Can the early 70s prog sound be cloned nowadays?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=101435
Printed Date: April 28 2024 at 12:30
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Can the early 70s prog sound be cloned nowadays?
Posted By: paragraph7
Subject: Can the early 70s prog sound be cloned nowadays?
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 18:07
Here's what I mean: there have been many attempts by several "Neo-prog" or other artists to capture the same sort of essence which was included in the early records of King Crimson and Genesis and so on. Yet it has felt to me that such efforts have been extremely hit and miss; they've written songs with a similar song structure, yes, used Mellotron, the Hammond Organ etc, but more often than not the result actually feels like a modernized homage/tribute to the classics rather than a personal and artistic work. And it's actually really easy to understand why, for if the aim, of say Steven Wilson, is to make a record which clearly is heavily influenced by the classics, then the record has also to be on par with said classics, or else the house of cards falls apart. It becomes a hollow copy of the masterpiece it is trying to be. While the musicianship and songwriting of such artists can be extremely acknowledgable, the product at the end fails to deliver something unique, which made the classics so good to begin with. While I love Opeth's Pale Communion, every time I listen to it I get this nagging feeling of "Oh Genesis guitars!", or "Oh KC intro!" or just "oh Goblin, as in GOBLIN"  What is your take on this? There are bands like Änglagård and Anekdoten that, in my opinion, are able to catch that 70's classic sound a bit better, but I'm not entirely sure. They were mostly active in the 90s, when digitalized audio engineering was still at its baby steps, maybe that had something to do with it? ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Replies:
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 18:46
 ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 18:58
Yep it makes my head spin as well  ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
SteveG wrote:Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 19:00
|
Perhaps I don't understand your question. Can you simplify what you're trying to get at? ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 19:07
|
What I try to say is that there clearly are musicians/bands who try to mimic the 70's early prog atmosphere in their sound, like Steven Wilson, but when doing so, they are unable to do it without sounding like a side-kick act to the real deal itself. Is it possible to create a 70s sound that not only sounds like a side-kick act but also unique, that could stand side-to-side with In The Court of The Crimson King? Or is it all just about trying to pay tribute to that time? As I said, I think Änglagård and Anekdoten are far more near that 70's atmosphere than the aforementioned Steven Wilson, or Opeth's Pale Communion. I'm not sure whether I can express it more clearly ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 19:12
|
No as it would be nothing but imitation and that wears thin very quickly as you yourself have observed. Bands can try to pay homage to their heroes by using mellotrons and the like but it carries a heavy price. A bit off the subject but not quite. I wish Wilson would try to pay homage to someone with sensitivity and feelings. But that's asking a lot from him. |
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 19:18
Exactly, although I never felt that when I've listened to Hybris. And that made me wonder. But perhaps that's just me?
Wilson has always struck me as a prog-fanboy rather than a fully-fledged artist with vision and ideas. Maybe he should try writing while drunk? To get out of his comfort zone and not write everything so damn neat and fuzzy proggy prog?  ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 19:19
|
^I think you need a pulse in order to get drunk. ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: Pastmaster
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 19:25
|
If you mean ripping off, that's an easy one. *Cough* Haken *Cough*
|
Posted By: Horizons
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 20:01
|
Out of all bands that are known to be rip offs, you chose Haken :I To answer the question: No. I think anything that sounds like it comes from the 70's, and isn't, never will hit the same level of impressiveness, influence, quality, whatever. Simply because it isn't really embodying the mentality that progressive rock is supposed to represent. Sure there is a difference between influence and copying, but if you instinctively compare the sound of a neo band to the 70's it just won't live up. If you're ripping off a sound or band, that is all you're doing - ripping them off. Personally i don't listen to much 70's prog or any neo-prog bands. I just don't like it. Whether it is stylistically or just the concept driving the band, i just would rather listen to the music that is more "now" and how is changing shape and actually progressing, in whatever way i like or find interesting. Again though, don't get me wrong, i'll blast Godbluff or Tago Mago or whatever I just enjoy more modern music in more ways. Just my opinion. Hope i sounded slightly coherent. ------------- Crushed like a rose in the riverflow. |
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 20:36
|
That early prog sound for sure can not be cloned as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_%28sheep%29" rel="nofollow - Dolly was as well, but the contemporary prog can be recorded and produced majestically in a retro-prog style. I'd like to recommended some great retro-prog albums by the contemporary prog bands: The Wistman Tales (2014) by Napier's Bones (UK)  http://napiersbones.bandcamp.com/releases" rel="nofollow - http://napiersbones.bandcamp.com/releases Of Things That Never Were (2013) by The Worm Ouroboros (Belarus)  http://thewormouroboros.bandcamp.com/album/of-things-that-never-were" rel="nofollow - http://thewormouroboros.bandcamp.com/album/of-things-that-never-were A Peaceful Nacht In Hell (2013) by One Of These Days & Thee Heavy Random Tone Colour Lab (Spain)  http://oneofthesedaystheheavyrandomtonecolourlab.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - http://oneofthesedaystheheavyrandomtonecolourlab.bandcamp.com/ Lizards Exist s/t (2014) (Croatia)  http://lizardsexist.bandcamp.com/releases" rel="nofollow - http://lizardsexist.bandcamp.com/releases
|
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 20:41
|
If you listen to Big Big Train's Underfall Yard or English Electric albums (I is better than II), they capture the 70s sound (Genesis with hints of Crimson and Yes), but they manage to incorporate it into an entirely new jargon. The lyrics are particularly well done and downright poetically beautiful without being maudlin or sing-song melodic. A song like "Judas Unrepentant" is incredibly clever and catchy at the same time, while the dark undertones, sad story, musical precision and powerful vocals of "A Boy In Darkness" represents what I think is the best of new prog, quite divorced from the 70s: ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: paganinio
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 21:25
|
1. Works of art can only exist in their time. Not in the future, not in the past. That's why no band will ever be able to clone the 70s rock music. They can sound identical to the 70s, but they won't feel authentic. 2. For people who aren't all that familiar with the 70s sound, you can duplicate the 70s feel and they won't be able to tell the difference. There's a guy I know that composes classical works (something like piano sonatas) that sound just like Beethoven's piano pieces. Enough to fool me! I certainly can't tell if it's the real Beethoven or someone in 2015 writing new Beethoven sound-alike music. 3. Just because you can clone the 70s prog, doesn't mean anyone out there will do it. The OP mentioned "personal and artistic work". You can't create that kind of work if you're trying to clone somebody else. The guy I just mentioned who wrote Beethoven sound-alike pieces? He's not creating any personal or artistic work. It's the opposite of personal and artistic. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Dellinger
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 21:32
| Well, Rick Wakeman himself did his retro albums, with only instruments from the 70's (out of his collection, I understand), and even though I would say they are really good albums... they don't sound 70's at all... they sound rather modern actually. |
Posted By: Stool Man
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 23:12
|
There isn't a single 70s sound, there are many. Let me demonstrate: Taking just one band: some of Pink Floyd's 70s albums sound very different from each other - if you didn't know that Atom Heart Mother, Wish You Were Here, and The Wall were all by the same band you'd never guess it just from listening to them for the first time. Now multiply that by a hundred other examples, and you'll see clearly that many bands don't have a single sound. And obviously the sound differences between bands are even more different. There also isn't a sixties sound, an eighties sound, or a 2010s sound. ------------- rotten hound of the burnie crew |
Posted By: omphaloskepsis
Date Posted: February 18 2015 at 23:27
|
I think you got to go back to what Genesis, Yes, or King Crimson were listening to. For example...If you want to sound like Steve Howe, then listen and play a bunch of Wes Montgomery. Staying with the Yes theme, you would want to study Igor Stravinsky et cetera, et cetera. You also need multiple composers who are massively talented. The end result could be a masterpiece that would stand beside Yes, but not sound like Yes. Unless you're foolish enough to hire a singer who sounds like Jon Anderson! Zeppelin and The Rolling Stones were influenced by many of the same American Blues artists, yet Zeppelin and Stones sound completely different. The 80's were replete with Zeppelin want-to-be's, yet all paled in comparison to the legendary Led Zeppelin. Go back to the source...The original source.
