I cannot stand Gentle Giant

Ok wow, here I am 3 months later. Gentle Giant is my 6th favorite band, 5th on a good day. How I cringe at my old words. So after someone suggested acquiring the taste here I tried it and really liked it, then soon after Power and the Glory clicked. At a record fair I decided to take a plunge and got every giant album from Three Friends to Free Hand. The first time Octopus graced my ears... holy moly. Incredible band, I take back all that I said.

richardh wrote: Blacksword wrote: moshkito wrote: Hi, It's a shame ... if anything within the first 5 or 6 GG albums, is a bunch of facts that you will never give attention to or some credit for their inventiveness. 1. Gary Green has been on record, specifying that in the early days, they never wrote anything down ... they just played. So the next time you listen, recognize that this is NOT ABOUT A SONG, but whatever comes out in the music ... similar to Gayle Ebbett specifying in his band that they might start with an A or a B, but will likely end up with a X, or Z ... which means, in case you don't know, that this is about the feel and the sound of the music ... not what you want ... you want hits ... GG is not for you, and many of us here will probably say bad things like ... good riddance! I would rather try to explain this for you, if you have the ears for it, but the music is throwing you off already ... and I doubt that any of our words will help! 2. The incredible musicianship of each member of the band, ought to at the very least, allow you an inch or two of ... yeah ... that's really good and tight ... and they were better in concert, even though most of the videos if it all have sync issues, and sound awful ... which doesn't help the band a whole lot. The show I got to see, their encore was 25 to 30 minutes long, and in that time all 6 band members played all instruments ... all 6 played drums, bass, guitar ... you name it ... so, when it comes to musicianship, I seriously doubt many bands can even stand up to the socks in these guys. 3. I have my doubts that you have actually listened to GG ... you played a few seconds, it didn't click and you tried another spot, same thing, and you decided it's not for you. You will NEVER, EVER, get an appreciation for a lot of the music in the 20th century, almost all of which was anti-melody and used a broken down orchestra (that too, but it means different combinations, not the usual!) to create different moods and ideas in music ... witness BERNARD HERRMAN and how his different use of an orchestra created some amazing sounds for so many fantasy films in the 50's and eventually many of the films for Hitchcock ... however, I am not sure that you can even consider a good listen to these things ... in some cases, the music is down right scary and weird ... and you already specified that's not your click. You want your metal, melodic, and not "anti-music". 4. Music listening, and appreciation, required one let go of ideas and tastes. If you study (take a music appreciation course in school!) some of this for the last 500 years, you will find nothing but the development of music from 2 or 3 instruments, to 150 and then the deconstruction of an orchestra to various weird combinations, that were most clear and represented with Stokowsky, who used to microphone special sections of the orchestra, in order to give that section a wider/larger role in its piece. It was perfect for a few films, and specially FANTASIA.  5. At the time, there was a lot of "anti-film" (French, started in the 50's probably with Godard), "anti-theater" (English and American, with actors controlling the highlights ... think Stellllllllllllllllaaaaa (Brando) or Olivier doing his words of Shakespeare, making a set of words more important than the whole play!), "anti-literature" as exemplified by a lot of writers doing significantly different things, and the Americans probably had a lot to say bout that, but the French scene was also important. The "anti-music" was more centered on the classical de-construction of music and it sounding weird and off beat and specially off key. It created a lot of strange things, in England and France ... many of which are now considered historical, since the folks involved were not exactly street urchins, but really well educated musicians that DID KNOW WHAT THEY WERE DOING! The thing that bothers me the most is how far behind the rock music scene was compared to many of these ... we're talking anywhere from 10 to 20 years ... and of course, now we could say that many listeners, some 50 or 60 years later, have made this even worse. I, myself, am not the great GG fan ... but I have their first 7 albums ... because the musicianship of it all makes 5 or 6 of the bands in PA's top ten sound like high school bands! With the simplistic of music and sound possible being considered "important" ... which if 500 years of history is an example ... that's backwards! have some heart ... do some serious listening ... it's not crap ... but really special stuff and the only one of its kind. many have tried to copy it and pay tribute to it ... but if you don't have it inside your heart and at the tip of your fingers, the copy just will not be as good. I don't dislike SB, but I would not put it in the same sentence as GG, either ... they did not grow up to be a special band on their own ... they grew up to love other bands ... how social and American this is ... you try to make sure that the fans love you and they think you are cool. Sorry SB ... I have GG in my collection, not SB (only 2 CD's!). You're over generalizing about what people think of GG, and over intellectualizing music appreciation. You may even be doing all that without realizing it! Whatever. The point is, no one has criticized GG as musicians. It's clear from the 4 albums I have in my collection, that they are technically talented and versatile musicians, but then broadly speaking you get that a lot in prog rock, so it's fairly disingenuous to suggest people don't appreciate the bands musical talent. If they like progressive rock, then they'll likely recognise good musicians when they hear them. The idea of just letting the music take form without much formal composition is fine. Improvisation and/or instinctively letting music just 'flow' and take shape organically is testimony to the bands technical skill, and open minded approach to making music. I applaud that, but it doesn't obligate me to always enjoy the end result.   Funny really as The Power and The Glory sounds like the most meticulously plotted album I've ever heard. I don't hear this natural flow. It sounds like they solved an equation and then shouted 'Eureka' for 40 minutes. It really clicks with me. IAGH on the other hand does sound to me like a band that recorded the first thing they played and then exited the studio. Then you have Three Friends which is all over the place to my ears. They are a fascinating band for sure but like all prog bands they put out a variety of stuff and really there is no obligation to like any of it all like all of it or like a tiny bit of it. Music is something to delve into and enjoy and relax to and have any opinion about .. of course!

