best rock(metal, punk, whaterver) instrumentals

Farlo · Post by **Farlo** » Mon May 05, 2003 9:27 pm

flint_the_dwarf wrote:Actually, a good rock instrumental is whatever the listener enjoys.

thats exactly what i was meaning when i made the topic

Rozard · Post by **Rozard** » Mon May 05, 2003 10:10 pm

Otohiko wrote:Uh... nevermind...

All I'm gonna say is that the vast majority of posters here seem confoozed as to what good rock instrumental music is like...

I'll shut up and crawl back to my basement now

I'll drop you a hint before I go - odd metric signatures, symmetric scales, heavy dissonance....

/me crawls to basement[/i]

Look, just because a song is in 11/32, is based on the Locrian mode of E, and throws minor seconds and tritones around everywhere does not automatically constitute greatness

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Tue May 06, 2003 7:32 am

Rozard wrote: Look, just because a song is in 11/32, is based on the Locrian mode of E, and throws minor seconds and tritones around everywhere does not automatically constitute greatness

No, but it's a good place to start

11/8 with the guitarsit tapping his foot in 7 and singing in 4/4, with the bassist going over to 13 every other measure just to throw him off is just about right... that's my idea. And Locrian is pretty darn plain

But uh... yea! I mean no!

I agree totally, good music is what sounds good to you, instrumentals included. I personally like a good, solid and simple riff, but some of the mainstream rock instrumentals are just not all that hot or enjoyable once you dig a bit deeper. Which is why I live in my basement...

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Tue May 06, 2003 8:31 am

Alright, alright, I give up.

I didn't mean to insult anyone in any manner, but it's just that I've spent years nurturing my hatred for the mainstream and I can't simply walk into a forum and shut up about it.

So, let me take off the Chicken Little outfit and say a couple of things without bitching:

Firstly, I'm sure people like Rozard will realize that I'm not much of a musicologist.

Secondly, I do not accept the notion of "great" as being the most popular or most likeable. Did anyone ever bother to think that most people here like anime, which as yet, is a fairly misunderstood and mostly disliked hobby in the mainstream? But there is more than one anime fan that thinks that anime is great.

However, thirdly, if I say "Semi-quavers at 138 bpm, all picked, mostly continuous, written and delineated with an awkward time signature", and it doesn't mean shit to you - you're right, it shouldn't. Because, newsflash - as Rozard said,

Look, just because a song is in 11/32, is based on the Locrian mode of E, and throws minor seconds and tritones around everywhere does not automatically constitute greatness

Exactly. Computers are much better suited to writing complicated music than people, and we don't like computers.

Yet, #4 - on the other hand, you need a certain level of competence to produce great music. If you're incompetent, you shouldn't be there. I will never accept the idea that a third-rate musician who doesn't really know shit about technique can create great music.

But, #5 - the most important thing - if you're only competent, you also shouldn't be there. Because you need to have a good creative spirit and intention to innovate, create and express. There is more to music than rhythm and harmony.

So if you like the top 40, I'm not gonna stop ya. But don't tell me it's great music - puh-leeze. Great music is competent and creative/expressive/innovative, qualities which I believe the mainstream is mostly devoid of.

So, just remember, I don't hate you!

Tom the Fish · Post by **Tom the Fish** » Tue May 06, 2003 8:52 am

Otohiko wrote:
Yet, #4 - on the other hand, you need a certain level of competence to produce great music. If you're incompetent, you shouldn't be there. I will never accept the idea that a third-rate musician who doesn't really know shit about technique can create great music.

Half Japanese blows this statement out of the water. Creativity can trump competence sometimes.

Tom

Tom the Fish · Post by **Tom the Fish** » Tue May 06, 2003 8:55 am

Otohiko wrote: But, #5 - the most important thing - if you're only competent, you also shouldn't be there. Because you need to have a good creative spirit and intention to innovate, create and express. There is more to music than rhythm and harmony.

And to follow up, Pell Mell makes this statement irrelevent. Structure by the book.

There's always exceptions

Tom

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Tue May 06, 2003 9:07 am

I accept the structure-only or creative-only music as music, yes. But I accept neither sort of music as great music.

This is my point. I didn't mean for you to take my statements separately.

Also, in terms of competence, I don't mean that it has to be perfectly structured according to western norms of rhythm and harmony.

However, I don't accept the idea that someone who never touched a musical instrument before could walk onstage and proceed to really amaze everyone and be applauded as a great artist.

If you want me to be more direct here, I think great music requires the assumption of innocence within a field of experience. Now, if anyone can understand what I mean by that, maybe I'll talk more about it later...

Tom the Fish · Post by **Tom the Fish** » Tue May 06, 2003 12:55 pm

Fair enough. But there's always exceptions to the rule. Listening to the first Half Japanese single, it's obvious Jad and David Fair had never touched an instrument in their life, but yet they are hailed as one of the greatest musical acts of all time by "people who know." For more information on the phenominam known as Half Japanese, please see "The Band Who Would Be King."

And believe me, there have been other bands who have tried to create Half Japanese's style, but very few even came close. They are a cosmic burp, if you will, being the exception to prove your rule.

Tom

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Tue May 06, 2003 2:22 pm

Half Japanese?

Fine then, allow me to take em for a spin, then I would be able to judge by myself (never heard em before TBH)

Also, mind you, natural giftedness or talent are a great bonus for a good musician, and maybe (and that we'll see after I hear Half Japanese) I'll concede and say that, under certain exceptional circumstances, they can be a viable substitute for competence.

Interestingly, I find that (and people are gonna jump on me for this one) natural talent is NOT a neccesary requirement for great music. I should know, since a few of my favorites have themselves confessed to being initially tone-deaf and without a sense of rhythm.

Geirr · Post by **Geirr** » Tue May 06, 2003 3:08 pm

Instrumental stuff: I live on it, mostly because I can't STAND most lyrics.

One VERY talented, almost 100% word-free band was 'The Dixie Dregs,' later called 'The Dregs.' Steve Morse was one of the most versatile and virtuoso guitar players I have ever heard - hands down, bar none. The band borrowed from Southern Rock traditions, Appalacian stuff, baroque chord progressions, along with ye basick ton of 'regular' rock. All in all great driving music - just watch for tickets. They were active about 1978 till 1985 or so.

The instrumental, last 60 seconds of ELP's 'Hoedown' would make a VERY silly, sped-up comedy AMV. Possibly to Trigun. 'Yes' has a nice intro right before 'Leave it.'

Rick Wakeman also produced several instrumental albums.

- Geirr