 |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 01:48
| Apocalypse in 9/8 seems to crop up all the time with Squonk a close second. But as said before they are never the real deal. Its one of the reasons I don't rate IQ's Dark Matter album as highly as some others and I do count myself as an IQ fan. Harvest Of Souls was just too close in structure to Suppers Ready for comfort for me. However what it just doesn't have is the 'feel' of that times and that is a very difficult thing to achieve. Astra on the other hand have managed to get the feel of the seventies using analog equipment and recording techniques (as I understand it) but to their credit never sound like a clone of anything (more like the b*****d love child of early Floyd and Sabbath if anything). |
Posted By: tamijo
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 03:32
|
Another one of the same tread, about old v new prog. Can there be an opinion not allready spoken ! ------------- Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 06:39
Why should that sound be cloned? Have albums of 70's bands and artists all of a sudden disappeared from the market?  |
Posted By: paganinio
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 06:58
This one doesn't have that "versus" vibe going on because the OP specifically asked for old prog. There isn't even any new prog involved!  -------------
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 07:04
|
There is a vsti soft synth available to replicate every conceivable piece of hardware available to musicians in the early 70's and beyond. Technology has made cloning texture a piece of piss but there is no computer plug-in that provides substance on demand. ------------- 
|
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 07:06
From the comments here it's easy to see that it shouldn't. But there are quite many artists who do it any way. The fun in this thread could be about finding bands such as Dark Elf mentioned, Big Big Train, who do prog in a way that's not only a rip off of the past (if that's true, I haven't listened to them myself). ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 07:18
Yup, and the plugin Mellotrons, such as Redtron, sound pretty authentic too. ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 07:27
|
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 07:30
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 08:19
 Nice one, Raff. ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 08:19
And there's difference between inspiration and imitation. I'm surprised that a'"real" musician like yourself hasn't come to understand that. I've come to appreciate Prog Rock because of it's innovation, not it's imitation. That's why I'm here. Why are you?
|
Posted By: tamijo
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 09:05
You must be joking : Quote the OP : While I love Opeth's Pale Communion, every time I listen to it I get this nagging feeling of "Oh Genesis guitars!", ------------- Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 09:33
It's because on my end of the stick, I see this so called inspiration as an imitation. I definitely don't desire to hear someone who is supposedly inspired ..when it is clear to me that they are imitating. I don't believe that a majority of the Prog community realizes the difference.
|
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 09:36
|
And it's a thin line I guess, as the Mellotron for example is so imbedded into the prog scene, that even if one would use it to record some kind of weird circus schlager music, someone still might call it imitation of King Crimson ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: Walton Street
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 09:40
see - I don't mind a well done homage by someone who was in love with the same thing as I was - shared nostalgia (I'm beyond giving a s%*$ that nostalgia gets a negative knee jerk reaction around here) It's like Tarantino movies - the guy is able to reproduce the gritty 70's films I love - with his own twist. Some people cry 'rip off' where I call 'sour grapes'. I watch these and feel like I've travelled back in time to a comfort zone I enjoy visiting occasionally. I'd feel the same way about a band who loved and WAS INSPIRED by the same things that shaped my musical interests enough to do their take on it. It would have to sound authentic but with their own twist. I'd dig that very much. this doesn't mean I don't want anything else - new or otherwise .. it's just a fun place to visit.
------------- "I know one thing: that I know nothing" - SpongeBob Socrates |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 09:45
|
^I love listening to The Flaming Lips and Tame Impala. But they're not Prog. ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 09:56
That is something most people can't avoid noticing, but why can't musicians use the mellotron differently by changing the typical chord structures that have been applied in the 70's WHEN using it? That within itself seems questionable. If you're recording a progressive piece, why is it SO necessary to copy those same passages that we all heard played on the mellotron in the 70's?
