Enlighten me about KC´s "Moonchild"

Sorry, but i didnt get the process you talking about, whats ``52 pickup``? Are you suggesting improvisation to create art?

Too bad that your definition for prog and the music came about 20 years after the music was made!

 

And of course, today's audience, can't handle a little fun and improvisation and experimentation! Even if it was meaningless!

 

Gawd ... we need another Frank Zappa so bad right now!

 

Thank you ... it's a conversation with spirit! ... if we keep it cryptic enough we can get rid of many of these neo-prog'rs and neo-progressive folks!

 

Hehehehe !!!

Cert1fied's interpretation is indeed wonderful, and in my opinion shows also the strength of Peter Sinfield's ability to write poetry, which can be understood from many symbolistic perspectives, or just be enjoyed as beautiful romantic lyricsm. When the music and lyrics unite in this manner, and the listener is capable of finding associations and reasons from more abstract characteristics, I detect the really fine potential of art being realized.

I do not personally like the instrumental movement very much, which is also from my observation categorically cut from all official KC compillations with Moonchild.I agree however that it is phase interesting as experimentation, and contrasts the other songs of the album, however not for me very succesfully. I'm also happy to learn here there are listeners who like it, and can argument their opinions most profoundly.

I believe having some appetite for minimal and atonal improvisations, but what I find in this piece troublesome is firstly the mood where the listener is entered to it; Melodic and finely detailed composed part works as introduction for the sequence, and though in theoretical level the concept could be seen interesting, this debated main part seems like a disappointing conclusion for the composed part.
This I think is a factor caused by the second point; That this discussed improvisational section is not in my humble opinion very focused to creation of coherent end result, but emphazised the "avantgardistic" dialogue of guitar and perscussions without valid responsibility of end result. On more concrete level; Fripp is in many parts doing quite beautiful mantras, but the neurotic short spasms from the rhythm section and which the guitar answers feel annoying to myself.

About the improvisation quality, as the band was so new, it is possible this reflects to the succesfulness of the open tune. Beginnings often hold much power in spirit, but also much weakness in self-criticism and some uncoherence due search of desired ways. For example the similar abstract sequences in Wetton-Cross era recordings worked much better, as the soundscapes had clear psyhcological qualities, which I feel these tender little testings lack.

The mentioned other quiet improvs Peter Sinfield told are ofcourse interesting too, material which you may have listened from "Epitaph" CD's or other available 1969 live recordings, offering glimpses to these live sessions with poor audio quality. Quite interesting moments, but the musical incoherence is in my opinion often there present also, a characterstic which does not need to dull the shining of these early recordings however.

I also thought about the original question, the considertations "why I don't get this part of the record", indicates how coronized the album is in value terms, as if would be impossible that there could be simply poor moments on it.
I consider judging "good" and "bad" in arts are mostly personal opinions, and the meaning of these insights have merits mostly in sociological groups where some artifacts, like this record, hold a sacred status.

I like some moments on this "holy album", and agree it's historical value in heavy & symphonic prog, but my own interests are drawn currently to slighlty different music, and I think the "progressive rock" innovations which I personally am mostly interested were created earlier in the psychedelic musical fields; These sounds do not relate so much to heavy or symphonic prog sound what I belive this record manifests. Many also seem to feel the following record was a no good carbon copy of the first album, but for me it is more fine tuned version of the same idea, and much more rewarding album as a listening experience, even though it lacks the sphere of progressive rock pioneering blessing this album.

 

AtomicCrimsonRush wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1m1l00eaDg There! Enjoy!