The art of navigating by the extremes

 

There is a difference between compromise and balance.  The former frequently results in a low common denominator which is almost always disappointing, while the latter often results in a rich and full expression.  Extremes have their appeal and their purpose, but by going to one extreme or another, balance is lost, the music is one-sided.  I see this in a lot of metal bands:  by going to an extreme of heaviness, they too often compromise uniqueness.  The same has happened in the opposite direction with a lot of new-age music: it becomes so soft it too compromises uniqueness.  Aristotle came up with a method to find the right balance by examining the extremes.  This is part of his ethical philosophy, but I think it can be applied here to some extent: To find some sort of balance in music, we can look at the extremes and therby navigate by them.

 

From experience in theater and film, it is much easier to "throw it all out" and see what you got left. It is a massively strong acting example done for modern theater in advanced acting classes and you could easily apply some of this experimentation to the majority of krautrock and a lot of the film, theater and art that came out of Germany at that time.

 

What is an extreme? Careful with your explanation and definition, as it can not be a personal preference, because then you take away the objectivity required here.

 

So if you are saying an extreme is three notes that might aproximate a chord and then one note is added that is totally off the wall and no relation to anything else at all? ( ... guess what a lot of 20th century music is all about!!!) ... ) is "progressive"?

 

So an extreme is when I take a melody, turn it upside down, add some salt and pepper to it, and then use the high notes on the trombones and the low notes on the violins! (... it's been done, btw!). Melody does NOT prog make, or music make by itself, btw ... melody is simply a part of the music, not a separate entity, although it can be a portion by itself. And a lot of "prog" is not always about melody. Porcupine Tree, I would say yes, but I am not sure that Amon Duul 2 (or Can for that matter!) is about melody that much at all, even though they also have "melodies" in their music! ... but their work was not about "conventions" and "melody" and "rock music" were two of the easiest traps ever to find. You don't need to go to a major Conservatory of Music to find that out. You won't even get past a quarter in there, either!

  

Or is an extreme, something that you have not heard ... that you have a hard time explaining musically, which is what synthesizers did before they became just another keyboard instrument? ...

 

And here is the other problem. Do not confuse "notes" with "sound" ... as in "sounds like this" ... or a set of notes or chords that we have decided that "they are sad" as is often mentioned with minor chords! (How bizarre is that?) ... and now it would seem like you are "defining progressive" as something that you expect other things to be, and guess what ... I am not you and you are not me, and your definition of prog for me is bad, and mine for you is probably worse ... see ... we're two different musicians now. You play left handed and I play right handed!

 

... By ''extremes'' I mean a musical approach that either shows rather simple, typical tunes and even simplistic at times, often combined with nice melodies or at the other edge, highly ''sophisticated'', technical music that reaches a level of complexity that might be hard to follow for a prog fan.

 

I have made the decision, and yeah, it sounds arbitrary sometimes, that if something is "prog" the whole thing is NOT about "songs" anymore. I say this on purppose to force you and I to get away from the more conventional music that you hear in country, pop and even most bars with the lounge lizard NY jazz, or the majority of rock places in London!

 

So guess what you are asking? Well, you are confusing dexterity in an instrument with the type of music and the style. Dexterity has absolutely nothing to do with prog or otherwise. But in many ways the definition of a lot of classical talent and music, for most of us is a dexterous approach. I ended up in a discussion with someone that thought Allan Holdsworth was prog because of his dexterity and talent, similar to Jon McLaughlin I guess, or Frank Zappa. ... Now we have a problem ... how can, or ever, has dexterity, had anything to do with anything else other than the person's ability? And since when does one person's ability define all music? So because Jean-Luc Ponty is very good with his violin, he's something or other, but never what we think ... ohh what the heck, let's call it "jazz" or "fusion" ... and he has a lot of experimental and explosive stuff that fits into "prog" really well, but somehow, we look at a violin as some kind of devil-idiot instrument that can not be progressive since it is 300 years old?

 

I think that music is about two things. There are notes and then there are sounds.

 

If you listen for the notes only, you lose sight of the "trip" to the stars and back, and the ultimate reason why 80% of all the music is created in this universe and has been for thousands of years. It's not the notes that take you away ... it's the feeling that it can get you to flow off and see all kinds of inner feelings. The notes themselves have nothing to do with it, since you can get a different person to play the same notes and it didn't click for you.

 

Lastly, the hardest thing. We have to be careful with these "definitions" ... it's like saying that Charlie Daniels can't fiddle, or Doug Kershaw is an idiot, and Darryl Way is not very good, or that Jean-Luc is a master, or that Kris Karrer couldn't play a fiddle at all! ... these people are master fiddlers and using it in contexts that you can not even imagine. Karrer spends his time playing with Sufi masters in music, to give you an idea of the depth and dedication and how he attacks his own feelings in music. That is "progressive" within a western music context, since he would do something with the violin that is different than you and I are used to. But it might be boring for all those folks in the far east that have hear many other fidlers, but they know that if someone puts on a rock piece that Kris is going to town and everyone else will stand there and clap and dance with it too! And so would Charlie or Doug or Darryl or Jean-Luc ... and to say that Kris is not dexterous is insane! Or Jean-Luc or Darryl Way ... but how do you compare these guys to them playing something like a Beethoven or Mozart? ... you do not! They probably can, but it does not interest them! Or vice versa for many classically minded people, that have a tendency to think that the majority of rock music is poor music anyway! ... and because you are not definining it properly, I am not sure that we're improving the argument.

 

Just some more food for thought.

 

 

 

Extremes are strange. What is extreme for me ...  check this out:

 

Sebastiam in Traum - Klaus Schulze

Terje Rypdal - Eos (skip first cut) (so soft that it is scary!)

Jan Garbarek - Soria Maria

Egberto Gismonti - No Caipira (side 2 in its entirety with the piece dedicated to Villa Lobos)

Amon Duul 2 - Yeti (the title piece in its entirety)

Guru Guru - Das Liebe von ... radio (sp) from Tango Fango

Aphrodite's Child - 666

Magma  (just about all of it really!)

Heldon/Pierre Henri stuff

... and this is just a quick sample off the top of my head ... I haven't looked at my music stuff yet!

 

By the time you get to these, or through them, you have blown out your conception of music. Assuming that you can sit through it in the first place, since a lot of this stuff is really advanced stuff and not child's play rock music with a couple of sound effects on the guitars, which most metal and thrash stuff tend to be. (Good test ... yeah .. that drummer! ... and snare drum on the 4th beat ... voila! Some prog!)

 

So hearing yet another metal band that sounds so much like all the others, or another lounge lizard on the wayside of fusion bands ... is just not what I want to hear ... I want to hear and feel things that ... let's say "they don't exist" ... for that is the meaning of true progress and experience ... in any art! 

 

One extreme being simple (even simplistic) tunes with nice melodies.  Nope.  Talybont has too much counterpoint and intricacy for that.

 

The "other" extreme being highly sophisticated, technical music so complex that it might be hard for a prog fan to follow.  Nope.  Talybont is too accessible and consonant for that.  Even a child can dig the swirling layers of harmony on that song IMO.

 

Wow!  I think I understand what you are asking! 

 

What proportion of my preferred albums follows these ''extremes'' and am I a fan of this approach?

 

To continue grading GG's Freehand album (one of my alltime favorites)...

   
1. Just the Same - neither extreme IMO

2. On Reflection - neither extreme IMO

3. Free Hand - neither extreme IMO

4. Time to Kill - neither extreme IMO

5. His Last Voyage - neither extreme IMO

6. Talybont - neither extreme IMO

7. Mobile - neither extreme IMO

 

I think I'm very *open* to either extreme.  But in this case, one of my favorite albums seems to be all somewhere inbetween.