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 09 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 610
Posted: May 28 2010 at 18:53
stonebeard wrote:
Besides the obvious personality flaws that follow from liking prog, you mean?
I always thought early Genesis were overrated as a prog band.
Foxtrot and Trespass i really like, but I don't think much of Nursery Cryme. While the Lamb and England are quite good I think Gabriel holds them back a bit imo
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 18064
Posted: May 29 2010 at 13:35
Hi,
Too bad that you can not read the post that defines things better for you. You are looking for something imaginary and everyone's suggestion is going to confuse you more, instead of helping you define your music tastes and why's for it.
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com
Joined: October 15 2009
Location: Slovenia
Status: Offline
Points: 296
Posted: May 29 2010 at 13:53
Doesn't matter. I find all your perspectives, opinions very interesting, I enjoyed reading every comment. Learned a few things. And again, gained perspective (there is no objectivity, only as many perspectives as possible (Nietzsche)).
Joined: August 30 2006
Location: NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Posted: May 29 2010 at 14:10
Kole, try listening to Sound Chaser off of Relayer - it is their most jazz-fusion-influenced piece, and Relayer's production sounds very modern even now, and so that might help you connect to their music better...I can't think of anything that sounds very fusion-influenced form Genesis, though...
I would otherwise say not to bother, but since you enjoy Transatlantic and Spock's Beard, there is still a a chance! Sometimes it has more to do with timing and mood - I never liked early Genesis, either, but a revisit to them a few years ago turned that around. It also took me two years or so to finally get into King Crimson...
Joined: April 05 2008
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 1243
Posted: May 29 2010 at 19:07
kole wrote:
I am really into Pink Floyd, King Crimson, Frank Zappa, Marillion, Beardfish, Jethro Tull (gonna see them on 1. 7., hell yeah!), and the whole Canterbury scene. Oh, and one of my top 3 genres is jazz fusion (or rock, if you prefer that expression).
kole wrote:
Well, I actually like quite a few bands, listed as symphonic prog. Spock's Beard is great, then Anglagard, Camel (one of my favourite bands), ELP (also one of my favourites), Focus (do I dare say it again?), Transatlantic... so I guess the problem doesn't lie in symph prog.
Based on what you like (which are also bands that I also love.... except for Marillion...) I think you should listen to:
*Yes - Relayer (lots of fusion in there!!!)
*Genesis - Trespass (since you like ELP....you might like the organ in there...)
*Genesis - A Trick of the Tail(also a great starting point!)
*Yes - Tales From Topographic Oceans (for me, the band's Magnum Opus... and their most unaccessible album)
Here are some samples (1 per album, except for Relayer):
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: May 29 2010 at 22:59
Hmm...I guess you really meant what is that thing that eludes you in their music that may be of interest if you haven't latched onto it already? Ok, as far as Genesis goes, their structures are very interesting, especially Musical Box, Dancing with the moonlit knight, The Cinema Show. It's not nearly as straightforward as it sounds on the surface, there are lots of twists and turns. Another interesting aspect is their songs have a very loose, organic, fluid feel even though the musicians play economically and don't generally go off into excursions that don't directly relate to the flow of the music. Hackett's use of tapping in different contexts is also worth investigating, like Hogweed.
Yes presents a contrasting approach: their songs sound hard rocking and tight but there are lots of jam-y excursions which don't rigidly stick to the requirements of the song. Structure-wise, Close to the Edge is incredible for exploring a pop chorus in various contexts and filling out the gaps with extended instrumental sections. By and large though, it's the details that are more interesting, like the way Howe flips back and forth between rock and jazz guitar. Contrapuntal vocalisations in the coda of Roundabout is another interesting aspect.
I am sorry if none of this was news to you , but if anything I have said here gives you something to explore in their music, I am only too glad to have been of help.
Joined: May 01 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 470
Posted: May 31 2010 at 16:47
rod65 wrote:
Paravion wrote:
rod65 wrote:
Paravion wrote:
You know how it is with prog music. It takes time for one to get into it. Especially "harder" stuff... That's what I meant by saying that I tried to like them.
Really?
