Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are prog fans Musicians?
 

Of course, so might plate tectonics. I've given up on trying to figure out Ozric at any level.

Indeed. But on the upside, baritone/euphonium wise, at least you weren't subjected to years and years of upbeats courtesy John Phillips Sousa.

I could go on (and have gone on) at great length about his musical incompetence when it comes to french horn parts....

Funny. I was just the opposite. I enjoyed marching band french horn. I wouldn't want to play baritone (or worse, marching euphonium) on the field, but the FH wasn't so bad.

(the problem with marching euphonium is that, due to the physics of the instrument, on the field it sounds like an elephant in labor -- and that's if you knew what you were doing!).

Encourage him. Good bone players are hard to find. Good bone players that can actually play below fff are a treasure. :D

Roger -Dot- Lee

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are prog fans Musicians?
 

well, that's good to hear.:cool:
being a flute player myself (i won't say "flautist"
that's what rampal, galway are)-
i thought i was being elitist.

IMO- that guy in ozric plays the flute
like steve martin plays the sax.

i like a few of their pieces, but not my
favorite new prog band.

p e a c e kirk

Re: Re: Re: Are prog fans Musicians?
 

Then according to your music theory instructor's definintion, the space chord (or something remarkably close) can also be achieved by accidentally setting your six-pack down on the keyboard...:D

Ozrics!
 

don't get me wrong I love Ozrics. Ed Wynne is an amazing musician, and if I ever get my Nearfest review done I may explain more.

I was saying the guy doesn't add anything on flute. Like the Steve Martin reference.....

I don't own any Ozric, but when I'm listening to AM and not paying attention to what's on, every once in a while something plays that just kills me. Then I look, and it's Ozric almost everytime. Never heard a song of their's I didn't like. Amazing group.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Are prog fans Musicians?
 

That's actually quite close. I understand tha Bela Bartok, one of the first classical composers to use the space chord, actually discovered it when he fell asleep at the piano and his head and arms hit the keyboard.

He liked what he heard, I guess... :D

Re: Ozrics!
 

*

Musicionship
 

Yeah - I often wondered about this.

I play guitar, flute, piano, banjo, mandolin and have the greatest admiration for musicians like Mike Oldfield who play every instrument under the sun.

I recognise my own limitations though, when I listen to Satriani or Steve Vai or Rick Wakeman.

I guess the kind of music we like is accessible on many different levels. Once can appreciate / like it without knowing how it is actually produced.
As a musician I like it because I feel a certain connection with the musicians themselves - I kind of have an insight into how they do what they do even though I could never match their tallent.

This can lead to feelings of awe and wonder but also deep frustration - it's a kind of love/hate thing!!

Most of all there is the emotional side of it. Some of the music I hear moves me to tears (literally). I know some people think this is a bit weird but I think music can connect with you on such a deep level that it bypasses any concious thought and goes straight to your heart.

Anyway - I'll stop ramling now but I thought this was an interesting question and I've enjoyed reading the responses.

I think musicians who are familiar with spending hundreds of hours studying and honing their craft are attracted to the genres of music that are known for superiority in craft, such as prog rock.

I also believe that, because of its advanced technical nature, prog rock attracts people who are more technical in nature and who are not neccessarily musicians. These people need to be aurally fed something a little more challenging then radio slop. Either the music, the craftsmanship, the lyrics or the sounds need to be comprised of substance to dig their intellect into. So, even if they don’t exactly know what technical things are being done, as a musician might (like whether it’s in 9/8th time, or the guitarist is double picking 32nds, or the synthesis is running his Synergy through Moog modules), they are attracted to the fact and appreciate the music because it is ‘intelligent’ in some or all ways.


I play piano - See http://www.simmphonic.com

My alter ego plays percussion perpetually probing for a fresh groove - http://www.simmphonic.com/cow/who_is_cow.htm

and for a little geek action check out - http://www.simmphonic.com/programming/flash.htm

hi scott- good point. there's at least an intellectual
facet to prog and it's listeners, if not always a
musical one.
it's interesting though- w/ your vote, we're now at X 5
musician listeners over non-musician.

i had a listen to some of your samples,
very soothing, well recorded newage, that i'd compare
to some of the windham hill artists.

p e a c e kirk/zenpool

Nice insight prythm. But I'd expand it to include people of above average intelligence, rather than just technical people.

Gordon Bennett!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

That's a joke right Spaz????????

If it's not.....PERlease!!!!!!!!!!

Anyone reading that could think "This guy is so far up his own a**e he's coming back down again"

Intelligence has bugger all to do with appreciation of ANY form of art or the appreciation of ANYTHING for that matter.

My friend's six year old daughter likes Van Gough's Sunflowers paintings because they LOOK nice to her whereas another friend of mine who has a degree in Physics doesn't. That's not to say that the six year old isn't intelligent, she is, but that her perception of the painting is different.

My wife, who I might add is one of the most intelligent people I know, can't stand listening to Stravinsky whereas I would go miles to hear, say, The Rite of Spring played in concert.

I'm sure some of the devils who nearly killed me in a bombing incident in 1974 were intelligent too but they didn't APPRECIATE life the way I do. They had their own agenda. And that's the point.

You don't need intelligence to like something it just has to appeal to your senses and fit in with your life agenda.

i'd buy tickets
 

to see the explanation for this one........

Thanks Kirk for the kudos.

I believe that music, as well as paintings, consist of two aspects- the art side and the craft side. The craft side refers to the technical facets of the composition, construction and performance of the piece. The art side is the spiritual, communicating, transcribed inspiration, subjective part. The art side, if the piece has some, is visible by anyone (at any age or IQ) although individually interpreted. I suggest that the technical side is appealing more to ‘technical’ people (people interested in process and/or structure and/or method and therefore deem the craft aspect as relevant to the substance of the piece).

As a musician I try to find a healthy balance of the two sides in my music as well as in my life. In this instance the technical side works in harmony with the artsy side, where both don’t disturb or consciously monitor the other (which is a tough thing to do).

I’m not saying that musicians that are more polar aren’t good though. Peter Gabriel, who admits he can’t find middle C, and writes two cord songs (Biko) is awesome because he is so good at the art (and not letting technical get in the way). The authentic music of Bach can be considered, by today’s standards, as truly technical however if you have insight into the craft and/or appreciate technical (I didn’t say intelligence) he can blow you away. Amazing stuff. Of course Bach on piano, as opposed to its native harpsichord, brings in an artistic performance element (Check out Keith Jarrett and his liner notes on balancing the right amount of art while realizing Bach’s music).

Note that I believe polarity, though it can spawn great art, can be a very bad and crippling thing though. Personally I believe balance is the key to art and life. Go with the flow but stay in the know.

KeithieW, sorry to hear about the 74 thing.

wow....
 

I just like to rock........

lol :p

keith- intelligence isn't a requisite for appreciation
of the arts, but individual experience plays a role,
as does the individual makeup of the viewer/listener.

whereas the child (in us all) views the painting in
the context of "pretty flowers", the trained eye goes
beyond the surface to individual brushstrokes, ect.,
why one artist's "pretty flowers"is worth millions,
considered a masterpiece, while another isn't.
a child has no sense of "gestalt", the transcending of medium
to become something other, unique.

i should mention that my education, degree is in fine arts.
i later studied w/ dc comics sr. editor joe
(sgt.rock, hawkman, enemy ace) kubert, apprenticed
w/ michael t. gilbert of moorcock's "elric" gr. novel fame.
i won't say the switch to music (less than 3 yrs. ago)
was easy, but my art background helped greatly.
i fall heavily to the "art"side of "art vs. craft".

I agree that experience plays a major role in what we perceive to be good. We can all look at things on a different level and our enjoyment of that can be enhanced with additional knowledge.

I have been studying the work of JMW Turner recently and the more I delve into it the more interesting it becomes. I have been looking into it at a deeper level. Brush work etc. and the way he portrays light and 3 dimensional things on a 2 dimensional background and it's fascinating.

As a poet myself I don't care if someone understands the metre, or the tempo of the poem. All I want from them is that they enjoy reading it. If they do that's great. If they don't, well that's great too.

As a musician would you rather someone said "Wow, I really enjoyed that!" or "Wow, that was in 9/8 time!"

(If they said "Wow, I really enjoyed that! It was in 9/8 time!" you've really got it made :D but to me the fact that they enjoy it is enough. I don't care if they appreciate the work that went into the creation....................am I crazy to think that way?)

no, not crazy. it could be argued that transparency of
technique is one of the elements we perceive as "genius".
also, the faster it seems to flow, the more "talented"
the artist appears.

re: art vs. craft-
while teaching someone to be "an artist" is
almost impossible, it's very possible to teach someone to be
a better artist, or craftsman.

IMO-that's it in a nutshell .
"craft" can be taught, "art" can't.
i.e.- many can learn to recite classical music note for note,
few could conceive the piece.
one's a R side of the brain activity, the other a L.

when writing lyrics or poetry, the final result is
often a "best of", after countless re-writes,
dead ends. the notes around the outside aren't
considered interesting until you're famous and dead.

kirk

Good points gentlemen.

On the 'you can't teach someone to be an artist, just a better musician' subject -

Do you think that in order to be an artist you have to have some sort of strife in your life to push (inspire, fuel, drive, understand) artistic creation?

I don't believe it has to be strife. You need some sort of drive, something to keep you going, but it doesn't have to be negative in nature.

Although I will admit that it helps if you're writing blues lyrics.

Roger -Dot- Lee

Interesting question.

A lot of great things have been created on the back of serious strife. The "Starving Artist" thing. The Blues is a case in point here. Wonderful music that lifts you when you're down but originally written under a cloud of oppression.

Beethoven was stone deaf when he wrote the 9th Symphony and the Missa Solemnis and we all appreciate what works of genius they are. I'd go as far as saying that the 9th symphony is one of the greatest achievments in Western civilisation.

But great work also comes from periods of great joy.

Jon Anderson seems to me to be one of the most contented people I've ever met and he comes up with some of the most beautiful music I've ever heard.

The same thing applies to Literature, Painting, Poetry and Sculpture.

So in answer to your question I'd have to say Yes and No. You need inspiration to create but that doesn't always have to be negative inspiration. It can be very positive too.

The American poet Joyce Kilmer (1886-1918) famously wrote about trees having been inspired by their beauty.

I THINK that I shall never see
A poem lovely as a tree.

A tree whose hungry mouth is prest
Against the sweet earth's flowing breast;

A tree that looks at God all day,
And lifts her leafy arms to pray;

A tree that may in summer wear
A nest of robins in her hair;

Upon whose bosom snow has lain;
Who intimately lives with rain.

Poems are made by fools like me,
But only God can make a tree.

*********************************

Beautiful and inspired by beauty, not angst.

Talent
 

Very interesting thread.

Where do you think talent comes into the equasion?

I was thinking of some autistic children who have amazing skills, artistic and/or musical.
These poor kids - because of their condition - would score quite poorly on most intelligence measures and yet they often display incredible abilities, is this just pure talent?

Perhaps the problem with this discussion is that we tend to measure intelligence in specific and often quite narrow ways, being emotionally intelligent is very different from being academicaly intelligent for example.

Musical / artisitc intelligence is also an aspect of human nature and can appear in greater or lesser degrees in people.

I picked up guitar quite easily but have really had to work on playing piano - it does not come naturally to me. So could you say I have an innate talent for music with a predisposition to stringed instruments?

Or is this becoming overly complex?

And in conclusion - are people who have musical inteligence in any form more likely to appreciate 'inteligent music' as opposed to mass produced pop?

I still......
 

just like to rock.:)

Re: I still......
 

So do I but it's nice to think about and debate things from time to time.:p

true........
 

it is difficult for me to leave my snart-aleck self behind sometimes...


continue oh scholars of the world.....

Re: true........
 

Oh, how WELL I know THIS! :D :p

(there re few things I enjoy more than giving R'n'R a hard time about these things...)

Quote:

continue oh scholars of the world.....

Oh THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

Roger -Dot- Lee, in a whimsical frame of mind...to the point where he's actually contemplating officially changing his name to Roger -Dot- Lee

Re: Re: true........
 

agreed.

from my perspective "the myth of the starving artist"
is just that. i've known some people that've almost starved
from choosing a career in the arts, but it wasn't intentional.;)


the fact is, it's very expensive for artists and musicians
to create competitively. an average 6x4 painting can
well cost several hundred dollars in materials.
in the indie music market, a poor person has very little
chance of breaking in. the technology has become
more affordable, my home studio can outperform
a million dollar studio from 20 years ago, but the
ante to enter the game is still considerable, out of
reach of the average income.

TBL- starving in today's arts climate isn't an option.

Re: Talent
 

Ya know, I think the human spirit and/or body has some innate ability to comprnsate for deficiencies in one area by being amazing in another. Blind people have better hearing, for example. Autistics don't absorb information the way "normal" people do, so their brain may be more sensitive to shape and form and such, and that's why many can paint well. etc.



I know that this is off topic, but still I thought it interesting.

Re: Re: Talent
 

Fascinating! There is a young autistic chap called Stephen Wiltshire who went for a trip on the London Eye. When he got home he drew the scene from the top from memory and it was nigh on perfect in detail. His work is exhibited now and is well worth checking out. He's done a painting of Times Square, NY that will, IMHO, amaze you.

THAT should inspire

True that. However, as we all know, he could see. And having a lifetime of musical experience, if he could write the note on a page, and he could hear everything in his head, why is this seen as such an amazing feat? I've never understood it. One would think, even being deaf, that one could place a score from something written say, by John Williams or Philip Glass or any other living composer, and he could read it in his head and know how it was supposed to sound.

So even though he was deaf, I don't know that we can suppose he was depressed when he wrote "Ode to Joy." As an opposite example, Igor Stravinsky was not deaf when he wrote the unnerving "The Rite of Spring."


What is it they say in England? Right-O, chap! An artist needs inspiration, but it can be positive, negative, or anything else. John Lennon was an artists. "The Ballad of John and Yoko," "Revolution," and "Julia" all came out of negative feelings. "I Wanna Hold Your Hand," "Two of Us," and "All You Need Is Love" all came out of positive feelings.

To give an opposite example to the James Joyce (and to prove I too can quote poetry from memory :D ), here's a poem written from a negative feeling, in this case, melancholy. The famous Robert Frost poem, "Stopping By Woods on a Snowy Evening."


"Whose woods these are I think I know.
His house in the village though.
He will not see me stopping here
to watch his woods fill up with snow.

My little horse must think it queer
to stop without a farmhouse near,
between the woods and frozen lake,
the darkest evening of the year.

He gives his harness bells a shake
to ask if there is some mistake.
The only other sound's the sweep
of misty frost and downy flake.

These woods are lovely, dark and deep,
but I have promises to keep,
and miles to go before I sleep,
and miles to go before I sleep."



As I was writing that, I was thinking about the "art vs. craft" thing. No one will deny the art in that poem, but the amazing thing to me, having written a few things in my time, is the craft.
Four stanzas, PERFECT iambic pentameter, AABA BBCB CCDC DDDD rhyme scheme. The fourth stanza uses a "no-no" in poetry, repitition, to perfect effect. It destroys the rhyme pattern, but more importantly, it is that last line that makes the whole poem work.

Now, I love this poem. I think it's the most perfect poem in the English language. I don't get free verse. In fact, I laugh at free verse (not trying to start a debate on the validity of free verse - still talking about music). IMO, it's basically prose with versification and a tighter use of imagery, but I can't think of that as poetry. Poems need some sort of structure, no matter how loose (even a list poem has structure).

In other words, this poem is studied still to this day because it is an example of great art AND great craft. While I agree with some of the sentiments in this thread that you don't need to know jack about music to like it and love it and appreciate it, I believe, to the core, that a knowledge of craft makes you enjoy music more than you would without knowledge of craft. I liked that Frost poem before I understood how it worked. But I like it even more when I was taught how poetry worked. Same with music.

That's why they teach Music Appreciation at every university.

there's no doubt about it, most of my musician
friends that lean to the "art" side joke about
having A.D.D.

there's verified cases that administering ritalin to A.D.D.
patients stripped them of their creativity.
in one case, the ability to play the piano vanished completely.

i was one of those kids that surely would've been
on ritalin today.
i couldn't pass a math class to save my life,
became my high school's 1st art major.

some studies are suggesting that what we're calling
A.D.D.(not to be confused w/ "A.D.H.D.")
may well be a personality trait of the "artist/inventor" (A.I.),
citing thomas edison as a prime example.

I'm not convinced there's an "art side" or "craft side." Art is a nebulous thing that you can't pin down, but craft has no such nebulousness to it. There are hundreds of old rock records from the early 60s, and they all have pretty much the same crafting: 3 chords in verse/chorus/verse/chorus structure, then a bridge-often with a key change to 3 other chords, then back to the original three for verse/chorus. Small variations on this patter, of course. But what stood out? Art of the Beatles and the Byrds, amongst others. Who still listens to Herman's Hermits?

Would you say Lennon was on the "art side" or the "craft side"? I'd say he's an artist, but he definitely knew the craft of making music.

I.e., "Art" and "Craft" are different things, but not mutually exclusive terms.

I cannot imagine trying to put "Ode To Joy" to any music, nor can I picture writing that portion of the Ninth, whilst depressed. That does not compute to either my analytical (I'm an engineer), or my artistic (I'm an AMATEUR musician, artist, prose writer and poet) side.
Actually, I think Paul wrote all of your positive examples above. Paul was the happy optimist, John the cynic.
That is indeed a beautiful poem, as is much of Frost's work. A little "trick" to making rhyming schemes work is to pick easy words to rhyme. Sounds obvious, but try coming up with a rhyming scheme using "silver" versus "gold" - even though they are similar "symbolically", picking the right word for A in your rhyme scheme is a key. And this is not meant to trivialize Frost - my best work can't compete with his throwaways.
I would agree with Yesspaz on this one. Knowledge is not necessary for, but it usually will enhance, appreciation.

Jon Anderson and Joyce Kilmer are excellent examples of artists who are inspired and transcribe positive energy, though I'd like to explore their lives a bit more. I know Jon Anderson admits that he didn’t like having to drop out of school to support his family because his father was sick. That can cause some angst that spawn artistic realization. I really don't know the truth but just saying it would be interesting to ask him. He is truly one who can actually 'hear' flowers as he's said at one show I saw him at. As for Kilmer, he was just included in a study where a computer program analyzed the words of poets to look for traits in word usage of suicidal people vs. non suicidal people (He was of course placed in the non suicidal test group (see www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/07/27/wpoet27.xml ). I admit he definitely derived from positive energy and made some beautiful art. Thanks for the recite. In both cases was there something earlier on in their lives that woke up their artistic vision. Jon was admittedly shy. Again, I’m just pulling whatever facts I can google. No matter the driver of the artistic awakening, the two example artists do demonstrate positive energy embodied in art.

This would be an interesting study of how a person gains artistic insight (the study probably already exists in some nature). I think we all agree that it’s something that can’t be taught, but must be learned or derived through experience.

Personally I’m currently questioning the polarity of my artistic drive and its product. I know it’s good, to me, if it is real (true), and if it successfully captures emotion and atmosphere of any tone.

Sorry we’re a bit off thread but all the above posts have been interesting to me.
Here’s a review, with some admendments.

I think most people agree that better crafted art is appreciated by and attracts people who study the craft.

All ‘works of art’, be it music or paintings etc., have a craft side and an artistic side to it.

Craft can be taught but art must be learned (or divinely granted ;) )

Knowledge of the craft brings about a different appreciation and enjoyment of the piece (painting, song, poem)

A person who does not know the craft can enjoy and/or appreciate the piece as much as someone in the know.

Whether or not a piece is good is subjective, no matter how much craft it may or may not possess. However, history proves that well crafted art holds up longer.

Autistic people can be fascinating.

QuantumJo is lefthanded.

Negative energy can make happy art. (I still have to examine this. I’ll have to hit some phyco forums and see what comes up there.)

One more thought on the "positive" versus "negative" thing - I think it is INTENSITY of feeling that generates creativity - and it may be that negative feelings are more often classified as intense than positive ones. That's why people associate negative experiences with being artistic inspiration moreso than positive experiences. But, as several people have already illustrated, strong positive emotions can be very artistically inspiring as well.

And Kirk, as far as the ADD thing goes: are you STILL talking about that?:D :D

Hmm. Maybe so on "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" and "Two of Us," but I'm positive Lennon wrote "All You Need Is Love." The trick to knowing who really wrote each Lennon/McCartney song is who's singing. I know Paul hates to this day that Lennon's name is attached to "Yesterday," which is Paul solo.

Exactly my point - that's part of the craft. Poets, artists, musicians, etc. that know craft, can appreciate the work at a deeper level.




BTW, can you see people discussing poetry, sculpture, art vs. craft, and inspiration on the AC/DC, Kiss, Poison type websites? Possibly, but I doubt it. Just one more piece of evidence that prog listeners are probably of a different personality than non-prog listeners. The same "tick" in our heads that makes us analyze movies makes us like prog.

Does the fact then that I like Prog AND Jazz AND Classical AND.......... make me schizophrenic? I hope not! ;)

Yes absolutely! INTENSITY of feeling is a huge factor in the creative process. If I feel intense about something that has inspired me, the words just flow but more thought is required when the intensity factor is lower. Also, and this is probably more to do with my personality than anything else, the best things I have written (other peoples judgement not my own) have all come from times of positive inspiration. This brings another factor into the equation, Personality.

I've taken the liberty of switching these paragraphs around as I think they need to be taken in this order.

1) Totally agree with you. You do NOT have to understand the finer points of the work to appreciate or like it.

BUT:

2) If you do look deeper into the circumstances behind and the technique used in the creation of the piece you can gain even more from it. The example I used of my studies JMW Turner's paintings demonstrates this. I always liked a lot of his work but knowing more about his technique and the stories behind the creation of works such as "Turnip pickers at Slough" or "Peace: Burial at sea" just enhances my enjoyment of them. You can use the same knowledge and apply it to many other artists as well.

I'm not advertising here but if any of you come to London and take a couple of my walks around the city I'm sure I could show you things that don't appear in any guide book and which unless they were pointed out you may miss. I hope that that would ENHANCE your enjoyment of visiting this city.

Excellent thread.

I'm off to the Dream Theater fans forum now to get the same discussion going. :D

???