Soft Machine

[Steve F.]

I take it back. I'd go.

hey! this is the internet! NEVER take back anything and don't forget to insult everyone on your way out!

seriously, Richard, thanks for publicly reconsidering, and being about the music!

[Zeuhlmate]

The Internet never forgets !
( http://archive.org/web/ )

Of course its about the music and not what moniker they are travelling under.
They could call themselves The Donald Trump Witnesses and I would still go.

[arturs]

These guys are not getting any younger and still play very, very well. Go see them!

No kidding! As per Wikipedia Babbington was born in 1940 and Marshall in 1941.

[Phlakaton]

I get the whole problem with the name - but seriously - music. If they sound good - who the hell cares - listen. Be entertained with your eyes closed. I'd love to see a couple of those guys in person - even if it is now and not the prime time.

[Steve F.]

I get the whole problem with the name - but seriously - music. If they sound good - who the hell cares - listen. Be entertained with your eyes closed. I'd love to see a couple of those guys in person - even if it is now and not the prime time.

I get the whole problem with the name too. Absolutely.

BUT: You can't blame them for doing this and completely excuse the public from blame as well. There is 'the whole problem' of a lot of 'fans' who won't go without the name. So, as I originally stated, it is a completely calculated ploy to put asses in seats and to get Visas and guarantees to be able to cover expenses, etc.

And it will work. And the music will be good, as people who have seen this lineup are saying right here.

And, ultimately, I hope that that is all that really matters.

[Phlakaton]

Completely agree Steve.

[Zappathustra]

And, ultimately, I hope that that is all that really matters.

Yes

[rapidfirerob]

I hope they come to the Bay Area and don’t care what name they use. Man I’d love to see John Etheridge!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TheH]

I hope they come to the Bay Area and don’t care what name they use. Man I’d love to see John Etheridge!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

John with the Paolo Ricca Group

[jkelman]

Excellent reasoning.

I'm going because I expect the music to be good!

Just to say, I'm with Steve on pretty much everything he has written on this thread. A band with three members of various lineups during its original run using the original name sure doesn't seem "disgusting" to me ... not to mention the unfortunate reality Steve also points out, that it'll draw far more asses into seats, being absolutely sad but true).

anyway, my 2 cents, for whatever it's worth....

[Stevie B]

^ ^ ^

John Etheridge
Roy Babbington
John Marshall
Theo Travis

I know it makes me an odd kind of Soft Machine fan, but apart from their first the Etheridge albums are my favourite era. I also have a treasured memory of seeing Etheridge with Stefan Grapelli in Glasgow...but that was forty years ago. If they came anywhere near me I'd definitely look into getting tickets. I don't see any problem with a band with Etheridge, Babbington and Marshall in it calling themselves Soft Machine and I find it a bit weird that anyone would...

[Zappathustra]

I...and I find it a bit weird that anyone would...

Correct. Who on earth would ever concieve Soft Machine ineluctably associated with the mere nobodies that created the band like Wyatt, Ratledge, Hopper, Allen, Ayers etc?

[Zappathustra]

Let's suppose that tomorrow Jimmy Page and JP Jones decide to resurrect Led Zep with Dave Coverdale on vox and Bohnam's kid on drums. Will they have the right to use the name? Yes. Will it be a good show? Yes. Will I go? Yes. Is it going to be Led Zeppelin? No. It's not a matter of how many original members are present. It's a matter of the energy shared. We may say what we like to others, but we all know deep inside what it is that we experienced. And Soft Machine it is not. But I would go and have a good time and be greatful. Great full stop.

[arturs]

We may say what we like to others, but we all know deep inside what it is that we experienced. And Soft Machine it is not. But I would go and have a good time and be greatful. Great full stop.

I'll let you know definitively after I have seen them, and yes I am and will be grateful! But I think it is a more subtle issue than you portray. The thing is that Soft Machine was really 3 different bands in its lifetime:

1) Progressive pop, led by R. Wyatt 1966-1969.
2) Brit-Jazz, led by M. Ratledge or E. Dean 1969-1972.
3) Fusion, led by K. Jenkins 1973-1977; 1981; 1984.

I think it is very plausible that the current lineup will deliver musically as an extension of SM#3, by which I mean that the original vision and ethos of that band still remains in the current group. And will emerge organically throughout the performance. But yes for anyone expecting SM#1, no, this is clearly not that.

[jkelman]

Let's suppose that tomorrow Jimmy Page and JP Jones decide to resurrect Led Zep with Dave Coverdale on vox and Bohnam's kid on drums. Will they have the right to use the name? Yes. Will it be a good show? Yes. Will I go? Yes. Is it going to be Led Zeppelin? No. It's not a matter of how many original members are present. It's a matter of the energy shared. We may say what we like to others, but we all know deep inside what it is that we experienced. And Soft Machine it is not. But I would go and have a good time and be greatful. Great full stop.

Sorry, but that's just your opinion and not something "we all know deep inside."

For me, the question is this: does the current lineup of any band (many which are having to deal with the loss of members as they get older) successfully invoke the spirit of the original? Yeah, that's a subjective measurement and YMMV, but that is what's at the core for me. Would Zeppelin with. Coverdale and Jason Bonham capture the original band's spirit? Dunno, but my gut says no. OTOH, the Celebration Day band, with Plant, Page, Jones and Jason Bonham absolutely did.

Anyway, that's my litmus test: are the majority of members from original lineups (admittedly, with very different stylistic periods for SM, harder to guage!), and does the current lineup successfully invoke the spirit of the band?

I've little doubt that Etheridge, Babbington and Marshall (all members of the last touring SM), with the exceptionally talented Theo Travis in tow, will absolutely invoke the spirit of Soft Machine's music, especially 1974-78, but I've no doubt that they'd bring the requisite credibility to earlier music as well, should they choose to attack it.

[arturs]

^^^ While I limited the current group's spirit to the "Fusion" era, you are right that they could do the more "Brit-Jazzy" material proud. I have heard them do (on YT only, sadly) a great version of Kings & Queens.

OTOH Hope for Happiness or Why Are We Sleeping might be just a little bit outside their wheelhouse...

[taliesin]

^ ^ ^

John Etheridge
Roy Babbington
John Marshall
Theo Travis

My god with that lineup I hope they come anywhere near me - I may have to wear my tinfoil hat to ward off the Facelift signals but it's worth it.

[rcarlberg]

If Soft Machine doesn't show up in your local music paper, look for them under the name "Donald Trump Witnesses."

[moecurlythanu]

"We are all witnesses"

-Nike

[Buddhabreath]

I'm thinking of going, never got the chance back in the day and it would be great especially for me to see Roy Babbington and John Marshall still at it. Not sure I can swing the drive or train to NYC though. Only NY and Milwaukee? Crap! Surely they can find a few more gigs to make the trip pay off.

[Skullhead]

A lot of these bands made great music that is going to out live their ability to stay healthy and perform. Death will get them all, even you.

Rock in general, and prog as a subset had it's golden age.... and that happened for a variety of reasons and circumstances. Bands that have tried
to re create that music have mostly failed for a variety of reasons, mainly because newer bands are listening to classic rock and prog bands, but those classic bands were listening to other things that came before them... often much better.

That being said, all bands will be relinquished to tribute bands... some better than others.

The Musical Box is very good. I think most here would agree... but they could never make another great Genesis album themselves. They could make something that sounds like Genesis, I am sure, but there is a huge difference between creating something unique and original, compelling and wonderful... and just filling in paint by numbers, which is what cover and tribute bands are doing.

Fortunately, there was so much great rock and prog made in the golden age, it should keep anyone's ears busy for a lifetime.

Before there is truly great new prog, there will have to be a huge resurgence of both classical music and jazz. That has to come first, because the fan base to support prog must already have a trained or cultured ear to really "get it".

A band could make the greatest prog album of all time and it will never gain the ear of today's dumbed down music listening culture.

Full circle means full circle.. and that doesn't start with a resurgence of anything in rock. A deep understanding of classical music both in writing, performance and audience ability to absorb, appreciate and inspire needs to come first, and then also with jazz.

[DocProgger]

A lot of these bands made great music that is going to out live their ability to stay healthy and perform. Death will get them all, even you.

Rock in general, and prog as a subset had it's golden age.... and that happened for a variety of reasons and circumstances. Bands that have tried
to re create that music have mostly failed for a variety of reasons, mainly because newer bands are listening to classic rock and prog bands, but those classic bands were listening to other things that came before them... often much better.

That being said, all bands will be relinquished to tribute bands... some better than others.

The Musical Box is very good. I think most here would agree... but they could never make another great Genesis album themselves. They could make something that sounds like Genesis, I am sure, but there is a huge difference between creating something unique and original, compelling and wonderful... and just filling in paint by numbers, which is what cover and tribute bands are doing.

Fortunately, there was so much great rock and prog made in the golden age, it should keep anyone's ears busy for a lifetime.

Before there is truly great new prog, there will have to be a huge resurgence of both classical music and jazz. That has to come first, because the fan base to support prog must already have a trained or cultured ear to really "get it".

A band could make the greatest prog album of all time and it will never gain the ear of today's dumbed down music listening culture.

Full circle means full circle.. and that doesn't start with a resurgence of anything in rock. A deep understanding of classical music both in writing, performance and audience ability to absorb, appreciate and inspire needs to come first, and then also with jazz.

So....does this all mean you're going to see Soft Machine or not?

[Zappathustra]

Sorry, but that's just your opinion and not something "we all know deep inside."

For me, the question is this: does the current lineup of any band (many which are having to deal with the loss of members as they get older) successfully invoke the spirit of the original? Yeah, that's a subjective measurement and YMMV, but that is what's at the core for me. Would Zeppelin with. Coverdale and Jason Bonham capture the original band's spirit? Dunno, but my gut says no. OTOH, the Celebration Day band, with Plant, Page, Jones and Jason Bonham absolutely did.

Anyway, that's my litmus test: are the majority of members from original lineups (admittedly, with very different stylistic periods for SM, harder to guage!), and does the current lineup successfully invoke the spirit of the band?

I've little doubt that Etheridge, Babbington and Marshall (all members of the last touring SM), with the exceptionally talented Theo Travis in tow, will absolutely invoke the spirit of Soft Machine's music, especially 1974-78, but I've no doubt that they'd bring the requisite credibility to earlier music as well, should they choose to attack it.

Well yes, it is subjective, we say more or less the same thing (and with kind of similar terminology, I used the word energy, you use the word invocation of spirit), but one could agree that invocation of spirit is not the same as being the spirit.

The problem with Soft Machine in particular is that already then it was highly dubious that they were right to use the name. I think they created an unnecessary confusion by keeping the name that didn't do justice to the great music that was still being made. I can hardly see this as just an equally legitimate period of SM when suddenly there is completely different people playing different music with the same name. Already then it was kind of awkward.

As I stated, I would go and it doesn't really matter anymore. If a less knowledgeable outsider wanted to attend, I would make sure that he understands that this is not at all the same band that used to be.

[calyx]

I can hardly see this as just an equally legitimate period of SM when suddenly there is completely different people playing different music with the same name. Already then it was kind of awkward.

It may have seemed sudden, but it wasn't, at least not in terms of several musicians being suddenly replaced by a bunch of others. They left one by one - Ayers in 1968, Wyatt in 1971, Hopper in 1973... Musically too, it was a gradual shift with each album. Each of these personnel changes, when they happened, seemed not to make a big difference musically as each departing member had been marginalised creatively, which is precisely where they left. There was nothing by Wyatt on "Fourth", nothing in two years from Ratledge, and Hopper's sole contribution to "Six" was a kind of trailer for his solo album "1984", called... "1983".

[Zappathustra]

There was nothing by Wyatt on Fourth

Nothing, except his drumming...Which is something.
I don't want to argue for argue's sake. Yes, they left one by one. But when the amount of people from the early fellowship reaches zero, it has to mean something. Anyway, that's how I see it.

And what about National Health? It's 3/4 from Hatfield and the North, and musically not that distant from them. Did Sinclair have the rights of the name? I don't know. But it feels right not to keep the name. It's another project, another vehicle of expression. A new name sounds about right. It gave them a destiny of their own.