Heart of the Sunrise, YesO vs YesFeatARW

[Scrotum Scissor]

This is supposedly a progressive rock website. Try "discussing" that subject, then.

Only not the "obscure" examples of it, as those are less superior. Perhaps not strictly musically speaking, but then again we're not dicussing pure music here - are we now?

[ronmac]

zealous neophilia

Great band, BTW.

[arturs]

Thank you for this very elaborate analysis. I can assure you that's not sarcasm at all, as this would - according to your elaborate analysis - by definition constitute a dodging of the issue. Now let's address these firmly elaborate points methodically.


1) My personal approach to music is, according to you, expressed as superior. But it is apparently clearly expressed as such. Please write more on this clearness, so that we finally can get to the very bottom of essential things.

2) My apparent sense of superiority is not only clear, but also "indeed" of a moral character. Although I specifically denied any general message of such nature in a previous post, you insist on knowing better and more. Please deduct this into an argument on importance itself, as I somehow fail to see that exact point of view.

3) If i was "[…] a little bit scared of explicitly saying that" which is implied in your assertions above, thus "[…] dodging the issue with sarcasm" - would I confirm how that "[…] is it?", you think? Because that's not really it either, you see - I mean, suppose I wasn't merely a little bit scared, but outright TERRIFIED?!

4) Why not consider five hypothetical people? Say person E is someone who simply made the whole world of his or her convictions from any given point in life, deciding upon the all-defining comfort of that precise position and consequently stressing that for no reason would there ever be allowed to appear an influence whatsoever to threaten the contrived coherency of that mindset.

Frankly, Henry, I wouldn't know the first thing about which of these stupendous persons you would appear to identify as. Because you see, I don't fucking know you and neither do I believe such knoweldge to be possible by discerning your writings on an internet forum which is aiming at discussions on the -music- itself, not on repeated nomenclatures or speculative extracts as to why contributors and participants apparently act as they do.

This is supposedly a progressive rock website. Try "discussing" that subject, then.

Scrotem, Gotta jump in here (against my better judgment) on Henry's behalf. His assessment of some of your posts is reasonable. Yes, none of us really know each other and while our writings might not reflect our true nature, his impression is mine as well. Arrived at independently. It would not hurt to tone down your criticisms of other folks here who are not "progressive" enough for your tastes.

I will also state I find you to be one of the more insightful and eloquent posters here on PE and I sincerely wish that you continue. I consistently marvel at the breadth of your musical knowledge, and I find your analyses to be worthy of consideration even if I don't always agree.

cheers, Arturs

I

[Scrotum Scissor]

Scrotem, Gotta jump in here (against my better judgment) on Henry's behalf. His assessment of some of your posts is reasonable. Yes, none of us really know each other and while our writings might not reflect our true nature, his impression is mine as well. Arrived at independently. It would not hurt to tone down your criticisms of other folks here who are not "progressive" enough for your tastes.

Thanks for your input. But these are, as you say, merely your impressions, and probably also those of others - arrived at independently or not. "Impressions" simply do not suffice when you're aiming for the heart - you need to be properly aware. The reason why I am attacked, as opposed to several others expressing the exact same sentiments, is the fact that I'm perceived as a nuissance due to the very fact that I admittedly do know the artists I might find it worth criticizing, or the arguments I find it worth countering. I used to be a fan of Henry's biggest musical love in life, and while I still think highly of those past achievements, we're in a different time and age now. I can see how that very logic contradicts his own and how satirical (as opposed to "sarcastic") play on stereotype of musical behaviour would upset or disturb it (see post no. 35).

But still - it has never been a case of anyone not being "progressive enough for my tastes". My tastes are not circling about degrees of "progression" - it's a case of taking the act and art of discourse seriously in accordance with semantics and etymology. If I was in it for the "progression" of it - then why would I bother to discuss garage rock or South-American acid-rock or German neo-folk or Belgian post-punk or Afrobeat or 70s electronic kitsch soundtracks or Phil Ochs? Because this is the matter; eclectic knowledge on "progressive rock" in all its possible connotations has exceedingly migrated from places like PE, simply due to the fact that popular (and rock) music is coming to an end and still even alleged supporters of it haven't been bothered to pay much notice. They're in it not for the music, but for reasons of confirming cultural identity and "self". Which is why the furthering of new and different music is unwelcome.

So my comment to Zappathustra played that gallow's humour out directly as a token to his point. It was not a nametagged expression of elitism, besserwisser cockiness or that notorious "prog-snobbery" which ironically has its torch carried mostly by voices who'd never consider moving close to threads on tones that somehow aren't traceable to the "non-obscure" nomenclature. When the act and virtue of listening to music for the sake of the music is replaced by listening to names - well, then I'm afraid it's basically all in the sack.

But I guess that's where we're all heading anyway.

[ronmac]

Perception is everything.

[Geoff O'Donoghue]

Perception is everything.

All we've got here at PE is what we read and our interpretation of it*


* In some cases PE members have met and know each other which obviously provides added insight when these members post.

[Zappathustra]

You clearly feel your approach to music is superior. Indeed, morally superior...

You appear to identify as Person A, and you disparage people in certain threads as Persons D. I can relate to Persons A, B, C or D: I feel like each of them at times. I don't think any of their approaches to listening to music have any superiority over any other.
Henry

But what you forget to say is that "feeling like A,B,C,D at times" is also an approach to music, which you also present as superior. You're doing the exact same thing as anybody else.

