Most important songs in Progressive Rock history
The Who - "A Quick one, While He's Away"
A nine minute PROGRESSIVE rock-opera with different sections and amazing vocal melodies. I'm pretty sure that without this song there wouldn't be any songs like Close to the Edge, Supper's Ready or Thick as a Brick. This is actually the first "prog epic". ... or proto-prog at least.
Frank Zappa & The Mothers of Invention - "Return Of The Son of the Monster Magnet"
Let's face it, NOBODY had ever done anything like this before Zappa. The album "Freak out!" even inspired The Beatles to write more experimental songs.
The Beatles - "Tomorrow Never Knows" /"A Day In The Life"/"Strawberry Fields Forever"
These three songs are not only extremely experimental, but I consider A Day in The Life also very progressive. A truly innovative masterpiece.
King Crimson- "21st Century Schizoid Man" Musically, the song is notable for its heavily distorted vocals sung by Greg Lake, a driving mechanical rhythm and piercingly loud saxophone and guitar, along with its instrumental middle section, called Mirrors. Most of the song is in either 4/4 or 6/8 time signature, save for the percussive section in Mirrors which alternates between 1/4, 2/4 and 5/4
I'm pretty sure that these are the most important songs in the prog rock history. Without these songs, there probably wouldn't be any progressive rock.
"A Day in the Life" or "Strawberry Field Forever", I think are two songs that I feel is the most closest to something new and definitive in it's influence in Progressive Rock. Someone care to name a song in this vein/structure/style that predates it in pop/rock?
Love You Too which is just an incredible fusion of western pop/rock and eastern sounds.
If "Love You To" exploded as a song that crossed the boundaries in terms of joining very dissimilar types of music in just one song (about 3 minutes long), "Tomorrow Never Knows", in just two minutes and thirty-seven seconds, invents a whole new type of music. You could say this is the day when electronic Rock music began. I don't know if the products of that birth were actually any good, but this was the main genesis of it all. Experimentation is all over the place, with the use of the tape loops, the backwards tapes, the one-chord structure, the distorted guitar solo, the repetitive drum/bass part, the two very-different sounding lead vocals... In sound terms, you get something that is really innovative and gorgeous: the use of very different elements rather than a proper "musical instrument" to make music. The results are overwhelmingly spectacular, in my opinion, and make up, along with the superb philosophical lyrics (which deserve another topic themselves), for one of the highest points in the best album of pop history.
Eh I dunno man - it seem like a good chuck of this is just unecessary or wrong details and flowery language ("a whole new type of music"). For one thing, it's not "electronic" - maybe you just mean "electronically processed". Also, tape loops are just a means of making a piece of music repeat, nothing new in and of itself, so you should be talking about the way the music in the loops sounds (all of the weird trippy noises) rather than the fact that they're loops. Also, lyrics are a separate concept that don't really belong in a musical discussion but for what it's worth, technically they shouldn't get credit for those lyrics anyway. Finally, the whole notion of it being "spectacular" and "the best album of pop history" are purely subjective (even if I might agree with the latter).
Perhaps the real start of the studio-manipulated-sound-college in rock was the Fugs' Virgin Forest and then later side 4 of Zappa's Freak Out! (granted these were only 2 and 1 month before Tomorrow Never Knows though). And if we don't count the studio methods and just focus on the way it sounds, the basic gist of it is not too different from the Monks' album.
Sean none of these facts are incorrect Experimentation is all over the place, with the use of the tape loops, the backwards tapes, the one-chord structure, the distorted guitar solo, the repetitive drum/bass part, the two very-different sounding lead vocals... in fact I forgot to add mellotron was in this song. Like Icona7 said on this song and "Strawberry Fields Forever" features Psychedelic Rock/ Electronic Music via the mellotron and the leslie vocal effect or electronically compressed created a new sound and style in rock music.
later side 4 of Zappa's Freak Out! Does not have electronic music and it's neither psychedelic rock. You are missing the point.
things which are incorrect or just illogical arguments (across the post I replied to and the lastest one):
- the idea that it's an "electronic" song (i'm saying you mean "electronically processed")
- the idea that the mere fact that it has tape loops contributes to the song's creativity in-and-of-itself at all (i'm saying it's the content of the music within the loops, rather than the looping...just talk about the sounds themselves and what they sound like...the sounds are sound effects and processed musical tracks which happen to be fastened into loops so as to repeat a few times each time they appear)
- they didn't write the lyrics nor would it make a difference in this discussion anyway since we're talking about progessive rock "music" rather than progressive lyrics within rock music.
- that Freak Out isn't psychedelic per se is irrelevant.
- that Freak Out isn't "electronic" is irrelevant (since TNK isn't either).
- while TNK and SFF definitely sounded different than what came before and different to the extent that you can say they created a new sound and style, the same can be said of plenty of artists to an even greater extent - even within the field of specifically "prog rock".
That being said, TNK can be described as an avant garde experiment (since it's basically all a C drone) with kind of trippy timbres (via production effects such as leslie, compression, and reverse tapes), trippy noises here and there (via the production effects-laden sound effects and instrumental parts fastened into 5 usually thrice-repeating tapes which are ocassionally overdubbed in between the vocals), a bluesy (mixylodian) vocal with a pop and mantra influence (and trippy vocal effects such as the aforementioned leslie), a vaguely Indian and bluesy guitar solo, and usually a danceable aggressive drum beat played along with a haunting bass.
So it's a cross between avant garde and psychedelic music, reaching out toward rock and dance music. While manages to sound unique even when compared to the far out songs I mentioned, the point is that they were more far out.
SFF is a psychedelic song (the timbres are blurry thanks to the same kind of production effects, the meter changes are perhaps disorienting, the first half is slightly off-key thanks to Martin's intentionally imprecise key-change after the joining of the two takes, the coda is just weird) with a baroque arrangement (lots of instruments in the arrangement, mellotron in particular, changes in the arrangement thanks to the edit). Perhaps as with TNK there were no precedents for that exact idea on the whole, but still other musicians broke even further from tradition in different ways. (for what it's worth - although maybe not much - an explicitly baroque/psych combination can be found in the Stones' Between the Buttons, which was completed slightly before SFF was)
Then also A Day In the Life - this is a multipart suite-style song: psych folk-ish verses, psych-ish soaring refrain, mult-tracked orchestral swell sections rising from low to high according to a vague score, McCartney's silly music hall-influences parts, the long piano chord, the trebly "for your dog" section", and the chopped up "never could be any other way" loop in a run-out groove. Again, kind of unique if we get down to the specifics, but not compared with others.
A song being more way out means nothing in terms of innovation. It also could mean random nonsense. "Tomorrow Never Knows" uses electronic music Mellotron within the sound collage of the track it's actually in 6/8 while the rest of the song was 4/4. The Electronic/Psychedelic Rock sound on "Tomorrow Never Knows"is more visible on "Strawberry Fields Forever" and "Flying". "Strawberry Fields Forever" I hear some baroque influences but it's more influenced by avant classical music. Which song on Between the Buttons is psych-baroque. For what it's worth no matter how spin it the Beatles are considered one of the pioneers of progressive rock. You had to be very innovative to come up with the some of the stuff they produced.
"Rain" was recorded fast then played back slower like on "Ticket To Ride" to help give the track a thick droney sound. "Tomorrow Never Knows" studio used as a instrument with the tape loops or sound collage being faded in and out with the studio faders. "Paperback Writer" bass sound achieved by McCartney by miking his amp through a second speaker and using compression. I know other artists were experimental but to say The Beatles were not being innovative or progressive is plain ignorant. They help invent many kinds of styles and recording techniques in music.Someone care to name a song in this vein/structure/style that predates it in pop/rock? That is called "A Day in the Life"
I am tired of this revisionist history of yours. They were other unknown artists doing way out things it does not mean squat it was the Beatles who were the big influence on the start of Progressive Rock. They were not called Proto Prog for nothing or in many people opinion Progressive Rock. Progressive Rock also at the end of the day also includes a Pop influence as most genres. Yes, Genesis, Jethro Tull, Rush, ELO all you use pop influences on their songs.
oh yeah also the fact that the other artists were unknown and less likely to have reached the masses so as to "influence" them doesn't make what they did any less relevant.
It also makes those artists less influential and important. Say if you replace some unknown band and they were as influential or innovative we would be talking about them then rather the Beatles. I have heard thousands of tracks from this period. It's safe to say the Beatles music was unique and very influential. You are suffering from revisionist history. And could we move on to some other group.
These are examples of electronic instruments
Mellotron- Electronic/Psychedelic Rock Tomorrow Never Knows, Strawberry Fields Forever.
Volume tone pedal- Yes It Is, Tomorrow Never Knows
Synth- Electronic/Hard Rock I Want You (She So Heavy)
Electric Guitar, Organs are Electromechanical Instruments.
I guess I can agree that the mellotron is "electronic" - but it's function is to play pre-recorded samples, usually of flute sounds.
So for all practical purposes, it's a flute.
Tone pedal you're right about that - but it hardly makese itself felt in TNK and in Yes It Is it makes a reverby sound like the Beau Brummels Just a Little for example
And I Want You would definitely have electronic aspects on account of the synth, but this was 1969 and by then we already have full-blown progressive rock.
See someone above mentioned Graham Bond. I know some have said he was the first to use the mellotron nice tidbit. The point is the innovation was the person who invented the mellotron not the person who first played it. The ones who put the Mellotron on the map was the Beatles they deserve the credit. The Mellotron was an important instrument to progresseive rock give the Beatles credit.
Thanks Coldplay02. Rock musicians who emerged in the 1960s and '70s experimented with unusual meters and structures. Notable examples include The Beatles, Henry Cow, Cream, Captain Beefheart, Frank Zappa, Emerson, Lake and Palmer, Genesis, Jethro Tull, Gentle Giant, Yes, Rush, King Crimson.
Speaking of structures. There is no doubt on my mind that the Beatles were just as progressive as anyone else. The Beatles music and popularity helped started the progressive rock movement. Here is some examples
"Norwegian Wood"- Modal Harmonies, Mixed Meter, use of exotic instrument sitar and drone, mix of folk/pop and Indian
"Tomorrow Never Knows"- Modal harmonies, avant structures, static Indian drones, backward tape and electronic sampling.
"Love You Too"- Indian Modal harmonies , avant guitar figure, unusual meter and Classic Indian Music.
"Eleanor Rigby"- Modal Harmonies, chamber pop, classical influence
Folk,Pop.Indian
"She Said She Said"- Indian Influenced Modal Harmonies, mixed meter
"Taxman- dissonant and distorted Mixolydian Riff influenced by Indian music, highly distorted raga styled guitar solo.
Abbey Road is the sound of the Beatles more in control of their disparate influences than ever before, and more comfortable with subtle experimentation than any of their previous records."I Want You (She's So Heavy)" is a minimalist-blues mindblower of the highest order, while also being groovy as a mother, much of which is due to Paul's killer bass playing. Finally, on the subject of the Beatles, we would be remiss to not mention that "Tomorrow Never Knows" is one of the all-time classic drone-rockers, and perhaps the formal invention of the aesthetic
Ok one more thing it's just that "importance" should be judged on the basis of comparing the music with what came BEFORE, regardless of whether it became "influential" via what came AFTER. If we all lived in a vacuum, and literally no one ever heard the Fugs for example, they'd still be equally as important.
Let's move on and talk about the pre-Soft Machine band, Wilde Flowers. Probably the first intellectualized free-jazzy rock - starting the Canterbury style.
I understand your point but that does not negact what the Beatles did. Or your lack of obectivity towards what they did musically and what they did in terms of recording techniques.
I'm just saying that a recording technique is irrelevant unless it's being used in a way which makes the music sound an otherwise-unachievable way. Like for example, a modern-day computer can imitate the sounds of any instrument. That's useless, right, since you could've just used the actual instrument (although maybe you don't have access to it)?. On the other hand, it can also make sounds nothing else is capable of (or capable of coming remotely close too). That's where the interesting part lies.
Nah man - there is no "electronic" music in Tomorrow Never Knows - you're not using this word right. Also, even if other songs were random nonesense (debatable anyway), that should be seen as a POSTIIVE attribute as far as what we're talking about, since it involves breaking away from the status quo.