|
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 11:11
|
I listen a lot to Triskaidekaphobic/Le Poison Qui Rend Fou by Present. I often hear the intro to "Promenade Au Fond D'un Canal" as a very original darkscape played on bass guitar, cymbals, and keys. Other times I am reminded a bit too much of the recording having John Wetton on bass, Bruford accenting the cymbals, and maybe what's being played on the keyboard is thought to be played by Robert Fripp on guitar. Why would that be? The answer is that the element of surprise is no longer there. The obvious evidence that Wetton, Bruford, and Fripp are there or because they came up with the idea to improvise/compose in order to create this particular vibe of sound in the first place. The music then continues to expand into a entire new section of a different musical direction based very much off the style that Frank Zappa often produced in his instrumental compositions of magnificent complexity and instrumental storytelling ..which is a very abstract process of thinking on behalf of the composer. We're not talking about Stravinsky and his style and approach to composition specifically and putting all our eggs in that basket for the sake of worshipping one of the masters. This is different. This was originally Zappa himself taking the influences of such composers and adapting it to "Rock Music". He was the person to do it and afterwards...it influenced many Rio bands to expand upon the idea itself and release some fine music. Univers Zero and Art Zoyd have written several instrumental pieces containing the Zappa formula, yet they manage to produce solid work of their own. Present and National Health are successful in these areas. In the beginning, it was a cool idea and people like Alan Gowen and Dave Stewart brilliantly composed the most adventurous music in the world, but as time progressed on, too many artists were attempting to do it and the originality that was suppose to further arrive from it, after Zappa, Gowen, and others, was now being cloned and sounding redundant. Simon Jeffes from Penguin Café Orchestra composed very hypnotic surreal avant-garde pieces. One piece in particular titled "Milk" is more keen to subside to The Residents approach in music composition...which is not all about someone pushing a button on a keyboard most of the time, but instead focuses on the essence of Avant-Garde structures. They were both choosing to approach music from an angle that Frank Zappa would pursue, but also trying to carry on a form of music that should be approached by the musician/composer thinking for themselves. Everything became too cloned and bands were not as daring to experiment with the formula. This occurred in the 80's when several Avant or what was defined as Rio, type bands began sounding too predictable. It was difficult to accept their own style because it revolved around the sole emulation of note patterns and structure that derived from the works of the great Keith Emerson. Keith Emerson was VERY responsible for a particular structure that influenced Rio. Many of his complex note patterns were created years before Brain Salad Surgery had been released. He was much more influential to Rio in that area than many of the keyboardists of his time...like Rick Wakeman, Rod Argent, and David Greenslade. I've heard a definite influence over bands like Univers Zero and a prime example would be the track "Combat", however there are many other pieces. Daniel Denis likes Jimi Hendrix. Think about it. It has to do with originality. You can play complex and melodic, but if it doesn't have enough originality, what good is it?
|
Posted By: Davesax1965
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 11:20
|
There's a quote from an old Greek philosopher - Heraclitus - who said "You cannot step into the same river twice". So, basically, unless I forget everything I've heard before I sit down, crack the knuckles and start playing....... no. You can't exactly recreate the period. Playing music is subliminal, you create melodies based on a back catalogue of thoughts, ideas, styles..... I'd have to forget the back catalogue and live through the 70's again. I couldn't cope with the trousers again, frankly. ------------- |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 11:42
|
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 12:43
There's also a quote from Ludvig Wittgenstein, who said, and I'm paraphrasing here: "I read Hercalitus who said 'You cannot step into the same river twice', but this is not true, since I just did on friday." (or something along those lines) But you are correct, at least in my opinion. ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 16:17
 What do Greeks know about civilization and philosophy? Oh, they invented both.Ah, never mind then.
|
Posted By: Pastmaster
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 16:24
To be honest, I haven't heard many rip-offs. I've heard of many, but not heard myself. I'm sorry if I offended you, I wasn't trying to say they were a bad band.
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 16:30
A brilliant keyboardist I know had an argument with a guitarist over this same subject. After a few minutes of patiently listening to the guitarist's rant, he played brief excepts from Rachmaninov and Mozart and asked the guitarist "what do these pieces of music have to do with each other besides the fact that I played both on this piano?" The guitarist couldn't answer. The keyboardist then said "perhaps you should take up the piano and study some of the classics." The guitarist silently walked out of the room without saying a word. The idea of music always being similar or merely copied disappeared from my mind. Just like the guitarist from the room.
|
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 19:51
The only problem here is that if the gap between most bands would be as big as Rachmaninov and Mozart then we'd be certainly dealing with some completely different and alien forms of music. The guitarist couldn't answer because he probably had no background or knowledge in classical harmony, how Mozart basically sticks to the Wien Classical functions like a baby on ice scream, while Rachmaninov pretty much does whatever he wants - hell, the add9/ninth chord didn't even exist in Mozart times, in terms of the rules and chord function the composers were going by. At least we are at a point where basically same musical theory/chord function is being used in the modern age as it was in the 70s. ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: February 19 2015 at 21:12
|
Random thought 1: It is possible to be influenced by material without being a clone or overly derivative. Some 70s Prog bands themselves did it. Jade Warrior were definitely influenced by Jethro Tull. It doesn't negate their originality (I'll presume I don't have to elaborate until someone tells me otherwise). I'm guessing Focus may have been Tull influenced. It doesn't negate their originality either. Random thought 2: The problem with Neo bands was/is not that they were influenced too much by the 70s. The problem is that they were influenced too much by the 80s. Random thought 3: I have to remember to get gas after I leave this restaurant. |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 01:37
| I suppose it about this point I say something like 'if I like it and it sounds good then it must be good'. Do I care whether the keyboardist studied Mozart or Emerson? No not really and I'm not sure why so many want to second guess what they are listening to. If it sounds good then it is good. |
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 05:35
Sure, but what I've encountered in music has been the fact that it isn't always black and white, good and bad. At least to me, there's 1. Bat sh*t crazy good "YEEESSS!" 2. "Great, I like this" 3. This is fine music to listen to once in a while and so on. I wouldn't say that I cringe when listening to Steven Wilson or Haken, but it's far from "OMG IN THE COURT OF THE CRIMSON KING AAAAAHHH". If that makes sense :D ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 08:41
Had to comment on your post Richard being both an IQ and Astra fan. I never thought Harvest sounded anything like Suppers Ready...other than being a long song with multiple sections I don't see the connection....and many prog bands have done that over the years . For me IQ has just enough of the classic sound married to a newer one. But both bands certainly harken back to that older retro sound and Astra has captured that murky ominous mellotron prog sound quite well. In their case one could easily think they were a band from the early 70's if they didn't know better. Regarding the OP question, I think a talented group could easily 'clone themselves' to write in that early 70's style if they wished. But then everyone would say ....'they are just clones of so and so...'. ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 08:53
I agree that Astra has a quite 70's murky sound going for them. Nice one. Btw, try comparing the main riff on Aphrodite's Child 666 "Aegian Sea" with the main riff on Astra Black Chord "Cocoon". These things happen ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: twosteves
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 09:04
Early groups were listening to a wide variety of music they site as influences---say Les Paul, Rhinehert Vivaldi for Howe, Simon and Garfunkle and church music for Squire, Stravinski and Beach boys for Anderson, Bach Mozart for Rick---not to mention who KC and Genesis members who site a wide variety of influences from every genre, jazz, classical, R&B etc---today's guys when asked who they are influenced by will ususally say Yes KC Rush, Zep whoever----so the outcome isn't going to sound very original.
|
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 09:11
I give credit to Richard for mentioning Astra first but I will ck out that Aphrodite's Child riff today.  ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 09:12
|
(I hope I got this right!) The history of music has not been kind to imitating someone, and nowadays, you even get Tom Petty's lawyers knocking down your door. I'm not sure I want Beethoven at my door, or a drunk Mozart at my door, or ... collecting money I don't have! They can have my litter for free, though! The software instruments these days are far more flexible than the originals ... with the exception of the huge pipe organs, that are more of a "feel" thing on the pipes than they are about anything else, and that personal feel can not be duplicated in the software. Anyone, trying to compare these with the original is crazy ... first of all, the original mellotron's were too difficult to tune and had issues with them not doing well in certain situations ... like Mike Pinder's melotron, at the LA Forum (of old!) and it not only sounded horrible, it sounded like it was out of tune! A lot of the really old synthesizers were also nearly impossible to duplicate. Tangerine Dream could not duplicate a whole lot past the basics, which were a nightmare to keep track of ... cord 1 to c, cord 2 to b, cord 3 to d, cord 124 to a, cord 34 to d and we're talking just the cords on the front of the moogs! And then change some of them between different pieces while playing or preparing the next piece! And their live concerts from the area, are all different and is the reason why there were so many live performances recorded and released! The only issue with it all, for me, is not so much the equipment itself and the cords going all over the place so you could get one sound ... and now you don't need it anymore and the rest of the performance is tied up because you can't go swipe the cords to get a different sound? WEIRD! This was, ALSO, a period that required learning and experimentation to have the time to be able to fiddle with the instruments ... today, by comparison, all of the bands talked about here are about the notes, the chords and the "music", and has nothing to do with the ability to experiment and learn something from the outer layers of the universe ... we have become the old line roman catholic folks that told everyone the world is FLAT! ... Just like we are with our own music! We can not even appreciate a lot of the music listed here that is experimental, because it does not sound like Genesis, ELP and some other BS/media hyped band listed in the top ten of the PA or other list of progressive idiocies! What you ask is interesting from a comparative perspective, with one problem ... there were no computers in those days, and the equipment was not that good compared to today and it's abilities that all music stores, "assume" you know how to use buried in those modules and buttons! Synthesizers, these days, are being wasted because less that 5% of its abilities and uses. At least you could say TD was trying to find more on them than Genesis! I doubt, otherwise that the different "sound" mattered that much yesterday as today ... you don't go around talking of harpsichords because of Bach or Handel, so I think the whole thing is weird otherwise! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 11:03
|
Jade Warrior were influenced by Jethro Tull and King Crimson in their early incarnation. According to their bio, members of Jade Warrior attended King Crimson shows in London. On a personal note...I felt that the influence of Jethro Tull in the early days was too obvious. I am a dedicated follower of the band and believe the band found their own voice in music during the Island period. Aside from the influence of Jimi Hendrix' playing through David Duhig, their writing style for the Island period was totally original. The sound and style they developed for the Island period was present on the debut, Released, and Last Autumns Dream , but was also shared with the Jethro Tull style. It is much easier to compose a piece of music that is directly influenced by another artist than it is to discover your own voice. There was a percentage of people in the 70's who were disappointed in the band FOCUS due to their influence of Jethro Tull and Emerson, Lake & Palmer. People actually felt a bit cheated by that. People sometimes felt a bit discouraged by bands like REFUGEE and only because the obvious influence of ELP became ridiculous. I suppose they felt cheated because they could play Pink Floyd's Meddle and not hear signature lines derived from other writers. I don't believe using a flute or a harpsichord can be attributed to sounding like someone else if the writing is unique. King Crimson, YES, Genesis, ELP, and Jethro Tull were not similar to each other regarding composition or sound. I believe that many guitarists, drummers, and keyboardists from the 70's who had training and were skilled sometimes felt intimidated by the big 5 or 6 and lacked confidence to enter the realm of discovering their own voice. This is not the case with Popol Vuh or Mike Oldfield. They were open to experimenting with the course of life along with music. They combined the experience of surrounding themselves with nature and I'm guessing that based on the many photographs I've seen of Florian Fricke and Mike Oldfield. They didn't seem to be the type of artists that would invest their energy and creative levels around what some other innovative Progressive artist created in the 70's. Krautrock artists seemed to incorporate a Pink Floyd sound. Ashra Tempel, Guru, Guru, Amon Duul II, Cosmic Jokers, and even Tangerine Dream seemed to reproduce the essence of Ummagumma, More, and Meddle. Krautrock is fascinating to me , but it does contain the basis of sound created and produced by the early Pink Floyd. Evidently it wasn't totally a duplication of Pink Floyd and as a result...produced a new kind of music for people to enjoy based on the originality of it....on another note Progressive Rock bands in the 80's pieced together sounds, structures, and ideas directly from other artists. One prime example would be an EDHELS album sounding like a Steve Hackett album. This indication of a more direct duplication was more evident in the 80's than it had been in the 70's...but yet in the 70's we arrived to the ridiculous point of every keyboard player stacking their keyboards, playing one keyboard with their left hand and reaching across with their right hand to play another, leaving their body posed in a dead center position for the crowd to see.....just like Keith Emerson and Rick Wakeman had done years before and not leaving much originality to the presentation or music performance of Progressive Rock. Stage presence and the style of keyboard performance was stylistically based on Emerson and Wakeman's originality. David Greenslade, Patrick Moraz, and Rod Argent were ideal candidates. The album by Argent titled "Nexus" was a take off in the direction of Wakeman and Emerson aside from Russ Ballard's writing. We even had characters like Michael Quatro with his In Collaboration With The Gods on United Artists. All ridiculous emulation to extreme points of exhaustion.
|
Posted By: Davesax1965
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 11:13
Yep, and don't forget that the world is, indeed, a collection of facts, not of things. :-) ------------- |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 11:22
This.
