categorically speaking?
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=3095
Printed Date: April 25 2024 at 00:18
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: categorically speaking?
Posted By: 70sSoundquality
Subject: categorically speaking?
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 02:22
|
Hello all, I new to this group. I've been lurking about for a while-
and had a few laughs watching slight debates turn into rants, and so on
and so forth. But it is okay. I do not get upset by redundant posts
because I ultimately have the power to turn it off. I am a "progger" with difficulties in my musical life. The ones in my age braket are much more influenced by "radiohead" and what not. Me I'm a straight ahead progger! In the true sense of the word. I will only listen to music from 1970-1979, actively anyway. Maybe a little 1968 here or a little 1969 there, but I like to keep it mid to late 70s if ya know what I mean.  I write and record in a fully 70's analog multitrack studio! (70s drums, analog synths, organs, 70s mics, etc) I am laughing to think that radio-brain got in the archives but this is where I feel stupid by saying I like "prog rock". There is no such way to categorize a band in a mythodical way that will reflect its true purpose. There is no point in that to me. What the hell does prog rock mean anyways? I mean I definitely know the music I like is creepy, weird, trippy, dissonant, complex, etc etc. But never would I think to myself "wow this Pulsar album sounds progressive" But I dont care because I have given Radiohead a very generous and fair listen, and my thoughts were "well its better than brittney spears" and true, I am glad that dudes like radio head even got a chance. But on the big big picture, they have no chance at holding my respect or attention because they just aren't musically competent enough, particularly in the "arranging". But I dont want to get too far off track, I want to know something... Is there anyway I can narrow my "prog searching" on this webwsite down to dates? It's so very frustrating to click on all these band-links and seeing the album date begin at "1981" or "1992" when in fact I am just looking for more 70's stuff. Any way I can isolate all the albums from 1978 ?? There should be a more "archival" approach to searching if this is to be an archive, not that I am bitching or anything. I like 1970's bands like FM, Mona Lisa, Egg, Yes, Jumbo, etc etc. This music is able to be extremely artsy without seeming extremely contrived (which is how radio head comes across to me) Anyway, best to all and I just felt like dropping a line. Best, John |
Replies:
Posted By: chorus of one
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 02:29
| Why not be a little more open minded? Not giving music a chance because it was recorded in the wrong decade is immensely stupid in my opinion...No offence. |
Posted By: Emperor
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 02:58
|
Hello, 70sSoundquality! Well, being a schoolboy (till 16-17 years old maybe - it was till the mid-90s) I also remember how I didn't listen anything post-70s-recorded (except Queen only). I think the main cause was in my lack of information at that moment, but suddenly I started to disappear some newer excellent bands like Dire Straits, Marillion or Peter Gabriel solo albums. Time-by-time I grew more open-minded and got more and more necessary information - it was a great amazing for me how wonderfull some newer experimental records by Peter Hammill, Robert Fripp and Brian Eno are! Internet (and such forums) also provide a lot of good knowledges about as rare bands from 60s and 70s, as about modern Progressive Scene. By such forums I've got to know and to listen a lot of less-known "continental" and non-european bands. From 70s: Samla Mammas Manna (Sweden), Omega (Hungary), Cai (Spain), Zao, Magma and Pentacle (all France), Tibet and Popol Vuh (both Germany), Popol Vah (Norge), Univers Zero (Belgium), Asia Minor (Turkia), Supersister (Netherlands) and a lot of great Italians - Lucio Battisti, Banco Del Mutuo Soccorso, Locanda Delle Fate, Il Balletto Di Bronzo, Quella Vecchia Locanda, Arti Et Mestieri... Excellent and really innovative modern bands: Citizen Cain (Scotland), Cast (Mexico), Garden Wall and Taproban (both Italy), Solaris and After Crying (both Hungary), Inquire (Germany), Saga (Canada), Present (Belgium), Halloween (France), Djam Karet (USA) and several Swedens - Isildurs Bane, Anekdoten, Anglagard, Landberk, Sinkadus, etc...
------------- I Prophesy Disaster... |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 03:02
| It's a good question.A lot of people will contend that the only true progressive rock was recorded in the seventies and I have some sympathy with that view.It would be helpfull to be able to isolate different decades on the site.One for the mods to consider I suspect. |
Posted By: Valarius
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 03:16
|
chorus of one wrote:Posted By: 70sSoundquality
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 03:51
simple, because 99% of the time, if it is 70s, I will like it. 99% of the time if it is non 70s, I will not like it! I am not closed minded. SOme things just cant be helped. I like food, but I hate sea food. I like 70s 'prog' but I hate music !! lol also another thing is the whole electronics thing is a big buzz for me. Analog circuitry and analog recordings with big impressive discrete consoles make for a much more "canvas" like of a recording. I have yet to hear a non-70s production that actually evokes anything out of me, and its very hard to listen to more modern production techniques after listening to an engineering master-piece like "breakfast in america". Truth is there is a lot more 70s stuff I have not heard and I would like to focus on that as opposed to listening to new music best, john |
Posted By: 70sSoundquality
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 03:57
see theres some bands Ive never heard! I would like to listen to
some newer stuff I guess just to see what Im missing. The last new band
I heard was supposed to be one of the better modern prog bands. They
are called "glass hammer" and it was just aweful to me. I could do much
better BMS is cool to me, remember that song "paolo moledetto!" ?? Wasn't
that from 1979 or 80. Thats a good little numberthere. I just wish i
could understand Italian. Best,
|
Posted By: 70sSoundquality
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 04:02
I hear ya bud. It seems like everything works that way. When one thinks about a vintage organ you think of quality, and a big rosewood tubed-machine. When you think of a new digital keyboard, you just think of plastic and IC's. To me, usually the 70s stuff is the most mature and realized music out there, and that is in the vein I try to compose and arrange in. and thank you for reading Best, John |
Posted By: sigod
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 04:27
|
Welcome to the forum 70'sSoundquality. You mentioned Egg in you first post and I'd quite forgotten they existed. If memory serves me well, Egg had Dave Stewart and Barbara Gaskin as members. I owned 'The Civil Surface' for a while but along with the majority of my prog collection, it was stolen in a burglary. Not sure I would confine myself to a specific period in time for music listening (it's like having a huge garden and only walking on the path) but if you know what you like and you like what you know, then who am I to to tell you otherwise? Anyways up, I hope you have a good time here. ------------- I must remind the right honourable gentleman that a monologue is not a decision. - Clement Atlee, on Winston Churchill |
Posted By: James Lee
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 05:34
|
Welcome- great nick, interesting stance. I always had a good laugh at the audiophiles out there who seem to think that anything not recorded in a state-of-the art facility is less worthy of consideration. I'm still happy with my car's tape deck, and though I'm just as happy with DAWs and mp3s, I tip my hat to you for knowing what you like and saying *&!@! off" to the rest. I don't suppose you've noticed how often digital remasters actually end up crappy. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/sollipsist/?chartstyle=kaonashi"> 
|
Posted By: 70sSoundquality
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 06:24
lollol I hear ya man. Back into the 1970s, albums were mixed for records. That was the analog mixing "philosophy". Vintage mixes have more dynamic differences in depth and volume range because the maximum headroom of vinyl was +4db. Now on to the future......CD’s are able to handle headroom of absolute 0 db fullscale which is about +10 db analog. You might not know this, but +10db would melt or destroy a vinyl record. Now with CD's, everything is mixed SOO loud (which is why I have a big problem with listening to anything new, take a "glass hammer" mix for instance. Uckk) but in order to make all that volume fit on a cd, compression is used with extreme force. Tube compression is my friend. Solid state and plug-in modernized compression is my enemy so I choose to keep it 70s. best, John PS-worst remaster Job might be "tales" or "relayer". Ohhhh no no, the worst remaster job is "Triumvirat" (A la Carte) from 1979. Awesome album, terrible broadband freq range and upper mids are almost non existant. Its just click and presense to me. Why didnt I get that remaster job???? |
Posted By: mirco
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 06:46
|