The cure is trying not to care about disliking yes or genesis.
I agree. While I think it is often worth the effort to get a taste for something you don't at first like, it is not a failure if you don't manage to acquire that particular taste, no matter how many other people have it. Some music, no matter what its merits, just doesn't do it for us. Personally, though I can recognize the excellence of Lamb Lies Down on Broadway, for instance, it has never really moved me. Not a failing: just a fact.
I'm not sure I agree. It reminds me of what Gentle Giant wrote inside the gatefold of "Acquiring the taste"
"Acquiring the taste is the second phase of sensory pleasure. If you gorged yourself on our first album, then relish the finer flavours (we hope) of this, our second offering.
It's our goal to expand the frontiers of contemporary popular music at the risk of being very unpopular. We have recorded each composition with the one thought - that it should be unique, adventurous and fascinating. It has taken every shred or our combined musical and technical knowledge to achieve this.
From this outset we have abandoned all preconceived thoughts on blatant commercialism. Instead we hope to give you something far more substantial and fulfilling. All you need to do is sit back and acquire the taste"
Writing something like that is a HUGE turn-off and makes it less likely that I end up liking the album.
(It's actually an okay album - and I like Genlte Giant (s/t is my fave). But what's with the pretentiousness and self-indulgence?- It's almost as if it is ironic?)
"While I think it is often worth the effort to get a taste for something you don't at first like"
Not sure. If I don't like an album first time I listen to it - I just don't like it, and it's unlikely that I give it another try in the near future. It's very rare though that I buy and listen to albums that I actually dislike.
If it's one of those annoying albums that requires acquisition of taste, I many times don't 'get it' at first listen - but I'm able to judge whether it has potential (or at least - I tell myself) - and if I feel it has potential, I listen to it a lot, and I end up (hopefully) liking the album. But it doesn't make an album better than other albums just because it requires that you have to "sit back and acquire the taste".
Thanks for the detailed response, Paravion. If I gave the impression that I thought it was necessary or better to like music for which a taste needs to be aquired, that was an accident. I certainly don't think we should spend all of our precious listening time spinning discs we don't enjoy, in the hope of getting to like them. And sometimes, I absolutely agree with you, a piece of music is just not going to appeal to us, and there is no good reason to force the issue. It has been my experience fairly often, though, going right back to my teenage years, that I may dislike an album on first listen and put it away, and then take it out again a few months or even years later, put it on, and find that something in me has changed, and I am now hearing things differently than I'd heard them before. It all depends, I suppose, on our reasons for that initial dislike. Often, I thnk we might dislike an album because it conflicts in some fundamental way with our expectations, either of the album or band specifically or of music more broadly. In this case--and again I need to be clear that I am speaking only from experience and not suggesting how anyone else "should" listen to music--I have often found it the case that my expectations were in some key way narrow, and when they either broadened by themselves as a result of exposure to a range of new experiences, or were broadened deliberately through effort on my part, my appreciation of previously unappreciated music increased, and the fabric of my life was enriched in some small way. I suppose I might wrap up by saying that if I only listened to what I liked on first hearing, I would presently have little or no appreciation for certain whole genres and sub-genres of music, prog and otherwise, that have become so much a part of my life that I cannot imagine what my mind would be without them.
You're welcome. I agree with you in most respects.
. It has been my experience fairly often, though, going right back to my teenage years, that I may dislike an album on first listen and put it away, and then take it out again a few months or even years later, put it on, and find that something in me has changed, and I am now hearing things differently than I'd heard them before. It all depends, I suppose, on our reasons for that initial dislike.
I suppose it comes down to different ways of disliking an album. When I first listened to 'Unavailable' by the Residents (years back, and my first residents experience) it somewhat scared me. I certainly did not enjoy it. I kept it in my collection and revisited it once or twice a year. Suddenly (i remember that particular sunday morning) it got to me, and it remains now one of my favorite albums.