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 14:24
Oh, and the main point of the story was about the different backgrounds and perspectives that the two musicians had.
|
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 22:14
I agree with all this. I made my earlier observations to temper and massage the discussion a little, since even the most original artist is influenced by something. But I agree, definitely. An artist has to find his own voice. I think what helps is if there is some diversity among influences. There's nothing wrong with being influenced by Symphonic Prog as long as there are other important influences outside it so that it combines to make something different. I want to add to the Jade Warrior discussion that they were also one of the first to incorporate World Music, African rhythms especially. So, yes they were influenced by JT, but that wasn't all they were about. You and I both know that of course. They also didn't use a mellotron. I don't know if it was by design or just because they were unable to procure one (they never had very good support from their record company). In the end, they didn't need one. They got a grandiose enough sound without one. But it was a hardware difference that helped them remain distinct. BTW, I enjoy Edhels too. They are definitely derivative of Steve Hackett in terms of guitar leads, which is what certainly appeals to me. They had a very primitive, paint by the numbers rhythm section. All the talent was all confined to the guitar. |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: February 20 2015 at 23:05
| An old discussion to which I am going to add points I have made before. Wetton basically nailed the issue in that 90s interview when he said, if not in as many words, that the problem is in approaching prog as a genre and simultaneously having of said genre-fied prog high expectations with regard to creativity, innovation, etc. An artist like Bjork most certainly has an unique style. But she is so different from the 70s reference point of prog that people have a hard time accepting her as prog. And the mainstream indeed doesn't regard her as prog. This is little more than the inevitable outcome of the maturity and age of prog as a genre. The 70s are four decades in the past at this point. Music built on the foundation of electric guitars, arpeggios, mellotrons and odd time signatures is going to sound at least a bit reminiscent of the 70s. Take one or two of these elements away and some people are going to say it's not prog. Prog metal released prog from this dead end but even that event is now two decades old. One of the bands we recently cleared for addition, Twombley Burwash, found a way to combine conventionally accepted hallmarks of prog with elements of techno/electronic music. Something also done by, who else, KC on Power to Believe. Therein lie possibilities for the regeneration of prog. But it's not going to get exciting again without expanding the box. Rock of all music forms is infected by the"this ain't rock" puritanism. It needs to break free from such ill conceived barriers to really rock again. |
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: February 21 2015 at 02:34
|
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 21 2015 at 10:37
Alas, I'm a tad retarded and hence immune to sarcasm, so I went and had that cigar. Was good. Thanks! ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 21 2015 at 10:42
This was very insightful. Cheers. ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 21 2015 at 10:51
Listen to CARMEN's last album. There is a bit of Jethro Tull in there, but the "link" is not the sound, but the bass player that Ian promptly stole and sadly, it ended the life of Carmen as a band. And that album (The Gypsies) is fantastic! Inspired by both classical spanish music and rock music and Jethro Tull ... and in all ways possible, the band was better than all of them!
NP: Bullerias
I always thought that Refugee, with Patrick Moraz, was quite different from ELP, and I NEVER/EVER got that album because of anything else, but I was impressed seeing a listing of 2 long cuts, and I bought it without having any idea of what it would be like.
Moraz, was not Emerson, and the comparison is very bizarre and silly. Moraz, in many ways was much more technically minded and he obviously knew EQUIPMENT, where Emerson was more interested in the sounds he could get, and what to transpose in them some of the music he liked.
I find Patrick's work there excellent, and when he did RELAYER, even more impressive, although in there, you could tell he was not interested in classical chops that both Emerson and Wakeman reveled in! And i thought that was gutsy and intelligent and valuable ... and quite different.
Folks not listening to "Refugee", are simply comparing oranges to apples and not wishing to listen to different artists do different things. In many ways, I found a lot of the ELP work and Wakeman's work after that time, as not innovative and simply about showing how smart you were with your classical knowledge. ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 21 2015 at 10:53
------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 21 2015 at 11:22
Agreed. We have the same problem with many of the folks that post here that will not listen to some other things that are different, to have any idea where/what some of us are saying!
But it does get boring when all some folks here can do is compare guitarist to guitarist, and music is not an issue. Most of them would get thrown out the window by Mozart's teachers and contemporaries! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 21 2015 at 11:25
|
^ I applaud you applauding me! ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 02:54
Refugee were not intended to be ELP MkII but were an incarnation of The Nice but they couldn't use the name for contractual reasons. I love that album because it has its own character ( not an imitation at all) and ironically that does seem the reason its dismissed.
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 03:17
|
I don't like to hear modern bands trying to capture those old sounds unless they are an actual tribute act. It surprises me that any modern 'progressive' rock band would seek to sound like something that happened over 40 years ago. Doesn't add up. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 10:09
Strange ... so the next thing we can say is that the next violin you hear on any music, is crap, because the violin is 400 years old (whatevaaahhh!!!) and still sounds the same!!!! How regressive is that, hey? You'll never go to a symphony concert anymore because the "sound" is wrong, and how the heck would you know since you did not live "there" 400 years ago?
That's insane and that comment is out of time and perspective.
Or the next time that Rick Wakeman uses a harpsichord, you're gonna laugh and say the record is crap because he tried imitating a sound that is so damn old! And tiresome!
It has nothing to do with the "sound", and that is the confusion that we're creating ... the SOUND is not the reason why it was "progressive" ... the composition, and the totality of the piece IS progressive. Not the sound ... the main difference could be considered that it was "electric" and now had "effects" that were not there before, but that is NOT a good reason to call it progressive. Jimi used pedals and was the best wah wah player around, and he is not progressive because of his pedals!
I think that we're considering "cloning" something that sounds like that one did, and there is nothing wrong with it sounding like that, with one exception ... all the lawyers will be at the door saying you ripped them off! You just killed an artist and his work,, specially when he is new and is being intimidated into becomeing a dishwasher in the local restaurant! THAT is WRONG!
You can have that sound anytime, anyplace ... but your composition has to be ... better, shall we say ... c'mon ... a C on a Hammond Organ will always sound like a C on a Hammond Organ and you are telling me that no one else can use a C on a Hammond Organ, without adding some phazing, some chorus, some merde and a little lipstick? That's not what "music" is about, and never was, unless it was the hair bands in California in the 90's!
   ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 11:16
|
All I care about is whether or not the music moves me. Overanalysis about it doesn't move me. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 12:02
That isn't what Andy said and I get the impression here that you are being deliberately obtuse just to be contrary. Why would anyone want to listen to a modern music that sounds "like progressive rock of the 1970s" when they can listen to progressive rock of the 1970s? Why would anyone want to listen to a band that sounds "just like Yes" when they can listen to Yes? Why would anyone want to listen to an album that sounds "just like Wish You Were Here" when they can listen to Wish You Were Here? Why would anyone want to listen to a track that sounds "just like Refugees" when they can listen to Refugees? Why would anyone want to listen to a song that has a bit in it that sounds "like a bit from the middle of Lark Tongue In Aspic Part 1" when they can listen to the whole of Lark Tongue In Aspic Part 1? [And there we must stop because deconstruction of the cloning process any more that that is just silly]. ------------- What? |
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 12:37
While not adding to the one you replied to, I just want to point out that the confusion you are writing about was precisely the point of my original post (albeit it was not that clear). It is not clear to me either why a band would want to sound like something made 40 years ago, but the fact is that there are many more or less renowned modern prog rock acts that actually do exactly that. As I said in my OP, Opeth's Pale Communion has many parts that take away from my enjoyment of the record because some parts are so close to something already done in the 70s. For example the Genesis-esque intro acoustic guitars, and the very Starless-like intro of Faith in Others. I like the record when it manages to stand on its own, but it does so extremely rarely. Same could be said about Haken's "Cockroach" that sounds exactly like Gentle Giant, and Steven Wilsons stuff that always sounds like something from the 70s. If its so evident that one shouldn't do this, then it is extremely weird why these bands keep doing it anyway. That was my point from the beginning, but plenty of good insight of the problem has already been shared. I just wanted to clarify this. ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 12:42
|
^This sounds like a job for Neo-prog Man! Oh, he left the planet? Never mind.
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 12:53
A 'Prog vs Progressive' subject search on PA might be of some help.
|
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 13:51
Might be, but I really didn't think of it like that. But you may be right that it boils down to that anyway. ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: Kayleur
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 14:06
|
Has it been questioned on this thread yet how much a factor engineering had to play in the "olden days" sound? Things like having bass in the center or in one channel (so as to negate tracking,etc problems). Top of bass being tamed, "pollarded" so that the recordings in late 70s were brighter. Was not mic placement more simple then? (Later thety went crazy-overboard ,miking this and that separately "confusing" the final result.) Studio drum placement was generally different then. And earlier tube recording etc equipment giving that different - some say precious - "distortion" sound. |
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 14:35
Audio engineering no doubt has a huge role to play in the sound, and more often than not I encounter musicians who completely disregard the atmosphere of the mix as something that will fix itself or be fixed by the engineer. They then only focus on the composition, rather than the overall feel of the mix, which could be argued to be far more important. Sometimes it also feels like many of my favorite mixes are actually "bad" in the sense that there are many flaws that could have been polished by better production and engineering, but being "bad" gave them actually a far more distinct and "raw power" sound when compared to over-produced and polished productions. Analog equipment and low-dollar produced albums tend to surprise the listener, whereas digital compressor pumping ultra-mastered albums all sound the same, at least in sound. ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: Pastmaster
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 18:47
|
Posted By: Kayleur
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 21:27
I for one most certainly would now (recent Glass Hammer) and back then also (Starcastle). Anyways, pretty well nothing can sound unique anymore. All the tunes have been used up. Comes a point in time that you're bound to sound like something previous. Don't sweat it. |
Posted By: Pastmaster
Date Posted: February 22 2015 at 22:53
There is unique music out there still, musical boundaries are constantly being expanded. There are a good amount of bands/artists that aren't on this site that are creating stuff unique and fresh. Even bands on this site, Unexpect, Bjork, and others. However, just because something isn't unique doesn't mean it's bad. It's when bands get ripped off or cloned.
|
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: February 23 2015 at 00:28
|
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 23 2015 at 01:34
because those orginal bands are now either defunct or clapped out and their are only so many times I want to listen to Floyd, ELP, Genesis etc. Not everyone wants to hear ear hurting experimental math avante garde metal or whatever. I actually like melody , composition, clear production and something that doesn't give me a headache on a Sunday morning .That includes a lot of crossover and neo and even new agey stuff (shock horror). I like The Mars Volta occasionally but I couldn't listen to that sort of stuff all the time. Also I will draw the line at something like Haken's The Mountain where they just cynically tick every prog box and obviously struggle to come up with an original idea of their own.
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: February 23 2015 at 04:59
Well I think Dean has covered most of what I weanted to say in his response to you. You're over complicating something that is actually quite simple. I expressed an opinion based on what I do and don't like to hear. That is entirely subjective. If a band wants to wash its sound in mellotrons and wear wizards hats and tights on stage then they should go for it. I probably won't be buying any of their albums though, on account of the fact that I already have hundreds of albums that cover that sound and style back from when it was fresh and genuinely innovative and not derivative of something that had gone before. It was played by young and hungry musicians who wanted to "progress" and break the rules of rock music, not immitate their favourite bands of yesteryear. Your violin comparison is also nonsense, and you know it. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 23 2015 at 08:18
Again, you are mis-using the information. If I am a folk band using the old instruments, sounding like it did 100 years ago is not an insult.
What you are saying about music is bizarre ... and silly. If I want to sound like yesterday (check out Tangerine Dream doing Phaedra many years later!), I can, but while the same piece of music, it won't be the same ... as far as we know ... we do not have any tangible evidence that the sound of it 40 years ago was "right" and ours is wrong!
It's the same in all classical music, and conductors are known to have different ideas and opinions for interpretation, and the only thing you are doing is saying that there is only one truth (valid point) and the rest are copies ... but 40 years later, you might find that Bernstein's version was actually "clearer" and less "muddled" than even Igor's! The music sound better to your ear and it made it even more famous!
Is it better live or memorex ... I don't think it matters ... if you are in tune with the source. But it will matter if all you can compare is the "sound", and of course a while back the instrumentation and halls were not as good as they are today, and there weren't many effects to hide deficiencies (even in classical music!), and the audience still came.
Think folk music and accoustic ... all of a sudden your argument is crazy! The only thing that is "different" would be my voice and I don't sound like Woody Guthrie and Dean does not sound like Bob Dylan!