I agree, regarding The Power and the Glory. It sounds like a mathematically orchestrated album in parts, at least. Playing the Game (probably one of my favourite GG songs - if I had to choose some) sounds very carefully 'composed'

noni wrote: I quite like Free Hand and Interview and often plays those when I'm in the mood for GG stuff.    I'm not partial to the other albums as they need an acquired ear to listen to these albums.   I have all the collection of GG's material and play only most of these a few times over a period of many years.

moshkito wrote: Frenetic Zetetic wrote: I feel like An Inmate's Lullaby is quite a divisive track, fans of the band or not. It's a little "too wonky" for many. Even though that's my favorite GG record, that track is still a "WTF am I listening to..?!" moment for me. I don't think I could personally call it weak, it's just very, very different. GG always had that combinational vocal flair absent in the majority of popular progressive acts. Those dudes knew music very well. Now, take a trip with me on this .... 50 years ago, there was no Internet, only LP's. And these did not make it into the USA (or elsewhere I'm sure), as fast ... many albums took months to get over here, as most of the "importers" were arms of larger record companies and they only brought in what they knew they could sell ... like the English version of Sgt Pepper because it was very different than the American release taken from a copy of a master found in a dump in Argentina! So, yesterday (so to speak) ... you said "wtf am I listening to..?!" ... but your curiosity stayed up ... because the next thing you thought was ... wow ... what was that ... it's certainly different ... and you end up listening to it again, to find out what ticked in it ... So, today (so to speak) ... you say "wtf am I listening to ..?!", but your curiosity will not always stick ... why? I like this and that which you have in your collection, and this is too weird to listen to and figure out and I'm not gonna bother, and you put on RUSH ... just to make sure you know where you stand! I am not sure that GG, in their early days were that musically cultured ... I think that some of them came up with the idea that if you did something different with this, it would be fun, and even funny ... and then we can create some lyrics based on some literary references, so folks won't spend their time thinking that this is some sort of intellectual exercise. GG, were all kids, just like us ... when they started out, they were learning their instruments just like everyone else ... thus, what came out, must have been figured out not only by accident but maybe by a sort of design. Per GG's statement, "nothing was written, we just played ... " to me this said it ... you came in today, and look what I came out with ... and the guy over there added a bass sequence that sounded like a broken string in it, and then ... someone added a counter vocal to it ... boom ... you got a combination that was strange, very weird really, although when you see it together cleaned up, it sounds like really polished music designed for ... an effect? I doubt it ... this band was not showy, even in concert ... they were very dedicated to the quality of what they did, even if the sync side of many videos are out of it. It showed on their albums. I often joke that GG is for folks that are not "riff" minded ... because if they are, this band will sound like the clocks in PF's album ... a total cacophony that will drive you nuts! My only question is ... is it intentional? ... now your perspective changes!

