If You’re Older than 40!

The real trick, and a lot of "progressive" music is like that, is to chase down the influences and what triggered the music and words. There is another thread on this board (gotta find it) that shows the literary influences in that one, and other pieces.

 

What is hard is to get a rock'n'roller to go find out why a famous such and such would quote Gurdjieff and study his meditational methods and try to apply them ... and then we call it .. "progressive" because of some esoteric use of this chord or that note, or that  change in the passage, or how the solo was used ... always a favorite ... it's always a solo and not about the music ... and its flow.

 

In the end, you gain the appreciation for how music is done differently ... but you must remember one thing ... if you have that ability you are a natural musician and you probably should be chasing down an instrument and start your own ... I have this stupid idea in my head that sometimes we sound like frustrated musicians here and are living our fantasies through music that others create and play ... and while that is nice, in the end, is also unsatisfying for the listener, who inevitably will want to hear more, or something else ... which of course, the musician that you like can not provide because he isn't you!

 

There ... a little existentialism for you!

Slartibartfast, I hope it's that simple! :)

An example of what goes on today: I'm standing in the hallway on break chatting with the drum teacher. Suddenly, we hear a pianist behind closed doors. We hear Mozart, Chopin, Bach, and we are both amazed. Out walks this 18 year old chap and we were stunned. We asked him who his influences were or his favorite composers. He answered ....no one. He said that he did not want to be influenced by any composers from the past. He claimed that by not being influenced by them in the least bit would gift him with originality. To me...that is like being blindfolded. It's a very backwards method of connecting your spirit with some kind of originality or innovative substance. People from the past who are documented as being original and unique in the music world never applied these types of practices. They had respect for the people from the past that laid a foundation for us all. The fact that they themselves had something original to offer us derived directly from natural talent. But closing off any possible influence from Classical composers would have made their personal originality less interesting. A lot of young students I teach have expressed this view to me....as if to say that it is the new gospel. But it's the wrong path to follow simply because it lacks glory. If you want to change music and make ..so called more interesting music as it was in the early 70's, you should investigate all the chapters that Emerson, Fripp, and a host of others left out.

If Fripp is your hero....let it be. But if your are smart, you might consider learning from his teacher or his influences....or the ones he did not consider. It's a sure way of not selling yourself short and it opens a new path or direction in music for the musician. It's a way to change music again and possibly re-enter new dimensional levels in composition.   

 

There is a scene in the movie Amadeus that illustrates this further, and how hard it can be ... and when Salieri is taking dictation and he suggests a note and Mozart says ... no no no ... and states a different note and Salieri hesitates and then writes it down ... and later ... agrees that it's ok. Or the other example ... too many notes, because music up to that time was about your ability to showcase your feeling, not just amount of notes ... which is a bit of an issue with a lot of metal in my book!

 

In the end, the music that we remember the most, is the music that was VISUAL to its creator ... and sometimes "lyrics" are not exactly visual, unless it is a "true story" and you know that person has lived through it ... ie. Peter Hammill.

 

And this is my problem with most "formulaic" music ... the feelings and visions themselves are so special and individualistic that they have (almost) in the end, they have nothing to do with what we think it does ... and this is the "depth" that makes that music better. Without it ... it's just "prog" or "metal" ... you know why? ... because if it is special and individualistic it would blow that label to smithreens!

 

... . We hear Mozart, Chopin, Bach, and we are both amazed. Out walks this 18 year old chap and we were stunned. We asked him who his influences were or his favorite composers. He answered ....no one. He said that he did not want to be influenced by any composers from the past. He claimed that by not being influenced by them in the least bit would gift him with originality. To me...that is like being blindfolded.

 

NO. ... you missed it ... in the end, he might play it a little to stay in tune with the notes and chords and flixibility, but if he is looking "inside" for his own music, he is doing the right thing ... with one problem ... the only teachers that can take him there are spiritual masters and then some, because all a music teacher can give you is notes and chords of stuff that has been done before.  And what you see might need a different way to express itself via those same notes/chords. Don't confuse the inner vision with the process ... the vision creates a process, the process can inhibit the vision if you can not find the proper combination of notes to express what you feel!

 

This is important ... think about it ... it is, in the end, about HOW you express yourself, and that has less to do with the notes and the chords than it does with your ability to get "defined" in words, or music. This is the difference between a poet and just lyrics about diddly doo nothing for fun!

 

The problem, more often than not (and this is a step further on the situation) is ... that most people can only compare anything new to the old stuff ... and generally we do not like to discuss "new stuff" because of the lack of point of reference ... and this is where we have failed in discussing "progressive music" ... we have taken that reference away (the time, the place, the revolution -- even #9, and other things) and then we expect to see the music be remembered away from its very source. You killed the frog ... you can see all the pieces and parts and organs ... but there is no life in it!  ... and we're expecting a lot of this music to survive that. It won't.

 

It's a very backwards method of connecting your spirit with some kind of originality or innovative substance. People from the past who are documented as being original and unique in the music world never applied these types of practices.

 

But we haven't discussed, and sometimes we can't ... HOW ... the artist got there ... and we think that he/she got there because of the notes/chords only ... and by the example above (Amadeus) ... it wasn't just the notes/chords that made it. It was the vision!

 

Poetry is like that ... you see something and you write it. Most literature is like that ... you see something and you write. The fact that some things are political, social or whatever maybe a part of it, but rarely is someone going to start with the concept and write something ... because it will go against your inner flow that wants to go left and your idea had said that it was supposed to go right! ... now you have the usual inner fight!

 

...  They had respect for the people from the past that laid a foundation for us all.

 

Yes, no and maybe. Depends on your own inner center. If you know what you are writing about and you know how it relates to you, you do not need the external anything ... just the means for you to be able to translate your inner movie!

 

And the better you can translate that movie, the more efficient and productive you will be.

 

Not ALL the music improved because of the previous music. The modern music for the past 60 years has been the best example of that ... and how a Mozart or Beethoven have no bearing on Klaus Schulze ... but he does play some Wagner ... which tells you that there is something else he sees, that we're not privy to.

Definitely young dirt! At 51 I am in better shape than when I was 40, listen to more diverse music than before, play more guitar than I have in years and generally appreciate everything a lot more!