Virtuosity vs Sound
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: General Music Discussions
Forum Description: Discuss and create polls about all types of music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=131273
Printed Date: December 02 2024 at 05:33
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Virtuosity vs Sound
Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Subject: Virtuosity vs Sound
Date Posted: July 15 2023 at 11:14
|
A while ago, I created a thread titled " https://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=121727" rel="nofollow - Music vs Sound " in which I asked whether you prefer the musical elements of music, or the sound elements of music. In this thread, I ask whether you prefer virtuosity of a piece of music or its sound. To explain, perhaps I should use an example: Consider the Van der Graaf Generator track "A Plague of Lighthouse Keepers". According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Plague_of_Lighthouse_Keepers#Recording" rel="nofollow - Wikipedia : "A Plague of Lighthouse Keepers" was recorded at intervals between gigs. It was recorded in small sections that were pieced together during mixing, and it took about three to four months to record, non-continuous. According to producer John Anthony, the track features a lot more studio experimentation than on previous albums, saying "we pushed the facilities at Trident to the limit and had involved the use of every single tape machine in Trident at some stage." The experiments included tape manipulation and Hugh Banton experimenting with Mellotron and synthesizer. According to David Jackson, one section of it features the entire band overdubbed 16 times. With all this manipulation, the virtuosity of the players becomes nullified as the band strives for an impossible-to-create-live sound. Thus, "A Plague of Lighthouse Keepers" satisfies a preference for sound over virtuosity. By contrast, a live-in-the-studio album, or a live album in general satisfies a preference for virtuosity over sound. In this case, the virtuosity of the players becomes evident and more important than the sound which will be naturally limited by the live format. To put it another way, consider a keyboard solo. Suppose that instead of it being recorded as a single take, it was recorded as multiple takes with a lot of editing and overdubbing. Would this decrease your enjoyment of the keyboard solo? Or would you be impressed with the sound of the keyboard solo that is humanly impossible? ------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man. |
Replies:
Posted By: Hiram
Date Posted: July 15 2023 at 11:49
| Voted sound. I'm generally more interested in the end result rather than the means by which it was achieved. I do appreciate virtuoso playing as much as anyone, but I think it should be put to service of the music, not the other way around. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 15 2023 at 14:23
|
I wouldn't call the options "Virtuosity" and "Sound" - what you are describing is more like "Authentic" vs. "Edited". Regardless, while I like and appreciate both, I'm more impressed with authentic virtuosity. And I can enjoy extremely edited/manipulated tracks more when I know that the musicians involved can also do the authentic/live thing. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to: 
|
Posted By: Necrotica
Date Posted: July 15 2023 at 14:27
Completely agreed with all of this. ------------- Take me down, to the underground Won't you take me down, to the underground Why oh why, there is no light And if I can't sleep, can you hold my life https://www.youtube.com/@CocoonMasterBrendan-wh3sd |
Hiram wrote:Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: July 15 2023 at 15:50
No, "Virtuosity" and "Sound" are precisely the options I intended. It's not so much about what music is listened to but why. Are you listening to music because it sounds great, or are you listening to music because it has great playing? The music itself can have both, but it is more likely that the listening focus will be on one of those.
And if they don't? ------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man. |
Posted By: mellotronwave
Date Posted: July 15 2023 at 15:50
| Sound |
Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: July 15 2023 at 17:41
|
I'm not interested in virtuosity for virtuosity's sake. I am interested in sound for sound's sake.
|
Posted By: MortSahlFan
Date Posted: July 16 2023 at 05:51
|
Sound. In the beginning of my musical journey, I cared a lot about
technique (drums, guitar), but now it's usually the other way, and the
economic solos (David Gilmour) seem to click with me more. Or, something
by Jimmy Page, with more of a variety. Also great tone. I'll add I
really love diversity, a guitarist like Terry Kath, who played every
style of music I can think of despite that tragedy in that first month
of January 1978. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/c/LoyalOpposition https://www.scribd.com/document/382737647/MortSahlFan-Song-List |
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: July 16 2023 at 06:02
I agree, nicely put. 
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 16 2023 at 06:03
How can you tell virtuosity from virtuosity for virtuosity's sake? And how would you rate the former against sound? ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: BrufordFreak
Date Posted: July 16 2023 at 06:34
|
Some nice, cogent comments here. I, too, voted for sound. It is the final mix or edit of a song that determines whether I like, enjoy, or remember a tune. Though it is pleasant/impressive to hear and recognize virtuosity in the musicianship or compositional skills, these are not necessary for me to like a song. ------------- Drew Fisher https://progisaliveandwell.blogspot.com/ |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: July 16 2023 at 07:17
| Tarkus v Tarkus (live) would make an interesting poll. The studio version is about the sound the live version is about the virtuosity. What gets lost is that a band like ELP can manipulate their music to sound different. The number of people that went to an ELP gig around 1974 and were disappointed not to hear the 1971 version of Tarkus would have likely been quite a few. Obsessing on sound means music can't grow. Its one reason I don't care about classical music as much as I should do. Keith Emerson ( a genius in my book) showed why music can be a lot more interesting if its allowed to evolve and not be stuck is some sort of snap shot of the time it was first thought of and composed. |