I simpathize with 70soundquality felling. In fact, I bought a lot of 80 stuff (that was the decade when I became economically independent, and have a little extra-cash for my hobbies) and those records are recollecting dust in some box. The creativity, the sound, the magic of the early seventies has never been achieved again, as far as I know. I give you the fact that there were some oasis in the music desert, like Marillion, but the balance is very negative. About the nineties, well, I became a father and my time was absorbed by the kids, so I hadn't the chance of knowing what was going on those days. ------------- Please forgive me for my crappy english! |
Posted By: oliverstoned
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 06:56
i agree nothing can replace the magic of the late 60's/70's there are VERY FEW good prog efforts since the late 70's nothing to do, that's a fact even if Radiohead and others today band are not too bad , it has NOTHING TO DO with the real bands. The problem today with poular music is that it's so poor and musically weak, that when a band just know playingn they are considered "prog"... For example "Dream theatre" is a very bad and poor band... Sorry guys! |
Posted By: Emperor
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 08:59
I'm glad that you're a bit intrigued :-) The bands I listed above are pretty less-known even among Prog-listeners. Unfortunately I haven't listened Glass Hammer, though several men told me positive words about, as I remember. You're asking about what modern band I mentioned above is the best. I say ALL OF THEM. Frankly speaking, it's difficult to me to say what is the best, because they all very different. And as I read your posts, you don't like the sounds of modern keyboards, just prepare the analog ones (as I do too, BTW). Though to my opinion, it doesen't matter what kind of keyboards somebody uses - the general thing is the purpose he uses analog or digital keyboards, how right he does it. Sometimes digital keyboards are very useful in complex with analog ones (Genesis'74-75 or Pink Floyd'73-75, for example). Mentioned above Isildurs Bane (in some sense), Magma, Present and Univers Zero are from the especial Prog-subgenre named RIO (Rock In Opposition), which means that they play very complex avant garde music. (Still try to wait to search for them ;-)). Garden Wall, Anekdoten, Djam Karet and Saga use much "modern" sounding, so I also recommend to you not to hurry with them. I especially recommend to you the following modern albums: Citizen Cain SOMEWHERE BUT YESTERDAY (1994, imagine that Genesis gathered in their classic line-up just after THE LAMB LIES DOWN ON BROADWAY - that's this record!) and RAISING THE STONES (1997, this album is absolutely unique and reminds nothing already - outstanding intelligent, powerful and clever record with oceans of excellent melodies and arrangements). Taproban - search for their 2004 album named OUTSIDE NOWHERE - groundbreaking virtuoso Progressive with a lot of analog keyboards. Cast ANGELS AND DEMONS (1997) - the band which also is like to nothing else. They play more quiet and melodic kind of Progressive. To my opinion the 1997 album is the best by Cast. Any album of Inquire and After Crying is at least excellent. (I heard almost all of them).
------------- I Prophesy Disaster... |
Posted By: Emperor
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 09:07
|
And among mentioned above 70s bands I especially recommend to you the following: Lucio Battisti ANIMA DE LATINA (1974), Pentacle LES CLIEFS (sorry, I don't remember this French name exactly, anyway this band released this one album only - in 1975), Il Balletto Di Bronzo YS (1972), Banco Del Mutuo Soccorso - their debut self-titled album (1972) and DARWIN (1972, only be careful buying it - the band rereleased the same album in 1991 with modern synths!) (BTW, I didn't heard the song you mentioned, because I haven't 79-80 records by them), Premiata Forneria Marconi L'ISOLA DI NIENTE (1974), and any album by Locanda Delle Fate and Asia Minor. ------------- I Prophesy Disaster... |
Posted By: arcer
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 14:31
dude, what's in your all-analogue studio - some moogs, voxs, neumanns, ureis, a nice old neve desk? - can I come and record there?
|
Posted By: Beau Heem
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 15:36
My question, exactly...  I understand and share the views presented in this thread. But in my opinion, not only did the 80s bring the worst out of recording, the 80s also turned out to kill all inspiration from arrangements. Not having lived the 70s myself, it's hard to step in the shoes of someone who's "brought up" with the atmosphere and sensibility of the vinyl record. When it comes to stuff like recording or mixing an album (/a song/whatever), I'm all lost and lonely, 'cause I have no clue, whatsoever, on that field. IMO albums should be recorded live - if not in front of an audience, but anyway. This is one of the reasons my own prog rock band decided not to have any quest "stars" on our yet-to-be-recorded album, and I even insisted (not that anyone opposed to it, nor that I had to tell anyone about it) to drop myself from playing the cello, it being impossible (for me) to both sing and play cello adequately at the same time... I think that closing everything that's made after 1979 out of your "listening spectre", you lose a lot, but that lot is a lot less than the lot you lose if you keep yourself from listening anything made prior to 1967, or even 1867.  