Does that make the music bad? ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Rednight
Date Posted: February 23 2015 at 09:23
| Yes, but to what end? |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 23 2015 at 10:29
|
It's insulting and very sad to me how supposedly a majority of Prog musicians fall in line and making the same decisions. When they all seem to follow the same path...Prog Rock fans feel a bit cheated and along with stressing that the music sounds too much like 70's Progressive Rock....when all along..they were probably innocently trying it out. As a result of what they bring to the table, some Prog fans might react to them like this: "Well..don't listen to "Neo Prog" and stick to the 70's" Prog....or...."You're not discovering the right bands and so you are dislocated in that sense"....or.....The opposed: "Neo Prog" is not like the 70's and you're not hearing the music for it's true identity." If many of you are hearing a repeated version of 70's Prog in the "Neo Prog", you will have to accept the new generation and how it relates to art. That could be an unfortunate series of disappointing discoveries because , good or bad, people are relating to art in a different way than the 70's. The way people reacted to art in the 70's was a vital energetic substance to Progressive Rock. That alone..was pushing Progressive Rock musicians beyond their boundaries. It basically meant..that if there was this abundance of interest in the audience , that they would work twice as hard to be original about it. Even "Going For The One" ..to various degrees resurfaced the memory of the early 70's Progressive Rock, but took it steps further by altering the sound with more modern keyboard settings and further adventurous guitar soloing/writing. Creating music that was progressive and changing it's sound and composition to something new without emulating what the composer had written 2 or 3 years before was suppose to continue after the 70's and it sort of died out. Keith Emerson had written Tarkus and for the next 3 years...everyone else was attempting to write another Tarkus while he was writing Karn Evil 9. By the time Progressive Rock bands were emulating the Brain Salad Surgery album, Emerson was already on his way to recording a progressive piece with an orchestra featured on Works Vol.1 There was more pressure on a Progressive Rock musician in the 70's to be original and further changing the music. Tony Banks always states something/anything, about how the early Genesis wasn't gaining enough popularity in the U.S. until Selling England By The Pound or The Lamb and truly..loads of kids in N.J. and P.A. bought the Foxtrot album and were already discussing how the next Genesis album would sound. All that support and pressure was in the air during the 70's Progressive Rock scene...unlike today's standards in which diseases like "Short Attention Span" have overthrown our Prog government and reduced it's original meaning to a minimum or poverty level which in some cases explains why several Prog events like fests...are cancelled due to lack of ticket sales.
|
Posted By: paragraph7
Date Posted: February 23 2015 at 11:01
So much this, and now I begin to notice what SteveG was talking about how the discussion is derailing to "Prog vs Progressive". So, progressive rock is about _progression_ rather than an established style. How moshkito can confuse this with mere similiarities in instrumentation, and make the analogy of conductors interpreting classical works in different ways, is beyond me. Romantic era composers progressed from the Wien Classical, and so forth. Wien Classical had it's place and time in the history of man just like the 70's prog rock did. But classical composers progressed, as did Jazz. The conductor analogy is only relevant if we were to have other bands cover a Genesis song in a different tempo or make some other change to the source material. It's hardly the same as modern prog bands living in the past and sacrificing an unique musical identity to an already established one. ------------- What you cannot speak of, you have to pass on in silence. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 23 2015 at 11:08
|
^Yes, this is why I'm not a particular fan of Neo-prog and go towards groups and genres outside of the classic prog style like Extreme/Tech and Experimental/Post Rock, in a quest to find something new or at least something not as dusty sounding as the more mainline prog genres. ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: cstack3
Date Posted: February 23 2015 at 19:13
Can the early 70s prog sound be cloned nowadays?Probably....wheel up a Mellotron, a Rickenbacker bass, some warbling lads singing harmony in counter-tenor, and let fly! The same could be asked of "Can the original blues sound be cloned nowadays?" Living in Chicago, I am forced to tolerate any number of all-white, "cool blues" musicians who attempt to portray themselves as offering the "real deal." F 'em. I saw Hound Dog Taylor and the Houserockers in the early 1970s, when he played to a 100% white college age audience. At one point, he shouted "Have you ever had the blues??" All the white kids started to cheer and clap, and he snarled "You ain't NEVER had the blues!!" I understood what he meant - the original blues musicians had to deal with alcoholism, drug addiction, VD, violence, robbery.....it was not an easy life. To try to rip that off by strapping on a Stratocaster and playing "Sweet Home Chicago" is a bit repellant to me. Same for early 70's prog. We musicians can play something that sounds like it, but we aren't the British/German/Dutch children who were born right after WWII in ruined nations....nor do we have the same societal pressures such as revulsion over the Viet Nam war, potential nuclear annihilation etc. I've written music and played it for people who said "You sound like Yes!" or "You sound like early Genesis," to which I might reply "You ain't NEVER had the prog!!" I haven't, I've just been an outside observer.
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 23 2015 at 19:22
Charles, if you can clone this, I'll be over to your house before tomorrow afternoon!  ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 24 2015 at 01:20
I understand your stance on neo prog but what do you think of something like Pallas - Dreams Of Men? That to me sounds nothing like seventies prog , not even the merest hint. There is neo prog and then there is neo prog. As usual we are hung up on labels.
|
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 24 2015 at 01:26
The seventies was a unique time for music , in fact so was the sixties and eighties for that matter. I have to admit that since then everything seems a bit of a 'fudge'. A very popular band nowadays that I like is Muse and they combine a whole load of elements derived mainly from the 70's (prog) , 80's (techno) and 90's ( a bit of straight rock influenced by their peers ( Oasis) ) and somehow make it work for them. I'm not sure what that means in the general argument other than it seems quite a cool thing to do.
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: February 24 2015 at 04:31
Muse are a bit of an anomoly in modern relatively mainstream music, because they are actually very good musicians. That's pretty unusual imo, and in some camps almost frowned upon. Late one night on BBC radio 4 some mooks were reviewing albums - at the time The Resistance came out - and this girl was saying how refreshing it was to hear a band pushing the boundaries a little, blending styles, messing things up a bit and writing passionate songs, and some guy laughed and said, I thought we'd left all that rubbish behind in the 70's. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 24 2015 at 08:25
I don't think it died out ... it just went somewhere else because it was not wanted at home anymore ... what else is new? We leave when we reach the age! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 24 2015 at 09:02
Sometimes people get hung up on quotes that appear to be sweeping generalizations. My quote was not. "Not being a particular fan of Neo-prog" is not the same as saying I dismiss all Neo-prog out of hand. In fact, I'm listening to Solstice's newest album as I type this.
