Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5101
Posted: January 10 2015 at 05:00
There was one time when Prog Rock and Jazz-Rock were considered as 2 different things, so it's quite logical that MO were then not considered among the bigs of Prog Rock, but they were always the bigs of Jazz-Rock together with Return To Forever, Weather Report etc (and consequently equivalent to the big Prog giants, although Jazz-Rock was less commercially successful).
KC (or other bands) may have infiltrated jazz elements in their Prog but they defined much of the symphonic sound with their seminal early works so by the time they had become more experimental they were already considered Prog Rock giants by many.
Joined: June 04 2012
Location: Virginia
Status: Offline
Points: 1413
Posted: January 10 2015 at 05:01
I can't speak for the humankind in general, but I could tell you why I never listen to Mahavishnu Orchestra (while recognizing their talent and innovation). Based on the Birds, Emerald, Flame and another album, the name of which I forgot;
Goodman's violentin is highly irritating; things got better wtih J-L.P, but I prefer his solo albums.
McLaughlin's guitar is highly irritating; he gets mellower and more listenable towards the Radioland.
Cobham's drumming is highly irritating, with Maha or solo.
They create a ragged, jagged, serrated pile-up of sound that takes too much effort to process.
Joined: September 25 2010
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 2449
Posted: January 10 2015 at 05:05
Skullhead wrote:
dr prog wrote:
They lack badly on the melody side. They are more about soloing. I only like the occasional song(usually slower tracks). Great musicians but I don't enjoy them much. Not really a fan of McLaughlins guitar style or sound and I don't like violin/fiddle unless it's classical style
I have to disagree, I think they have amazingly strong melodies, quite often. Lot's of soloing but didn't ELP have lots of soloing?
I find them to be a compositional mess. I much prefer prog fusion bands such as Hatfield, National health and Gilgamesh who had some real catchy melodies mixed with crazy jazz impro bits. I never found mahavishnu to be catchy or cool. I only like classical violin too. That American country violin should be banned with the banjo and bagpipes
Edited by dr prog - January 10 2015 at 05:07
All I like is prog related bands beginning late 60's/early 70's. Their music from 1968 - 83 has the composition and sound which will never be beaten. Perfect blend of jazz, classical, folk and rock.
They lack badly on the melody side. They are more about soloing. I only like the occasional song(usually slower tracks). Great musicians but I don't enjoy them much.
I agree with this.
i have immense respect for them as musicians, but to me they epitomize the ol fusion downfall of 'all chops and no sauce'.
Edited by Guldbamsen - January 10 2015 at 05:10
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”
Joined: September 25 2010
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 2449
Posted: January 10 2015 at 05:11
Argonaught wrote:
I can't speak for the humankind in general, but I could tell you why I never listen to Mahavishnu Orchestra (while recognizing their talent and innovation). Based on the Birds, Emerald, Flame and another album, the name of which I forgot;
Goodman's violentin is highly irritating; things got better wtih J-L.P, but I prefer his solo albums.
McLaughlin's guitar is highly irritating; he gets mellower and more listenable towards the Radioland.
Cobham's drumming is highly irritating, with Maha or solo.
They create a ragged, jagged, serrated pile-up of sound that takes too much effort to process.
I agree but I do like cobhams drumming. I think Inner worlds is their best album. It's more relaxed, has no violin from what I remember and has some catchy moments
All I like is prog related bands beginning late 60's/early 70's. Their music from 1968 - 83 has the composition and sound which will never be beaten. Perfect blend of jazz, classical, folk and rock.
Joined: December 20 2010
Location: Tomorrowland
Status: Offline
Points: 10066
Posted: January 10 2015 at 05:18
octopus-4 wrote:
The difference I was mentioning is about the mainstream listeners. Everybody knows Genesis, Yes and Pink Floyd.
What I wrote wasn't in response to your post. But partly to Svetonio's "theory" and explaining how popular they actually once were. Despite being fully instrumental and without hits.
Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
Posted: January 10 2015 at 05:52
Saperlipopette! wrote:
Instumental or not they were once hugely successful compared to Gentle Giant and Genesis as well. All their 1971-1976 albums charted in the us and many other counties.
(...)
The Mahavishnu Orchestra and especially John McLaughlin was/is slightly overrated. John McLaughlin was pionneering in jazz-rock and he is one of iconic figures of the genre without a shade of doubt, but his stuff not passed test of time so gracefully as it is the case with some far lesser-known 70s jazz-rock guitar wizards.
Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
Posted: January 10 2015 at 06:08
Saperlipopette! wrote:
^If you read the rest of my post you'll see that I agree.
I read it and I disagree that the Mahavishnu Orchestra was "like the early 70's jazz-rockfusion version of Dream Theater".
I do not think that DT were / are overrated.
If we talk about that overvaluation of John McLaughlin by the audience and rock journalists in 70s, for a comparison would be better to choose Eric Clapton. Although Clapton was quite a different genre, they both had a "god" status.
Joined: December 06 2014
Location: Vancouver BC
Status: Offline
Points: 160
Posted: January 10 2015 at 09:53
Argonaught wrote:
They create a ragged, jagged, serrated pile-up of sound that takes too much effort to process.
