Is Prog For Musicians Only?

TO: Trademark.
It's a point well made when you refer to the terminology used and the terms 'natural' as opposed to 'classically trained' musicians. Your observation that the ideal musician would combine both of these qualities is also what I was referring to when borrowing from that old standard ' it don't mean a thing if you ain't got that swing '- corny I know.

But in the context of the thread question , what this all means is that there well may be differing degrees of appreciation of progressive rock/music for trained and untrained, naturals and non-naturals but as appreciation of it is relative to a persons background and personal to each of us , we all appreciate it in our 'own special way'.

Therefore, Prog is not just for musicians only. But for musicians it may or may not be better. In the end ,it doesn't matter one jot if we all like it for a variety of reasons and , if you like, according to different levels of appreciation. I'm sure this is true for any musical genre or type. It has certainly provoked an interesting discussion in this context.

Trademark wrote: Here is an interesting thought about the "untrained" musician. Apart from a handful of truly otherworldly individuals, most untrained musicians learn by listening and copying what others do (and have done before them) until they have sufficient chops to "be themselves". What we don;t think about is the fact they what they are copying and learning from is all based on the practises and techniques described by music theory. The key word here is describe. Theory isn't music, it is tool used to understand and describe music. Bach, Haydn and Mozart were using I-IV-V progressions centuries before the untrained Robert Johnson or Jimi ever thought of using them. Did they just pull that sound out of the air? Absolutely not. they used what they heard other trained musicians doing and mastered it well enough to be recognized for it. Can music theory be used to describe Hedrix or Robert Johnson. Absolutely, yes; just as easily as it can be used to describe Mozart, Stravinsky or Milton Babbitt. Music theory is a tool to aid in the understanding of music. It is knowledge, and the more you know, the more you can do, and use of that knowledge is one of the reasons we like Rick Wakeman, Keith Emerson, Kerry Minnear, Eddie Jobson, Martin Orford, Clive Nolan (the list goes on...) and other trained musicians better than the guy in Maroon Five or REO Speedwagon.

Chus wrote:  I can also add that not every trained musician likes prog, in fact, some despise it. In the end a certain training doesn't necessarily affect the emotional response to any type of music, though I doubt trained musicians would listen to hip hop or reggaeton, in fact, I think anyone who finds a value of emotional substance in melody-less lyrics like "playing with my ho's" over naive musical structure is seriously challenged

You'd be surprised. As I've said, I am in music school and I am astonished daily by the amount of people here who love hip-hop, neo-soul and whatever you call the Beyoncé garbage. I've met a few Prog fans, but not many.

hmm i can agree with this somewhat. I would say you would have to at least be affiliated with musicians or in a musical family or environment to enjoy prog.

Atavachron wrote: thellama73 wrote: Trademark wrote: "They know intuitively what works and what doesn't." This statement does not equal music theory, it equals musical intuition which is not at all the same thing. And no, you cannot know music theory without having studied it. Sorry, but you have obviously NOT studied it or you would not make this statement. For many of my theory students, that type of wishful thinking gets them a D. I am an A student in my sixth semester at Berklee College of Music. :D

I remember friends of mine who were fans of Lou Reed saying they didn't think Rap was music, cause it was just talking , not singing
P.S. Anytime you want to dismiss other people's taste in music by describing as garbage, crap etc ... try substituting your favourite genre(s) with those & see if the argument is as "strikingly" true   People listen to music for their own reasons. As long as they allow you the same freedom, do you really need to demean them ? Like, love, loathe, abhor the music you want to, but remember - a "subjective" opinion does not equal an "objective" statement, no matter how much we believe in it.

As per Pye
We're just musicians, here to thin the thickness of your skin

P.S. There is knowledge , there is smarts & there is wisdom. The first can be acquired in schools, the second should come naturally as part of living, the third usually does not need to proclaim itself as being so....
Or to quote a wise man - "the person who needs to proclaim their intelligence (insert any other claim here), likely has reason to doubt it in the first place


Edited by pantacruelgruel - March 14 2007 at 21:45

pantacruelgruel wrote: Atavachron wrote: thellama73 wrote: Trademark wrote: "They know intuitively what works and what doesn't." This statement does not equal music theory, it equals musical intuition which is not at all the same thing. And no, you cannot know music theory without having studied it. Sorry, but you have obviously NOT studied it or you would not make this statement. For many of my theory students, that type of wishful thinking gets them a D. I am an A student in my sixth semester at Berklee College of Music. :D     I remember friends of mine who were fans of Lou Reed saying they didn't think Rap was music, cause it was just talking , not singing P.S. Anytime you want to dismiss other people's taste in music by describing as garbage, crap etc ... try substituting your favourite genre(s) with those & see if the argument is as "strikingly" true   People listen to music for their own reasons. As long as they allow you the same freedom, do you really need to demean them ? Like, love, loathe, abhor the music you want to, but remember - a "subjective" opinion does not equal an "objective" statement, no matter how much we believe in it.

I've graduated twice from conservatories and I agree with that jackass completely. I wonder if you will... graduate.

if you close the thread you close our minds.

I love prog yet don't consider myself a musician. Therefore I disagree with your initial post. As I am sure many do

Trademark wrote: "I am an A student in my sixth semester at Berklee College of Music. :D" That being the case, you knew (or should have known) your own statement was bogus when you made it. Music theory is a confusing area for most people without deliberate mis-information clouding the issue. M.M. Music Composition , M.M. Music History, Working on Disertation for PhD. in Interdisciplinary Arts in Music History & Aesthetics. 4.0 GPA throughout, Phi Beta Kappa

I disagree with you. I have no doubt that Miles Davis knew his chord scales like the back of his hand, but he didn't get that knowledge by sitting down with a book or taking classes. He got it from playing, and noticing what worked and what didn't. Maybe that constitutes a type of studying, but it's different from what was being implied by the thread.