(no subject)

[notyourbroom]

[Poll #688140]



edit: http://www.livejournal.com/support/faqbrowse.bml?faqid=229&view=full



vague thought--

It's strange, I think, that all of the albums I might juggle about as 'best album' (dsotm, revolver, abbey road, ... I could add a few others) aren't quite classifiable prog rock, though they all have features relevant to the genre.

Also, I continue to be somewhat obsessed with the Vivaldi Gloria in D Major. I've recently put midi versions of the movements on my iPod [in addition to the mp3s] so that I can, y'know, have that feel of starkcrisp contrapunctal lines and suchforth accentuated. It's easy to lose a part here or there while listening to a recording due to the caprices of the singers, microphones, and the recording engineer/producer, but all of those variables are cut out when you're just listening to the artificial playback of a digitally-sequenced score.

and anyway,
does it really make me a bad person
if I rock out to this?

because if so, I haven't received my bad-person badge yet.

Comments

[drake-anaya.livejournal.com]

I think I know how to enable the feature, but I'm lazy.

[ivoryminstrel.livejournal.com]

If Dark Side of the Moon isn't prog, I'm a one-legged cowboy from Juneau.

[notyourbroom.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry to hear of your plight;

Yeah, Pink Floyd is a contentious little duck. The usual basic argument is that Pink Floyd songs are somewhat slower and less focused on instrumental virtuosity (by which I mean "lack of unnecessarily complex figures") than work by the canonical "prog rock" -type bands. Of course, other than 21^st Century Schizoid Man, you don't get much virtuosity at all on King Crimson's first album, yet it's often held to be the first real prog rock album. so.. who knows.

[attackpenguin.livejournal.com]

Dude that song needs to be longer.