to play it exactly by ear?
Other questions... do you really have to fumble around first before you "pick the tune" or does it come to you straight away?
Since this is a prog forum, let's also talk about what makes one listen to progressive music. Prog means different things to different people, for me it means expansiveness, the unshackling of rock music from the verse-chorus constraint so that it can explore newer and newer frontiers. The motivation to listen to prog rather than hard rock - and I love hard rock by the way - is the same as it is when I choose to read Thomas Hardy or Somerset Maugham rather than Sydney Sheldon or James Hadley Chase. I think the latter two are excellent writers, I'd love to be able to handle English with so much confidence and to be able to write so crisply and racily. But with them, I only get a story to read, enjoy and forget, with Maugham, I get a perspective on life I ponder about for weeks. Progressive music too in the same way lends itself to explorations of life because it offers a greater scope to do so for musicians than radio-oriented music. This is not to say that radio-oriented music is necessarily always shallow and lacking in profound thoughts but it has certain limitations that prog is free from. So, if you love music and if you are interested in exploring the meaning of life, chances are you will chance upon progarchives and become an ardent follower of progressive rock - it happened to me.
|
I think you'll find that if you can't find non prog bands that also are quite outside those "limitations" you speak of, you're really not looking hard enough.There are so many non prog bands and non prog rock genres that are also incredibly far removed from pop music.
|
|
|
|
song_of_copper
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 20 2008
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 1065
|
Posted: September 08 2008 at 06:45 |
HughesJB4 wrote:
(orig. post trimmed for readers' courtesy!)
To be completely honest, the whole "music is either in your blood or not" is normally just a load of garbage, unless your speaking of perhaps someone born with perfect, who will then usually have an inherent advantage over the people without it in the field of music.
I don't really understand how people believe that sort of crap to be honest (no offense to you on my part, I mean in general). I guarantee you there are people out there that went from "not having music in their blood" to being virtuoso musicians.
I spent most of my life knowing nothing about music really.
How do you explain that I now possess a good sense of relative pitch and can sometimes tell what an arpeggio is from just by hearing it?
I wasn't born with any of these abilities, nor do I believe I was born with an "innate musical sense".
Taking from your examples, if I hear a vocalist, I listen to spaces, vocal phrases etc, but I guess it makes more sense to speak as a guitarist (which I am), and that I know how to apply subtle nuances in my playing, have a sense of phrasing (which all came from learning technique). It was all developed from playing, and then from ear training, listening to other musicians and how their make their approach.
Anyone with a reasonable level of intelligence, any able body, and the drive could learn to play guitar as I did, learn to here the phrases, have a sense of relative pitch and compose music.
After spending much time studying music theory, a lot of things really "come into the light" so to speak and it can really help you to break through limitations like not having perfect pitch for eg.
It also really helped me from not really appreciating complex, technical music, to absolutely loving it.
Harry, I know that you are a technical maestro, and that you have spent many hours honing your musical skill and studying the theory of music. I hope that nobody reading this could underestimate how much dedication and effort that has taken, and how completely admirable it is. (Esp. by a no-talent hack like me! )
However, my personal belief is that there are two routes to 'musicality'. Some people just are innately musical - perhaps everyone is, to varying degrees, assuming that they do not suffer from any neurological difficulties! There is the route you have taken - training, practice, self-improvement. And then there is the other route - followed by those of us who cannot remember a time before song.
Both are, in my opinion, equally valid. Both have their problems, too.
Someone like me who can't read music or get their bimboish little brain around music theory is at a major disadvantage, compositionally speaking. I can imagine very complex music, but I can't play it or write it down.
On the other hand, someone who is wholly technical may find themselves relying on learned conventions rather than following their creative instincts. (NB: I'm not suggesting that this is you.)
I guess what I really mean is that yes, music has rules. But you don't necessarily need to have been taught them (or have taught yourself these rules, in a formal manner) to understand them. Just growing up hearing music is enough to be aware of that stuff, if your brain is arranged in the right way. Plenty of people don't need to 'know' that a particular type of chord goes well [here] - they don't need to know what it's called, or anything else about it - they can just sort of... put it in.
"but I have no problems in picking the tune on the keyboard flawlessly"
What do you mean by this? Being able to hear the key signature? Being able to play it exactly by ear?
Other questions... do you really have to fumble around first before you "pick the tune" or does it come to you straight away?
Speaking very personally, I can pick out almost anything (unless it's totally weird) pretty immediately, with one finger on the piano. (No way do I have perfect pitch, though. But I can easily transpose what I've heard to an easy-to-play-in key.) Like I said in my reply above, it's like spelling. The musical equivalent of two-finger typing. This may be to do with the way one's brain and hearing works, though. When I was very young, everyone in my class at school got tested on how good they were at naming intervals, singing back short musical phrases, clapping rhythms, etc. I totally aced that test at 8 years old (with the bare minimum of musical education behind me).  There are plenty of people who can read music and play an instrument well who are not very good at that sort of thing... not very good at all. You certainly can improve at that stuff with practice, but some people can do it very easily without being taught how. (Haha, sorry, that all sounds very vain. I didn't mean to boast!! )
[trimmed again!]
I think you'll find that if you can't find non prog bands that also are quite outside those "limitations" you speak of, you're really not looking hard enough.
There are so many non prog bands and non prog rock genres that are also incredibly far removed from pop music.
That is undoubtedly true.
Anyway... I think that having BOTH the innate instinct for music and the dedication to learn the technical side is what makes a true musical genius. Talent isn't enough, and technique may not be either, depending on the person.
Well... I've rambled enough! That's all! |
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: September 08 2008 at 10:29 |
HughesJB4 wrote:
To be completely honest, the whole "music is either in your blood or not" is normally just a load of garbage, unless your speaking of perhaps someone born with perfect, who will then usually have an inherent advantage over the people without it in the field of music.
I don't really understand how people believe that sort of crap to be honest (no offense to you on my part, I mean in general). I guarantee you there are people out there that went from "not having music in their blood" to being virtuoso musicians.
I spent most of my life knowing nothing about music really.
How do you explain that I now possess a good sense of relative pitch and can sometimes tell what an arpeggio is from just by hearing it?
I wasn't born with any of these abilities, nor do I believe I was born with an "innate musical sense".
Taking from your examples, if I hear a vocalist, I listen to spaces, vocal phrases etc, but I guess it makes more sense to speak as a guitarist (which I am), and that I know how to apply subtle nuances in my playing, have a sense of phrasing (which all came from learning technique). It was all developed from playing, and then from ear training, listening to other musicians and how their make their approach.
Anyone with a reasonable level of intelligence, any able body, and the drive could learn to play guitar as I did, learn to here the phrases, have a sense of relative pitch and compose music.
After spending much time studying music theory, a lot of things really "come into the light" so to speak and it can really help you to break through limitations like not having perfect pitch for eg.
It also really helped me from not really appreciating complex, technical music, to absolutely loving it.[/QUOTE}
You know better but it is quite possible that you had latent musicality that you didn't explore and didn't attempt to endeavour. I have seen people who have learnt music formally struggle to match scale with me when I accompany them, so there ARE people who probably cannot be taught music no matter how hard you try. Ergo, you get music or you don't, how far you get music is a question that depends on your experiences in music and your learning too. As you can see from my earlier post, I am aware that the technical aspects of music elude me and I am not scornful of it and wish to correct it. If only wishes were horses! 
HughesJB4 wrote:
"but I have no problems in picking the tune on the keyboard flawlessly"
What do you mean by this? Being able to hear the key signature? Being able to play it exactly by ear?
Other questions... do you really have to fumble around first before you "pick the tune" or does it come to you straight away? |
I can pick the whole sequence of a note formation without any trouble. If I experience trouble, it is because my fingers cannot obey my brain's command and fumble and trip over each other but not because of hitting the wrong note ever. I don't have to fiddle around and then "Eureka, I got it.". It just comes to me naturally and I have no explanation why I can do it. I never played keyboard upto the age of 9, so I discovered my musicality only then.
[QUOTE=HughesJB4]
I think you'll find that if you can't find non prog bands that also are quite outside those "limitations" you speak of, you're really not looking hard enough.
There are so many non prog bands and non prog rock genres that are also incredibly far removed from pop music.
|
I don't know that I implied that ONLY prog music is removed from pop and has profound thoughts. I said one reason for certain kinds of people to take to prog could be because of what seperates it from prog. I have also said that pop (or rock) is not necessarily always as dumb as hardcore proggers make it out to be but it suffers from constraints that prog doesn't.
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: September 08 2008 at 12:40 |
HughesJB4 wrote:
I spent most of my life knowing nothing about music really. |
I am taking this up again because I would like to add a few more points. What is the definition of "knowing nothing about music"? I am sure even in that part of your life, you would have been able to separate tuneful patterns of sound from pure noise though you would have been indifferent to music as such, which is what musicality is all about if you ask me. There are people who cannot make this distinction and I don't think they are a minority because merely being endowed with hearing ability does not help you perceive music - it is a suggestive pursuit. There is no reason why a pattern of sounds should suggest some thoughts, some feelings to you but they do because you can grasp music. As the lines between noise and music in the normally understood sense get more and more blurred, it becomes a more and more elusive pursuit because fewer people are willing to persevere that far. To again use a reference to reading, how do you explain that often scholarly, intelligent and articulate people have no interest in reading fiction, whether prose or poetry? Because it is an artistic pursuit and it fulfils a need for some people whereas for some others the need doesn't exist at all. The same goes for music.
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Learn to listen, listen to learn...