(Taken from another thread ... but it fits better on its own)

This is a bunch of ideas/comments on how/what I think of Rick Beato. AND some of the guests I would like to see him do!

Hi,

I don't dislike him, although I think that sometimes he is doing a band or someone just to be cool, and not meaningful. Maybe it is my tastes have changed over the years, but there are times when I think his guests are not as valuable or important as they think themselves to be, and (they know!) are getting one more tinkle with fairy's dust of attention.

I kinda think that PG would make for a really boring show, with overblown stuff about the meaning of some of his work. And in his MM article taking several pages when he left Genesis, he has forgotten why he left ... conveniently, because he also got big. But other things could be discussed like his attention to other musics and works, which he does not use in his own bunch of songs, many of which feel like a redo, and not important or valuable. I think, that PG has outlived his ability and time ... and to just recreate what was done before is not original, and neither is it creative, though his ego would demand the attention to the "creativity" and its appreciation. Not a good guest in my book.

Some folks that would be much more interesting ... 

Manfred Mann, but I think that Manfred would roast him to pieces, for simply being a kisser to "fame", and sometimes, not a student of the music itself. 

Roy Harper would be a nice one to do, before he passes away, for his insane talent in song and words, even though it now seems to come up dated somewhat but not out of time and place. Poets like him never fail to deliver and he likely would make Rick ... be out of place, and not in tune with the work at all. Others that really deserve some attention, but never will get it ... 

Mike Heron and Robin Williamson ... both extremely creative minds, and Robin can tell you the history of things like only Eno has done in his book. Mike, is probably more reclusive, but a massive creative mind ... and it feels to me that he has left the music business because it isn't about the poetry or the words ... specially these days with the Internet when no one reads, and no one knows what was said! We have to be careful here, since RW can be a bit of a clown, and often sings like it, too, which is worth a discussion ... I think that for him, it's about the acting and making the piece come alive with it. Mike is more reserved and probably word centered ... but it's hard to imagine that he has gone 20/30 years without writing a poem, or saying hello to anybody ...!!!

Maddy Prior ... probably deserves a go, but I'm not sure that RB is keen on too many women, that are sometimes too smart and special. 

Kate Bush would be a good show, but I think she's too self conscious in front of the camera and not looking good enough for her tastes. Her talking about how she created some things and fought for others ... would make a fantastic piece ... though some might think of her as spoiled and boring. Her not releasing the videos from her recent London shows, is really likely she thought she was over weight and not looking good enough to make the show even more special, as compared to some of her previous materials and films.

Toyah Wilcox would be nice, if she could get away from RF long enough to discuss her own thing, and how she came about in film and theater, and then music. She has said some nice things about Derek Jarman, but none of us are sure what it is that she was saying ... as most of us have never seen anything of his, to even get any ideas. Toyah was a minor character in his films, but the artistic influence is there somewhat, though these days, when you see her, it's starting to feel sad, and just asking for attention so it could sell another album! And while RF is ok, in general, I would prefer that he had his own thing, but it has already been done in the movie and I'm not sure RF wants to do that again. And, btw, he looks very bored playing guitar on his wife's pieces ... that is bad. Very bad!

Even though it is late, and they might be too old to bother with it, Grace Slick would be nice, and she probably has juicy stories if she's inclined to say anything about them ... her self titled book was ... lacking badly ... and felt like she didn't care for the attention.

There aren't many left from the SF days, to say a whole lot ... we have allowed many of them to go away to their universal address ... and we only have the lyrics from many songs, left behind ... 

The LA music scene, if there are enough folks left, since the great FM Radio Rape of the late 1970's in LA ... because they did not want to give attention to many bands that won the court case for air time. The FCC had a way out by the station changing hands (right!!! what a crock!) and then changing the formats. And many of us thought that Radio Kaos was a joke ... it wasn't. But we all ignored it all ... and then some!

The imports, and how they all came alive in the early 70's in Southern California and possibly NY and some places in the Midwest ... many European bands ended up being known in America from it. But the folks left to discuss the "imports" are just about gone, and I'm not sure that Archie Patterson would bother ... he already said what he had to say in his periodicals going back to 1970, and then the release of the book of all the periodicals. But he was a massive mover, in that area and then some, even though I think he would think it embarrassing, and state that it was the music that mattered to him!

