Can We Please Stop With The Damned Sound Effect?

[Splicer]

I like ambience and I like scene-setting and I like a nice bit of weird audio thrown in during a song. However, there are far too many so-called Prog albums that begin with a minute and a half of sound effects before dissolving into the next song which continues the fade-out of the sound effects before any music kicks in. It seems like fully 25% of Prog albums start this way. Cliche much?

I get it - you're artsy. I get it - you're being dramatic. I get it - you think you're Roger Waters. I also get this: You're not Roger Waters. It's not original and it comes across as nothing more than either padding or self-indulgence or a mistaken belief that it makes your album a work of art rather than merely entertainment.

Stop it. It's terrible, boring and wastes my time. Just make your album a minute and a half shorter. It's fine. I understand.

[Firth]

I have an idea. Don't listen to it

[cingram]

As long as they make it a separate track it's no big deal. But if they do attach it to a legit track, that is annoying.

[GuitarGeek]

In the book The 100 Worst Rock And Roll Albums Of All Time, Roger Waters' Radio KAOS is listed. It's explained that if you buy a record, and the first thing you hear is not music or spoken word, but a sound effect (in the case of Radio KAOS it's that telegraph thing), you should immediately return the record to the point of purchase and demand a refund, on the grounds that it's defective.

[GuitarGeek]

I get it - you're artsy. I get it - you're being dramatic. I get it - you think you're Roger Waters. I also get this: You're not Roger Waters. It's not original and it comes across as nothing more than either padding or self-indulgence or a mistaken belief that it makes your album a work of art rather than merely entertainment.

Yeah, if you were Roger Waters, your album would have less actual melodic and "song" content than your work actually does.

BTW, it was actually Nick Mason who took care of the sound effects in Pink Floyd. And The Beatles used sound effects on Yellow Submarine way before Pink Floyd.

(and there was probably somebody who did it before The Beatles)

[Splicer]

I just hear it as a trope meant to give an album a sense of gravitas. I think the music itself should convey whatever the artist wants to convey.

[chalkpie]

I like ambience and I like scene-setting and I like a nice bit of weird audio thrown in during a song. However, there are far too many so-called Prog albums that begin with a minute and a half of sound effects before dissolving into the next song which continues the fade-out of the sound effects before any music kicks in. It seems like fully 25% of Prog albums start this way. Cliche much?

I get it - you're artsy. I get it - you're being dramatic. I get it - you think you're Roger Waters. I also get this: You're not Roger Waters. It's not original and it comes across as nothing more than either padding or self-indulgence or a mistaken belief that it makes your album a work of art rather than merely entertainment.

Stop it. It's terrible, boring and wastes my time. Just make your album a minute and a half shorter. It's fine. I understand.

How do you really feel?

To dismiss all pieces with some 'field recordings' or 'processed sound effects' from this point forward seems a little harsh, and of course the artist is entitled. Used creatively to add texture can be brilliant. Overused? Perhaps? To stop it permanently? No way.

[arturs]

I agree Floyd and Waters over-rely on this sort of thing but who else? Are there really all that many? Some examples (non-Floyd related) would help.

[Mr.Krautman]

I have nothing against (and actually like) ambience settings and sound effects but tend to agree with the O.P's view that it became an overused cliche today and most often than not doesn't add anything to the work. If used sparingly and cleverly and in the right context (concept/story), sound effects could help but are not mandatory. Let the artist decide if and when he need to use them.

[Jefferson James]

I generally dislike stuff like that in prog-rock songs -- to me it's not musical, it's not interesting, it's nothing but padding to make a song longer. It's much easier adding a 3-minute ambient intro than trying to compose a 3-minute intro like ELP's "Eruption".

I know a songwriter who took a 3 minute pop song and added 4 full minutes of keyboard washes and "ambience" to the head of the song, then touted it as a prog-rock masterpiece. As if, in their mind, this is what it means to be progressive. It's still a 3-minute pop song except now the listener has to endure a long, boring, pointless, ran-out-of-ideas, creatively bankrupt introduction. In this case, I listened to the song once, because that's all it warranted. There was no reason to return to the intro because there was nothing engaging there. True filler. Or 'filla', if you will.

Used tastefully and with purpose, a little texture or a break from the rhythm and melody is fine (although I would prefer an actual musical, chord-based break). In this genre there are far too many instances where I see a band touting how lengthy a song is, only to learn it's primarily due to drawn-out ambient sections, and not actual composed music with changes.

Anyone can listen to any music I've ever been part of and note there is not one instance where an "ambient" moment or intro exceeds 5-10 seconds. I won't have it! Pink Floyd got away with it because it was novel at the time; in 2016, it's just a sign of laziness or a complete lack of imagination.

On its own, like, say, "Another Green World", it's cool because there is no pretense, it is what it is, unashamedly. But don't tell me you've got a progressive rock epic only to learn it sounds like Enya.

[The Dark Elf]

If it fits, why the hell not? There's plenty of songs that have an effect that heightens the start of a song. Just offhand, I really like these, and they're not even prog:

[jkelman]

I just hear it as a trope meant to give an album a sense of gravitas. I think the music itself should convey whatever the artist wants to convey.

Thing is, I doubt most artists think of it that way. Hatfield's "The Stubbs Effect" is a great bookend to their debut, I think, as one example.

I think you make, with no disrespect intended, too big an assumption about the "why." Most artists would likely have a very good explanation as to why they include field recordings, found sounds, electronic effects, what have you, as segues between songs. Gravitas would not be one of them.

[StevegSr]

Hmm...Could you be a bit more specific? Some instrumental intro or outros to songs are essential and some are not.

[jkelman]

I generally dislike stuff like that in prog-rock songs -- to me it's not musical, it's not interesting, it's nothing but padding to make a song longer. It's much easier adding a 3-minute ambient intro than trying to compose a 3-minute intro like ELP's "Eruption".

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. That intro sets up "Eruption" better than anything else I can think of (ok, we're talking me ).
Not saying you have to like it, of course, but I remember the first time I spun Tarkus back in the day, and that intro (it isn't ambient) was a real set-up; it drew me in, and when "Eruption," well, erupted, it was absolutely staggering - all the more for that intro, which does build in dynamics and density, so absolutely has a purpose as a setup for when the band finally launches in, at least IMO.

I wouldn't change that intro for anything.

[jkelman]

Hmm...Could you be a bit more specific? Some instrumental intro or outros to songs are essential and some are not.

Well, that is simply a matter of opinion; what I will say is that of all the things a musician might do as filler, that isn't one of them, because it takes too much consideration to come up with it.

You may think they're essential (or not); but I guarantee the artists would all say they are, as they are intended for specific purposes of mood, dynamics or simply build-up, wind-down or connective thread.

[The Dark Elf]

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. That intro sets up "Eruption" better than anything else I can think of (ok, we're talking me ).
Not saying you have to like it, of course, but I remember the first time I spun Tarkus back in the day, and that intro (it isn't ambient) was a real set-up; it drew me in, and when "Eruption," well, erupted, it was absolutely staggering - all the more for that intro, which does build in dynamics and density, so absolutely has a purpose as a setup for when the band finally launches in, at least IMO.

I wouldn't change that intro for anything.

I, myself, wonder why anyone would dog (pun intended) Floyd over effects. Growing up in the 70s, that was half the fun of getting their albums. Take "Sheep", for instance. The effects, both field and vocal, make it the great song it is:



Or the heightened sense of impending doom that the alarm siren adds to War Pigs:

[rottersclub]

Think about the last 10 prog concerts you saw. How many started with a minute or so of "sound effects" (for lack of a better term), swirling stage smoke, the band members coming on to the stage, getting set, and launching into the first song ...

No doubt it's a cliche these days, but it has a practical purpose as well. Think of it as a scene setting device, to steal a term from the cinema. And John's example of Tarkus is spot on. But three minutes of it would be annoying as hell.

[ThomasKDye]

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. That intro sets up "Eruption" better than anything else I can think of (ok, we're talking me ).

I think you misread that. Kerry is praising "Eruption" as an ideal intro.

[StevegSr]

Well, that is simply a matter of opinion; what I will say is that of all the things a musician might do as filler, that isn't one of them, because it takes too much consideration to come up with it.

You may think they're essential (or not); but I guarantee the artists would all say they are, as they are intended for specific purposes of mood, dynamics or simply build-up, wind-down or connective thread.

Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed? I'm a retired recording engineer that that has recorded deliberately thought out instrumental intros and outros that were excellent and some that were cobbled together hap hazard as album filler.

Since when did all musicians acquire such great integrity?

[Nijinsky Hind]

I like effects... 45 second intro that adds "gravitas" . Makes this song much better IMO. I call it buildup, or tension and release...

[ThomasKDye]

I really disagree with this. If all prog sounded like fiddly organ and guitar bits in 13/8 every moment of the time, there's no way I'd be into it. The idea of restricting a progressive rock artist's palette seems to be the antithesis of what it's all about. I like being able to go from the sound effects, the ambient moodscapes, the solo piano/guitar/kalimba ("Larks Tongues I"), and yes, even the drum solos, to a more constructed "song" according to the artistic through-line. I couldn't imagine "The Wall" without the final exploding of the wall. I couldn't imagine "The Talking Drum" or "Shine On You Crazy Diamond" without the wind effects providing the mood. I couldn't even imagine XTC's "Summer's Cauldron" without the nature noises. I agree it can be a bit much at times, certainly, but if an artist feels two minutes of a building wind climax adds to the mood of the song, I won't question them. It's on you to skip it if, to you, it sounds as musically "deficient" as "Revolution 9" or "Metal Machine Music."

[Scrotum Scissor]

Kerry is praising "Eruption" as an ideal intro.

Because it was "composed" - whereas sonic constructions necessarily aren't? Noise is music as well, you know; that's what academies have been teaching since the 1950s. Sometimes it appears as if the "prog people" constitute the last bulk of listeners still estranged to the inherent implications of this doctrine.

My experience is that the throwaway effect-making usually comes with artists who are just as lackluster at the rest of their compositional or conceptual game.

[ThomasKDye]

In this genre there are far too many instances where I see a band touting how lengthy a song is, only to learn it's primarily due to drawn-out ambient sections, and not actual composed music with changes.

Well, at the same time, composed music with changes can seem as much like "musical wallpaper" if they're using the same instruments, the same sounds, the same dynamics all the time. It's why I'm not into Niacin as much as others are. The fifth click organ-bass-drums piece is pretty much like the first, yet I'm sure they're all "composed" differently. Whereas "The Gates of Delirium" has the long ambient section in the middle just before "Soon," and it's PERFECT.

[Crystal Plumage]

Classical music uses/ used special effects as well. Cannons, tubular bells etc.

[PeterG]

I like ambience and I like scene-setting and I like a nice bit of weird audio thrown in during a song. However, there are far too many so-called Prog albums that begin with a minute and a half of sound effects before dissolving into the next song which continues the fade-out of the sound effects before any music kicks in. It seems like fully 25% of Prog albums start this way. Cliche much?

I get it - you're artsy. I get it - you're being dramatic. I get it - you think you're Roger Waters. I also get this: You're not Roger Waters. It's not original and it comes across as nothing more than either padding or self-indulgence or a mistaken belief that it makes your album a work of art rather than merely entertainment.

Stop it. It's terrible, boring and wastes my time. Just make your album a minute and a half shorter. It's fine. I understand.

Totally agree!