most of the s*it done in the 80s, 90s and since isn't crap because of the instruments or the recording or the mix. They are crap because it is what they are "meant" to be. It isn't a complicated matter. By saying this, I do not mean that ppls tastes have developed in such a sh*tty direction, but that such a direction is the only one provided to an average listener. I do not have the guts to claim that the amount of good (read: prog) music recorded hasn't decreased since the 70s, but I dare to say that people with a taste for "the different kind of music" (whatever that difference is) are too ready to give up and quit the search of such. This is (IMHO), the sole reason why all the prog acts that are noticed are closely (or at least rather closely) related, one way or another, to "The Acts" of the (early) 70s. It is funny that the music which was undoubtedly progressive (in the actual meaning of the word) in the 70s, and that is still named progressive rock, wouldn't be progressive 30 years later (read:today), and despite this fact the music that is "all around" today is much more simpler and regressive than the music progressive rock progressed from. (sorry, I'm too lazy to check if I can use the verb progress in such a manner...) When it comes to Radiohead, I am (after a rather lengthy consideration and despite the fact that I have earlier stated otherwise) ready to entitle the named band as being progressive (I still have no idea, whatsoever, what they have to do with progressive rock, though). On the whole, the term progressive rock cannot be used when talking about a piece of music that is forgotten by tha majority (if not all) of the (future) composers (and/or musicians). A progress that doesn't lead anywhere (is forgotten or left unfurthered) isn't a progress at all. As progressive rock wasn't a term to describe the music known today as such, we shouldn't disable our contemporaries of the word progressive. To be progressive doen't have anything to do with progress anymore. However, what we call progressive rock hasn't died (it is almost death-bound, though). It is our job and task, as fans and even more so, as musicians (those around here), to make good music, to listen to such music, to purchase such music, to appraise (even with "bad grades") such music - music that suits (or comes close in suiting) our ears. Even though that music can hardly be evalueted as progressive music having heard the progressant (am i developing new words?) elements used in music decades ago. Gee, I'm happy to be a bit drunk - I'm able to write some of my thoughts down. They might be worth nothing, but anyway...  Now, those of you using soulseek; I'd be more than happy if you'd even consider listening to the music I am/I've been a part of. I'm found in the slsk under the name Beau Heem (hit me w/ a msg, plz). Thanks in advance. -Beau ------------- --No enemy but time-- |
Posted By: 70sSoundquality
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 18:31
lol you can record for free. Its not a professional studio. I record at -10db where most pro analog have more headroom of +4. But it still sounds quite pro and 70s. I can give you an incomplete list here though, -1978 Teac 80-8 (half inch 8 track, 15 IPS) -1979 Teac model 5B (mixing console) -1975 Teac/tascam model 5A mixers (2 of em) -1978 Teac Model 15 recording console (16 channel board, HUGE, 400 lbs, smashed my hand between it and a fence, but I got it for free. Each channel strip has 2 discrete FET circuits) -1978 Teac DX-8 (for compression and noise reduction) -1978 Ludwid Birch (disco silver drums) -1973 gibson Eb-3 bass -1974 Les paul Deluxe -1975 Hammond dolphin -1976 Fender Rhodes piano -1957 Wurlitzer tube organ (model 4420) (non 70s) -1976 Octave Cat analog synthesizer -1976 Arp Axxe (synth) -1992 Fender Super amp (non 70s, 8 tubes) -1979 Mu-tron envelope follower -1976 Univox echo chamber -1975 Big muff sustainer -1967 Dual spring reverberator (for effect sends, not 70s. Great vintage reverb sound) A lot of the gear above was given to me for free. People spend hundreds of bucks on new gear, but I like to think im much more outgoing than that. I want to score that deal, I want to find that old man who has 3 tube amps and thinks they are only worth 20 bucks. My mic list is very weak, but I have a couple 1972 Electro Voice 664's (good mics). Rest of my mics are just CRAP, like the Shure SM58 or the Audix om2. I have other things too, like 70s Akai mixdown decks and stuff. Also other assorted 70s guitars and effects, etc. My prize though is my 1976 Pioneer Hr-100 8 track deck (yes the big clunky carts). I modded it to record at 10IPS. Nobody disses 8-tracks when they hear my drums play back on it! 8 Tracks are wonderful Best, John |
Posted By: 70sSoundquality
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 21:18
|
wait a minute, you guys are in finland and ireland!!! how the hell are
you going to record at my pad???? You guys can fly out, LOL |
Posted By: Rob The Plant
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 21:26
|
Seems a bit harsh to close off some great later prog. It may not be a s numerous, but it's there man.
