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.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage") |
|
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 56789 13> |
| Author | |||
The Dark Elf 
Forum Senior Member 
VIP Member Joined: February 01 2011 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 13063 |
 Posted: September 07 2013 at 21:35 |
||
|
Ahem. Ah, well then...ummm...I suppose it's too late to retract my request then.
|
|||
|
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
|||
 |
|||
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012 Location: Oklahoma Status: Offline Points: 7951 |
Posted: September 07 2013 at 22:11 |
||
|
I love threads Dean takes an active hand in.
Moshkito is of a philosophical persuasion which contends either that there is no structure in art and communication, or that it is something to be avoided. In other words, structure is a bad thing for music appreciation. Theories in the conventional sense supply structures, so conventional theories are bad. You can see it in his stream of consciousness writing style. He's very consistent about this philosophy in all his posts I must say. I don't agree. My view of structure in music (and in cognitive science, incidentally) is far more tempered. I think of music theory as enabling me to do things I wouldn't otherwise. I don't feel handcuffed by it at all. A musical scale and key to me is simply a list of potential notes for me to recombine as I see fit. It provides opportunities. If I'm not inspired by a given set of notes in any given scale on any given day, I pick another scale or I do what Allan Holdsworth does and make one up. An inspiration phase doesn't happen until after a sufficient exploration phase has taken place. I believe this is what Toddler was getting at a couple times. You have to know your scales. |
|||
|
|||
|
TODDLER
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member Joined: August 28 2009 Location: Vineland, N.J. Status: Offline Points: 3126 |
Posted: September 07 2013 at 22:22 |
||
Excellent post! thank you for putting everything into perspective. And...you must be a great player!
 |
|||
|
|||
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012 Location: Oklahoma Status: Offline Points: 7951 |
Posted: September 07 2013 at 22:43 |
||
Thank you. I'm an amateur, a little sloppy at times. I've been doing nice things lately with the whole and half diminished scales and the nine note augmented scale. I still have a recording of yours linked to the forum on my favorites list. Absolutely exquisite. |
|||
|
|||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator 
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: September 08 2013 at 05:49 |
||
I agree with you entirely. I think it is amazingly cool that if we take a root note and any combination of 6 of the remaining 11 notes in the chromatic scale we can construct 462 different (diatonic) 8-note scales in that single (root) key and that through the course of musical history we have essentially whittled that down to just 7 common modes that can be transposed into 11 different keys (a total of 77 different scales), and then further reduced that to just major and minor in a few selected keys to form the basis of all modern popular music. And that's still pretty cool given the number of different tunes that can be made just by using those few scales. Of course this simplification was not the result of design, but it wasn't by accident either - musicians picked the scales that sounded good and worked best based upon the consonance between the notes in the scale to produce harmonious chords and phrases - something that can be made even simpler and more consonant by removing three more notes from the eight to produce the pentatonic scales so people can solo and improvise in a pentatonic scale without fear of hitting a dissonant "bum" note. And that's cool too. Contrary to popular belief, academics did not invent these scales - musicians did, and they did it to make music easier to compose, play and listen to, not more difficult - if we want to use different scales and add dissonances and accidentals then we can, there is no rule that says we cannot, just as there is no rule that says we have to use the safe and easy popular scales. And that is amazingly wonderfully cool.  Edited by Dean - September 08 2013 at 07:12 |
|||
|
What?
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Mystical
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 20 2012 Status: Offline Points: 604 |
Posted: September 08 2013 at 07:41 |
||
|
I love improvisation in any kind of music. And I love mistakes in music too. They give music a personality.
|
|||
|
I am currently digging:
Hawkwind, Rare Bird, Gong, Tangerine Dream, Khan, Iron Butterfly, and all things canterbury and hard-psych. I also love jazz! Please drop me a message with album suggestions. |
|||
|
|||
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Offline Points: 17524 |
Posted: September 08 2013 at 13:02 |
||
You really need to re-read things!
In the arts for the stage, film, music ... stating that there is no communication is counter productive, when in the end, it is ALL about communication.
You are taking the meat of the product and changing it to yor own interpretation ... without the film/theater reference!