But some albums I really dislike to such an extend that I find it very certain that I always will so. Yes' Big Generator and the Asia albums are good examples of that kind of disliking. I don't intend to give them another try (at present state of mind), and they are not to be found in my record collection anymore (I have some strange idea that an album has to be 'worthy' of my collection and from time to time I get rid of albums that I in no way relate to or like. )
I suppose my response was triggered by the word 'effort'. I don't feel it's an effort to listen to an album - no matter how complex or simple it might be - and I have no idea what kind of 'effort' I should employ in order to like a particular album - other than just to listen, of course. 'Effort' has some unfortunate conscious elements attached to its meaning.
If I don't like an album, there can be many (indefinate, I hope) reasons for and ways of disliking that pårticular album - just as there are many possible reasons for and ways of liking one. It's my belief that most of these reasons and ways are in fact unconscious. When post-rationalizing, I can only eye the (somewhat obvious) fact that there are 'good' and 'bad' ways of disliking an album. Somehow I have to make a judgement - but I rely solely on my intuition in that respect - it has made me discover much good music, and I'm pleased with it, and I trust it.
I was also responding to the (seemingly) widespread notion that an album is better when it's of a such complex and difficult nature that listening to it has to be 'learnt' in order to enjoy it - and if learnt - it's more rewarding eventually.
Joined: October 21 2007
Location: n/a
Status: Offline
Points: 8052
Posted: May 31 2010 at 17:59
Paravion wrote:
I'm not sure I agree. It reminds me of what Gentle Giant wrote inside the gatefold of "Acquiring the taste"
"Acquiring the taste is the second phase of sensory pleasure. If you gorged yourself on our first album, then relish the finer flavours (we hope) of this, our second offering.
It's our goal to expand the frontiers of contemporary popular music at the risk of being very unpopular. We have recorded each composition with the one thought - that it should be unique, adventurous and fascinating. It has taken every shred or our combined musical and technical knowledge to achieve this.
From this outset we have abandoned all preconceived thoughts on blatant commercialism. Instead we hope to give you something far more substantial and fulfilling. All you need to do is sit back and acquire the taste"
Writing something like that is a HUGE turn-off and makes it less likely that I end up liking the album.
(It's actually an okay album - and I like Genlte Giant (s/t is my fave). But what's with the pretentiousness and self-indulgence?- It's almost as if it is ironic?)
I don't really think that's actually pretentious. Pompous, arrogant and elitist are all adjectives that could (but very unfairly) be applied to those sleeve notes. It's honesty. They were aiming to expand the borders of popular music, and I think it's fair to say that, on that particular album, they did. I really don't think that musicians (or anyone else for that matter) should play dumb to avoid unkind adjectives.
And really, any decent art has self-indulgent elements, though that self-indulgence may actually be populist and since art has a communicative aspect, complete self-indulgence isn't really ever the case.
Joined: October 29 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 573
Posted: May 31 2010 at 19:54
kole wrote:
Wow, liked it a lot, giving it a second spin.
Glad to hear it. Reading through the thread, I kind of thought that Relayer would be the album for you. It's probably my favourite by Yes too, for the jazz influences (not to mention Anderson's unusually coherent lyrics).
As far as Genesis goes, no one's mentioned it but if you still want to get into them you may want to try their albums Trick of the Tail and Wind and Wuthering. Those albums aren't really their "classic" sound but they're pretty close. The reason why I suggest them is that they have a much more polished and I'd say mature sound than the earlier albums. I still think of them as inferiour to the Gabriel era stuff, which has the upper hand in terms of raw creativity. But if you're hell-bent on getting into the band, that might be a good, alternative place to start. Besides, a number of people find Collins' voice easier on the ears than Gabriel (though I've always preferred Gabriel myself)
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: May 31 2010 at 20:30
I agree with Orb. Actually, the write up just sounds like a warning to fans that the second album is more ambitious than the first and not so easy to get to like upfront. And it IS a very ambitious effort, so they are simply saying don't come here if all you want from music is catchy hooks to have a good time. That is a sentiment espoused by a lot of prog fans here about prog per se, so why would it be self indulgent if prog musicians said it themselves?