------------- Collaborators will take your soul. |
Posted By: 70sSoundquality
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 21:39
i have an obsession with the 70s. such a serious one that when listening to non-70s music i feel like im "coming down". cant be helped |
Posted By: Sweetnighter
Date Posted: January 18 2005 at 22:14
|
Welcome 70sSoundquality! Its nice to see somebody like you on the boards here, I may actually use you as a resource in the future... I'm just getting into recording myself, although I don't have near the resources you do so I'm going digital, which doesn't bother me as much as it may for you... although I'd love to get my hands dirty in that kind of recording .
You really have a lot of retro stuff... like that 57 Wurlitzer, wow,
thats ancient stuff... makes me think of Sun Ra and his Arkestra .
If you don't mind my asking, how old are you and where do you live? And
how long have you been recording what instruments do you play?In terms of digital vs. analog, I think you're too harsh on ditigal technology. Although digital can sound colder and doesn't have the natural warmth/distortion that tube analog recording has, there are some benefits. MIDI allows an amateur musician to be a pro one man band! Some may criticize and say that MIDI takes the skill out, but I think it creates a market for a new type of skill, namely musical programming/sequencing. Although most of the board here won't praise it too highly, newer electronica/techno/dance music incorporates pretty sophisticated programming through MIDI. One question: from my limited recording experience, I've found that digital doesn't give much leeway to high signals while recording- any signal that clips on my recording program (Cubasis) makes the entire track straight static. You say digital is mixed at higher levels... you are referring just to the monitors levels during mixdown or what? Again, I'm new with this stuff, so I may have totally missed the mark. Also, I agree with some of the other posts made here, you shouldn't limit yourself simply to the 70s, or even simply to prog for that matter. I firmly believe that the greatest musician is open to all musical styles and can draw from any style should he or she wish to. Other suggestions for you might be found in the Jazz-Rock (Fusion) realm... groups like Mahavishnu Orchestra, Return to Forever, Larry Coryell, and Weather Report (althought WR is a bit of a stretch as its not really rock). I'm just discovering it myself, but krautrock groups like Can and Neu! might be of interest as well. ------------- I bleed coffee. When I don't drink coffee, my veins run dry, and I shrivel up and die. "Banco Del Mutuo Soccorso? Is that like the bank of Italian soccer death or something?" -my girlfriend |
Posted By: 70sSoundquality
Date Posted: January 19 2005 at 17:11
Well I had a little 16 bit studio thing going on and I found that track separation was next to impossible, and I mean to sound BIG like any Yes recording you've ever heard. Also digital gave me these popping and glitching noises which had to with the latency settings, but in the end I though digital was an aweful, rotten media to get into because to me, looking at a bright screen while trying to record is a little uninspiring. my age currently is 18 and i live near San Francisco, CA. I play all the instruments i have with equal ability and can play other things like maybe a little flute in my day. Ive been recording I guess since I was 12 because I got a four track then. But just recently (last 3 years) ive been diving into to composing, and I mean really arranging things like these ex-proggers did in the 70s. Im a one man band and drums usually go down first. By the way that 57 wurly organ is very creepy sounding. I paid 60 bucks for it, but the tube amp in the back is the whole point of this organ! I will now use a 1957 tube amp to pre amplify my bass guitar, which would really give me a vintage bass tone.
Well to me thats not really right. The 70s were great because recording time was at least $200 bucks an hour at decent sounding studio. That meant that only the best of the best would be recording in a studio back then. That also means i dont have to weed through a lot of bullsh*t to find something with quality
Now what do you mean by straight static?? You cannot punch digital like you can with analog. +3db was always clipping for my digital bass guitar recordings, but only for the part that was played to heavily. To even these things out Id go with buying a decent compressor, maybe a DBX compresssor? ? That will take the rough edges off. But dont use the built in plug-in compressor. Just not worth it. As to digital being mixed to higher levels, i mean 0db fullscale is now the mastering levels for Cd. Thats means each instrument can be louder, where vinyl records have a limit to what volume can be placed on them. Another problem with digital is ear fatigue. Ive been in digital land for 6 hours and my ears started to slip and I simply didnt feel to good. With analog i can go way longer than 6 hrs
why though? There is enough stuff from the 70s to fill my plate. I dont want to become a chronic musical listener, I dont have the titles for styles of music like some do. I just know the 70s is the best so why would I try the rest? Even if it is decent? My approval of modern music is not that important. Besides, with 70s recordings your guarenteed awesome sound and tonal quality. Best, John ----- www.freewebs.com/octavecat |