Post: #101

The Brian Eno nomination is interesting. He is both front and center performer and in other cases "behind" a lot of good music.

Post: #102

Bruce Springsteen. Man his politics suck but he can put on a show. When I saw him a few years back he played for three and a half hours with no opener or halftime show. Even now every once in awhile I pop in one of his albums and feel like I'm a teenager again driving around town late at night looking for girls ad trouble.

Post: #103

Joe Satriani is probably the musician you want to BE. I didn't appreciate him so much when I was younger and more into angsty stuff. But the guy just sounds like he is happy and having a blast and he keeps on doing it year after year.

Post: #104

Yanni

Post: #105

(02-18-2018 01:10 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  Well, he died recently, so I am just slipping him in here as a footnote.

Maurice White was one of the great innovators and geniuses of pop music.

To understand why his band was great, you have to have seen them live, and maybe this is one of the hallmarks of a great musician, that they really came alive when they had a real audience in front of them.

For White, music encompassed many things, beauty, fun, spirituality, individuality, but most of all love, which he spoke of openly, sincerely, and often. Probably why they are often forgotten in the mention of the all time greats, just too sincere, so people call it corny, that simple life affirming mentality.

That too was why, and White has spoken of this many times, he felt the most loving thing he could do for people was to give them a good time, to get them involved, through sound, in a communal experience of joy.

Also why, they had songs with titles like Gratitude, Devotion, stuff like that.

Also too, why there were so many meaningless phrases, "Ba Di Ya," like in their hit song "September." White has said that the real message was love, and it was shared through the harmony of the voices, punched up by the band and especially the horn section, as well as the application of theatrical and special effects during carefully chosen parts of their shows.

They also utilized the call and response formulas from church services to great effect in some songs, an echo of White's start as a church musician.

I saw them many times in the late seventies, early eighties, before they started to fall off and sound just like another band, and an Earth Wind and Fire concert was an electric, communal event, without the self conscious bad boy posturing of other bands, or the fake edginess.

A group of individuals filed into the stadium, and when you left everyone was smiling at each other, feeling as if you had been part of something you couldn't explain. Was it church? A magic show? A concert? The circus?

You couldn't articulate why you all felt so good and so connected, you just did, and wanted to come back again next year.

One of the amazing things about the band is that their songs were completely different experiences live, as if the studio had constrained the band, and they only really came alive when they could share it with other people, and this wasn't only true with their hit songs.

They might tackle a song you barely noticed on the album, and absolutely bring down the house with it live, to the degree that it was actually better than any of their hit songs.

To get a taste of what I'm talking about, listen to this studio version. You don't even have to listen all the way through, just skip around here and there:





Not a bad song.

Now see where the charismatic bandleader takes it live.





RIP Maurice White. Still feeling it somewhere.

I agree with all of the above.

I did some analysis of EWF songs and came up with the reason they were so good: They were packed from start-to-finish with catchy hooks. You'd have a fantastic intro, followed by a great verse, followed by a chorus that was even better, followed by an instrumental horn riff that was infectious.

Most hit songs tread water at some points, musically speaking, but EWF's singles usually didn't. The only other group that I think did this was the Beatles on records like "She Loves You," where practically every few seconds a hook would come up.

But as for EWF, take a song like "Let's Groove," which got to #3 in late 1981. These days, that opening "Boogie Down" riff alone would be what producers would build the whole record around. But in their hands, it's just a kick-off for better things to come.

What's sad is that these days you have eight songwriters getting credit on a hit song with one barely passable hook. "Let's Groove," with all its musical complexity, was co-written by only Maurice White and Wayne Vaughn.

Have people gotten stupider, like we were saying on the "Marvel/Brie Larson" thread? "Let's Groove" was a massive hit and dance floor anthem, but would probably be too complicated for today's radio audience to grasp.

Post: #106

DOBA,

Thanks for articulating that. I am just a fan and appreciate an explanation of the nuts and bolts.

Maurice started out as a jazz drummer with the Ramsey Lewis Trio which might partially explain his approach to building a song.

Post: #107

^-- and his brother, EWF bassist Verdine White, is a monster.

There's this vibe of the bass being slightly ahead of the beat, and the drums laying back, in a lot of studio EWF recordings, that gives it that BURSTING WITH ENERGY vibe.

I've seen'em live too, incredible!

Post: #108

(06-18-2018 12:12 PM)456 Wrote:  ^-- and his brother, EWF bassist Verdine White, is a monster.

There's this vibe of the bass being slightly ahead of the beat, and the drums laying back, in a lot of studio EWF recordings, that gives it that BURSTING WITH ENERGY vibe.

I've seen'em live too, incredible!

He was a madman in the 70's.

Post: #109

By the way, there is a good interview with Allee Willis who helped write the song "September," among other things about working with White writing songs.

It is worth listening to the interview instead of reading just the printed one, because this woman is obviously an insufferable, horrible woman who understands nothing about funk, Maurice White, or inspiration.

One of the things EWF does is bypass reason and talk directly to the feelings of the listener, and that is why they will just sing notes without words or use nonsense phrases.

This bitch spends her time begging Maurice to get rid of the phrase "Ba Di Ya," and use real words, because she has no funk in her soul.

https://www.npr.org/2014/09/19/349621429...r-sustains

Quote:"The, kind of, go-to phrase that Maurice used in every song he wrote was 'ba-dee-ya,' " she says. "So right from the beginning he was singing, 'Ba-dee-ya, say, do you remember / Ba-dee-ya, dancing in September.' And I said, 'We are going to change 'ba-dee-ya' to real words, right?' "

Wrong. Willis says that at the final vocal session she got desperate and begged White to rewrite the part.

"And finally, when it was so obvious that he was not going to do it, I just said, 'What the f- - - does 'ba-dee-ya' mean?' And he essentially said, 'Who the f- - - cares?'" she says. "I learned my greatest lesson ever in songwriting from him, which was never let the lyric get in the way of the groove."

The sound of her voice makes you hate women, especially ones like this one who don't know what they are talking about, are sure they are right, and talk down to muscial geniuses like they are little children.

Post: #110

That bitch was gonna de-ba-dee-ya one of my fave band's ba-dee-yad-ass hits??

Post: #111

(06-18-2018 01:03 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  By the way, there is a good interview with Allee Willis who helped write the song "September," among other things about working with White writing songs.

It is worth listening to the interview instead of reading just the printed one, because this woman is obviously an insufferable, horrible woman who understands nothing about funk, Maurice White, or inspiration.

One of the things EWF does is bypass reason and talk directly to the feelings of the listener, and that is why they will just sing notes without words or use nonsense phrases.

This bitch spends her time begging Maurice to get rid of the phrase "Ba Di Ya," and use real words, because she has no funk in her soul.

https://www.npr.org/2014/09/19/349621429...r-sustains

Quote:"The, kind of, go-to phrase that Maurice used in every song he wrote was 'ba-dee-ya,' " she says. "So right from the beginning he was singing, 'Ba-dee-ya, say, do you remember / Ba-dee-ya, dancing in September.' And I said, 'We are going to change 'ba-dee-ya' to real words, right?' "

Wrong. Willis says that at the final vocal session she got desperate and begged White to rewrite the part.

"And finally, when it was so obvious that he was not going to do it, I just said, 'What the f- - - does 'ba-dee-ya' mean?' And he essentially said, 'Who the f- - - cares?'" she says. "I learned my greatest lesson ever in songwriting from him, which was never let the lyric get in the way of the groove."

The sound of her voice makes you hate women, especially ones like this one who don't know what they are talking about, are sure they are right, and talk down to muscial geniuses like they are little children.

Maurice was thinking musically, while she was thinking logically. Luckily, the musicality won out in the end.

I just have one response to this: "Na na na, na na na na, na na na na, hey Jude." The Beatles repeated that for four minutes straight and the result was one of their best songs and the longest run at #1 for any of their U.S. singles.

There was also "Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye" (#1 for Steam in 1970) and "Shoo-Be-Doo-Be-Doo-Da-Day" (#8 for Stevie Wonder in 1968). I'm gonna assume Maurice brought at least one of these up during that convo.

Had I written the above NPR story, I'd have added this for historical context. But then if I were writing for NPR I'd also have to jump off a bridge, so...

Post: #112

And in contemporary urban pop, Rhianna makes heavy use of vocalization "Na na na na na come on" and "Ooh na na, what's my name" and countless other examples in her many many top 10 hits in the past decade.

It's musical direct game.

Post: #113

It simply can't be answered. I know it's not supposed to be "best pianist, best drummer..." but there's no other way I could answer the question. I think Sting is easily one of the greatest musicians of all time, as is Jimi Hendrix, but there are classical musicians who blow them away.

First, the question is "greatest living musician" and not "greatest living composer". So by that metric it would have to represent sheer technical prowess, creative innovation, and ability to convey feeling through an instrument.

For me it would surely be any one of thousands of phenomenal classical musicians that are alive today. On piano you've got Alfred Brendel, Andras Schiff, Murray Perahia, the young Danil Trifonov...

Jazz drummers would be up there. Danny Carey or Dave Weckl, Thomas Pridgen up there.

Electric Guitar Guthrie Govan. Hands down.

I'll just stop there. There is no 'greatest'

Post: #114

Right --

- greatest instrumentalist

- greatest musician (i.e. Communicator of music)

- greatest artist / front-man

- greatest composer / writer

- greatest producer / engineer

- greatest bandmember / session guy / live performer

etc.

Many axes of greatness. Bob Marley vs. Coltrane -- haha! One could argue Bob reached billions with his music, and Coltrane reached millions but in a deep abstract yet guttural level. Lyrical messages versus Just Sounds...

So yeah I agree with @Veloce on that. But it's still fun to see what comes out of the woodwork!

Post: #115

And for those not familiar with Guthrie Govan:









This man is a guitar wizard. He has a knowledge of all techniques, styles, players, history, modes, theory, that is ultimate and complete. He is incredible to watch. He leaves Vai and Satriani in the dust.

Post: #116

Is virtuosity the most important measure of greatness?

Or sophistication?

Or speed?

Or popularity?

What about subject matter? Who is greater, an absolute beast on a guitar whose songs are all about doom, or a less gifted player who uplifts millions?

Or is it complexity? Would the person who plays the most complex compositions be considered the greatest, even if hardly anyone likes them?

For me, this is actually the "Come Up With a Good Argument Why My Favorite Musician is the Greatest of All Time."

More fun that way.

Post: #117

(06-18-2018 03:58 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  Or is it complexity? Would the person who plays the most complex compositions be considered the greatest, even if hardly anyone likes them?

Complexity's a funny one. I posted on the private musician's lounge a while back that a lot of musicians who take musical study seriously become obsessed with dissonance chords, exotic scales, time signature changes and etc. as a display of how complex their music is, when they haven't even got a solid grasp of the fundamentals, and they produce structurally incoherent garbage.

The question a lot of these musicians ought to ask themselves is "why is it complex to begin with?"

Is it a byproduct of the high musical goals you're trying to achieve, or is complexity the goal in itself?

The former is the hallmark of some of the greatest musical masterpieces, whereas the latter is generally an exercise in self-aggrandisement that nobody wants to listen to.

People have been marvelling at the finale of Mozart's 41st Symphony "Jupiter" for the past 230 years, and I'd say without hesitation that it's more "complicated" than anything written in the last 50 years. It's also actually listenable. Even non-musicians love it, and is his second-most popular symphony next to the 40th. Barring nuclear hellfire, people will be treasuring it long after the last tech metal bands have been forgotten.

So "complexity" in music is not an intrinsically good or bad thing, but the listener shouldn't feel like someone is trying to justify their crippling student loan debt in song form.





Also, Guthrie Govan is a great example of someone who has an incredible command over his instrument, coupled with real musicality. One of the most "complete" musicians out there. His work with Steve Wilson a few years back blew me away, especially Drive Home:

Post: #118

Maynard.

Just listen to Tool. Listen.

Post: #119

Much respect Ocelot,

You should write a blog or something. ; )

I've never liked Mozart. I never felt his music personally, but the counterpoint studied above is obviously a serious compositional display. I did watch Amadeus and enjoyed it enough, and just thought at the time 'ok, seems the whole musical world considers Mozart a genius', I guess he is.

I don't listen to classical regularly, but I really enjoy specific pieces now and then. Your example of the brilliance of Mozarts counterpoint reminded me of counterpoint by Shostakovitch that I remember enjoying. I typed in "Shostakovitch counterpoint" and the following came up. Listen to the section from 2:35 – 3:45 ... damn that turns my crank, I absolutely love it. Would this be in league with Mozarts genius, or is Mozart greater in your opinion?





and now for something completely different.

Forty five seconds to 3:25 – Man, who else can do this? Pat Metheny is inimitable, this solo swings, it pulls and pushes against the harmony and rhythm so expertly, this solo is like some really interesting drunk genius at a bar who tells you the most fascinating story you’ve heard in a long long time. Really, such a brilliant solo.






We could go on and on and on and on.

Post: #120

(06-18-2018 07:51 AM)YoungBlade Wrote:  Yanni

Post: #121

(06-18-2018 09:34 PM)Zep Wrote:  Much respect Ocelot,

You should write a blog or something. ; )

I've never liked Mozart. I never felt his music personally, but the counterpoint studied above is obviously a serious compositional display. I did watch Amadeus and enjoyed it enough, and just thought at the time 'ok, seems the whole musical world considers Mozart a genius', I guess he is.

I don't listen to classical regularly, but I really enjoy specific pieces now and then. Your example of the brilliance of Mozarts counterpoint reminded me of counterpoint by Shostakovitch that I remember enjoying. I typed in "Shostakovitch counterpoint" and the following came up. Listen to the section from 2:35 – 3:45 ... damn that turns my crank, I absolutely love it. Would this be in league with Mozarts genius, or is Mozart greater in your opinion?





and now for something completely different.

Forty five seconds to 3:25 – Man, who else can do this? Pat Metheny is inimitable, this solo swings, it pulls and pushes against the harmony and rhythm so expertly, this solo is like some really interesting drunk genius at a bar who tells you the most fascinating story you’ve heard in a long long time. Really, such a brilliant solo.






We could go on and on and on and on.

This is my ringtone on my phone:

Post: #122

I am surprised that nobody has mentioned Pete Townshend of The Who. He is the brains and the most important member of the band. He wrote the rock opera Tommy and others. Here is their best song, "We're Not Gonna Take It":





Here is Pete performing "Pinball Wizard" solo. I actually like it better than the version they released. It just sounds great:

Post: #123

Billy Corgan is one of the top songwriters of the past thirty years.

Post: #124

(06-23-2018 05:54 PM)Krivo Wrote:  Billy Corgan is one of the top songwriters of the past thirty years.

We had this jamming pretty hard in my junior high hallways near Chicago decades ago not far from Billy's own home:

Smashing Pumpkins - Bullet With Butterfly Wings

Post: #125

(06-23-2018 06:03 PM)jordypip23 Wrote:  

(06-23-2018 05:54 PM)Krivo Wrote:  Billy Corgan is one of the top songwriters of the past thirty years.

We had this jamming pretty hard in my junior high hallways near Chicago decades ago not far from Billy's own home:

Smashing Pumpkins - Bullet With Butterfly Wings

I'm from the western burbs myself, but at least ten years older than you, since the Mellon Collie album was popular my last year of college.
I had a chance to go the famous '93 Metro show (Siamese Dream album release), but had to help a friend move into his new college apartment that day (out of state)...