Your definition of an epic
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=34412
Printed Date: February 21 2025 at 11:22
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Your definition of an epic
Posted By: proglil49
Subject: Your definition of an epic
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 12:57
|
I've been wondering this for a ling time. I know enough in prog to tell that for exemple Supper's Ready is an epic, but I don't know exacly what does this word means being used in prog. So, the question is, what is your definition of an epic song? ------------- I want to be an astronaut |
Replies:
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 12:58
|
Either a song over 15 minutes or a song with multiple, easily distinguished parts.
Both are used.
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 13:06
| In literature, an epic is a poem divided in various parts, usually containing a story line relating to some historical or mythical event - just like the Iliad and the Odissey. Therefore, epic in music usually applies to either very long tracks, or those with multiple parts, as Inpraiseoffolly said. In many cases, the two things coincide - as in the case of Close to the Edge. |
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 13:12
|
^^^
Yes, that's basically what I was going for.
BTW Ghost Rider... I read with amusement your reviews for Lizard, Larks', and Discipline. You didn't give the first two five stars because of the vocals, and then gave 5 to discipline... which has the worst vocals (IMO)...
 Oh well... well written in any case.
To somewhat relate this to the topic, the song Lizard (on the album Lizard) would be an epic. Larks' Tongues in Aspic would not because it isn't over 15 minutes and because it doesn't really have distinguishable parts (other than the obvious first three minutes/the rest of it distinction).
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 13:19
Thanks for the compliments! Believe it or not, I like Belew's vocals quite a lot, while I find Haskell thoroughly excruciating. Odd, isn't it?As to Larks' the track, I wouldn't call an instrumental an epic. Just as a literary epic has a narrative story line, so should a musical one. Just my opinion, of course... |
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 13:21
|
^^^
I get the best of all worlds... I love the vocals on all three.
Should've said "least bad."
Haskell's not excruciating ('cept on Lady o' da Dancing H2O) at all...
And Lizard has Jon Anderson, too, anyway. And he gives what is, IMO, his best vocal performance on it...
|
Posted By: fuxi
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 13:41
|
In my opinion, an 'epic' shouldn't just be long, it also involves vehement emotions and triumphant climaxes. For this reason, I would never apply the term to dreamy twenty-minute tracks by, for example, Tangerine Dream. Even A PASSION PLAY doesn't qualify, although it's one of my favourite Tull albums. But SUPPER'S READY and GATES OF DELIRIUM fit the glove perfectly.
And even 'Firth of Fifth' is an 'epic track', even if it's not strictly speaking 'an epic'. |
Posted By: laplace
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 13:47
|
A long track with fantasy lyrics, eg. Hemispheres or anything by Magma.
------------- FREEDOM OF SPEECH GO TO HELL |
Posted By: The Letter M
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 13:53
|
Strictly speaking about length, I often categorize epic songs in several groups based on song length.
You have the short epics which can last 7-12 minutes.
There are the regular epics which go from 13-18 minutes.
There are Side-Long epics, lasting anywhere from 19-24/25 minutes. (yes I still call modern epics of this length Side-Long epics, like The Great Nothing by Spock's Beard or Stardust We Are by The Flower Kings).
Long Epics last from 25-30 minutes, and the aforementioned Flower Kings have a couple of those.
Super Epics are any songs from 30-50 minutes, depending on several things. Some examples of this are Dream Theater's Six Degrees or Part I of Neal Morse's Testimony.
Anything above 50 minutes might as well be an Epic album, such as Neal Morse's ? or the upcoming Fear Of A Blank Planet, which is said to be like one long song anyways.
As for musical qualities, I do agree that there needs to be some sort of introduction that's a bit drawn out, there are some subsections/movements (although not necesarry), and there's a climax with a powerful, moving ending. There are also many recurring themes or thematic/motific material that is used throughout, or plays a large part in the musical score.
Lyrically, the epic is usually a story, like someone brought up the poetic epic, which are myths and legends told in lengthy poems. I think the best epics are the ones with stories in them, and aren't just about people or things, but about ideas or events, real or not. The lyrics don't all have to tie together though or even make much sense, but if there's a loose connection both musically and lyrically between all the sections, then it becomes an epic.
But that's how I feel about epics. And I love epics.
On a side-note, how do people feel about Epics with subsections? Should they be seperate tracks on the CD or one whole track? By that I mean, would you rather have an album like "The Music That Died Alone" by The Tangent, or the second disc of "Six Degrees Of Inner Turbulence", or something more like both Transatlantic albums, where even though they have several parts to them, each song is still one track?
-M. ------------- I know what I like and I like what I know. I will choose a path that's clear, I will choose free will. If I die tomorrow, I`d be alright because I believe that after we`re gone, the spirit carries on. |
Posted By: infandous
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 14:30
Well, I am pretty flexible with my epic definitions. I've even heard songs in the 3 to 4 minute range that I think of as mini-epics because they have distinct parts and go through a cycle of sorts (and no, they can't be verse-chorus-verse-chorus-bridge-chorus type pop songs). But generally speaking, they have to be over 7 minutes long. As to Tangerine Dream and similar lengthy atmospheric stuff, I guess I don't really consider those as epics in the traditional sense as they tend to flow as one entity and are fairly simplistic in composition (though they often have various sections to them). As to breaking epics into tracks...........I really hate when artists do that  In both the cases you mention (Music that died alone and 6 degrees) I join them into single tracks on my computer. To a certain extent I understand why they might choose to do that, so the listener can clearly see where the artist intended the parts to begin and end, but for the most part I never have much trouble doing that myself when they are one track.(I am reminded of a CD player a friend of mine had many years ago, that actually showed which part of Cygnus X-1 Book Two from Hemispheres you were currently listening to..........that track is a single 18 minute track, but the song has 5 or 6 parts.......not sure if they make CD players like that anymore and I assume the CD itself would have to have meta data the CD player could read to know which part it was on.........seems like a great thing for prog albums  ) |
The Letter M wrote:Posted By: Philéas
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 14:34
| I usually refer to 10+ minutes long songs as epics. Some set the bar at 15 minutes though. |
Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 14:41
An epic song is anything by Rush!  I feel an epic song is a song that has different parts to it (musical or lyrical). It also helps if the song is longer than 10 minutes. A great instrumental section is always welcomed. |
Posted By: Angelo
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 15:15
Does this help (from the Prog Rock? link on the home page)? Long compositions, sometimes running over 20 minutes, with intricate melodies and harmonies that require repeated listening to grasp. These are often described as epics and are the genre's clearest nod to classical music. An early example is the 23-minute "Echoes" by Pink Floyd. Other famous examples include Jethro Tull's "Thick as a Brick" (43 minutes), Yes' "Close to the Edge" (18 minutes) and Genesis' "Supper's Ready" (23 minutes). More recent extreme examples are the 60-minute "Light of Day, Day of Darkness" by Green Carnation and "Garden of Dreams" by The Flower Kings. ------------- http://www.iskcrocks.com" rel="nofollow - ISKC Rock Radio I stopped blogging and reviewing - so won't be handling requests. Promo's for ariplay can be sent to [email protected] |
Posted By: proglil49
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 17:04
|
This explains a lot. Thanks ------------- I want to be an astronaut |
Posted By: NotSoKoolAid
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 18:50
|
There are all sorts of epics.
Songs, albums, and groups of epic influence, innovation, and perhaps size or length, etc.
Your question is a decent one, but very grey and shadey.
|
Posted By: Angeldust
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 18:53
|
The track Ocean Cloud from Marbles (marillion) is epic! ------------- 
|
Posted By: Freak
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 18:58
Don't forget "Grendel" & "This Strange Engine"! I think "Goodbye To All That" is also an epic...
Anyway, I'd say an epic is any song that has mutiple movements and a common theme (usually it's gonna be over 10 minutes, but as someone said, "Firth Of Fifth" is pretty epic!). ------------- 
|
Posted By: Angeldust
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 19:01
Surely they're more epic than hammerfall for example,that's for sure 
-------------
|
Posted By: mrgd
Date Posted: February 15 2007 at 20:37
|
It seems to me that we've lassoed the word 'Epic' and started to apply it to what seems to be basically a long and varied piece of music to create our own esoteric terminology. While that's very innovative, it's really a misnomer.
An Epic is a narrative work of poetry often celebrating the achievements of heros in history or tradition, according to my dictionary. Other than the reference to a narrative there is no specific mention of length. The subject matter and depth of description often dictated it's length. Therefore, technically speaking, there is some question as to whether the term can appropriately be applied to a piece of prog. music.[ How boring is this]? It's one of these terms like 'masterpiece' we use all the time, but don't get me started on that. Anyway, there is cetainly an argument to say that it would be more accurate to refer to a 'piece' or , as we often see, a 'suite' [e.g. The Valentyne Suite] to describe a musical work comprising parts, movements, a concept etc. irrespective of length, as distinct from something which might otherwise be nothing more than a long song. [Remember what IAN says - 'Life's a Long Song' - not necessarily an epic]. ------------- Looking still the same after all these years... mrgd |
Posted By: el böthy
Date Posted: February 16 2007 at 01:10
yep...pretty much ------------- "You want me to play what, Robert?" 
|
Posted By: Aspiring hope
Date Posted: February 16 2007 at 08:39
Actually, he did narrow it down to an epic song, in asking the definition of epic, whithin the progressive/musical boundaries. People just have been posting addendums to the topic in order to enhance their purpose's clarity, I think. -------------  |
Posted By: Aspiring hope
Date Posted: February 16 2007 at 11:02
I agree with your perspective, it seems there might be a problem/misunderstanding, though minor, with the word, in attributing it to music, whereas it's derived from literature. What I understand is that people "transfered" that piece of nomenclature to a more popular conception of the term, to describe something of an opulent, sumptuous, or simply enormous sense of grandeur, in comparison or a metaphor to the literary epic. A much less rigid system of semantics there, nevertheless, it's harmless, as long as people recognize it as a non-literal term and understand why it's called so, given the more literal sense of the expression. I'd also prefer labeling those songs as suites - perhaps because it's not so common. Anyhow, "Epic" songs are, in my world, transcending in importance, complexity or emotional instigation, in comparison with the standard material, normally bedecked with a sense of larger greatness, with a content of high, uncanny significance and manifest (or exacerbated to seem such) - often phylosofical -, that'll either move the listener or overwhelm him (naturally depending on the listener himself, too). Exceding in magnitude of concept, it requires a more complex arrangement, thus presented divided in pieces, each contributive to a larger theme, which may or may not cause an extension of the song's length. In example, I deem Stairway To Heaven to be an epic piece, given the quaint, unfathomable theme and composition of the song and its progression in emotive effect, yet it's only a tad over seven minutes. Speaking of Zeppelin, I guess Achilles Last Stand would fit the literary/literal definition of epic best. On a different level, I don't consider Yours Is No Disgrace an epic, despite its longevity surpassing that of Stairway's. Summing it up, Epic is "our" expression of what we understand be grand, formally and in content. By the way, I prefer to have my epics solidly cohesive, when it comes to pieces. Tracks just stray, or induce to such, from the main theme. In Tangent and LTE's Three Minute Warning, they're almost useless, in DT it's just understandable, since they're already too separate by nature, but it'd be best to be more like TransAtlantic and Yes, if there's to be info on the pieces' beginning and ending. ------------- |
Posted By: MadcapLaughs84
Date Posted: February 16 2007 at 11:06
|
It's a song over 15 minutes with parts or segments well marked that complete a whole story. ------------- 
|
Posted By: condor
Date Posted: February 16 2007 at 11:59
|
An epic should end at a noticeably higher place than the start: a qualative leap; a perfect example would be Starless. It should feel longer than its actual duration because of the amount of different themes fitted in. And, if it's really good it should leave you feeling emotionally drained by the end.
I have listened to epics less than 5 minutes. Simply being a long track doesn't make a piece an epic. There a lot of Yes "epic"s of 20+ minutes which I don't feel match any of these criteria. Most Opeth track's are around 10 minutes. Few of them I consider epics, more movements. |
Posted By: Tenth Chaffinch
Date Posted: February 16 2007 at 13:19
|
An epic doesn't have to be 15 minutes in my opinion. I consider a song like "Heart of the Sunrise" by Yes an epic, clocking in at 10:33. I would even consider "Watcher of the Skies" and "Get Em Out By Friday" by Genesis epics as well, both of them clocking in at less than 10 minutes each.
I believe an epic by definition, is a song of a greater length than the commercial norm that consists of a single strong theme lyrically, while being overtly technical musically to portray the activities described by the lyrics. There is also a certain level of emotional and concious involvement with what is actually going on in the piece. Not every long song is an epic, and not every epic is a long song. I believe the time factor is highly overrated, as no one alive could convince me that songs such as "Lady Fantasy" or "Ice" by Camel, "The Musical Box" or "The Fountain of Salmacis" by Genesis, or "Spartacus" by Triumvirat are anything less than epic. ------------- www.myspace.com/fatherunderground |
Posted By: The Acolyte
Date Posted: February 16 2007 at 15:49
you left me speechless man!!  ------------- "…but would I leave you in this moment of your trial?" |