Blacksword wrote: moshkito wrote: Hi, It's a shame ... if anything within the first 5 or 6 GG albums, is a bunch of facts that you will never give attention to or some credit for their inventiveness. 1. Gary Green has been on record, specifying that in the early days, they never wrote anything down ... they just played. So the next time you listen, recognize that this is NOT ABOUT A SONG, but whatever comes out in the music ... similar to Gayle Ebbett specifying in his band that they might start with an A or a B, but will likely end up with a X, or Z ... which means, in case you don't know, that this is about the feel and the sound of the music ... not what you want ... you want hits ... GG is not for you, and many of us here will probably say bad things like ... good riddance! I would rather try to explain this for you, if you have the ears for it, but the music is throwing you off already ... and I doubt that any of our words will help! 2. The incredible musicianship of each member of the band, ought to at the very least, allow you an inch or two of ... yeah ... that's really good and tight ... and they were better in concert, even though most of the videos if it all have sync issues, and sound awful ... which doesn't help the band a whole lot. The show I got to see, their encore was 25 to 30 minutes long, and in that time all 6 band members played all instruments ... all 6 played drums, bass, guitar ... you name it ... so, when it comes to musicianship, I seriously doubt many bands can even stand up to the socks in these guys. 3. I have my doubts that you have actually listened to GG ... you played a few seconds, it didn't click and you tried another spot, same thing, and you decided it's not for you. You will NEVER, EVER, get an appreciation for a lot of the music in the 20th century, almost all of which was anti-melody and used a broken down orchestra (that too, but it means different combinations, not the usual!) to create different moods and ideas in music ... witness BERNARD HERRMAN and how his different use of an orchestra created some amazing sounds for so many fantasy films in the 50's and eventually many of the films for Hitchcock ... however, I am not sure that you can even consider a good listen to these things ... in some cases, the music is down right scary and weird ... and you already specified that's not your click. You want your metal, melodic, and not "anti-music". 4. Music listening, and appreciation, required one let go of ideas and tastes. If you study (take a music appreciation course in school!) some of this for the last 500 years, you will find nothing but the development of music from 2 or 3 instruments, to 150 and then the deconstruction of an orchestra to various weird combinations, that were most clear and represented with Stokowsky, who used to microphone special sections of the orchestra, in order to give that section a wider/larger role in its piece. It was perfect for a few films, and specially FANTASIA.  5. At the time, there was a lot of "anti-film" (French, started in the 50's probably with Godard), "anti-theater" (English and American, with actors controlling the highlights ... think Stellllllllllllllllaaaaa (Brando) or Olivier doing his words of Shakespeare, making a set of words more important than the whole play!), "anti-literature" as exemplified by a lot of writers doing significantly different things, and the Americans probably had a lot to say bout that, but the French scene was also important. The "anti-music" was more centered on the classical de-construction of music and it sounding weird and off beat and specially off key. It created a lot of strange things, in England and France ... many of which are now considered historical, since the folks involved were not exactly street urchins, but really well educated musicians that DID KNOW WHAT THEY WERE DOING! The thing that bothers me the most is how far behind the rock music scene was compared to many of these ... we're talking anywhere from 10 to 20 years ... and of course, now we could say that many listeners, some 50 or 60 years later, have made this even worse. I, myself, am not the great GG fan ... but I have their first 7 albums ... because the musicianship of it all makes 5 or 6 of the bands in PA's top ten sound like high school bands! With the simplistic of music and sound possible being considered "important" ... which if 500 years of history is an example ... that's backwards! have some heart ... do some serious listening ... it's not crap ... but really special stuff and the only one of its kind. many have tried to copy it and pay tribute to it ... but if you don't have it inside your heart and at the tip of your fingers, the copy just will not be as good. I don't dislike SB, but I would not put it in the same sentence as GG, either ... they did not grow up to be a special band on their own ... they grew up to love other bands ... how social and American this is ... you try to make sure that the fans love you and they think you are cool. Sorry SB ... I have GG in my collection, not SB (only 2 CD's!). You're over generalizing about what people think of GG, and over intellectualizing music appreciation. You may even be doing all that without realizing it! Whatever. The point is, no one has criticized GG as musicians. It's clear from the 4 albums I have in my collection, that they are technically talented and versatile musicians, but then broadly speaking you get that a lot in prog rock, so it's fairly disingenuous to suggest people don't appreciate the bands musical talent. If they like progressive rock, then they'll likely recognise good musicians when they hear them. The idea of just letting the music take form without much formal composition is fine. Improvisation and/or instinctively letting music just 'flow' and take shape organically is testimony to the bands technical skill, and open minded approach to making music. I applaud that, but it doesn't obligate me to always enjoy the end result.