Joined: July 20 2009
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Status: Offline
Points: 7412
Posted: June 01 2010 at 00:10
kole wrote:
So, here's the deal. I like neither Yes nor Genesis. Tried many times to get into them, but... it simply wasn't it. There are exceptions, of course, but no more than a few songs. I am quite a prog listener, but Yes and Genesis... don't know. Maybe I am starting from the wrong point (as in album), or something. Or I am just not into symphonic prog... but I really do want to like them. So, what's wrong with me?
Try upgrading your choice of drugs! It worked for me back in the 70's.
My college roommate LOVED Tull, ELP, and Yes, but could not STAND any Genesis at all! Eventually, I got him good & stoned, and played "Voyage of the Acolyte" by Steve Hackett for him. He quite liked it....when "Trick of the Tale" came out, he was hooked on Genesis and became their biggest fan, ever.
Now, this is not to imply that consuming illicit substances enhances the prog experience....in no way to I condone such activities!! However, if you live in Jamaica or Amsterdam, why not?
Joined: May 01 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 470
Posted: June 01 2010 at 00:36
TGM: Orb wrote:
Paravion wrote:
I'm not sure I agree. It reminds me of what Gentle Giant wrote inside the gatefold of "Acquiring the taste"
"Acquiring the taste is the second phase of sensory pleasure. If you gorged yourself on our first album, then relish the finer flavours (we hope) of this, our second offering.
It's our goal to expand the frontiers of contemporary popular music at the risk of being very unpopular. We have recorded each composition with the one thought - that it should be unique, adventurous and fascinating. It has taken every shred or our combined musical and technical knowledge to achieve this.
From this outset we have abandoned all preconceived thoughts on blatant commercialism. Instead we hope to give you something far more substantial and fulfilling. All you need to do is sit back and acquire the taste"
Writing something like that is a HUGE turn-off and makes it less likely that I end up liking the album.
(It's actually an okay album - and I like Genlte Giant (s/t is my fave). But what's with the pretentiousness and self-indulgence?- It's almost as if it is ironic?)
I don't really think that's actually pretentious. Pompous, arrogant and elitist are all adjectives that could (but very unfairly) be applied to those sleeve notes. It's honesty. They were aiming to expand the borders of popular music, and I think it's fair to say that, on that particular album, they did. I really don't think that musicians (or anyone else for that matter) should play dumb to avoid unkind adjectives.
And really, any decent art has self-indulgent elements, though that self-indulgence may actually be populist and since art has a communicative aspect, complete self-indulgence isn't really ever the case.
I don't kown what the note actually IS. But it surely seems pretentious, pompous, arrogant and elitist.
Special Collaborator
RIO/Avant/Zeuhl,Neo & Post/Math Teams
Joined: October 31 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 14550
Posted: June 01 2010 at 01:17
cstack3 wrote:
kole wrote:
So, here's the deal. I like neither Yes nor Genesis. Tried many times to get into them, but... it simply wasn't it. There are exceptions, of course, but no more than a few songs. I am quite a prog listener, but Yes and Genesis... don't know. Maybe I am starting from the wrong point (as in album), or something. Or I am just not into symphonic prog... but I really do want to like them. So, what's wrong with me?
Try upgrading your choice of drugs! It worked for me back in the 70's.
My college roommate LOVED Tull, ELP, and Yes, but could not STAND any Genesis at all! Eventually, I got him good & stoned, and played "Voyage of the Acolyte" by Steve Hackett for him. He quite liked it....when "Trick of the Tale" came out, he was hooked on Genesis and became their biggest fan, ever.
Now, this is not to imply that consuming illicit substances enhances the prog experience....in no way to I condone such activities!! However, if you live in Jamaica or Amsterdam, why not?
Even if I don't live in Amsterdam and I've never been in Jamaica, that kind of stuff worked for me with Pink Floyd and Vangelis. I've never been able to get into Genesis. What is strange, maybe, is that I like Steve Hackett, Ant Phillips and Smallcreep's day...I was deeply into Fish's Marillion...so why I don't like Genesis?
Can it be because of that drummer/singer ?
I stand with Roger Waters, I stand with Joan Baez, I stand with Victor Jara, I stand with Woody Guthrie. Music is revolution
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 0.283 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.