The Role of Virtuosity in Progressive Music

twosteves wrote: dr wu23 wrote: rogerthat wrote: pitfall wrote: Could you please give me some examples of these frequent occasions when Howe's electric playing sounds jarring? I've never come across it myself. I find it difficult to accept that you have ever really listened to his playing! Eh, any number of his faster leads with Yes but CTTE if you want one example.  Please read what I said with context - though I didn't specify it, I was comparing his approach with Hackett. Yes, compared to Hackett, I do find Howe's electric playing pretty jarring, the more so as he gets faster while Hackett is very smooth and makes me oblivious to how fast he might be playing.    I was thinking about Howe's leads and his playing just yesterday and I agree with you that Hackett and others are much 'smoother' and more melodic at times. There are leads by Howe here and there on all the best known lp's by Yes that sound 'jarring ' to me also...but it fits somehow with their overall approach. -- for me jarring is the wrong word --but I do know what you mean--his playing is more chunky (and funky) and guitarly if you will, where Hackett is coming up with his own smooth guitar sound---what I love about real artists like these two--is you give them a paint brush (the guitar) and they both paint in the same genre (prog) and they come up with completely different masterpiece's.

Hi,

moshkito wrote: Hi,   Kinda scary thought to think that even pop music does not have any virtuosity in it ... which would beg the question ... why we buying it, then?   There has to be more to it, somewhere!

What are you saying - no pop music has any virtuosity in it? We should only buy music that does?

Just found two counterexamples to a suggestion made earlier that virtuosity is more relevant in entertainment than art.   Um, One More Red Nightmare for Ian McDonald's saxophone work and Dancing with the moonlit knight for Collins's work on drums!   Esp the former....he's not really trying to play blinding fast but it is certainly well beyond the reach of a mediocre musician.   And at the same time it's very expressive.  Parts, if not of all the expression actually come from his improvisational approach where he contrasts sections with lots of notes played quickly with ones where he just 'lazily' lays down a few spaced out notes.  It's not as such a particularly different approach from jazz, much of which would be considered art rather than just entertainment music. 


Edited by rogerthat - May 11 2013 at 00:22

progbethyname wrote: Does DUKE have virtuosity in it? I kind of think it does. It's a very accessable prog album...pop like at times.

I don't know about Duke but Toto did have plenty of virtuosity and were a top pop group in the 80s.   I think at least until the advent of boybands and girlgroups - i.e. Spice Girls, NOT Bangles - pop could be pretty smart and sharp.   There are plenty of subtle examples of instrumental virtuosity but skill used to be pretty important in pop vocals.  Here's Patti LaBelle and Mike Bolton (filling in at the last minute for Levi Stubbs, hard to tell unless you are already informed of this) ripping it onstage:




Edited by rogerthat - May 11 2013 at 01:49

It can't be beyond the realms of possibility that the greatest public speaker in the world has precisely zero opinions of their own? Eloquence is not tantamount to 'smart'' e.g there are those who can express their ignorance brilliantly and very entertainingly...