All in all, I think it ends up getting into the history of what became ... Progressive Music. Well, at least the kind we don't believe in anymore because it has no format and violates the very definition of the whole idea by folks that don't like music much!

I'm lost here. 

You might want to add at least the link to the other thread that the post belonged to (so we understand the context), or explain better what you're trying to achieve here (the link to Beato)

Hi, 

I cleaned it up a bit, so the comment can be a sort of trigger for this.

It's just a thought I had that RB was not that great an interviewer and that he only stuck to "known" folks because they were easier and had a story to tell ... as opposed to other folks in the music business that were less into the fame of it, and more into the music itself. There are some good things though .. .Skunk was one nice example, and three guys from The Police was too much, and boring after 10 minutes. His DG is seriously lacking, and probably was the condition that DG insisted on ... to not discuss anything else. As such, I think it was sad.

I'm kinda looking through a listing of his choices, and would like to see more interesting things than just famous goons that don't really have a whole lot to say ... just because they are "stars". The story and history of the music we loved, has a lot more folks to show for itself, and they won't ever be appreciated properly ... as far as I can see, though I'm glad to see them mentioned here and there on PA.

(BTW ... far out listing that you posted on JMA, btw ... I listened to everything listed!!! ... and made a few comments as well. Great work.)

Refer to his interview with Sting, most of that time was spent talking about how he created his music and the bass lines, rather than how huge Sting is as an artist in general.

In the context of Rick's channel, Toyah is not a fit for an interview, and God forbid he think about talking to Fripp, love his music but that interview would be a smelly mess. 

Hi,

I don't necessarily dislike what he does, though I could say that a lot of the folks he does, and bands, do not interest me a whole lot, and that is not to say that they are not good at all ... that is to say that a preference of mine is on a very different scale, which the more commercially minded folks here think I am criticizing. I'm simply making a statement, and it is not a criticism as much as it is a comment. 

The world, and the music we love, has a lot of folks deserving attention, and while it is fine for me to see RB do his thing, and folks appreciate his status and ability to make money off it all ... in the end, the sad fact would be that many of the very bands that we love that gave us this history, are not given a chance ... and I can't help thinking that's not fair ... though it is what it is ... just another commercial adventure, just like DD now making enough money so he can retire next week!, so to speak.

But, I think it also specifies how much folks have not exactly heard more stuff beyond the better known and commercially accepted bands and folks. It's not to say that any of those folks are wrong ... they aren't ... it's a simple comment about the state of the art being about the commerce, and not the art many times. And sometimes, making it think that it is the art, is sad ... there is a lot more out there, and you and I know it, and hear it all the time here with another something found out there!

Saperlipopette! wrote: ... Jesus Christ. Are you totally sure you don't dislike him? I love Pentangle, but is Maddy smarter or more special than Joni Mitchell of Tori Amos?

I won't compare Maddy with Tori, Joni or Jacqui ... it's not fair and they are all different in their own way. However, I would like to hear more about other women, and their touch. It has nothing to do with dislike or like. It has to do with the art of it all ... heck, even Dagmar would make an interesting interview if she was up to it!

Hi,

With all due respect to your tastes and ideas, what you are saying would have killed a lot of the progressive music some 55 years ago.

And while it is some kind of ego enhancing thing here on PA, making comments that pronounce the commerciality of it all, is one thing that we did not worry about 55 years ago, when some new music showed up.

It's not a matter of things would not work ... anything can work, given the right context ... but folks dismissing things because it's not what "they like", is a really good way to kill a lot of music like the record companies did for so long.

And now we have PA doing it? I sincerely hope not, and people like you and I are needed to help the music, not to bury it! Just sad to see you on the popular/commercial side of things ... on a "progressive" group on top of it ... that's just sad!

And for the record, Space Pirate Radio had its 55th year in January ... and we (Guy and everyone else!) never once wavered from the desire to hear something different and new ... and you talk as if many of those folks were jerk-offs in the history of progressive music ... totally unreal ... and so cynical, it's not funny. Sorry ... 

He might've enjoyed it at first (probably still does), but let's face, it's become a fulltime job, with pressures to keep his "creating content" duties to keep the money flowing in.

But the man knows quite a bit about music, that's sure.

In terms of being a prof, he's light years ahead of Pete Pardo or Scott from Miami, if only that he's got his own recording studio.

Hi,

I'm not going to sit here and condemn folks for making money ... I'm all for it. I do take a wee bit of an exception when it changes into the commercial side of it, so that the show looks better and more important, because it can get three stars.

All in all, the only thing that we worry about is the sake of the "progressive" music, and some of the folks talked to, have been there at the start, but in many ways, they are no longer there, and not exactly good ambassadors for the whole thing.

My only concern as you probably know and are aware of, is that somehow, things are tending to a commercial thing and siding with a small number of folks ... and leaving behind a lot of people and music that was a really good part of the whole thing ... however, the age of the internet has added folks that won't look at history, or give a damn, and thus the "favorite", or worse ... the usual "objective/subjective" argument takes over, and in general terms a lot of that discussion makes a point of ignoring the history as it will quickly dismantle a lot of folks tastes in music, and in the end, it isn't "progressive" ... progressive would have no "favorites" is we look at the whole thing objectively, right from the start ... but it is impossible these days, since many folks don't care, and will end up thinking that ITCOTKC is just another song that is out of time and date. 

Goodness gracious, I guess that Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky, Coltrane, Miles and so many others are also out of time and place already and their work is meaningless.

To me, none of the music is meaningless, and personal tastes makes a mess of things ... and sometimes, I think that we should be the ones to ensure that we can work on that a bit more ... you're doing your part nicely with some amazing lists ... and I can't think that it is not valuable in a way or two, even if it is not always my "preference". 

Agreed...

I have noticed his bias toward men and toward the 1970s.

My favorite YouTube vid maker, however, is Andy Edwards. I love his "showmanship" and his fearlessness in broaching "sensitive" topics: provoking thought and reaction with his "wild" opinions and theories. At the same time, he, too, knows his music: he knows the drums! The rhythms! And he's willing to listen to and talk about 21st Century artists and themes. Plus, he led me to discover Hermann Szobel and Knower!

He's had some really good videos fairly recently

TBF, most of the artists in the (prog) music business are men. And since he focuses on (classic) rock and jazz/fusion, most of his favorite artists are from the 70s.

Nice. Really nice. A lot of details that are actually very helpful to people that "create" music .... and a good primer to the idea of creating a piece of music ... you can go empty with no idea or visual, and then you can go in by watching something. I did not realize that he was one of the first to go electronic early ... nice stuff, though in my book not great, and sadly, what he got for BR2 was not very good.

The only problem with the visual thing is that things have to mix or at least marry in a positive way that makes the whole thing more attractive, and this is where a lot of rock music thinks that the lyrics will do it for them, and then just keep the same drum beat and riff going. And within a psychic level, that usually goes in very different directions which will not help the "attraction" for the viewer.  It's nice to see that Hans is aware of that, though he likes to do it without any visual, though he says he likes to hear the story ... although in many films the story is ... you got it ... where?

Some thoughts/ideas to check out (aside from RB stuff)

I've learned a lot watching his channel and I like him, his interviews are some of the best around. But I don't ever expect him to interview any of the musicians that have been suggested by Pedro, simply because people don't know who they are. He may only ask Roy Harper about his involvement with WYWH, because the viewers would connect with that band and album.   

Hi,

That would be weird, when considering who one of his best friends is, and has been in several of his albums, and not exactly in the background. 

I think that just about anyone, is capable of being a good review and story, but things are kinda controlled by the commerciality of it all, and while I certainly don't think that some of those folks RB does is bad at all, there are a lot of neat things ... his 2 shows on CHICAGO are excellent examples, and you know that he is a very capable listener, which is the reason why I don't think he would have a hard time with other folks ... and you never know, and one or two of them would make a heck of a show. 

