| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
jude111 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 20 2009
Location: Not Here
Status: Offline
Points: 1754
|
 Posted: March 21 2014 at 00:19 |
 HolyMoly wrote:
A separate question is whether the human race will survive another 200 years. If we don't, maybe the hardier species remaining on the planet can still enjoy all those Yes and Genesis albums. Ah. But what will they play them on? Who will pay for the electricity? This poses a problem. I hope it doesn't come to that.
Assuming we do, in all seriousness, I'd say maybe 1% of all the great music today will still be remembered 200 years from now. Luckily, thanks to Bandcamp, that still comes out to a couple of million bands.
|
And if the human race *does* survive for the next 200 years, another important question is: Do the Chinese or Asians care all that much about 1970s (UK) prog music?  Because if they don't (and let's face it, most here in PA don't care and aren't interested in the music that's been made in China), then, yeah, probably prog's not going to be all that warmly loved in the year 2214.
Edited by jude111 - March 21 2014 at 00:20
|
 |
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 00:24 |
Hey, I did buy both Hatfield and the North CDs from a local store. On a serious note, yes indeed, apart from the names of PF, JT and Rush, prog hardly makes an impression in the second most populated country in the world. And even those three names only resonate with the small ( and largely metropolitan) minority who listen to a little bit of Western music. And we don't attach the same importance to preserving the past as the West seems to. So forget about prog rock, I don't think the work of R D Burman, Ilayaraja or A R Rahman would be remembered in 2050. If I am still alive and so is PA, I will let you know whether I got it right. 
Edited by rogerthat - March 21 2014 at 03:59
|
|
uduwudu
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 17 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2603
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 03:58 |
silverpot wrote:
Out of those 250 songs Irving Berlin has 39 song writing credits. That's pretty amazing for a three year period. His name will probably be remembered for another 100 years.
There's no business like show business.
|
Nah, that was Ethel Merman. Immortalized on two Genesis live albums though apparently mixed out of the new version of Three Sides Live. Shame... Speaking of Irving I heard one of his numbers (a pro-Republican US political thing called I Like Ike) - Eisenhower, not Willis. Anyway, it was beautifully composed, arranged,played, thoroughly detailed and technically interesting and very musically correct and yet, still one of the most unbearably tedious things I have heard in a long time (stupid as well, lyrically, "I like Ike and Ike likes the mike"...). That I regret to say will stay in the memory for longer than I care. 
|
|
Prog 74
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 16 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 171
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 09:31 |
rogerthat wrote:
Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant that it is more organised in the commercial sense. For the first time, you had whole corporations, some with interests (again, used in the financial sense of the term) in film/television, employing an army of executives to decide which albums would be made, which artists would get a chance to record. The activity of promoting an album or selling it say in record stores or online also became highly professional. Substitute all music or music related terms here with a word like cars or cosmetics and the above sentences would probably still make sense. And that is what I am getting at. Even if the music business in some sort of sense may have been centuries old, it was the quantum leap in technology in the 20th century that allowed music to be sold worldwide as a PRODUCT that fulfilled a NEED. And that has a very significant impact on the kind of music that gets pushed to the forefront of culture. The industry will make every effort to get you to listen to what THEY want you to listen to. Because they are just like any competitive organisation being run for money. We are still reluctant to acknowledge this even as the music business marks a decade of a steep decline in album sales (i.e. lurching perhaps towards it demise at least in its present form) because we do not like to believe our tastes could be manipulated by invisible corporations. But it is undeniable, just as in any other walk of life today. We have corporations competing to fulfill our needs and purporting to offer readymade products to satisfy those. It takes a conscious assertion of our ability to make our own choices to step back from the marketplace and decide that we will only pay for albums we want to listen to and not necessarily the ones the industry wants us to listen to. But they obviously bank on the fact that such people are bound to be in a minority and there will be enough listeners who are casual enough to be content with what is advertised in the billboards and on the TV channels as 'good music'. |
This is right on the money dude. What is considered "good" or "popular" is indeed very much manufactured by corporations and we are manipulated into believing it to be so. It's really part of the brain-washing & dumbing down of society that keeps most folks from taking a step back and conscientiously objecting to what they are hearing or seeing. If MTV says that in order to be popular and hip you need to buy the latest Katy Perry album then people will, by the hordes. A complex, intelligent band like the Flower Kings can't compete when the game is rigged against them. People don't want to think, they want to dance damn it!