And I have the newest album by Mostly Autumn readied to follow. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 24 2015 at 09:22
I would be more concerned with folks listening to a "label", than otherwise. I find that bizarre, actually, because one is shutting down other venues of music ... and one is not exactly listening to "music" per se, and I guarantee that they will dry out of their "fad". For my tastes and 50 years of history and friends with and in music, the ones that fell out of the whole thing were the ones that only liked "disco", or "blues" or crap, or (probably "neo-prog" in the future!
You're limiting your musical experience and taste and eventually you will tire of it faster! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 24 2015 at 12:15
I'm not sure if I understand you correctly. Reaching the age? If it means what think it means ...then did Segovia reach the age? I think not. It's still just music/magic and how you expand through it. What's the lame excuse for a majority of Prog music lacking in the area of creativity today and leaving the better choice of being creative to a minority of "Neo Prog" bands?
|
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 24 2015 at 14:15
Knock me down with a feather
 |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 24 2015 at 14:15
|
I don't think that ANY process died out. A lot of the music continues even when it's out of style, and 'disco" is a perfect example ... but when it's done by U2 on a place in Paris it's considered cool, but here ... no one cares! My joke is all kids end up leaving home, anyway, and my take is that music/arts only dies when the country/population dies, and it could be said that Europe lost a lot due to WW2 ... and even Edgar Froese made a comment about it in that special. I do not think, like you that there is a lack of creativity, that is more of a sign of blinders on the person that can not see or hear it, than it is a fact about the music itself. The only other issue is that it doesn't matter if it is "neo-prog" or "neo-crap" since the definitions are so poorly designed that Bob Dylan is neo-folk because he is not like Woody Guthrie ... because of a bizarre, and not specifically defined, btw, since there is no constant and different websites adhere to different things to make their case. I thought the same thing about theater, about 100 years ago, that became known as "neo-realism" (or neo-naturalism)which was another way to say that it was a copy of the original ... and sure enough in one play in Europe, they even put together a REAL butcher shop and you could smell it! How's that for bizarre, that a group of folks is so poor at showing you, and telling you anything that they have to make sure "you know" what they are about! I don't need music, literature or film or theater to do that for me ... but I find it bizarre that some folks have to have a "label" to even consider listening to it! Or worse ... only if it has a label will they listen to it, like Christian or any other designation! Or my favorite ... "dark"! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: SkeptiGal
Date Posted: February 24 2015 at 19:54
|
When I hear, say, Steven Wilson sure I hear echoes of 70s prog- a few riffs here or there mind me of a MB, KC, Genesis, or ELP. But only shades. He is not trying to repeat the past or even pay homage. He's creating his own music and intends on progressing toward new styles and instrumentation, Do we really need a "cloning" of early prog? I think not. If you want to hear the old stuff, just listen to it again. I do. It gets me through the day. But I'd rather have new guys like Wilson doing their own thing, cuz it works. Tech is different now too. Remember that Moog monster Emerson used to play? sh*t that thing looked scary! Now the same or better sound can come out of a much smaller instrument. Mellotrons? Are they even around anymore? Even tho the MB and KC used them, they kind of sound "tinny" now, Even though I love the sound and the incorporation in the MB music. Nowadays, they don't use a mellotron on tour- just a small synth/organ Julie Ragins plays. |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: February 25 2015 at 03:00
I would have agreed with you about Wilson being clearly inspired by 70's Prog but not necessarily in thrall to it (together with earlier and later developments of course e.g. I hear a bit of Psychedelia and a lot of Post-Punk in his music) However, there are sections of the otherwise excellent The Raven That Refused to Sing that for the first time since his Floyd drenched juvenilia, smack of the sort of textural homage to early Crimson, Rush and erm....Floyd that the likes of Tranatlantic and Wobbler churn out seemingly effortlessly to great acclaim. Maybe Mr W needs to take a break, as someone as prolific as he has been over the last few years is bound to betray some signs of cracks starting to show?... -------------
|
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: February 25 2015 at 03:25
|
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: February 25 2015 at 10:54
Hmm......then I guess all the great blues that Clapton, Beck, Page, Duane Allman, Vaughan, and the rest played over the years is just so much bullsh*te.....back to the drawing board. ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 25 2015 at 13:18
Clapton, Beck, and Page studied the Blues. The British Blues scene was very innovative to the development of Hard Rock. Their guitar tones ...particularly characters like Jeremy Spencer with his Elmore James emulation were cemented into the Blues scene in London. Many of the British guitarists were skilled and eventually met their heroes when they toured the U.S and further presenting them with opportunities to travel back to England and perform/record ...which was very sincere/noble of the British. On the other hand many of the British Blues guitarists lacked more in the area of vocals than guitar playing. The award of "White Boy Blues" was given, but the vocals lacked feeling in the phrasing and even the screaming which was a great aspect to Blues and if it wasn't done right, it didn't feel right and sounded awkward.
John Mayall sang like "Kermit the Frog", Ian Anderson came across like a Folk singer with a Blues twist and so did Sandy Denny. Chris Farlowe was kind of original and Mike Harrison was soulful. Paul Rodgers was very soulful and unique. John Baldry, Chris Youlden, and Alvin Lee were acceptable. Keith Relf was sometimes horrible sounding and had no business singing Blues. Steve Marriot and Rod Stewart had an original approach to Blues vocals , but Colin Cooper was just a terrible vocalist approaching Blues music with a total lack of feeling and forced emotions in his voice that were not fitting at all. Ironically Eric Clapton and Peter Green didn't bother to emulate Blues vocals, sang in their natural tone instead, and came across more fitting to the style of music. If you listen to Albert King's "Born Under A Bad Sign" album, most B.B. King albums, or one track in particular by Howlin' Wolf titled "Nature", it's like a breath of fresh air compared to most British singers in the British Blues times. On another note, some of our great Blues Masters in the U.S. recorded a few albums that were Psychedelic...like Muddy Waters and B.B King, and those albums were just completely awful and were far from representing what these Blues guys were all about. Musically it didn't work. The shoe completely did not fit. |