I was just thinking of Daevid Allen, and how he would have a riot with RB ... though Daevid might have preferred to discuss his experimental stuff like the Glissando school and even some of the stuff he did with Gilly later. But Daevid, as he clarified to me, was more about how the sound developed around his words, than he was about the mechanics of the music. He specified, that you either listen to the music itself, or you don't, and not exactly just the notes and chords. It's the feel that makes it ... and RB shows it in that CHICAGO special.

It's all good, though I much prefer that a few lesser known folks were made visible. I would like to see this done with one or both of the Decamps brothers (ANGE) or even with Vittorio (BANCO), and the one that doesn't do interviews much ... Christian Vander (MAGMA) and I bet he would be a mind full and then some!

It would give a lot of credibility to progressive stuff, though I can not say that RB is just about any specific thing, he seems to travel fairly wide. Also a nice one on The Grateful Dead would be nice, now that there are only 3 of them left. 

History is a funny thing ... best bury it, I guess! I do wish that we could hear/read about the interviews that Guy Guden did, which amount to probably over 50 to 100, I am guessing, and some of them were far out and totally entertaining, and you learn more about the artist and his/her work that we can imagine. Robin Williamson comes to mind, and even hearing him tell jokes about ... !!!!

Hi,

I think it is pretty clear that he loves what he is doing, and I find his choices rather interesting, also sticking with engineers and other side folks in the business, that in many ways, did some things with the work that helped us remember these things today.

The one thing I like the most is his appreciation for some of the beauty in a lot of folks' work, and his appreciation for some of the things that CHICAGO did, is far out, and rare. Even DD can't do that, and normally goes back to chords and notes, which is boring after a while. I always thought of music as way more than just notes and chords.

The knowledge, however, and this probably does not apply to RB, is that he does not go to the easiest thing to do, which DD does all the time, since he does not "feel" the music as well, without knowing the notes and chords ... and one thing that is important, though a lot of the history of music for hundreds of years, has been the explanation how the theory was extended, and it is always explained as a chord or special moment, but if all you do describing Stravinsky in this style, no audience would be out there and even Walt Disney would not have created a silly cartoon that was far out, or Bruno Bozzetto would not have created the imagery that he did for his far out take on FANTASIA ... and in some ways, it is the visual effect of the music that makes the history and continuously brings us to it ... not the notes or chords.

RB is great in my book, although I think that some folks he did were not exactly special for me, but they were OK, and the best example was DG which made for a very boring hour, speaking about an album that is not that great but his name makes it look like it is special, but he is loved by many folks in the last 50 years, so I suppose that it is OK to gush over it all, and anything they do.

It's interesting to see who RB will do next ... his choices, generally, are interesting, though some of them I tend to bypass completely. And, in general, I prefer not to comment on things I did not enjoy as much as others.

IMHO

Utterly pointless and totally uneeded (I mean, who gives a hoot about who set up the mics??)... made just to occupy the terrain and keep the revenues coming in.

It's about 15 minutes too long , too!!

Hi,

Sometimes this is the part of things that are scary ... and you know it's not exactly about the music, as much as it is how it ends up sounding different. And how, we think that "different" is better and that hearing Bonzo's drumming in that one house ... and anything else that can be thought of ... 

But we have been at this for some time ... Stokowski used to shift the orchestra seating arrangements to make sure he got the touch he wanted for some sections of the recording, and this, of course, later showed up HUGE in works by Bernard Herrmann and his soundtracks.

For hundreds of years there was no changes to the sound, other than maybe hiding it behind a panel kind of thing, so the music was clean in terms of a natural sound, but these days this is not the case, and it one of the reasons why I like to say ... UNPLUG IT ... and then let's hear it, and I think that we will end up not liking that much ... which makes me think that we have been white washed by the fiddling of sounds for the last 65 years, and hopefully this will slow down enough so we can learn to hear the actual music, not the sound ... it's not exactly the same thing.

However, there are a lot of things that we have heard ... and they are really fine things ... and trickery or not, it helped things, however, this is always an issue for some folks ... they won't sound half as good in concert, and likely won't play some things because of it.