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: December 25 2011
Location: internet
Status: Offline
Points: 2549
Posted: August 02 2012 at 22:23
Mirror Image wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
I have said many times that I consider The Mars Volta to be one of the most innovative bands of the 21st century. They are far more interesting (and consistent!) than those who are just trying to be different.
No matter what TMV as done since their inception, one can always tell he is listening to TMV, and not just because of Cedric's voice!
TMV remind me of a bunch of kids hyped up on Red Bull. To me, their music lacks focus and it just sounds like one chaotic mess. I can barely listen to them and I'm thankful I never have blown my hard earned money on one of their albums. There are some bands that you just have to see what the hype is about. Thankfully, I was inquisitive enough to check them out on YouTube.
How about this?
And this? (the first 1:25 or so is a barely audible ambient drone opening; you can skip it if you want).
I have said many times that I consider The Mars Volta to be one of the most innovative bands of the 21st century. They are far more interesting (and consistent!) than those who are just trying to be different.
No matter what TMV as done since their inception, one can always tell he is listening to TMV, and not just because of Cedric's voice!
TMV remind me of a bunch of kids hyped up on Red Bull. To me, their music lacks focus and it just sounds like one chaotic mess. I can barely listen to them and I'm thankful I never have blown my hard earned money on one of their albums. There are some bands that you just have to see what the hype is about. Thankfully, I was inquisitive enough to check them out on YouTube.
I just want to mention that I was one who "checked them out" online numerous times and did not like them. It was not until I bought two of their albums (yes two- the store gave a freebie every ten you bought) that I began to like them. I got Frances the Mute and Amputechture right before a week long vacation. I am now a fan.
By the way, if you want to approach them, please try Octahedron. It is a much mellower album. Check it out!
Joined: December 13 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2111
Posted: August 02 2012 at 22:18
Getting back to the Wilson/Stolt topic, the more I read Wilson's comments, the angrier I get. I think it showed what a class act he is by bashing other musicians who he felt didn't follow his little narrow idea of what progressive music should be. As I said, he made some valid points, but he didn't need to act the way he did. It's one thing to give your opinion, but it's a completely different animal altogether to bash other musicians. What did Stolt do to him? What did Wilson possibly have to gain from degrading The Flower Kings or Transatlantic? He could have simply said he didn't care for their music, but the interviewer didn't ask him to go into great detail about it. It was a simple yes or no question that Wilson took to mean it was time to flaunt his apparent massive ego.
“Music is enough for a lifetime but a lifetime is not enough for music.” - Sergei Rachmaninov
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Posted: August 02 2012 at 22:13
Mellotron Storm wrote:
The T wrote:
Steven Wilson is rather close to an imbecile when he opens his mouth. When he shuts up and plays his little simple instruments he fares way better.
Anyway, if what he's being doing recently is supposed to be the real standard for real "progressive" rock, count me out of that stupid train. Porcupine Tree is rather always good (except the last album) but Wilson's multiple projects in recent years all make me yawn and get sleepy.
And that's beside the point. He just showed he's a child. He looks like a child, and acts like a child.
I've always said: that one person is extremely good at something doesn't mean they are extremely good at giving opinions, or even that they're intelligent.
Are we talking about the same person here ? Unless your only example is this 7 year old interview which does make him look immature i'd love to see them.
Any interviews i've read with him have been nothing but intelligent and thoughtful. Whether it's about progressive music in general or his work in the studio re-mixing King Crimson, ELP or Jethro Tull he always has my full attention.
The fact most of his music makes you yawn and sleepy is simply your tastes just like classical music bores the hell out of me, no ones right or wrong it's just opinions and tastes my friend.
It's the second or third time he has given pompous interviews. This time he borders on idiocy. But he has shown to be arrogant many times.
Yes, part of what I said was based on my tastes. That doesn't make my very last sentence wrong. It applies perfectly to this case and to the persona of Steven Wilson.
Joined: December 13 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2111
Posted: August 02 2012 at 22:08
Epignosis wrote:
I have said many times that I consider The Mars Volta to be one of the most innovative bands of the 21st century. They are far more interesting (and consistent!) than those who are just trying to be different.
No matter what TMV as done since their inception, one can always tell he is listening to TMV, and not just because of Cedric's voice!
TMV remind me of a bunch of kids hyped up on Red Bull. To me, their music lacks focus and it just sounds like one chaotic mess. I can barely listen to them and I'm thankful I never have blown my hard earned money on one of their albums. There are some bands that you just have to see what the hype is about. Thankfully, I was inquisitive enough to check them out on YouTube.
Edited by Mirror Image - August 02 2012 at 22:09
“Music is enough for a lifetime but a lifetime is not enough for music.” - Sergei Rachmaninov
I have said many times that I consider The Mars Volta to be one of the most innovative bands of the 21st century. They are far more interesting (and consistent!) than those who are just trying to be different.
No matter what TMV as done since their inception, one can always tell he is listening to TMV, and not just because of Cedric's voice!
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: August 02 2012 at 21:25
Epignosis wrote:
So no, Steve. I don't want my prog to sound like Nickelback, thank you very much.
Except, contemporary music need not be Nickelback, it could be Mars Volta or Tool, to reiterate Wilson's examples or Bjork, Massive Attack, Mastodon among many others.
However, I highly doubt that exposure to new music is the only way a musician makes something fresh or daring.
Joined: December 13 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2111
Posted: August 02 2012 at 21:19
Epignosis wrote:
I'm sorry I have not read the thread, but I read the excerpt from the interview.
I agree with Stolt, but not for the reasons he mentions.
When I think of "progressive music," I think of music that progresses in and of itself: That is to say, a piece of music that is adventurous or dynamic, as opposed to pure pop which has a verse and a chorus. Progressive music for me is that which explores rather than just entertains.
The definition Wilson gives that progressive artists must in some way "progress" (i.e., find something new and venture into new styles) has always been silly to me. Some bands do very well with that (King Crimson, er Bob Fripp, made a career out of it, but he is the exception here, and a likely one since KC was hardly ever the same band at all). Imagine if Yes had, after Fragile, took what they had stylistically as a band and made disco (an emergent genre at the time): Would that have been considered progressive rock? Well, many bands went toward popular music (and disco!) and progressive rock fans have regarded many of those albums as rubbish. What progressive rock fans wanted was more of what they had fallen in love with. Hence the rise of "Neo-Prog" bands like Marillion and IQ. They were doing in the 1980s what Yes and Genesis ceased to do.
So no, Steve. I don't want my prog to sound like Nickelback, thank you very much. I want bands to make the music they want to make, and I will continue to be the judge and jury with respect to their product.
Derivative trumps boring anyway, I say.
This is essentially what I said in my post back on page...uh....one!
“Music is enough for a lifetime but a lifetime is not enough for music.” - Sergei Rachmaninov
Joined: August 27 2006
Location: The Beach
Status: Offline
Points: 13502
Posted: August 02 2012 at 21:02
^ I agree completely with you Rob and i think it's a shame that people take the word "progressive" to mean the music has to explore new territories(good luck with that anyway). Progressive music is as you say music that isn't necessarily verse, chorus, verse, chorus etc but music that explores. I've even heard WIlson describe it this way. When you listen to Blues whether from 1960 or 1980 it's still Blues. It's a style of music just like Progressive Rock is a style. The word isn't a verb.
I'm sorry I have not read the thread, but I read the excerpt from the interview.
I agree with Stolt, but not for the reasons he mentions.
When I think of "progressive music," I think of music that progresses in and of itself: That is to say, a piece of music that is adventurous or dynamic, as opposed to pure pop which has a verse and a chorus. Progressive music for me is that which explores rather than just entertains.
The definition Wilson gives that progressive artists must in some way "progress" (i.e., find something new and venture into new styles) has always been silly to me. Some bands do very well with that (King Crimson, er Bob Fripp, made a career out of it, but he is the exception here, and a likely one since KC was hardly ever the same band at all). Imagine if Yes had, after Fragile, took what they had stylistically as a band and made disco (an emergent genre at the time): Would that have been considered progressive rock? Well, many bands went toward popular music (and disco!) and progressive rock fans have regarded many of those albums as rubbish. What progressive rock fans wanted was more of what they had fallen in love with. Hence the rise of "Neo-Prog" bands like Marillion and IQ. They were doing in the 1980s what Yes and Genesis ceased to do.
So no, Steve. I don't want my prog to sound like Nickelback, thank you very much. I want bands to make the music they want to make, and I will continue to be the judge and jury with respect to their product.
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: August 02 2012 at 20:51
questionsneverknown wrote:
Sorry to go against the tide here but I don't think that Wilson is actually being that mean. The interviewer asked him what he thought about current directions in progressive music and which ones he'd like to see be pursued further. He then offered his opinion. He spoke of bands that he thought moved the genre forward and others that he thought didn't, and he gave aesthetic reasons for why he thought this. That seems completely reasonable. It's what artists in most fields do--I like this direction, I don't like this one; I'd prefer to more of this and it's what I'm trying to do; I could do without more of that; it's not what I'm into and I don't think it's healthy for the field. Again, that seems reasonable to me.
I think calling their music rubbish and labelling them the death of prog rock, as reinforcing old prejudices about prog rock is out of line. As Stolt infers, it is a bit like suggesting that they rob the prog community of fans. Wilson is entitled to say he finds them boring and regressive. I remember Wetton made similar observations about IQ and neo prog generally in an elaborate interview in the 90s (and there are people who would find even that rude, not that I do), but Wilson went beyond that. I have found even in other interviews that Wilson is somewhat touchy about how prog rock is perceived, why he can never be a multi millionaire as long as he makes prog rock and such and such. He could let go a bit.
I agree that Stolt seems to have over-reacted there, but he probably took it personally with regard to "death of prog rock". Prog rock musicians feel persecuted so Wilson calling them the death of prog rock is probably the last thing they want to hear.
Joined: August 27 2006
Location: The Beach
Status: Offline
Points: 13502
Posted: August 02 2012 at 20:28
The T wrote:
Steven Wilson is rather close to an imbecile when he opens his mouth. When he shuts up and plays his little simple instruments he fares way better.
Anyway, if what he's being doing recently is supposed to be the real standard for real "progressive" rock, count me out of that stupid train. Porcupine Tree is rather always good (except the last album) but Wilson's multiple projects in recent years all make me yawn and get sleepy.
And that's beside the point. He just showed he's a child. He looks like a child, and acts like a child.
I've always said: that one person is extremely good at something doesn't mean they are extremely good at giving opinions, or even that they're intelligent.
Are we talking about the same person here ? Unless your only example is this 7 year old interview which does make him look immature i'd love to see them.
Any interviews i've read with him have been nothing but intelligent and thoughtful. Whether it's about progressive music in general or his work in the studio re-mixing King Crimson, ELP or Jethro Tull he always has my full attention.
The fact most of his music makes you yawn and sleepy is simply your tastes just like classical music bores the hell out of me, no ones right or wrong it's just opinions and tastes my friend.
Joined: February 15 2012
Location: Silicon Valley
Status: Offline
Points: 6
Posted: August 02 2012 at 20:18
I really have a hard time understanding the why of this kind of thing. Wilson is extremely talented, why should he feel the need to trash anybody? Artistic insecurity? I guess an artist is only as good as the next idea he has? I like music that is interesting enough to return to, over and over again. Both of these guys have created music that have done this for me- and both have created stuff that I don't listen to all that often. I don't like PROGRESSIVE MUSIC. I like music that is most easily described as Progressive. There is a difference and I am ever so thankful there continues to be music being made that I love, regardless of the genre, tag, or label associated with it.
Joined: June 18 2009
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 12732
Posted: August 02 2012 at 19:47
As many have stated here, I do agree with Wilson's opinion about the kind of bands that move the genre forward. And also about the bands that don't move it forward. And if he doesn't like those bands, it's perfect, and he can say so without any recrimination from anyone. But implying that it is wrong what Stolt is doing with music, and that said music is bad music, that's what I think was wrong... he might have been a bit more diplomatic. That's always the better. I actually like what I have heard from both men, as long as the music is good, I don't care if it's retro or avant or whatever. I guess that if the musician is good, symphonic prog still has a lot to offer (I really love The Whirlwind as much as the best albums from the 70's, for example), if the musician is bad, avant music just won't be good.
Joined: June 22 2009
Location: Ultima Thule
Status: Offline
Points: 602
Posted: August 02 2012 at 19:08
I have to say that I'm a little surprised by the turn of the discussion on this. I read the initial Wilson/Stolt exchange this morning and then just came back to read all the comments, and then had to go back and read the initial exchange again.
Sorry to go against the tide here but I don't think that Wilson is actually being that mean. The interviewer asked him what he thought about current directions in progressive music and which ones he'd like to see be pursued further. He then offered his opinion. He spoke of bands that he thought moved the genre forward and others that he thought didn't, and he gave aesthetic reasons for why he thought this. That seems completely reasonable. It's what artists in most fields do--I like this direction, I don't like this one; I'd prefer to more of this and it's what I'm trying to do; I could do without more of that; it's not what I'm into and I don't think it's healthy for the field. Again, that seems reasonable to me.
Frankly I find it a bit hard to follow Stolt's argument, but that's probably simply down to a language issue--so, fair enough. But I do find it strange that he hears ad hominem attacks in Wilson's statement, like when he says, essentially, but Mike Portnoy's a really nice guy. I don't know that that was ever part of the issue. I don't think Wilson said anything mean about these other artists as people, he simply expressed (strongly) his likes and dislikes for different kinds of music. We can agree or disagree with Wilson, but I like that he gave some aesthetic reasons for his tastes and opinions.
The damage that we do is just so powerfully strong we call it love
The damage that we do just goes on and on and on but not long enough.
Joined: January 30 2012
Location: UT, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 374
Posted: August 02 2012 at 17:13
The T wrote:
Steven Wilson is rather close to an imbecile when he opens his mouth. When he shuts up and plays his little simple instruments he fares way better.
Anyway, if what he's being doing recently is supposed to be the real standard for real "progressive" rock, count me out of that stupid train. Porcupine Tree is rather always good (except the last album) but Wilson's multiple projects in recent years all make me yawn and get sleepy.
And that's beside the point. He just showed he's a child. He looks like a child, and acts like a child.
I've always said: that one person is extremely good at something doesn't mean they are extremely good at giving opinions, or even that they're intelligent.
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 0.227 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Steven Wilson Vs. Roine Stolt
Topic Options
Epignosis wrote:
