Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Butterfly Attack
Forum Newbie
Joined: January 21 2011
Location: Mannheim
Status: Offline
Points: 7
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 05:55 |
You're right, the GG singer sometimes sounds almost like P.Gabriel, but on other tracks the voice sounds thin and weak, maybe another bandmember sometimes sung ?
|
 |
caretaker
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 19 2010
Location: united states
Status: Offline
Points: 288
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 06:14 |
Good musicians, good production. I love a good rhythym section. Complexity and time changes but not just for the sake of complexity and time changes.
|
 |
mono
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 12 2005
Location: Paris, France
Status: Offline
Points: 652
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 06:21 |
- Clean, subtle and groovy drums - Use of odd time signatures - Dirty guitars - Thick ambiances
|
https://soundcloud.com/why-music Prog trio, from ambiant to violence
https://soundcloud.com/m0n0-film Film music and production projects
https://soundcloud.com/fadisaliba (almost) everything else
|
 |
mmmreesescups
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 21 2009
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Points: 100
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 09:18 |
thehallway wrote:
The common thing here is drums.
That's because a band is only as good as its drummer (whoever said that?)
Personally I also like songs with really interesting structures with loads of different sections that keep comng, going, and returning. If I don't know where I stand with the structure then I usually can't enjoy the individual themes (unless it's an improvisation).
|
This is a pretty good summation of what I thought.
|
|
 |
mmmreesescups
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 21 2009
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Points: 100
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 09:20 |
mono wrote:
- Clean, subtle and groovy drums - Use of odd time signatures - Dirty guitars - Thick ambiances
|
Excuse the double post, but this too! I can't stand hearing something that's predictable and babies you through all the parts of the song.
|
|
 |
thehallway
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 13 2010
Location: Dorset, England
Status: Offline
Points: 1433
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:42 |
caretaker wrote:
Complexity and time changes but not just for the sake of complexity and time changes. |
Hmmm.... for what sake then?
I feel that it seems fashionable on this site to criticise the use of key changes, odd time signatures etc when they are done for no reason. Yet everyone here likes them anyway. There is never a reason for any music, 4/4 or otherwise. Who cares if Robert Fripp wrote Larks' Tongues in Aspic in all those funny meters on purpose? Would we prefer it to be accidental? (or "natural" as it is sometimes described)......
Not a criticism of you personally... but lets just forget about motives behind being prorgessive and enjoy the music!
|
|
 |
Negoba
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:49 |
Gentle Giant had two lead vocalists: Derek Shulman whose voice is pretty forward and aggressive but occasionally pitchy and annoying, and Kerry Minnear whose voice was much airier, had less variation, but was almost always pleasant. The big brother Shulman sang lead a bit on the first four records at least by credit, though I still can't pick him out.
|
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
|
 |
SaltyJon
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 08 2008
Location: Location
Status: Offline
Points: 28772
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:53 |
What really gets me?
Experimentation, a unique sound, a good bassist, a good drummer, a good guitarist, wind instruments...any combination of these, or just plain old good music. It's not always the same thing from band to band.
|
|
 |
AllP0werToSlaves
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 29 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 249
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 10:58 |
Butterfly Attack wrote:
You're right, the GG singer sometimes sounds almost like P.Gabriel, but on other tracks the voice sounds thin and weak, maybe another bandmember sometimes sung ?
|
It's funny because I always thought Derek Shulman sounded a little like Paul Stanley, especially on "Free Hand".
Gentle Giant is pretty much the epitome of experimentation for me, such great music.
|
 |
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:16 |
friso wrote:
Gentle Giant has a thicker voice then Genesis and Yes, but the vocals aren't recorded that loud. |
If you mean Derek Shulman, he doesn't have a thicker voice than Gabriel, Gabriel just has better reach high and therefore tends to sing fairly high but his spoken voice is quite thick. Also, a thicker voice or thinner voice does not signify distinction or lack thereof, which both of you seem to be suggesting. Rob Halford is arguably more distinctive than Tony Martin or Zach Stevens. Yeah, Jon Anderson actually has the thinnest voice among these singers.
|
 |
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 11:32 |
thehallway wrote:
Hmmm.... for what sake then?
I feel that it seems fashionable on this site to criticise the use of key changes, odd time signatures etc when they are done for no reason. Yet everyone here likes them anyway. There is never a reason for any music, 4/4 or otherwise. Who cares if Robert Fripp wrote Larks' Tongues in Aspic in all those funny meters on purpose? Would we prefer it to be accidental? (or "natural" as it is sometimes described)......
Not a criticism of you personally... but lets just forget about motives behind being prorgessive and enjoy the music! |
I agree to the extent that we should not necessarily decipher a motive of showmanship or self indulgence when odd time signatures are used or, simply, drastic time signature changes are effected. However, I personally believe there is a reason or supposed to be anyway why one section of music follows the other. When this 'logical' flow of development is not so evident, I am not satisfied and I cannot just enjoy it for the sake of it because my enjoyment of progressive music extends partly from the skill and command exhibited by the composer. And being able to make the parts fit as if they were always meant to be is a testament to great compositional skill, the kind that really gets me excited. Without evidence of such skill, the only thing I glean from a band playing an odd time signature is that, well, maybe it's tough to play and they are able to do it but so what. Genesis sail through time signature changes as well as odd time sigs so smoothly you'd have to pay attention to notice it. There are some bands who do it so abruptly it's in your face and disruptive. I know what I'd rather have, so to that extent whether 'meaning' can be assigned to the use of a particular compositional device is important in music appreciation. If, even after careful analysis and assessment, there seems to be no rhyme or reason why some piece of music had to be part of the composition, it reflects a bit badly on the composer.
|
 |
Acidchrist
Forum Newbie
Joined: January 14 2011
Location: Raleigh, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 9
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 14:00 |
For me the best elements of progressive music are a. Lots of layers, ala Yes from Fragile to Relayer. b. Classical influence. c. The feel of having a 'concept' throughout an album, even if it's not a concept album. d. The music flowing, and feeling like each part is the logical progression, even if it's totally left field of what's expected. For me the album The Court of the Crimson King by King Crimson does this absolutely perfectly.
|
 |
thehallway
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 13 2010
Location: Dorset, England
Status: Offline
Points: 1433
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 14:26 |
rogerthat wrote:
thehallway wrote:
Hmmm.... for what sake then?
I feel that it seems fashionable on this site to criticise the use of key changes, odd time signatures etc when they are done for no reason. Yet everyone here likes them anyway. There is never a reason for any music, 4/4 or otherwise. Who cares if Robert Fripp wrote Larks' Tongues in Aspic in all those funny meters on purpose? Would we prefer it to be accidental? (or "natural" as it is sometimes described)......
Not a criticism of you personally... but lets just forget about motives behind being prorgessive and enjoy the music! |
I agree to the extent that we should not necessarily decipher a motive of showmanship or self indulgence when odd time signatures are used or, simply, drastic time signature changes are effected. However, I personally believe there is a reason or supposed to be anyway why one section of music follows the other. When this 'logical' flow of development is not so evident, I am not satisfied and I cannot just enjoy it for the sake of it because my enjoyment of progressive music extends partly from the skill and command exhibited by the composer. And being able to make the parts fit as if they were always meant to be is a testament to great compositional skill, the kind that really gets me excited. Without evidence of such skill, the only thing I glean from a band playing an odd time signature is that, well, maybe it's tough to play and they are able to do it but so what. Genesis sail through time signature changes as well as odd time sigs so smoothly you'd have to pay attention to notice it. There are some bands who do it so abruptly it's in your face and disruptive. I know what I'd rather have, so to that extent whether 'meaning' can be assigned to the use of a particular compositional device is important in music appreciation. If, even after careful analysis and assessment, there seems to be no rhyme or reason why some piece of music had to be part of the composition, it reflects a bit badly on the composer.
|
I see what you mean. The art of integrating these rhythms into good music without ruining the melody or whatever, is a element of our enjoyment. But that is subjective.
I guess what bothers me is when people decide that band X are consistently capable, and as such, "allowed" to use these time signatures, while band Y, for whatever reason, are doing it for the wrong reasons and should stop. I think in those cases it is the listener, not the band, with the problem.
|
|
 |
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 18884
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 15:47 |
mmmreesescups wrote:
mono wrote:
- Clean, subtle and groovy drums - Use of odd time signatures - Dirty guitars - Thick ambiances
|
Excuse the double post, but this too! I can't stand hearing something that's predictable and babies you through all the parts of the song. |
Ohhh the shame ... no Wagner or Puccini, or Verdi for you then ... and goodbye Italian progressive music, too!
|
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
|
 |
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: January 21 2011 at 21:24 |
thehallway wrote:
[
I see what you mean. The art of integrating these rhythms into good music without ruining the melody or whatever, is a element of our enjoyment. But that is subjective.
I guess what bothers me is when people decide that band X are consistently capable, and as such, "allowed" to use these time signatures, while band Y, for whatever reason, are doing it for the wrong reasons and should stop. I think in those cases it is the listener, not the band, with the problem. |
Yes, it is subjective but the most important things in music are, unfortunately, rather subjective and cannot be 'zero-factored' out of debate which tends to happen a lot these days in discussions. As for the second part, my response to that is they should not but yes, they do. You are basically saying that sometimes just because it's a piece by KC or some such big prog name, their music is treated as beyond reproach. I personally do think albums like Lizard and Islands lack initiative and parts of SABB lack direction. Just because it's KC doesn't mean I am precluded from saying so. AND, Red is my favourite music album of all time.
|
 |
Butterfly Attack
Forum Newbie
Joined: January 21 2011
Location: Mannheim
Status: Offline
Points: 7
|
Posted: January 22 2011 at 04:16 |
ah, there you go, that's what I thought
|
 |
thehallway
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 13 2010
Location: Dorset, England
Status: Offline
Points: 1433
|
Posted: January 22 2011 at 10:28 |
rogerthat wrote:
thehallway wrote:
[
I see what you mean. The art of integrating these rhythms into good music without ruining the melody or whatever, is a element of our enjoyment. But that is subjective.
I guess what bothers me is when people decide that band X are consistently capable, and as such, "allowed" to use these time signatures, while band Y, for whatever reason, are doing it for the wrong reasons and should stop. I think in those cases it is the listener, not the band, with the problem. |
Yes, it is subjective but the most important things in music are, unfortunately, rather subjective and cannot be 'zero-factored' out of debate which tends to happen a lot these days in discussions. As for the second part, my response to that is they should not but yes, they do. You are basically saying that sometimes just because it's a piece by KC or some such big prog name, their music is treated as beyond reproach. I personally do think albums like Lizard and Islands lack initiative and parts of SABB lack direction. Just because it's KC doesn't mean I am precluded from saying so. AND, Red is my favourite music album of all time.
|
It is! By fans who believe their band can do no wrong.
See, there might be someone who's a massive Pink Floyd fan but not a Genesis fan..... and they might say that PF's use of key changes is really natural and essential to the song, while Genesis "just do it to show off". It could be the other way around. It could be that big bands are allowed but new proggers aren't......... The point is, you cannot enter the mind of a musician, so you should never look at their music based on their intentions. It isn't ethics, it's art. This is why I hate the word 'pretentious' because people now apply it to music as well as people. It's crazy! Why should the fact that Keith Emerson loves himself make his music any less interesting? Of course, it shouldn't (and he really does love himself  ).......
You obviously aren't one of these people, so.... great!
|
|
 |
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: January 22 2011 at 10:36 |
thehallway wrote:
See, there might be someone who's a massive Pink Floyd fan but not a Genesis fan..... and they might say that PF's use of key changes is really natural and essential to the song, while Genesis "just do it to show off". It could be the other way around. It could be that big bands are allowed but new proggers aren't......... The point is, you cannot enter the mind of a musician, so you should never look at their music based on their intentions. It isn't ethics, it's art. |
Ethics is a rather loaded word. Anyway, I agree that this sort of thing happens and I have said before that it shouldn't. However, to repeat, I do look at whether a particular compositional choice sounds natural to me. I don't generally make hasty judgments on this, but I know at what point (of repeated listening) the music and not moi is the problem if it still doesn't make sense. Maybe I wouldn't allege showing off or exhibitionism but I would infer inadequate compositional skill and the latter is not exactly flattering either. Also, in certain contexts, showboating can be reasonably inferred. Inserting an excessively fast burst of shred where the musical moment simply doesn't call for it can be called showboating. Of course, it could be argued that the musician is simply enjoying himself. Well then, enjoying oneself at the expense of the requirements of the song IS showboating.