I thought the same thing about KC for years after first hearing Red and Starless. Too much effort to process could be an argument for anyone not into prog in general?
Joined: August 27 2014
Location: riding the MOAB
Status: Offline
Points: 1505
Posted: January 10 2015 at 11:35
In the light of this topic, I decided to check them out. I must say, quite spectacular. I love the bass lines especially from Visions Of The Emerald Beyond. Me also being a drum enthusiast, I love Walden's snare rolls and his overall rhythm. I would highly recommend them.
Joined: November 09 2014
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Points: 8636
Posted: January 10 2015 at 12:33
jayem wrote:
Lear'sFool wrote:
^ Prog can go either way. Crimson and the Giant's hardly relaxed, just to start...
Eh, eh...Crimson has the storms and rushes that made them so enjoyable, but you also have chillouts like after the LTIA I solo, or they have Exiles, and Trio. We'll Let You Know takes its time. So much more "relaxed" times than in Mahavishnu. Giant feels much less "speedy" and on the nerve, esp when sung falsetto.
Mahavishnu...Very long busy tracks, and in some ways less contrasting moods and tracks than KC or Giant...
Birds of Fire had "Thousand Island Park" and "Hope", just to start. I have no idea where you're coming from.
Joined: August 27 2014
Location: riding the MOAB
Status: Offline
Points: 1505
Posted: January 10 2015 at 12:53
I do agree that they rather cram a lot of sounds into their songs for complexity, but I do know that there are other tracks like 'Thousand Island Park' and 'Hope', as said before.
Joined: June 04 2012
Location: Virginia
Status: Offline
Points: 1413
Posted: January 10 2015 at 13:46
Skullhead wrote:
Argonaught wrote:
They create a ragged, jagged, serrated pile-up of sound that takes too much effort to process.
I thought the same thing about KC for years after first hearing Red and Starless. Too much effort to process could be an argument for anyone not into prog in general?
Yet, in Red and SaBB all those odd-shaped disjointed pieces somehow end up fitting together and creating complex, but perfectly enjoyable music. That's because Fripp is a genius several times over.
The real problem with some progressive music has to do with its abstruseness and prolixity, not complexity (as in "verbosity ≠ eloquence").
Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
Posted: January 10 2015 at 16:38
Rednight wrote:
I'd say Birds of Fire is prog.
I agree.
After Birds of Fire, their music was started to suffer from John McLaughlin's excessive try to connect it with the spiritual things of the Sri Chimnoy's cult to which he belonged (imo).
Joined: July 20 2009
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Status: Offline
Points: 6776
Posted: January 10 2015 at 23:30
Gerinski wrote:
There was one time when Prog Rock and Jazz-Rock were considered as 2 different things, so it's quite logical that MO were then not considered among the bigs of Prog Rock, but they were always the bigs of Jazz-Rock together with Return To Forever, Weather Report etc (and consequently equivalent to the big Prog giants, although Jazz-Rock was less commercially successful).
KC (or other bands) may have infiltrated jazz elements in their Prog but they defined much of the symphonic sound with their seminal early works so by the time they had become more experimental they were already considered Prog Rock giants by many.
I agree. Also, they were nearly entirely instrumental.
The amazing "Visions of the Emerald Beyond" featuring Jean Luc Ponty wandered off into symphonic territory, with choir vocals! This is great stuff, vocals come in at 1:40
Interestingly, Jon Anderson is now teamed up with Jean Luc Ponty in the Anderson-Ponty Band! The first cuts are very interesting, sort of a blend of traditional Jon Anderson with some jazz-rock composition!
Joined: June 21 2006
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Points: 981
Posted: January 10 2015 at 23:45
Lear'sFool wrote:
jayem wrote:
Lear'sFool wrote:
^ Prog can go either way. Crimson and the Giant's hardly relaxed, just to start...
Eh, eh...Crimson has the storms and rushes that made them so enjoyable, but you also have chillouts like after the LTIA I solo, or they have Exiles, and Trio. We'll Let You Know takes its time. So much more "relaxed" times than in Mahavishnu. Giant feels much less "speedy" and on the nerve, esp when sung falsetto.
Mahavishnu...Very long busy tracks, and in some ways less contrasting moods and tracks than KC or Giant...
Birds of Fire had "Thousand Island Park" and "Hope", just to start. I have no idea where you're coming from.
Anyone who can express better the way I hear (and listen to) them is no less than welcome.
I'd consider Mahavishnu slightly closer to jazz, despite proggish moments, and Crimson's overall energies closer to rock, in spite of KC's flirting often with jazz.
When I say "horizontal" I mean light, quick, line-oriented music (of fill-in on drums), and vertical I'd say chord-oriented, slow, heavy.
If that doesn't feel right I'll stick with Gerinsky's comment, and try to post better messages next time...
Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
Posted: January 11 2015 at 01:22
Steely Dan's Aja is also a jazz-rock, but it's a gloriously LP as much as the anything great by the symph bands that are mentioned in OP. Because Aja is the vocal jazz-rock LP with ingeniously composed songs that are radio-friendly and yet meet the highest level of the genre.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.164 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Mahavishnu Orchestra
Topic Options
Skullhead wrote:
