I gave this one another listen. What I think elevates this above other Yes-inspired bands is a refined sense of melody. I also totally dig the Moog playing.
It doesn't sound "commercial" to me at all, so I was surprised by some of the previous comments.
"Poppy" doesn't necessarily equal "commercial".
This being said, if listening habitus goes somewhat beyond the understanding of modern progressive rock as merely an eternal grind on the same given set of handful 70s Angloamerican "symphonic" rock groups, and rather reflects that whole array of various directions and developments in rock occurring quite naturally since 1977 (40 years!), the music of a band like Moth Vellum comes across as fairly easygoing. Simple structures of arrangement, melodies squarely based in circular phrasings, "soft" dynamics, constant focus on major chord variations, dissonance predominantly as "effect" or motif rather than as general outline or principle of composition.
It's a nice album, but it brings out the brackets nonetheless.
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
So far I have not found a Symphonic rock album by some band from Los Angeles that sounds really good to these ears... Prog Metal, Experimental rock, Fusion, Psych / Space, even Krautrock and Berlin School - they have great representantives in all of mentioned genres, but in Symphonic rock - no.
Suppose, you've never heard about these lads.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceokbi9O2co
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdVdZJbU4no
Actually, I always loved this
And in The Source we'll find Aaron Goldich from Ampledeed: http://ampledeed.com/index.html
In a sense, so do I, in that it would mean pop music would have at least a bit more substance to it.
But to my ears, as 'Prog Rock," this comes up short. It focuses too much of the sugary, simple, and appealing (thus "pop" or "popular") elements without enough of the challenging elements that to me, make Prog, "Prog." For me, the balance is just too far in the "accessible" direction, without enough of the other elements to keep me interested in it as Prog Rock.
Obviously tastes and thresholds vary in this, which is cool. But that's where I'm coming from when describing this as "poppy" (and I was specific in saying "too poppy for my tastes"). It's a relative thing, relative to other Prog Rock that leans in a much more decidedly challenging direction, without necessarily falling off the bleeding edge and eschewing all sense of accessibility.
For real pop music, I tend to prefer more bluesy-based stuff. I wish that element was more prominent in commercial/popular music, I don't really need or want it to sound "faux-Proggy."
Bill
Hey, that's cool. I can respect that. And I agree that Moth Vellum is not particularly challenging, especially when considering it as "prog". Sometimes I'm in the mood for sunny, pleasant music with a bit of substance to it, and Moth Vellum fit that bill just fine for me. It's perfect summertime music, for example. I think of MV as more of a sunny symphonic rock disc than outright "prog rock".
That said, it's a fine line to walk between accessible and challenging, and highly subjective between one person and the next. For example, when I'm in the mood for challenging, I'll reach for something like Magma or Zappa. To some, those might be considered almost "easy listening".
What I don't buy into is that England's Garden Shed is somehow more original than Moth Vellum. That's a head-scratcher, for me.
Last edited by aith01; 01-11-2017 at 11:23 AM.
I'd agree with all of that.
I originally brought up the England comparison. I did so only because I heard a strong similarity in a particular musical passage between the two discs. I didn't mean that as positive or negative, I was just commenting on the fact that the two sections were remarkably similar.
Someone else made a comment about the relative merits of England versus Moth Vellum. To some extent, I can see that person's point, though I'm not sure this was really the place to voice that thought, and I don't think "originality" is really the issue. Neither band is particularly original, both being cribbed pretty closely in the sound of a few big name 70s Prog bands. I'd say that's a wash, and isn't really that important. Since the cat's out of the bag, though, where I personally give the England album an edge over Moth Vellum as "Progressive Rock" is in overall ambition and willingness to stray from the norm in their arrangements, and a more pervasive eclecticness in their musical approach. But don't get me wrong, I don't see Garden Shed as some great masterpiece either. In many ways, to me, it is perhaps the first Neo Prog album, by which I personally mean a form of latter day, somewhat watered down Prog that borrows from the style of some 70s greats, but lacks much of the substance. To my ears, as "Prog Rock," it has perhaps more substance that Moth Vellum (and many of the Neo Proggers that followed them), but it isn't running with the great Yes/ELP/KC, etc. stuff either.
But again, I didn't bring up the England comparison to argue the merits of the two bands, I just heard that section and it screamed "ENGLAND" to me.
Bill
Apologies. My comment about Garden Shed wasn't directed at you. Another person made the statement that England was much less derivative than MV, which I do not agree with (obviously).
You were just pointing out a similarity, and I don't disagree especially regarding their eclecticness (although I have probably forgotten much about Garden Shed by now).
Over the years, I had seen so many 4- and 5-star reviews for Garden Shed that when I finally bought it and listened, I was disappointed. To my ears it didn't flow very well, instead sounding like "prog for prog's sake", rather than just letting the songs be songs -- a problem I didn't hear in Moth Vellum, personally. Perhaps my expectations were just set too high.
I don't mean to disparage England (the band) or the folks who like Garden Shed. It's all a matter of taste, after all. The ingredients in Garden Shed just didn't add up to a final product that appealed to me. Although enough time has passed since then, maybe I should give it another chance.
Going back on-topic, another thing that I liked about Moth Vellum's album was the overall sound. The clean guitar tones (obviously reminiscent of Howe), and the choice of synth and keyboard sounds (that Moog!). The sonic palette was unusual for a relatively young modern symph band at that time, at least in my opinion. An overall clean, crisp sounding collection of songs. It was refreshing.
No apology necessary, I didn't take what you said as directed at me, I was just clarifying my original statement, and then responding belatedly to the comparison of the two bands. Your position on Garden Shed is not dissimilar to mine. I seem to enjoy its "Prog for Prog's sake" approach a bit more than you, but if your ears lead you to prefer Moth Vellum then that is a perfectly valid perspective. But my initial response to Garden Shed was also a bit "meh," so I see where you're coming from.
If there's one thing I do sort of like about Moth Vellum, it is the Moog. He gets great tones and it adds the most to the album for me.
Bill
From memory, I recall he had a lot of movement in his sound. I think he really used those pitch and mod wheels to sculpt the tones as he was playing. Coupled with a fairly soft attack in the sound, he was able to add color without being overly prominent in the mix. I've heard that approach before, but not as pervasively as what Lynham does on Moth Vellum. It reminds me a bit of some of Kit Watkins Moog playing, particularly on softer HtM pieces.
You have nice boards, I'm sure you get good tones too!
Bill
I bought MV based on recommendations on PE. Wow! A disappointment. Garden Shed is vastly superior.
Oh interesting! I hadn't thought of the HtM similarities, but I can definitely see it. And you're right about the keyboard sound. There was a good bit of movement in Lynham's sound when he played, and it had a sort of "rounded" quality if that makes any sense. There was quite a bit of modulation and sculpting on the fly as well.
Thanks! I'm quite partial to them both. The Ion in particular has served well over the years as a gigging keyboard.
Bought it, gave it a few listens, then traded it. Now having re-listened via this thread, I'm still underwhelmed. Just seems to lack energy for me.
Compact Disk brought high fidelity to the masses and audiophiles will never forgive it for that
Interesting; I never got that feeling from it. I would say that overall the album is pretty mellow, but is punctuated by energetic passages. The band plays it cool quite a bit, but they know how to bring the power when the song calls for it, like in the end section of "Against The Suns" after that ambient middle section.
I recall this cd back when it came out, wow 10 years now, it was reviewed at Proggnosis, and after reading the review I had to give it a "hear". And in giving it a listen here tonight, it's is as I remember, pleasant, and while YES-ish, it is not a deliberate attempt at clonage, like a few other bands we have heard. It was a great debut, and many assumed there would be more from a band that had a very solid collection of songs for a first cd.
Perhaps it's best that they did a one and done thing for whatever reasons it worked out that way. In this day and age, a band can really produce the perfect first release unlike the old days where the members had to "grow up" together and polish their craft.
But yes, as this cd plays on, there are some very nice, solid prog pieces, odd beats and all.
Thats a good one to revive, I am not sure how many more years would have gone by had I not been reminded of it here on PE, Thanks...
A wee bit "guilty pleasure"-ish in it's closeness to the Yes sound but thorougly enjoyable the whole way through-way more than say, World Trade.
Bookmarks