|
 |
thehallway
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 13 2010
Location: Dorset, England
Status: Offline
Points: 1433
|
Posted: January 22 2011 at 10:55 |
rogerthat wrote:
thehallway wrote:
See, there might be someone who's a massive Pink Floyd fan but not a Genesis fan..... and they might say that PF's use of key changes is really natural and essential to the song, while Genesis "just do it to show off". It could be the other way around. It could be that big bands are allowed but new proggers aren't......... The point is, you cannot enter the mind of a musician, so you should never look at their music based on their intentions. It isn't ethics, it's art. |
Ethics is a rather loaded word. Anyway, I agree that this sort of thing happens and I have said before that it shouldn't. However, to repeat, I do look at whether a particular compositional choice sounds natural to me. I don't generally make hasty judgments on this, but I know at what point (of repeated listening) the music and not moi is the problem if it still doesn't make sense. Maybe I wouldn't allege showing off or exhibitionism but I would infer inadequate compositional skill and the latter is not exactly flattering either. Also, in certain contexts, showboating can be reasonably inferred. Inserting an excessively fast burst of shred where the musical moment simply doesn't call for it can be called showboating. Of course, it could be argued that the musician is simply enjoying himself. Well then, enjoying oneself at the expense of the requirements of the song IS showboating.
|
What's wrong with showboating? 
Okay... so it ruins the song. But while this is theoretically true, I still think it is inferred much more than it actually occurs. I'm not entirely sure what a fast burst of shred is, but in how many real instances has it actually made you think - "well that was unnecessary and bad; I do not like this music because of what he did there". It certainly isn't the case with the usual suspects: Emerson, Fripp, Squire...... these people are virtuosos and seem to be capable of integrating their skill into compositions that make sense and flow.
It's just like the whole pretentious problem is inflated where it doesn't really exist; people locate egotism and use it as a weapon against a band they already dislike (yet the prior dislike must be because the music is bad, so even if the performer didn't show off, that wouldn't make the listener suddenly like the band).
So I agree with you but I am yet to see a real example. I haven't heard too much prog yet though.
|
|
 |
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: January 22 2011 at 11:04 |
thehallway wrote:
What's wrong with showboating? 
Okay... so it ruins the song. But while this is theoretically true, I still think it is inferred much more than it actually occurs. I'm not entirely sure what a fast burst of shred is, but in how many real instances has it actually made you think - "well that was unnecessary and bad; I do not like this music because of what he did there". It certainly isn't the case with the usual suspects: Emerson, Fripp, Squire...... these people are virtuosos and seem to be capable of integrating their skill into compositions that make sense and flow.
It's just like the whole pretentious problem is inflated where it doesn't really exist; people locate egotism and use it as a weapon against a band they already dislike (yet the prior dislike must be because the music is bad, so even if the performer didn't show off, that wouldn't make the listener suddenly like the band).
So I agree with you but I am yet to see a real example. I haven't heard too much prog yet though. |
Showboating is all over the map as far as hard rock/metal based music goes. By fast burst of shred, I simply meant a really fast portion of guitar playing, you know, the so called face melting solo. Emerson can get a bit carried away live but not in the studio albums. Those musicians you mentioned all seem to have a strong grounding in classical music, not necessarily by means of formally studying it but by having been exposed to a lot of it. So, they were usually able to write compositions with the kind of complexity that accommodates virtuosity. Hard rock based music tends to be more rudimentary in terms of structure so it comes across simply as if instead of a simple rock solo, the guitarist decided to do something that really pushes the limits of his skill. Oh, and the most prominent means of showboating is the drum solo and I have heard a few excessive drum solos in prog. The one in Focus's Eruption comes to mind immediately.
|
 |