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 09:39 |
|
I wouldn't say people would necessarily be reluctant to step up in terms of attention span or accepting complexity in music. Lots of them may be but nevertheless an even bigger problem is most people would not like to have to look hard for any product they need because that is the modern way. Our lifestyle pampers us to no end so we have a subconscious need to get what we want without having to look for it, even when it comes to works of art. I used to resent the idea of having to find out about good music that I might like rather than being told about it in the papers or TV...that is, until I found out what all I was missing.
Edited by rogerthat - March 21 2014 at 10:03
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 18993
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 09:49 |
Hi,
I've been mentioning this for several years in quite a few of my posts.
The history of the music itself, is debatable today, and we won't be there in 100 years, so it's all conjecture. However, we have one precedent that we did not have before, and it is a massive amount of music that was recorded, in the past 75 years, and this is something that "classical" and any other "music" did not have until 1925/1930 or thereabouts. Film, created a "history" and a "snapshot" of that time and place, and how people thought, and saw things. Music, added to it, and it was just a matter of time before music could be recorded, like film was doing to the visual and eventually adding the sound strip to the celluloid.
All that is left of the history of music from 500 years, let's say, is what has survived in the librettos and the scores of music, that some teachers kept for their students and such. This was their "recording" of the time, but it did not exactly tell us a whole lot about that day and age, like rock/jazz music has in the 20th century. The advent of "rock'n'roll" as a form of anti-social behavior would not have been accepted in any music form until the 20th century as a historical document in the 16th or 17th century for example, when so much of music was dominated by the upper class, and pretty much stating that the lower classes had no talent for the arts, which was strictly something that the upper classes enjoyed and the lower classes couldn't!
Advertising and the media, killed the upper class controls of the arts, and it continues to do so, except that today, "upper class" means super rich, and Mick Jagger fits better the whole thing than any of the classical music stars! Better wines and food, if you will!
I seriously believe that the line between the "classical" and "popular" music will be almost gone in another 50 years! In the sense that the time and place will be remembered more for the music that we love and respect, than it will any "classical" music, that died when the ballerina fell over and banged her head! Even Ian thought that the future was not classical music, but what we were doing and appreciating!
You got to see that "editorial" and its subtle comment.
I see "progressive" as a possible leader in the attempt to show that "popular" music, deserves just as much respect as "classical" music, specially when it shows its quality and talent, like so few classical folks are doing in these days, courtesy of the bad instructors in academic areas of music. Why would you go see some flute guy, when you can see Ian Anderson? Why would you go see some violin guy when you can see Jean Luc Ponty? Why would you go see some Soprano out there, when there are far better singers in rock and jazz out there? Why wouldn't you want to see a guitar maestro like Jon McLaughlin? Why wouldn't you want to see a Keith Jarrett? These guys are far more versed and talented than just about anyone on the "classic music" horizon and only a stuck up bunch of jerks would not appreciate their musicianship and talent!
In some ways, the "long cut" might not exactly be the measure of what might become as a "standard", but it should differentiate it from the top of the pops material, which is fun stuff that sells, but not considered "serious music" per se as the stuff that we discuss.