Structure or no structure ... is an idea ... for AFTER the event ... not ALWAYS before or during ... since while you are in the middle of the improvisation, you barely have time to pay attention to what you are doing, in order to worry about a "structure"!
Conventional theories are not bad ... they are grossly mis-interpreted! But you are stating, via your own wording that only a socialistic (ie conventional -- that everyone knows, kisses and does) is possible, and we know that it is not, and it is the right and home of the arts ... to show you the error in your thinking. It's what the history of art is all about!
I'm consistent, thank you ... I actually am not as much as I would like, but thank you -- in that I KNOW what I see and what I describe. I really believe that the reason you question it is because you don't see the colors and the vibrations and the stuff I see, therefore, it can't be possible and has to be some sort of "stream of consciousness" ... for you to be able to accept any part of 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 |
|||
|
|||
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Offline Points: 17524 |
Posted: September 08 2013 at 13:08 |
||
I never said, that structure is wrong.
The part that I said is not good, is when "structure" insists that something that is NOT STRUCTURED, which we might not be able to interpret YET ... is wrong.
This is the problem with "improvisation" ... you think I'm telling you that you have to go back to your childhood and just slap the keyboard like a child, as if you were so intoxicated and stoned ... that you have no idea what a concept or idea is, or any rememberance of what chords or notes are/were.
This was the point in the works of Aldous Huxley, when he talks about Mozart ... while under the influence ... and it's not a secret (never has been) that HUMANS have the ability to see things in more than one way ... and the one that is not "structured" is just another avenue for learning ... WHICH I PREFER ... and have worked with ... with amazing results ... but you think that "results" can only happen through your "structure".
Of course it can ... I would be totally stupid to not see that!
|
|||
|
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 |
|||
|
|||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: September 08 2013 at 14:21 |
||
I really don't know - what did Aldous Huxley say about Mozart while under the influence? I understand that in Doors Of Perception that he said intrumental music (of Mozart) had no effect on him at all and left him rather cold. If that's what you ment them please explain so I can understand how that fits in with what you are trying to tell us.
|
|||
|
What?
|
|||
|
|||
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012 Location: Oklahoma Status: Offline Points: 7951 |
Posted: September 08 2013 at 14:37 |
||
I didn't say anything about communication. It all depends on what functional characteristics you want to use to qualify it.
Exactly, it seems I understand perfectly. I just don't agree. Structure after the fact is meaningless and tantamount to saying there is no structure. There's no more or less time available when we speak and yet there's likely even more structure involved, and it is not after the fact. I do not see online implementation of structure in music as any greater a challenge.
On this I agree. -Regards |
|||
|
|||
|
TODDLER
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member Joined: August 28 2009 Location: Vineland, N.J. Status: Offline Points: 3126 |
Posted: September 09 2013 at 08:31 |
||
OMG...the nightmare production of my instrumental music. ZNR Records originally distributed my cd's and that was a mutal agreement between the 2 of us. That was okay within itself, but when others got a hold of it and created vids, it was even more obvious just how bad the recording quality was. I was living in poverty...(practically), and money was left to me to finance the manufacturing of the discs, which meant I was paying more for the UPC code than anything else. It was truly nice that Nick Tate reviewed my music in Progression magazine 2004 , but I kind of get a vision of an artist who is homeless, crawls out of the woodwork, and produces some cheap low-fi recording and getting attention from it. That's me
 Believe it or not, my music sold well in Hungary and there are websites that still have it for sale or download. Musicians insist that people are making profit from it ...while I am absolutely not. I don't care because...I don't even write like that anymore...which says to me that I am no longer the same type of artist anymore and am detached completely from anyone involved to begin with and they can have it because it's another lifetime that I can no longer relate to.  |
|||
|
|||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: September 09 2013 at 13:45 |
||
Examples please - real ones that we can relate to and verify, not obscure unreferenced film or book references, but actual real-live events, preferably about music, Progressive Rock music and/or improvised Progressive Rock music.
Rubbish. (Too harsh?... ).
Even in ensemble jamming everyone is thinking what to play next, looking several bars/measures ahead, listening for musical clues and cues from the other players and someone will be deciding where to go next and what to do next and all of this will happen in real-time by conscious decisions made by the people performing. This is not the result of some magical stream of consciousness or by telepathic mind-linkage or other such metaphysical connection between the musicians - it's the result of practice and hard work, of paying attention to others around you and not what you are playing at that moment and of following someone's lead and unspoken direction. Do you really think that jamband pieces that have a clear beginning, middle and end just appear out of the ether?
You can hear this in any improvised piece of rock music if you listen and pay attention, even in Yeti where the free-form sound-scape gives way to the space-rock jam after the first five minutes when Leopold and Anderson start to lay-down a repetitive spacey "groove" that started with the 12-string guitars, once that's in place then the lead guitar comes in and does the trippy psych stuff and Leopold can start throwing fills in like they're going out of fashion, then 6 or 7 minutes later that gradually slows to a stop leaving Anderson to link into the next piece while the other's re-group and rethink what the next section will be. This is still "structured" - it still follows the "rules" of rock'n'roll - without it there would just be cacophony and it would not be rock.
Even in one-man improvisation the musician is thinking ahead of what to do next based upon what he's just played, to change the tempo, to modulate into a different key; to progress the melody, to get from point "A" to point "B" he plans his route while he is making the path he is going to take, the structure forms in his head. All this happens in real-time because the player has more than enough time to plan these things because playing is, as Toddler said earlier, [the actual playing becomes] second-nature - he doesn't have to think about where his fingers have to be for each and every note (that's how someone learning an instrument plays... before everything "clicks"), so he can play run of 32nd notes without having to think each note, he that means he does have time to think about the next phrase and possibly the one after that....
Because without that it's just a senseless din, a dreadfully embarrassing racket, and, well, just bad really.
Edited by Dean - September 09 2013 at 13:49 |
|||
|
What?
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Dark Elf
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member Joined: February 01 2011 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 13063 |
Posted: September 09 2013 at 22:14 |
||
I would agree with Dean. Having been in bar bands for decades, I would say that the practice, the familiarity with the players and the pieces of music, leads to better improvisation. The cues and idiosyncrasies of each player manifests themselves over time, and you recognize where they are coming from. This process gets easier and easier the further one goes with a set group of musicians. Take it one step further... You invite another musician onstage to jam with your band (the other players here will understand). What's the first thing you do? Play a piece that the guest has never heard, let alone played? That would be damn uncomfortable and usually leads to an embarrassing result. No, you find a song that everyone knows and then build off that with improvised leads. |
|||
|
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
|||
|
|||
|
The.Crimson.King
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 29 2013 Location: WA Status: Offline Points: 4596 |
Posted: September 10 2013 at 00:44 |
||
The one we always used to do was "The Talking Drum"...or the old standby, 12 bar blues in E  |
|||
|
|||
|
The Dark Elf
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member Joined: February 01 2011 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 13063 |
Posted: September 10 2013 at 09:38 |
||
In the immortal words of the great Albert Collins, "Nobody leaves this place without singing the blues."  |
|||
|
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
|||
|
|||
|
TODDLER
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member Joined: August 28 2009 Location: Vineland, N.J. Status: Offline Points: 3126 |
Posted: September 10 2013 at 10:57 |
||
|
Of course you follow what other musicians are going to do? That's part of being professional. But that is not in any way connected to what I play on my own during improvisation...unless it's Billy Cobham attempting to follow John McLaughlin's soloing and hitting the drums for every note he produces..which is just from knowing the predictability of each other. That develops from long hours of rehearsal. The band will back you of course, but your personal expression on the instrument comes from inside yourself and that is usually when no thoughts are swimming around in your head. When I follow the singer in a composition, a point in time will arrive when I must take a solo/ride..and then I'm on my own. They follow me, adding reflections..otherwise they become bored, but the musicians haven't a clue where I will go within my improvisational expression. I'm thinking of absoulutely nothing and enter some other world or level during that time. Do you know what I mean?
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: September 10 2013 at 11:17 |
||
So the rhythm section (bass, drums, rhythm guitar) has to follow you - you set the pace, they keep up? *shrug* That's more or less what I said - one man will be deciding what to do next and everyone follows his cues, however I would imagine that you are also responding off them to some degree - because without that back-up you're just noodling, surely?
|
|||
|
What?
|
|||
|
|||
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Offline Points: 17524 |
Posted: September 10 2013 at 13:35 |
||
|
You guys are mixing up ideas with a process. Please pay a little attention to a couple of things ... that have NOTHING to do with "band", and yes, it could be considered an interesting idea, but that was NOT what these folks were looking for! Why would Holger say that he cut "Tago Mago" from 20 hours of tapes and that most of it was just ... cut and paste and cut and paste. Maybe he waited for a moment to come to an end and then put them together ... that seems fair! Acting process -- same with music: On an improvisation exercise, by the end of the first hour you are running out of things to do THAT YOU KNOW ... and by the 2nd hour, you start tuning to various things around you, and it might be one of the folks around you, or you yourself ... and at that point, things MIGHT come together and be together, or not! The point of this exercise after three hours is so that you LEARN to find your own link inside to your own "instrument" ... regardless of what it is! It might be EASIER, but if I was the instructor I would say ... don't do it! ... if you do tune in to someone else ... but that breaks the point of the whole thing ... to find out what you got inside ... without a "source" for it. You CAN NOT be sitting here and writing this stuff, when you have not BEEN through exercises that are design to break down the structure that you have created, by your OWN head ... (inside cover of Wolf City ... PERFECT!). You are also ignoring, the SURREALIST point of view that was created 40 years earlier and what you are saying is that Bunuel/Dali were stupid and could not create a movie out of nothing, regardless of what it was ... WHICH THEY DID! The arts, for the most part, are parallel in history! With some "oddballs" here and there ... not exactly mothballs! But you "musicians", can not fathom the ability to create something from "nothing", because you think that the instrument is GOD, and creativity is no longer possible. Ohhh ... or you do not think that you can play music, or understand music, without your mind in the middle ... and the answer is ... YOU CAN! It's like the old Marshall McLuhan bull ... the medium was the message, not the message was the medium ... and the total immersion in confusing people with it, that makes the understanding of things tougher all around ... and this is the problem with discussing psychic and experimental things ... you do NOT trust, appreciate, or believe, that your own brain ... can create something! Different! You always "feel" the need to connect it to something you know ... so no one, not even Pedro, can tell you the "idea", or "concept" that it can be done! It can ... but I have to lock you up for 3 hours with 4 or 5 other musicians in the same room ... and we can talk after that! I'll take notes in the meantime or video, so you can see the differences and the changes in that time, and how what you have in the end ... is not the same as what you had in the beginning! So you think you know yourself and your process, really well, do you? You will be totally surprised by the results! Go back and read a little about the experimental arts in the 20th century ... and look at Andy Warhol making fun of them later ... here's someone sleeping ... ohh I'm just changing the color on sweet Marilyn! ... and then realize how so far away from our imagination some of these things were ... ohhh go ready Patty Smith's book ... all of a sudden Mapplethorpe makes a lot more sense ... and so does Burroughs ... but you guys think that all this came from their drunk or stoned mind! Not always! Not always! Our minds merely do not like or believe ANYONE that does anything without the mind! And obviously you do not believe that any musicians are nuts enough to do something that is "anti-music" ... as the German and French folks called it for many years! For you "anti-music" is another process in the mind ... and it WASN'T! Edited by moshkito - September 10 2013 at 13:40 |
|||
|
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 |
|||
|
|||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: September 10 2013 at 16:20 |
||
|
|||
|
What?
|
|||
|
|||
|
CPicard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 03 2008 Location: Là, sui monti. Status: Offline Points: 10841 |
Posted: September 10 2013 at 21:01 |
||
|
moshkito, do you play an instrument? If you do, did you try to learn to play another instrument, so you could forget what you learned with the first instrument? If you did, had you try to play a third instrument without actually learning to play it?
|
|||
|
|||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 56789 13> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions 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 |
Improvisation
Topic Options
HackettFan wrote: