| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Rednight 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 18 2014
Location: Mar Vista, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 4812
|
 Posted: January 10 2015 at 16:04 |
|
I'd say Birds of Fire is prog.
|
 |
Argonaught
Forum Senior Member
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").
|
|
aglasshouse
Forum Senior Member
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.
|
|
http://fryingpanmedia.com
|
|
LearsFool
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 09 2014
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Points: 8644
|
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.
|
|
aglasshouse
Forum Senior Member
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. 
Edited by aglasshouse - January 10 2015 at 11:36
|
|
http://fryingpanmedia.com
|
|
Skullhead
Forum Senior Member
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?
|
|
Saperlipopette!
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 20 2010
Location: Tomorrowland
Status: Offline
Points: 12542
|
Posted: January 10 2015 at 08:08 |
Svetonio wrote:
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.
|
Altough I think they are, that wasn't my main point. Kids/noobs (as seen here on PA) still outgrow DT once they dig deeper.
|
|
Svetonio
Forum Senior Member
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.
Edited by Svetonio - January 10 2015 at 07:02
|
|
Saperlipopette!
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 20 2010
Location: Tomorrowland
Status: Offline
Points: 12542
|
Posted: January 10 2015 at 06:03 |
|
^If you read the rest of my post you'll see that I agree.
|
|
Svetonio
Forum Senior Member
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. Just my opinion, of course.
|
|
Saperlipopette!
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 20 2010
Location: Tomorrowland
Status: Offline
Points: 12542
|
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.
|
|
dr prog
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 25 2010
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 2528
|
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.
|
|
Guldbamsen
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin
Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104
|
Posted: January 10 2015 at 05:07 |
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. |
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.”
- Douglas Adams
|
|
dr prog
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 25 2010
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 2528
|
Posted: January 10 2015 at 05:05 |
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Argonaught
Forum Senior Member
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.
|
|
Gerinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154
|
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.
|
|
dr prog
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 25 2010
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 2528
|
Posted: January 10 2015 at 04:46 |
octopus-4 wrote:
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.
Here's a slightly vulgar comparison and not totally fair. <span style="line-height: 1.4;">They are like the early 70's jazz-rockfusion version of Dream Theater. Most noobs curious of jazz(rock) are blown away hearing MO's two first albums. Myself included. After a while their frenetic noodling and constantly showing off chops combined with lack of substance gets tiresome. Especially after you discover all the real great stuff </span>that's<span style="line-height: 1.4;"> out there. Excellent musicians that were put to use better in other </span>constallations (I have not heard Apocalypse, though). That said some of Inner Mountain Flame and Birds of Fire's quieter moments are not without beauty. |
The difference I was mentioning is about the mainstream listeners. Everybody knows Genesis, Yes and Pink Floyd. In this sense Gentle Giant are second league as well as Mahavishnu. I'm considering only the years up to 1977 more or less. Nothing to do with the beauty of their music. |
Gentle giant were probably the ultimate prog band. Surely not 2nd league
|
|
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.
|
|
dr prog
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 25 2010
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 2528
|
Posted: January 10 2015 at 04:44 |
richardh wrote:
I think they were/are a bit overlooked very much like Gentle Giant were. Tremendous musicians without doubt. At school I can remember people going on about Billy Cobham so I guess he was the one who managed to have a successful solo career beyond the band.
Oh and isn't the name just a bit confusing? Why did they choose it? |
Gentle giant were great composers though.
|
|
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.
|
|
jayem
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 21 2006
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Points: 997
|
Posted: January 10 2015 at 04:39 |
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...
Edited by jayem - January 10 2015 at 04:41
|
|
|
|
octopus-4
Special Collaborator
RIO/Avant/Zeuhl,Neo & Post/Math Teams
Joined: October 31 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 14608
|
Posted: January 10 2015 at 04:16 |
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.
Here's a slightly vulgar comparison and not totally fair. They are like the early 70's jazz-rockfusion version of Dream Theater. Most noobs curious of jazz(rock) are blown away hearing MO's two first albums. Myself included. After a while their frenetic noodling and constantly showing off chops combined with lack of substance gets tiresome. Especially after you discover all the real great stuff that's out there. Excellent musicians that were put to use better in other constallations (I have not heard Apocalypse, though). That said some of Inner Mountain Flame and Birds of Fire's quieter moments are not without beauty. |
The difference I was mentioning is about the mainstream listeners. Everybody knows Genesis, Yes and Pink Floyd. In this sense Gentle Giant are second league as well as Mahavishnu. I'm considering only the years up to 1977 more or less. Nothing to do with the beauty of their music.
|
|
I stand with Roger Waters, I stand with Joan Baez, I stand with Victor Jara, I stand with Woody Guthrie. Music is revolution
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Mahavishnu Orchestra
