Prog !! is it a one man effort , or a Teamwork !

 

Many progressive musicians in the 70's added ideas to pieces already completely written  by 1 particular founding member. In otherwords, they had progressive ideas, but not compositions. An "idea person" colors a piece adding a passage of notes or an atmosphere of sound which didn't originally exist when the piece was written.  In a band situation it can be mainly 1 writer and 3 players with ideas to add. It's not quite teamwork regarding composition and the idea person and the composer are 2 seperate worlds. The process could be considered teamwork in the simple logical sense that they are all working together with their efforts, but I don't think it would be fair to say that they should all get the same credit. If members of a prog band are sharing the writing skills for a composition, then it's teamwork in the writing department.

 

In the case of Robert Fripp composing Lizard and Islands himself, imagine Ian Underwood replacing Mel Collins or Chester Thompson instead of Ian Wallace. Who knows....the music may have sounded different ,but with the same level of quality. Still...Wallace and Collins were not writers for King Crimson. The most popular teamwork historically was Wakeman, Howe, Squire, Bruford, and Anderson meeting at the studio , not speaking very much...yet creating and naturally molding compositions for Fragile. Each musician actually wrote a part for "Heart Of The Sunrise" 

 

^This

 

 

 

You should wonder about yours ... I was there and one of the folks that helped it become what it did ... not your fault that you weren't born there, but what the heck ... your attitude is so far apart from the whole thing, in fact, quite naive, and you are not willing, capable, or interested in reading a bit more on the subject!

 

So let's talk who is the "progger" of the two!

 

Your question is not even a progressive one!

 

Sometimes. Sometimes not.

 

I think that some folks are, at times, better developed, in their ideas of what they would like to see done in music, than others ... I mean, are we going to criticize Mike Oldfield for not playing in a band now? ... and he had his start with Kevin Ayers and a few other folks!

 

I think that folks like Peter Hammill, Roy Harper, Mike Oldfield, Vangelis and many others, already had a well developed sense of identity, in order to be able to define it with music.

 

Folks like Peter Gabriel, learned it with his band ... and we have to give him credit ... he studied, and did his homework ... where most musicians get lazy and go for the fame and close down the shop!

 

The main difference for me, is that in a place like America, where there are no artists, just "stars", it is really difficult to find and help a true artist, and folks like Frank Zappa have to go mental against the system to get something done, because otherwise he wouldn't sell, and would not be able to make a living. He was well known here, mostly due to the LA Free Press, but in New York and Chicago? ... they had their own "gods" and "stars" and he was not appreciated until later! And even John Lennon had already mentioned him, when so few people in America gave a darn, THEN.

 

No two situations are the same ... I just don't think that any music has anything to do with anything, or any kind of music anymore ... and there is no difference between a single and a double anymore (LP's ... hahaha!)  ... and while an interesting question, in so many ways, it is a serious issue that is causing the re-evaluation of the definition of music ... that most folks don't want to deal with ... any more than anyone else here does!

 

 

  THANK YOU moskito , ENJOY WHAT YOU'RE DOING !!

Vangelis is one of my favourtes. Just spent stupid money on the SACD of Blade Runner even though I don't have a SACD player! Then booklet is very nice though 

666 is a remarkable album and ridiculously under appreciated (imo)