Prog Song Structure

moshkito wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: ... Henceforth, you must refer to a song as a vitelloni, an Italian word of dubious definition found in the title of a Federico Fellini film. And please, don't ask me to explain why -- what would you know of Italian cinema? ...   STOP MAKING SENSE       You just missed the magic bus! The trip went much further than you care to admit and have tried. You probably were way too square to know it!     PS: I much more like the beginning of "Intervista" ... just watch it, until after the helicopter and the kid. I'm not exactly the kid, but sometimes I am the kid, and kids would not know the difference! But some evangelicals have to go on a rampage about all the stupid stuff ... and basically tell a kid he can't be a kid!  And I look at some admins here as the same kind of evangelicals, telling us what Progressive (Prog as well) is supposed to be!   If you want to see how I really "see" music ... check out my staging for "Lamb" and "TFTO" on this thread. This is "normal" for me when I hear some of these pieces, and one of the reasons why "songs" are crap ... they have no "vision" and you are supposed to supplant YOUR OWN by the lyrics. It doesn't work for :"visual folks". It might for others!   http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=97264&PN=2   But all "creative", and "original" artists, will always have that strange/weird streak with them!

Mosh, the farther you go, the further you are gone. There are some observatory telescopes that can't track you.

But I wish you well in your current trajectory. You give new meaning to Bowie's "Space Oddity". Unfortunately, I want no part of your trip, Major Tom.

And since you seem unwilling to remain earthbound and answer a simple question asked several times, I am uninterested in deciphering any further new age gibberish.

Say no to structures

!!

TFTO a symphony... 

The Dark Elf wrote: ... The rest of your dalliance with psychotropics is as unintelligible as usual. From what I could decipher, using a combination of the Rosetta stone, Ginsburg and astrophysics, is that you are still incapable of answering a direct question

Format is an odd thing.

Why does it exist? To make a piece of music communicable. There are contemporary conventions of how this is done but often change according to the artist wishes. Artist wishes and audience wishes are often at polar opposites.

The Symphony format. This veers from any of Haydn's 100 c. 6 minute, 3 movement numbers to the giant opii (opuses?) of Tchaikovsky, Mahler and Beethoven. Concerti are not really that different though more likely to feature a soloist in a large orchestral context. There is a more or less standard format - the four movement thing but this has been played with a lot. Progressives, eh? Who'd have 'em.

Pop structure used to be defined (think Cole Porter and the '20s - '30s jazz era) by 32 bar numbers with nice, (sophisticated) chord sequences. That is, having the harmonic decency to use a diminished chord cadence now and then as the Put On The Ritz.

Rock and roll is limited to a guitar (or two) bass drums, vocal and maybe keyboards. Often a 1 rhythm thing all the way through and sometimes a repeated refrain to indicate there is indeed, a chorus. Audiences do a curious thing here. they moan like buggery at standard cadences but hate it when there are not. Classic rock is now, a hot bed of cold feet.

Contemporary pop usually features the chorus. Some songs even started with this. The Beatles had a go at doing this thing quite a bit. People really only want the chorus and put up with a verse just to get to the chorus. The unbelievable wait of 15 - 30 seconds.

So then we get to the by now scarcely noted world (in the greater scheme if things) of prog rock.

How can there be arguments about a prog rock format when no one knows what it is (but you do when you hear it, as one reads clear unequivocal definitive terms such as "proginess").

TFTO has vocals and lyrics. Symphonies do not. Opera? Well, it's not a play or drama, it's a narrative. Songs? Well if Yes had formatted the recording there would indeed be identifiable songs such as Relayer on The Remembering, or Leaves of Green, Nu Somme du Soleil. The first number works as a song - it's just 20 minutes long rather than 3 - 4.

Yes trustingly left it up to their sophisticated and understanding progressive audience to hear these features and know what was going on. Big mistake. It's probably the one thing that stopped it from being Yes' TDSOTM. That and lyrical obfuscation anyway, people want songs about sex, that's what, not other worldliness. But it keeps writers busy so there we go.

It is a suite. A rock concerto. It features the soloists in their own movements. Being rock it features the vocalist illustrating via his narrative of a journey of spiritual awakening, conflict, resolution and full circle by the end. Tull did a couple, Purple did as well. ELP had Karn Evil 9. Supper's Ready by Gabriel's Angels... there are many.

The features of prog rock are the harmonic sophistication not evident in most rock. Sometimes a song is a prog rock song as it may feature a chorus among the busy sounds - again nothing wrong with this, however the writer and artist want to communicate a musical idea - that's all that is happening. No biggie. Asia, for example have loads of prog rock songs but no real lengthy numbers. This has been argued as a dumbing down of prog rock, making enjoyable music available for the masses rather than the exclusive preserve of snobs like me. Swine. Still, we do have TFTO to annoy people with...

Sometimes the work is structurally more adventurous. Sometimes more so than the audience can understand. So we have prog rock in multiple structures, usually vocally phrased as it is still rock, popular music and able to seed it's ideas to other areas such as the '80s KC, T Heads, Bowie and other so called "art rock" acts to adventurous and talented to be limited by corporate commercial "requirements" as well as marginalized by either prog rock dogma or punk rock fascism and media manipulation. These (KC et al) were a bunch of v. smart people. They had songs and sophistication by the bucket load. Artistic credibility and contemporary acceptance and commercial success. Well done.

No one thing but many things define prog rock. It uses various formats, it explores and creates new ones. Don't let a format trap your thinking, as much as music is about it's audience so a progressive audience must be that thing - progressive. It uses a lot of instruments, it allows instrumental bands to flourish (Univers Zero, Djam Karet and to an extent Magma) unlike the petty tyranny of reactionary rock, punk and standard pop. Are these rather nebulous traits absent friends from the prog rock community?

The answer is Yes.

I hope.






Edited by uduwudu - April 30 2014 at 01:38

*sigh*

 

moshkito wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: "If you have specific evidence that what we refer to as "Progressive Rock" did not originate in Britain in the late 60s, then provide it. That's it. No socialist babble. No revisionist worldview prattle. No mind-numbing flights of film fantasy." And besides, you're gonna say it's not rock, and then find another excuse because it doesn't have a mellotron or a bike!

You're damn right.    And if it isn't rock, you'd have a lot of explaining to do, now wouldn't you.   it's always worth the hassle, that's what most of us are doing here;  make your case and back it up or get off the pot.

The Dark Elf wrote: HackettFan wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: And Happy Easter to you too as well. If an atheist can wish someone that. We're both atheists alike, but there's nothing particularly religious about hiding eggs, and I love a feast. Leg of lamb...yum. It's originally a pagan holiday anyway.

Indeed!

The Dark Elf wrote: And Happy Easter to you too as well. If an atheist can wish someone that.

We're both atheists alike, but there's nothing particularly religious about hiding eggs, and I love a feast. Leg of lamb...yum.