I think that VdGG, Genesis, Pink Floyd, King Crimson, Yes, will be the well known "composers" (definition will be refined I guarantee you!) of this time and place, and this is not all about pop music! And I'm one of those fighting that battle. This is the classical music of our time, and even Sir Paul agrees with that assessment!
|
|
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
|
|
Prog 74
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 16 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 171
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 10:13 |
|
You make some very valid points Moshkito. Part of the problem classical music has is that they keep re-recording the same stuff over and over. Every conductor feels compelled to record the 9 Beethoven symphonies, though there are hundreds of recordings of his symphonies already in existence. It becomes tiresome and stale after awhile. More focus should be spent on new works or works from relatively unknown composers. One of the main reasons VdGG, Genesis, Pink Floyd, King Crimson, Yes and any other band we enjoy remain so popular with us is that they are creating their own, original body of work. If they were more or less forced to keep re-recording 50s rock songs over and over rather than new and exciting works of art then we would not be listening to them now.
|
|
jude111
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 20 2009
Location: Not Here
Status: Offline
Points: 1754
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 11:11 |
rogerthat wrote:
Hey, I did buy both Hatfield and the North CDs from a local store. On a serious note, yes indeed, apart from the names of PF, JT and Rush, prog hardly makes an impression in the second most populated country in the world. And even those three names only resonate with the small ( and largely metropolitan) minority who listen to a little bit of Western music. And we don't attach the same importance to preserving the past as the West seems to. So forget about prog rock, I don't think the work of R D Burman, Ilayaraja or A R Rahman would be remembered in 2050. If I am still alive and so is PA, I will let you know whether I got it right.
|
I saw a map recently in my Facebook feed from Neptune Pink Floyd, and it broke down which countries per capita listen to Pink Floyd the most. (I just did a quick search and couldn't find it - if someone else locates it on the Web, could you post the link here?) That map may discourage many people here. If I remember correctly, a greater percentage of Americans listen to Floyd than anyone else. A few other countries listen to Floyd a bit; but generally, most of the world hardly listens to them at all. I wish I could find that article and map... Not sure about the methodology, or how scientific it really is...
Edited by jude111 - March 21 2014 at 11:13
|
|
Prog 74
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 16 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 171
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 11:19 |
I'm an American and listen to Pink Floyd a whole helluva lot. 
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 18993
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 11:48 |
rogerthat wrote:
Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant that it is more organised in the commercial sense. For the first time, you had whole corporations, some with interests (again, used in the financial sense of the term) in film/television, employing an army of executives to decide which albums would be made, which artists would get a chance to record. |
The equivalent 400 years ago was the "upper class" that determined what was important or not in music, and there is not enough popular music history for us to make a fair appraisal, like there is today!
rogerthat wrote:
...
The activity of promoting an album or selling it say in record stores or online also became highly professional. Substitute all music or music related terms here with a word like cars or cosmetics and the above sentences would probably still make sense. And that is what I am getting at. |
This is all a part of the rise in "advertising" in the 20th century. I am not sure that "advertising" in the old days reached as many, even in a comparative sense, as it does today. And this became a massive tool to develop the business which controls the arts today. All arts, not just music.
The main difference 50 years later is that the Internet is helping develop the "individual" business, for any/all artists, and this might, YET, make a massive difference in the whole process. I am inclined to think that the "upper class" control, or "media" control of most of the arts will probably dissipate for a while, and might change the structure of it all, but we won't see it so soon, until the internet is better developed. Right now, the "corporate" side of things is too visible, with the Google, Yahoo, and the like. Hopefully their "influence" will die down considerably!
| ...What is considered "good" or "popular" is indeed very much manufactured by corporations and we are manipulated into believing it to be so. It's really part of the brain-washing & dumbing down of society that keeps most folks from taking a step back and conscientiously objecting to what they are hearing or seeing. |
Glad to see that I am not the only one saying this. So much literature for hundreds of years has been about this "control" and people revolting to it, and still ... we put together a top ten, and deny the better listen to other things! To counter the might makes right thing, that even PA uses, I would have listed the bands as "composers" and their "listing" would entail their catalogue, not just one album! This way, if we don't think the rest is as good, they won't get the mention! We do that for so many classical musicians, it's not funny!
We're a kiss-as$ society. We have the same issue here. Folks agreeing immediately because they do not have anything else to add to the thread. That's just like the very system of advertising that we deplore, but they don't see that! They also do not see how the original folks that went on to become "progressive" were working on a form of change on many things, of which the arts was their part. There were also other changes at the time socially and what not, a lot of which was swept under the carpet, but you and I already know that is the history of the world.
|
|
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
|
|
Kobaek
Forum Newbie
Joined: October 16 2013
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 31
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 12:02 |
Planet Earth becomes uninhabitable in 2084 anyway and there'll only be one guy left alive. I hope for him they have prog on Mars...
Somebody had to do it
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 18993
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 12:28 |
Prog 74 wrote:
You make some very valid points Moshkito. Part of the problem classical music has is that they keep re-recording the same stuff over and over. Every conductor feels compelled to record the 9 Beethoven symphonies, though there are hundreds of recordings of his symphonies already in existence. It becomes tiresome and stale after awhile. |
We have the same thing with radio and "classic rock", so I'm not sure I would exactly trash the classic areas, though I have been known to trash the Portland Symphony, specially after a long article by some goon complaining about the low attendance for their shows!
So I wrote a letter back, and said go ahead and keep getting those washed out pieces and bring over Pink Martini, so you can get more bored with them than they already are, and maybe one of us will show up! And then I wrote that maybe he should pay more attention to the number of folks going to the Rose Garden and other venues around town, and maybe they might like to bring over a few of them, but not with over dressed old ladies whose attraction is quite questionable! And then I dropped the bomb. That maybe when they start giving some credit to someone like Frank Zappa and other more modern conductors, specially in America, that their fortunes might improve.
You really think they read it? Nahhhh ... the same folks are still there and in charge, and as I said, this is the bad/old folks that are in charge of the academic side of things in the arts, specially the music departments across the country, when they are not even checking out or appreciating the very stuff that the kids have on their own iPods!
You really think many kids are going to Berklee and other schools of music to learn crap they have no interest in? Very few ... VERY FEW! But those folks have "tenure" and will get paid until they die on the job! And the arts suffer ... it's been like that for hundreds of years!
|
|
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
|
|
jude111
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 20 2009
Location: Not Here
Status: Offline
Points: 1754
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 12:35 |
Prog 74 wrote:
I'm an American and listen to Pink Floyd a whole helluva lot. |
I may be wrong, but my impression is that (white) Americans look back more. So many radio stations are 'oldies' stations and 'classic rock' stations. I don't know enough about UK radio stations, but it does seem to me that the UK and many other European countries are less interested in the past, and more interested in new-ish stuff, and even newer genres (e.g. electronica). I could be wrong; I wonder what others have to say about this.
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 18993
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 13:16 |
jude111 wrote:
Prog 74 wrote:
I'm an American and listen to Pink Floyd a whole helluva lot. |
I may be wrong, but my impression is that (white) Americans look back more. So many radio stations are 'oldies' stations and 'classic rock' stations. I don't know enough about UK radio stations, but it does seem to me that the UK and many other European countries are less interested in the past, and more interested in new-ish stuff, and even newer genres (e.g. electronica). I could be wrong; I wonder what others have to say about this. |
FAIR assessment about radio and tv in America.
However, I would remind you that America does not have 400 years of history of the arts, because the white folks that took it over a few years back spent their time killing off the folks that had all the art in them! All they left behind was some forms of religion because many of those "arts" were evil!
Europe has a massive history of all the arts and it is well known and validated! America is still trying to figure out what the word "art" is all about, so that allows for Andy Warhol's to get big and make fun of the whole thing at your expense!
Edited by moshkito - March 21 2014 at 13:17
|
|
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
|
|
tamijo
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 06 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 4287
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 13:19 |
moshkito wrote:
I see "progressive" as a possible leader in the attempt to show that "popular" music, deserves just as much respect as "classical" music, specially when it shows its quality and talent, like so few classical folks are doing in these days, courtesy of the bad instructors in academic areas of music. Why would you go see some flute guy, when you can see Ian Anderson? Why would you go see some violin guy when you can see Jean Luc Ponty? Why would you go see some Soprano out there, when there are far better singers in rock and jazz out there? Why wouldn't you want to see a guitar maestro like Jon McLaughlin? Why wouldn't you want to see a Keith Jarrett? These guys are far more versed and talented than just about anyone on the "classic music" horizon and only a stuck up bunch of jerks would not appreciate their musicianship and talent! |
The way i see things Its not one or the other, Franz Liszt and Rick Wakeman, Niccolò Paganini and Jean Luc Ponty, Mauro Giuliani and Jon McLaughlin they all compliment each other, and Classical music can be a way into both Prog and Metal, as well as the other way around.
|
|
Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 66013
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 19:57 |
moshkito wrote:
I may be wrong, but my impression is that (white) Americans look back more. So many radio stations are 'oldies' stations and 'classic rock' stations. I don't know enough about UK radio stations, but it does seem to me that the UK and many other European countries are less interested in the past, and more interested in new-ish stuff, and even newer genres (e.g. electronica). I could be wrong; I wonder what others have to say about this. |
Interesting observation, it may be so, hard to say. There is a nostalgic vein that runs through US culture, even among people as young as 20.
|
|
The Dark Elf
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13445
|
Posted: March 21 2014 at 20:05 |
Atavachron wrote:
The Dark Elf wrote:
Atavachron wrote:
^ Bollocks.
They had the same grasp of whatever "technologies" were a part of their lives.
This attitude reflects the absurd notion that humans who lived in the past or during deprived times somehow didn't have the same intellectual or creative potential that people who came later had. It is utter nonsense and indicates a lack of historical understanding. |
Double bollocks back at ya, bud.
Where exactly did I say "that humans who lived in the past or during deprived times somehow didn't have the same intellectual or creative potential that people who came later had"? Don't tell me I lack historical understanding -- your perspective is entirely skewed, and you have an annoying habit of making things up as you go along (wonderful if you are a fantasist, but not so much while attempting sentient dialogue). Like your dim diatribe regarding Vivaldi.
Most of the world's population 100 years ago did not have automobiles, owned horses as a means of conveyance and lived a rural agricultural lifestyle -- without radio, television, and in many instances electricity -- like generation upon generation before them. Hell, serfdom in Russia was officially abolished in 1861, but did not end in some provinces until 1892. It had nothing to do with people's intellectual capacity, but their circumstances and their means of economic survival.
It is inane to think that people pre-WWI had the same outlook, technologically speaking, as anyone living today, because the necessity for such technology was unnecessary for the time. The pace of life has accelerated in lock step with the pace of technological advancement. I remember my grandmother crying as we watched the lunar landing on TV in 1969. She was amazed, and started to recall taking a horse cart with her father to market in downtown Detroit. It really affected her in a bewildering way that I, who grew up watching the space race on TV, could not then comprehend. |
Hit a nerve, did I. Well that's life on the streets, buddy.
|
No, you didn't hit a nerve, but to use another tired old idiom, you missed the boat. I don't even think you are at the right dock. Perhaps you should just stay in the tub with your rubber duck and blow fart bubbles..
|
|
...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...
|
|
Toaster Mantis
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
|
Posted: March 22 2014 at 05:49 |
|
I'm under the impression that while it's still something of a niche, there is something of a market today for popular music (mostly folk and jazz)
from the dawn of the vinyl era in the 1920s. So who knows?
|
|
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
|
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Penal Colony
Status: Offline
Points: 11420
|
Posted: March 22 2014 at 05:54 |
Toaster Mantis wrote:
I'm under the impression that while it's still something of a niche, there is something of a market today for popular music (mostly folk and jazz)
from the dawn of the vinyl era in the 1920s. So who knows?
|
A much bigger niche I'd hazard than any misplaced nostalgia for blown fart bubbles from as recently as two posts ago (It was just a passing fad) 
Edited by ExittheLemming - March 22 2014 at 05:59
|
|
Toaster Mantis
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
|
Posted: March 22 2014 at 05:58 |
|
Yeah, it seems like it's mostly the recording media issue that keeps popular music before that from having an audience. Of course, in the case of folk music it helps a lot that the fanbase has a more traditionalist approach to things rather than preferring things to evolve and stay relevant than is the norm.
|
|
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
The longevity of prog (and rock) music
