Re: A quote to make you think
88persuader wrote:
Very true. And I've heard seveal instrumental "rock guitar gods" where the soloing was strong but the song writing was nothing more than something to hang the solo off of.
Yep. And let's be real here ... this is not confined to rock. There are plenty of jazz tunes out there that are just "vamps" and there are plenty of players who are simply regurgitating from thier collection of licks and bringing absolutely nothing new to the table.
88persuader wrote:
So IMO even technical music needs to SAY SOMETHING.
Sure! I completely agree. But the word "technical" can come in many forms too. Sure ... fast is technical. But other stuff can be very complex harmonically but not necessarily in notes per second. Ravel composed solo piano music that left people scratching there heads over the harmonic structure. Satie wrote piano music that was so beautiful and simple it was considered brilliant in it's day even though a beginner could play the notes. Genesis were one of the king bands of "prog" but much of there stuff wasn't over the top technical. The early prog bands were more interested in bringing the harmonic and structural complexities of classical music into rock than they were showing off chops. Somewhere along the line that changed though.
But again, I don't think this is new. Somebody brought up Rachmaninoff as an example. I like Rachmaninoff but it's not my first choice when I want to hear piano music. For some it genuinely is. For others, they think he was the "king of piano music" simply because he composed music that is considered the most difficult to play. So even back then, there was the simpleton camp that thought harder automatically equals better.
It kind of makes you wonder ... if you went back to Vienna during Mozart's time, how many of the people attending those operas realized how brilliant the music was and how many went for the spectacle of the live opera?