Hi,

I find this strange. Mostly because something of the nature that you speak, is not about the "art" of it all, the band and the individuals, but about your "likes" and "dislikes".

It does not matter who the artist is, let's say Picasso, with 1001 paintings, and you and I both will say that that one is crap, and that one ... you call that a painting? ... and so on, but in the end, IN ITS TOTALITY, you can sit there, and eventually say ... got to admit, not my preference, but one heck of an artist and he did a lot.

I think, sometimes, that we are too far apart from the music and these bands, and we do not understand them. You should have heard the wording about Gentle Giant in 1972, 1973 and such, when around my roomate and friend, there were people saying things like ... that's horrible vocals ... because they wanted to hear rock'n'roll lyrics and not some supposedly Rabelais'ian piece with modern school vocals that rock STILL has not used or worked with well enough for people to get more familiar with extremely different things in music. And rock music is the simplest form, and the one that has expanded the least from a point of view of possibilities and comparatively speaking to other arts!

I'm sure that many people did the same thing to Stravinsky. Or Bartok. Or Orff (specially his lyrics for Carmina Burana ... go check those out! That's why your symphony, or rock band, will never do it, btw!

Of the 2K CD's I have, and still 1500 LP's and going back to the beginning of my psychedelic/weird/off kilter/crazy/weird/experimental collection, there are a lot of things that you can shake your head at, be it Roy Harper standing there on the loo, or Kevin Ayers throwing up in the kitchen, or RW/RG doing their song, but all in all, for me, it is just a part of life and the one thing that no one got in the White Album when John and Paul just walked down the street with the microphone turned on, and every one thought it was just crap!

It wasn't crap ... it was life!

Now, lyrics I might agree with you, since I'm not exactly one to like vapid and vacuous rock music lyrics that supposedly mean something and in the end, they don't. I won't even discuss LZ because they are everyone's lyrical darling and best example of what "lyrics" are supposed to be like ... but I like the differences and the wild ones. AD2 is wild with lyrics. Banco's singing is an acquired taste that eventually just melts in your heart. Ange in their early days (up to Tome VI), was the same and very theatrical, something that only Peter Hammill can do well, and everyone else wonders how can he do that? It's not about the doing that ... it's the context that it is set next to that specifies the strength of the whole thing.

But really, since you and I are not doing it, why are we being critical about someone else doing it? Would you enjoy that comment?

I'm with you - mediocre vocals/lyrics definitely ruin some music for me. In my experience it's been with '70s jazz/rock fusion. For instance, post-Al Di Meola Return to Forever, or some of the solo albums of the classic fusion musicians. 

But I try not to limit myself to my first impression - it can take a few listens to get used to.

For an artist, IT IS!

You will never be anyone that matters, other than collecting a few dollars here and there, if all you do is pay attention to everyone else's output. First of all, none of it agrees with anything. Second of all, these comments would be so far apart and weird that you could not possibly understand them. Third of all, you will be OK today, and tomorrow you will be sh*t because they now like someone else.

NOT being a practitioner of the art, does NOT make you qualified to judge it. You can choose not to buy it, but just sitting up and stating that it is bad, and then saying that someone else is better, because you like it, is not quite a very good objective concept or idea about the music that you are discussing.

And the majority of the history of the arts, is about people that went against the grain, because they were told they could not do it, and weren't good enough ... you really ought to read some of the early stuff about the Beatles, Rolling Stones, Kinks and the shakers and movers that helped bring all of the music that we listen to today. From "you call that music?" to "they will never amount to anything", to "just another kitchen band", to "how can anyone enjoy that loud crap?", even going so far as to having Elvis legs never show on a TV spot whatsoever, because it was suggestive and this and that and this and that at the time.

The internet, has destroyed the "ruination of new music", and my hope is that the artists that do it, get stronger and stronger and better for it, regardless of what you and I like, or think! Or any board out there says. You can not be FAUST and goof around with toys and special effects that is so appreciated 20/30 years later, because at the time the ears were not tuned to it, and its potential. The late 60's were full of artists experimenting with voice in theater and film, to the point that rock music finally took it on ... but no one wants to even take a look at the experimental theater at the time to realize this. 

It didn't ruin anything new ... much of it disappeared ... few today have any idea of what THE LIVING THEATER was really all about, and how it affected so much music and arts out there ... but its soul and source did not disappear ... it is alive and well in so much music yesterday and today, and in other arts. It was experimentation in theater in the 50's that gave us the American greats and the British greats, and the same thing happened in music ... it did not get ruined. The black music may have died a bit, but by the middle and late 60's it has exploded and when you saw Michael Jackson 10 years later, you saw a 50/50 mix in the audience, STILL the only such mix these days!

Either that, or we are back to ... what was it ... schlagger ... or something like it? I hope that never happens to our beloved "progressive music" because it is not something that "we" like, or "dislike". Or worse, that the government thinks it does not represent the will ... errrrr .... are you ready? ... of the people!

Vocals are important to me, so my interest can go away when there is mediocre or too clean vocals, that is also quite common in new music.

Davesax1965 wrote: Pedro likes coming on and making comments about what it means to be an artist.  Except he doesn't play.

He writes, he directs, and films. He doesn't require a musician to tell him what is artistic or not. 

The rest is not worth discussing!

So what happened ?... During 32 seconds there's some spicy harmony coming from church bell rich sound, not quite in tune (but that's makes it exciting) and the rythm section... I was in soundscape, contemplation-please-do-not-disturb mode, expecting some more drama and tension. Then all of a sudden there's a guy singing, the rythm section is the same but everything becomes "correct" and less mysterious. I guess the 32 first seconds are called awkward, just enough for the sung part to be felt as a deliverance "Ah they nail it, they're in control".

So it's really a matter of how we connect to each other...

Aye.  Same here. 

Right on. I tend to enjoy "warm" sounding recordings. I'm getting better at mixing and running my own stuff for my projects, and it creates a whole new level of appreciation/disdain for certain records.

Maybe this is due to such a coincidental meeting of unorthodox minds, that it defies all probability laws  ...BUT some hints in the thread suggest it could also be that a whole roaring crowd might one day hold a protest and demand a major editing !!

I'm not sure what that even means, but I will agree that vocals can 'ruin' the accessibility of a new band for me. This is one of the reasons why I have always had trouble with VDGG. I recall first listening to their albums in college (Pawn Hearts and then later Godbluff...)but not liking the vocals by Hammill.

While I have come to accept his vocals on most of their tracks...vocals in general can really bother me if they seem annoying.

I'm far less picky about production or recording values if the music is good.

Where can we listen to those albums ? Regarding the global atmosphere and dynamics I expect them to not be my cup of tea, but given your great ears ( by the way,  http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=100703&PID=5098490#5098490" rel="nofollow - beat my super score there , and then next step you'll  be ready to train and challenge Dylan Beato at speed-naming piano bunch of notes  ) it's unlikely the Muses would refuse you at least some moments by very gifted musicians' standards...