 

BaldJean wrote: dougmcauliffe wrote: Well I apologize in advance to gentle giant fans... I’ve really tried with these guys but I’m just not hearing what everyone else is. The only song that doesn’t give me a headache is proclamation. When I’m listening I realize their music is very unique but overall I just think... it’s bad. I’ve listened to power and the glory, octopus and in a glass house and free hand all a couple times now and I just can’t get into it. I can usually get into most prog, I hated van der graaf on first listen but now that’s a favorite, but with them I feel there is plenty of movement in their songs, with gentle giant I feel like they play 2 riffs a song and then do some uncomfortable vocal harmonies. I think so sincere may be one of the worst songs I’ve ever heard. I am really having a problem with understanding why these vocal harmonies feel "uncomfortable" to you. I could understand if someone said he does not like that kind of singing, but "uncomfortable"? do you mean to imply that there is, from a musicological point of view, something "wrong" with these harmonies, like for example using intervals that should not be sung at the same time?

If you ask me, and you haven't, but I can't help myself, it's choppiness of the notes. There is a lot of melody with a paucity of notes being emphasized through sustain. Very little variety in note length. This is similarly true of vocals and every instrument they play. Now once a harmony enters, they may be different pitches, but it also tends to be constructed of the same short choppy notes. The base lines also tend to play up the short choppy notes of the top line melodies. There's no reprieve and it's simply bad inartful orchestration to my mind. This is far removed from the wonderful variation in note durations one gets from Univers Zero, a RIO/Avant band that is nothing like Gentle Giant. They like to layer things too, yet they may have one instrument playing something rapid while another is playing something slower until it evolves into something else.

dougmcauliffe wrote: Well I apologize in advance to gentle giant fans... I’ve really tried with these guys but I’m just not hearing what everyone else is. The only song that doesn’t give me a headache is proclamation. When I’m listening I realize their music is very unique but overall I just think... it’s bad. I’ve listened to power and the glory, octopus and in a glass house and free hand all a couple times now and I just can’t get into it. I can usually get into most prog, I hated van der graaf on first listen but now that’s a favorite, but with them I feel there is plenty of movement in their songs, with gentle giant I feel like they play 2 riffs a song and then do some uncomfortable vocal harmonies. I think so sincere may be one of the worst songs I’ve ever heard.

I am really having a problem with understanding why these vocal harmonies feel "uncomfortable" to you. I could understand if someone said he does not like that kind of singing, but "uncomfortable"? do you mean to imply that there is, from a musicological point of view, something "wrong" with these harmonies, like for example using intervals that should not be sung at the same time?

"Your prog friend's going to kill me and he's ten six feet ten....... I can't I can't I can't stand gentle giant I can't I can't..........I can't stand gentle giant...."

BaldJean wrote: it is my earliest childhood memory

I beat you by...6 months. I was 3½ when Luke blew up the death star. I also met my first true love that night...her name was Leia.

I just want to point out that after discovering "Knots" at the age of 4 I used to run around the house going "It hurts him to think..." endlessly until everybody yelled at me to stop. it is my earliest childhood memory