Despite mild and careful rhetoric, you do appear as very passionate in defending your opinions. But when did "passionate" become a bad thing? I never thought it was.

It is absolutely fine to continue endorsing Yes in their remaining versions, and who would even bother to stop you, but when you seek grounding for this in vague concepts like "the life of a music piece", you might expect some criticism. My criticism wasn't addressed in your answer. According to your sayings a musical piece is alive as long as it is continued being played live, regardless of the musicians who play it. And this holds true even if the music is classical, jazz or rock.

So Hendrix's music is dead - because we couldn't find a replica to play it - while Yes music is alive because of Live at the Apollo.

We've had this discussion before: some of the concepts you are using are not as self-evident as you present them to be. On a good day someone might jump and point this, and stir some discussion. On all other days he would be too tired to do this because of automatic, polite dismissal.

[Staun]

Wished Henry and SS would apologize to me, I'm confused.

[Scrotum Scissor]

Perception is everything.

This is the rule by which Ted Bundy lived. Still he kept whining and sobbing on approaching Ol' Sparky, as the outcome of his case somehow didn't comply with his perception and thus expectance of things.

No, substance mass and matter is everything. That's why those physicists down at that black hole-simulator turbine in Bern better know what the hell they're doing, or else we'll all get sucked in. Perception notwithstanding.

[ronmac]

This is the rule by which Ted Bundy lived. Still he kept whining and sobbing on approaching Ol' Sparky, as the outcome of his case somehow didn't comply with his perception and thus expectance of things.

No, substance mass and matter is everything. That's why those physicists down at that black hole-simulator turbine in Bern better know what the hell they're doing, or else we'll all get sucked in. Perception notwithstanding.

FFS it's a figure of speech. Of course it isn't everything.

[Scrotum Scissor]

FFS it's a figure of speech. Of course it isn't everything.

Neither did I suggest that you'd actually mean that. It was a rhetorical point, FFS.

[Zappathustra]

FFS means Fuckin Figure of Speech?

[Scrotum Scissor]

FFS means Fuckin Figure of Speech?

No, that would abrreviate as FFoS. Which is fine as well, and very handy.

[Zappathustra]

No, that would abrreviate as FFoS. Which is fine as well, and very handy.

No, FFoS is the irish for fuck's o'sake I believe.

[NogbadTheBad]

Fantastic entertainment guys.

[Scott Bails]

Needs more crowd noise.

[NogbadTheBad]

Only if obviously dubbed.

[ronmac]

FFS means Fuckin Figure of Speech?

For Fuck's Sake

[moecurlythanu]

For Fuck's Sake

Great catch. 👍😉

[Zappathustra]

For Fuck's Sake

I can't tell anymore who's taking the piss on whom here.

[Fracktured]

I still would like to hear ARW do some of the early Yes music from the first two albums. I think that would be interesting to hear their take on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bondegezou]

This is supposedly a progressive rock website. Try "discussing" that subject, then.

I'm discussing how people approach music, specifically progressive rock. I believe that what we, as listeners, bring to the music is an important part of our experience of the music. This is a widely held view, advanced by many musicians and academics (e.g. from Robert Fripp to Georgina Born). So, it seems to me a worthwhile line of discussion. But if you feel otherwise, no probs.

Henry

[bondegezou]

But what you forget to say is that "feeling like A,B,C,D at times" is also an approach to music, which you also present as superior. You're doing the exact same thing as anybody else.

Despite mild and careful rhetoric, you do appear as very passionate in defending your opinions. But when did "passionate" become a bad thing? I never thought it was.

I'm sure I am doing the same thing as anybody else, and I am more enamoured of my own positions than of others'!

I did not mean to present myself as superior for feeling like A, B, C and D at times. That's just how I do feel. And, of course, there's an E, F, G, H etc. I wish to question often unspoken assumptions that particular ways of approaching music are better in some way or another.

It is absolutely fine to continue endorsing Yes in their remaining versions, and who would even bother to stop you, but when you seek grounding for this in vague concepts like "the life of a music piece", you might expect some criticism. My criticism wasn't addressed in your answer. According to your sayings a musical piece is alive as long as it is continued being played live, regardless of the musicians who play it. And this holds true even if the music is classical, jazz or rock.

I love Yes, including modern Yes(es), and I love following Yes. I think it's a cheaper obsession than some people's (my sister collects Lego -- that's expensive!). I don't love Yes because I think they are the bestest musicians ever who can do wrong. I love Yes because of my own personal journey. I'll debate and discuss Yes until the cow's come home, but I'm unbothered by anyone having a different view of the band (as it was or is now). I like debating and discussing music, so I'm all for discussion being stirred.

Yes are also, for me, a lens through which to explore broader questions, like the relationship between a musical piece, its creators, a specific performance captured on record or its continued performance by line-ups with various relationships to its origins. I think reaction and interpretation are an important part of how all art has an ongoing 'life'.

Henry

[Bruno Sampaio Barbosa]

https://vimeo.com/294271571

[iguana]

https://vimeo.com/294271571

1:55 > JANEEEEEEEEE!

excellent performance, thanks for this.