Does prog suffer from gear-fetishisation?

[Rarebird]

Excellent point! I can't imagine Keith, Rick and the others back in the early 70's complaining about "the wrong feel" or "authenticity" of new instruments and technology - they embraced it! The prog movement was much about exploring previously unheard timbres, or more-or-less traditional instruments in new contexts.

OK, fans that embraces artists commonly want the artists to sound the same as when they lost their heart to them, alas all genres tend to get quickly fossilised. It's a natural fact that most active musicians - professional or amateur - are emulating the style and sounds of someone that were truly progressive before, present or past. Of course there is a big market for emulations, being it carefully copied LP Standard 59s, VST-emulations or that infamous digital mellotron

Personally I try still to embrace the "progressive" adjective, but it was really on PE that I came to realise that its just a word used to pinpoint some musical movements in the early 70s, when the guys referred to above were among those leading the way. It's ust a label, like Glam, Punk, New Romantic, Rockabilly... Then, of course the tools they used become archetypes. Cumbersomeness and crappy designs aside. Hey, even those weird sounding Yamaha CP-70/80s stage pianos of the 80s are considered "authentic"

A B3 excellent instrument, but have you tried add some Alchemy or K5000 sheen to it...?

If there is one advantage that old stuff, or their virtual emulations have on truly new forms of synthesis, it is that it's more easy to create new sounds. With newer forms of synthesis people often got stuck with factory-presets, because they often were a hell to program. I have a Waldorf Blofeld and I still have to create one sound on it. On the other hand, in Cubase I have a virtual analog synthesizer and within an hour I created a new sound.

I suppose the Yamaha CP-70/80 stage piano's are going the same way as the Wurlitzer and Fender Rhodes as sounds of their own, worthy of being emulated.

[Zeuhlmate]

The music ? No ! Sound is very important.
The budget of the musician ? Yes.

[Rarebird]

The music ? No ! Sound is very important.
The budget of the musician ? Yes.

In the end it's the creativity of the musician. I have an album from Trikolon, the first group with Hendrik Schaper, on which he still uses some cheap organ.

And I think Hoelderlin didn't use a Hammond as well.

[chalkpie]

In the end it's the creativity of the musician. I have an album from Trikolon, the first group with Hendrik Schaper, on which he still uses some cheap organ.

I agree with this.

From my cheap, broken lawn chair, I think you can have different perspectives. If Yo Yo Ma is performing the Bach Cello Suites, then I think every facet of a recording (or live performance) is essential in today's age. The room, the bow used and placement in relation to the bridge, the LH technique (including vibrato), the vibration of the instrument itself, articulation, intonation, the mics (and placement) used, etc etc all plays a role in the end result. However, you don't necessarily have to fulfill 100% of those things in order to have an amazing recording or performance.

Then again, you can listen to an old recording of Heifetz from the 30's and still enjoy it immensely, but obviously you are at the mercy of the technology of the day. Modern day recordings are the same - a REAL Hammond is not going to make an album better just for the sake of using it, it boils down to the performance, the recording, and the manner in which its used for the final result as a whole.

I'm sure there is a certain snobbery associated with this ideology, and if you enjoy it, then you enjoy it. Its not isolated with just prog either, the high-end audio world is full of this ideology, and I think that sometimes the gear overshadows the real important part - the music itself.

So, I'm going with there is no right or wrong, and there is validity in both perspectives.

[battema]

Yep...no "one size fits all" is applicable here.

Some amazing music has been made with decades of musical training and top-shelf instruments, and some amazing music been created by individuals with little/no training and limited gear, but an incredible amount of creativity and innovation.

One doesn't negate the other; if anything, with the right ears I think a willingness to consider, acknowledge and perhaps even embrace the unfamiliar is in part what ought to define us as progressive music listeners. Not everything will hit the mark of course, and we all have our old "familiar favorites" that we enjoy regardless...but I think by and large many folks here are generally open-minded.

[Plasmatopia]

Yep...no "one size fits all" is applicable here.

I agree. I remember watching a documentary which I had recorded on a VHS tape about trying to duplicate the sound of a Stradivarius violin by matching construction techniques, woods, varnish, etc. I was able to hear the differences between the copy and the real thing even with just the sound coming from that crappy VHS tape through the TV's crappy little 3" speaker. Similarly, I think a lot of the feel of a performance would come through less than stellar technology...but not always. And technology could get in the way. But one could just as easily suggest that there might be elements of the performance that could be enhanced by more modern technology. Not being distracted by certain elements of a vintage piece of equipment could contribute in positive ways as easily as negative.

The live music situation could also be very different than a studio recording for a number of reasons. Even if you brought authentic vintage instruments on stage, will they use the right microphones? Will they be EQ'd and mixed "correctly"? You're probably not going have high end Neumann mics and Avalon preamps on every channel in a live situation (probably a pointless and/or impossible exercise anyway).

Or in the studio you could use a lo-fi approach or use some horrifically bad instruments and come up with something that just has that certain je ne sais quoi.

So many variables...let's just simplify and make our own judgments based on the end result.

[Thebigdipper]

From the perspective of the working musician, it generally doesn't matter to them what they use as long as it works properly, sounds good and doesn't let them down. As I said elsewhere recently, King Crimson used iPad emulations of Mellotrons on both their recent "three drummers" tours. I was fine with it, personally. Lots of people keep their vintage gear at home and tour with something more replaceable or reliable. It's a professional decision aimed at delivering the best performance.

Does it matter to me as a fan? If I can't hear the difference, then probably no. Sometimes there might be an aspect of an act that means the wrong guitar will jar visually, but that's about it, I think.

Despite me, as a guitarist, not getting on with modelling amps myself, I can even accept Steve Howe and his Line 6 Vetta backline....

[hFx]

I suppose the Yamaha CP-70/80 stage piano's are going the same way as the Wurlitzer and Fender Rhodes as sounds of their own, worthy of being emulated.

The specific thing about the CPs are that they were designed especially for stage use as grand piano replacement - virtually no one used them in the studio, but they catch on because they're vintage = good-by-definition

I think the Mellotron is a really interesting example - a real weird design which did not very well fulfil it's original purpose. Imagine "Watcher" if Tony had access to a keyboard sounding like a real big HiFi orchestra Sure it's a sound most of us love, but still a compromise - like comparing a 78 record to a HiFi-record.

"Hey why can't the orchestra sound like the original - the Toscanini records we all love??"

[battema]

The CP does have a unique signature; there are times that is exactly the right sound for a particular piece. I used to play in a band that had a Yamaha weighted board and an excellent emulation of "that sound." Came in handy when playing certain types of covers.

[Jefferson James]

sometimes the gear overshadows the real important part - the music itself.

I was surprised when I joined PE all those years ago and discovered how so many prog fans seemed more interested in the gear than the music. Anyone who ever asked me about my bass was let down when I told them I just plug it in and tune it up then play. That's about the extent of my involvement with vintage instruments.

Live, as long as it sounds good and is physically being played by a musician, I'm cool with whatever the musician chooses, it's their call, their game.

However, from an audience standpoint, I think a Moog modular wall just looks cool, and back in the day it represented the wealth and success of the band 'cause normal people couldn't afford one back then.

These days there is nothing particularly unique about modern rock/prog band setups, there is no mystery to a laptop controller; we all use laptops or computers. We can all afford the modern gear. So when a musician chooses to use a real B3 or Mellotron onstage, it's more entertaining because it's different for today and it shows a committed artist.

I don't see myself ever playing live with anything other than my bass, a cord, and a live, breathing amp (tube or solid state, I don't care). It's just easier and all I have to do is focus on the notes I feel like grabbing.

[DrGoon]

The specific thing about the CPs are that they were designed especially for stage use as grand piano replacement - virtually no one used them in the studio, but they catch on because they're vintage = good-by-definition

There were a swathe of (primarily British art-rock) musicians who used them in the 80s on their major-selling albums - Genesis, Phil Collins, Peter Gabriel, Simple Minds, Talk Talk, Tears For Fears, U2, The Police, etc. Having these sounds as sample libraries is much easier than carting a CP around if you intend to go after that sound.

[hFx]

There were a swathe of (primarily British art-rock) musicians who used them in the 80s on their major-selling albums - Genesis, Phil Collins, Peter Gabriel, Simple Minds, Talk Talk, Tears For Fears, U2, The Police, etc. Having these sounds as sample libraries is much easier than carting a CP around if you intend to go after that sound.

I stand corrected on that one... Of course I've heard the famous chorus-grand sound! The CP sound, especially the bass has that piezo-sound similar to old Ovation acoustics...

[lak611]

It's pretty funny. In the past prog-musicians were often the first to embrace new technologies, even working together with creators of instruments, like Keith Emerson with Bob Moog. Later Keith Emerson had the Yamaha GX-1, which was also played by Rick van der Linden. .

I don't like the keyboards Emerson used on the Emerson, Lake & Powell album. Those sounded tinny compared to his vintage instruments.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[JKL2000]

Maybe hearing Prog with no vintage instruments is kind of like hearing Wendy Carlos' Switched on Bach was for some people.

Wasn't there a scene in Amadeus where he's playing a piano forte or something, and some people are freaked out by it?

[DrGoon]

Maybe hearing Prog with no vintage instruments is kind of like hearing Wendy Carlos' Switched on Bach was for some people.

Wasn't there a scene in Amadeus where he's playing a piano forte or something, and some people are freaked out by it?

So much so that genre fetishists termed such 'prog' as 'neo'. The fortepiano, yes.

[Progbear]

These days there is nothing particularly unique about modern rock/prog band setups, there is no mystery to a laptop controller; we all use laptops or computers. We can all afford the modern gear. So when a musician chooses to use a real B3 or Mellotron onstage, it's more entertaining because it's different for today and it shows a committed artist.

You can still be creative even within those parameters. I remember someone on this very messageboard said that he bought a DX7, a Roland D-20...basically a bunch of undesirable digital synths of the 80s/90s, and wound up just using them as MIDI controllers for soft-synths; making a bunch of Stock/Aitken/Waterman-era synths sound like Mellotrons and Moogs.

I’ve had the idea of building a MIDI controller out of an old, salvaged Baldwin home organ, building customized cases for MIDI controllers out of plywood, paint and other materials. You just need to exercise some creativity.

[Rarebird]

I was surprised when I joined PE all those years ago and discovered how so many prog fans seemed more interested in the gear than the music. Anyone who ever asked me about my bass was let down when I told them I just plug it in and tune it up then play. That's about the extent of my involvement with vintage instruments.

Live, as long as it sounds good and is physically being played by a musician, I'm cool with whatever the musician chooses, it's their call, their game.

However, from an audience standpoint, I think a Moog modular wall just looks cool, and back in the day it represented the wealth and success of the band 'cause normal people couldn't afford one back then.

These days there is nothing particularly unique about modern rock/prog band setups, there is no mystery to a laptop controller; we all use laptops or computers. We can all afford the modern gear. So when a musician chooses to use a real B3 or Mellotron onstage, it's more entertaining because it's different for today and it shows a committed artist.

I don't see myself ever playing live with anything other than my bass, a cord, and a live, breathing amp (tube or solid state, I don't care). It's just easier and all I have to do is focus on the notes I feel like grabbing.

Yeah, a Moog Modular wall looks cool, but if I have to choose between paying $ 35,000 or more for the real beast, which I can't afford and buying the sofware version from Arturia, I know what to do. Besides I would need more room for the real thing.

[Enid]

This prejudice seems to be a little macho. It's not often when people in the audience accept Jimi Hendrix played on a Les Paul. I've picked up on people having the same reflection regarding a Hammond B3. I was informed once that Keith Emerson was slightly resistant to signing a Mellotron. That seems to revolve around him not playing one and the reaction could have been macho or perhaps he felt uncomfortable....but certain instruments end up having a compartmentalized history and probably pointless for anyone to think they could change that.


I did travel with these instruments ,( which are now ancient fossil), in the 70's but we had a road crew which basically solves your problems for the most part. However it never solved the unreliable nature of things such as tuning. Every gig I played the mellotron would go out of tune. Always at some specific point in the night when the band wasn't playing and I had to back a short section of vocals with the mellotron. It was a royal pain in my ass. The roadies would cover it with blankets after loading it. They were so careful not to bump it and yet even after the entire truck was loaded and secure, the mellotron would still have problems when we arrived to the next gig. It's truly to blame the aspect of being mobile.....not in every case...but just the act of having to slam on the break a few times or making sharp turns always in the end damaged something.


Apparently hard core supporters feel a bit cheated by sampled sounds. But they should settle with it and maybe consider that the economy is not exactly something to be proud of. Audiences are not expected to understand what is involved with hauling equipment from gig to gig ...or the money spent doing it...but maybe they would have more acceptance to their expectations being letdown if they had some sympathy for the financial struggle of a musician in a world where prices are skyrocketing. Several independently owned music stores in my area are going out of business because the corporate ones are wealthy enough to play a game with retail dealers jacking up prices whenever they feel it is right. People who demand a authentic Hammond organ at gigs and act disappointed when it's being samples need to consider that not everybody is born out of the right vagina.


Last week we played Larks Tongues In Aspic Part II for a dinner crowd and they loved it. I don't understand what is wrong with people?? We are hired to play this one particular dance club and the people are expecting to hear old standards or mellow modern Pop music while they are eating. They are not fans of King Crimson and probably don't know that they ever existed. Yet they watch our Classical violinist through the whole piece and at the end they give us a roar. Then they ask us what kind of music we were playing. It's programming for sure. These people are programmed to like certain music and when they hear something different they love it....but don't know what to do with themselves.

[3RDegree_Robert]

I hated beer until I was 30 and then someone gave me a hard cider and then I tried sweeter/strong beers and then worked my way back to like almost all beers so...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lak611]

Yeah, a Moog Modular wall looks cool, but if I have to choose between paying $ 35,000 or more for the real beast, which I can't afford and buying the sofware version from Arturia, I know what to do. Besides I would need more room for the real thing.

What about using a Minimoog rather than a software program? Would a Minimoog be that expensive or unwieldy?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[Sputnik]

What about using a Minimoog rather than a software program? Would a Minimoog be that expensive or unwieldy?

Um, yes. The Minimoog Voyager is $2,000+ depending on the model. I guess you can get used MiniMoogs for under a grand, but will they be reliable? They are heavy and can be highly temperamental in hot weather - recall what happened to Wakeman's MiniMoog for the Songs from Tsongas DVD (I think he had to re-do all his parts).

A software synth might be $100 - $200, though I'm sure there are awesome one far cheaper than than, some even free. Or an analog modeling synth, which is what my wife uses, will get you perfectly serviceable sounds in a highly dependable package with MIDI controls and the ability to save your patches (not possible on the vintage Minis).

I'm not saying that a vintage or modern Mini or other analog synth might not be the solution for some. But they will have spent A LOT more money, and will have far greater issues transporting and maintaining the unit than someone who goes with modern digital gear; laptop or keyboard based. Don't kid yourself about that.

Bill

[lak611]

Um, yes. The Minimoog Voyager is $2,000+ depending on the model. I guess you can get used MiniMoogs for under a grand, but will they be reliable? They are heavy and can be highly temperamental in hot weather - recall what happened to Wakeman's MiniMoog for the Songs from Tsongas DVD (I think he had to re-do all his parts).

A software synth might be $100 - $200, though I'm sure there are awesome one far cheaper than than, some even free. Or an analog modeling synth, which is what my wife uses, will get you perfectly serviceable sounds in a highly dependable package with MIDI controls and the ability to save your patches (not possible on the vintage Minis).

I'm not saying that a vintage or modern Mini or other analog synth might not be the solution for some. But they will have spent A LOT more money, and will have far greater issues transporting and maintaining the unit than someone who goes with modern digital gear; laptop or keyboard based. Don't kid yourself about that.

Bill

Wouldn't it be just as expensive to buy all the computer hardware and software? I'd expect that one would need lots of RAM, and a high-end CPU and GPU to run that software.

I'm not that familiar with music software, but I know that Pro Tools isn't cheap.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[Jeremy Bender]

I was informed once that Keith Emerson was slightly resistant to signing a Mellotron. That seems to revolve around him not playing one and the reaction could have been macho or perhaps he felt uncomfortable

He didn't like the sound, for a start. He'd worked with "real" orchestras in The Nice, he didn't feel it was adequate. He also didn't like the 8-second limit on notes, the fact that it was largely just a chordal instrument, plus he wasn't a fan of the original King Crimson, he didn't want to be seen as copying that sound. Of course, ELP did end up using a Mellotron when Greg played one during their failed experiment to do Abaddon's Bolero on the 1973 European tour.

As a listener, I am picky when it comes to the sound that bands produce. I never liked Keith's GX-1 sound at all, it always sounded thin and washed out. However, on the ELPowell tour, Keith used this:

PPG_Wave_2.jpg

It's a PPG Wave2, it had a nice beefy sound. Greg used different basses throughout his ELP days, loved the Jazz Bass through HiWatt sound of 1970-1972, loved the Ripper through his Crown amps > speaker cabinets set up on the BSS tour, loathed the Alembic sound on the Works tour. For me, I loved the beefy, full sound of the BSS tour, the thin washed out sound of the band on the Works our is one of the reasons I don't like the Works tour stuff at all.

It's not just prog performers and fans who are gearheads, I found this great article about the terrific French band AIR , they love vintage gear and had their own studio built to accommodate it.

Memorymoog, hell yes!

[lak611]

He didn't like the sound, for a start. He'd worked with "real" orchestras in The Nice, he didn't feel it was adequate. He also didn't like the 8-second limit on notes, the fact that it was largely just a chordal instrument, plus he wasn't a fan of the original King Crimson, he didn't want to be seen as copying that sound. Of course, ELP did end up using a Mellotron when Greg played one during their failed experiment to do Abaddon's Bolero on the 1973 European tour.

As a listener, I am picky when it comes to the sound that bands produce. I never liked Keith's GX-1 sound at all, it always sounded thin and washed out. However, on the ELPowell tour, Keith used this:

PPG_Wave_2.jpg

It's a PPG Wave2, it had a nice beefy sound. Greg used different basses throughout his ELP days, loved the Jazz Bass through HiWatt sound of 1970-1972, loved the Ripper through his Crown amps > speaker cabinets set up on the BSS tour, loathed the Alembic sound on the Works tour. For me, I loved the beefy, full sound of the BSS tour, the thin washed out sound of the band on the Works our is one of the reasons I don't like the Works tour stuff at all.

It's not just prog performers and fans who are gearheads, I found this great article about the terrific French band AIR , they love vintage gear and had their own studio built to accommodate it.

Memorymoog, hell yes!

I have the Sprocket Sessions CD and don't have any complaints about the keyboard sound. It's the Emerson, Lake & Powell CD that I dislike the keyboard sound.

Is the keyboard pictured there one of the many that Emerson sold in 1995?

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[Vic2012]

I hated beer until I was 30 and then someone gave me a hard cider and then I tried sweeter/strong beers and then worked my way back to like almost all beers so...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Burp. ...