Pretty much the whole of Between the Buttons is psych-baroque - this is a minor point though.
This stuff you're saying about Rain and Paperback Writer and such is again another comment about how the song was made, which has nothing to do with anything (just kind of serves to fill out a paragraph).
If Paperback Writer has an interesting bass sound, that alone is what's important, regardless of "how" it was made. And you should be able to talk about how interesting it sounds even if you didn't know the "how" (like if the research had instead concluded that the sounds in TNK actually turned out to have been generated by someone making funny noises with his cheeks, those sounds would still be what they are and would therefore be equally as interesting).
I never said they were not being innovative or progressive in some ways. I said that others were more so.
Here are some Beatles tracks we can discuss. I apologize to Sean,Sean even if I disagree with him. I am open to debate with him.
"I Am The Walrus": The prog gem. Four minutes and thirty-five seconds of Lennon madness/genius (with producer George Martin's help). Stomping, electric piano-driven beat married to avant-garde tape loops, taped radio broadcasts, strings, brass, choirs. distorted lead vocal and Mellotron. Lennon's fantastically nonsensical lyrics add to the organized chaos.
"Baby You're A Rich Man": \,a big-beated psychedelic rocker making good use of John Lennon's Clavoline (a unique, monophonic keyboard instrument) doodlings (the Arabic-sounding blasts in the background).
"Magical Mystery Tour": Intruguing mix of stomping rock/R+B rhythms and jazzy sections, particularly jazzy in the coda. Great use of trumpets; the vocal trade-offs between Paul and George are also notable
"Flying": Group-written three chord moody instrumental; John Lennon plays trumpet-melody/chords on then-novel dual-manual Mellotron Mark II which would be a commonplace instrument for them that year. Ending features innovative use of backwards tape loops, initiating a trippy effect
"Blue Jay Way": .With Abbey Road staff flanging (by hand)the recording tape (very innovative sound for '67!) the dirgy, spacey track is driven along by a swirly George-played Hammond organ and Ringo's plodding drums. Cello accompaniment and backwards backing vocals add tension .
Strawberry Fields Forever": , noted for first notable use of Mellotron in musical applications (the flute sound; brass towards the end). The Beatles'/George Martin's technical advancement is in full "view" here, from backwards cymbals to exotic instrumentation to tape loops to tape-speed manipulation to over-compressed drums and bass to outside orchestration. The arrangement is effectively dynamic and atmospheric. Spooky tacked-on false ending, too.
No doubt all of these songs are cool and interesting, but not "prog"...unless you wanna really really stretch the definition to just mean "ecclectic, very-much-so-non-'rock and roll'-ish rock with experimental influences and aspects of the more 'sophisticated' end of non-rock".
I Am the Walrus - pretty kooky sound-effects laden psychedelic song.
Baby You're A Rich Man - anthemic mantra-ish pop psych
Magical Mystery Tour and Flying- I agree with your description
Blue Jay Way - pretty much right except, just for the record, the Small Faces did the effect a few months earlier, and two years earlier the Raspberry Parade did it.
Strawberry Fields Forever - I'd basically sum this one up as a psychedelic song (slightly trippy timbres thanks to all of the different types of track manipulation in the studio you mention, kind of eccentric chords/meter changes) with a baroque arrangement (the use of a lot of instruments, the flute-like mellotron sounds in particular, the changes in the arrangement, the multipart structure). Id' say it's definitely one of their three masterworks (along with Tomorrow Never Knows and A Day In the Life)
"I am the Walrus" is considered by many as Avant-Progressive Rock when the sound collages are tacked at the end of the track.
Here are my other reviews on certain Beatles tracks that stand out from other music at the time
"Being For The Benefit Of Mr. Kite" is another genuine psychedelic piece, and it may be my favorite song on the album. The use of organs/calliopes and circus sound effects are complimented wonderfully by strong drumming from Ringo and some awesome majestic musical interludes
"Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds" a song rare in rock music at the time that song is in 3/4 and 4/4 throughout the song. There is slight phasing on the vocals, tamboura drones, doctored organ sounds. The shifts from soft and psychadelic to the rocking sing-a-long choruses and back are cool.
"Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" (reprise) is a short interlude that acts as an introduction to the finale of the album, it has some nice harmony vocals and some great leads from Harrison.
"A Day in the Life" with its contrasting sections, time changes It begins with just piano, acoustic guitar, and a double tracked Lennon vocal. Slowly the rest of the band kicks in (along with the orchestra). Ringo drum work is very complex and progressive, The song has many psychedelic and majestic sections (with soaring violins and Lennon vocals), and it changes in tempo and mood when McCartney takes the lead, but then it reverts to the old theme from the beginning of the song. The ending note (a simple pound of an E chord on the piano and the backing orchestra) lasts around 30 seconds and really ends the song on an epic note (which it is). Finally, if you wait around long enough you'll hear a vocal experiment at the end.
Others
"Within You Within You" the start of Indian Prog?
" She Leaving Home" very nice orchestrated song
Sound collage and "prog" are mutally exclusive. Really I Am the Walrus is just a weird/eccentric song. Doesn't belong in this topic.
And I wouldn't call Mr. Kite a "genuine" psychedelic song. It basically has sort of trippy sound effects overdubbed on top of a normal tune.
Lucy's time signature switching (and arrangement switching) doesn't really make for a wild ride of sorts. So it's more of a factoid about the song than anything else. (Also, I'm pretty sure, especially given the stuff about phasing we were talking about, that the vocal effect you hear is another example of "ADT", not phasing - not that it makes a difference what exactly it is).
Finally, it just seems kind of silly to call Within You Without You "Indian Prog". Especially wheen there's no such thing as this genre, nor is the song prog-like anyway. It's a long raga-ish ballad
Sean I am LOL you can't seem to give the Beatles credit for anything innovative or creative they have done. "I am the Walrus" is certainly progressive rock. "I Am the Walrus", unique composition with great use of instruments (piano, guitar, drums, mellotron) with the orchestral ones (cellos, violins, trumpets), sound effects and collages. In three different sections
Pink Floyd are purely psychedelic, Zappa, Beefhart are avant or experimental. "I am the Walrus" combines the avant influence of Stockhausen, psychedelia and pop melodies. Something neither Floyd or Zappa could do.
A song does not have to be wild to be innovative or to be musical. The vocal effect on "Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds" is phasing like you said it does not matter. Lucy's time signature switching (and arrangement switching) are prog features.
" Within You Without You "Indian Prog" is a genre in progressive rock which Love You Too is.
" Mr Kite" you actually ignore the fact that the use of samples in this song creates a trippy soundscape.
It's not that Floyd or Zappa "couldn't" combine avant, psych, and pop. It's that they didn't. They did the same thing but with more of the first two and less of the pop usually (well actually Zappa was poppy early in his career).
It seems like there's this syllogism I see used which makes no sense: "more diverse = more interesting...even if you become more diverse by adding a less interesting element".
What I meant by "wild" was that the time signature switching does not impact the song in such a way so as to sound "challenging", which seems to be what innovative art should do. And simply having prog features does not make a song prog. Or else jazz itself would be prog.
If you check google for example, there's only 106 pages with the phrase "Indian Prog" and of the few that refer to music (rather than abbreviations for the word "progress" or something similar), most are talking about the Beatles in forums like this. So it's probably a made up term. But let's say it's a real term which means what it sound like it means. Love You To and Within You Without You still wouldn't fit this.
I wasn't ignoring the trippy quality of Mr. Kite. I'm just saying it's a pop song that is embellished with slightly trippy sound effects (more specifically, as you say, from the calliope samples).
The thing is Zappa didn't which is something you can't take away from the Beatles doing. The Beatles invented a style in rock that was influential in rock music. Frankly, I don't think Floyd was avant either on Pipers they were the psychedelic rock and they were the best ever at it. Bike uses musique concrete but that's it.
Indian progressive rock is on progarchives.com not it's not a big deal and the Beatles are mentioned. The difference is this is a big departure from Eight Miles or even the Beatles Norwegian Wood. Progressive ears.Com The Beatles are listed as Symphonic Prog, Art Rock, Psych Prog and World Music. They are considered the most important group to Art Rock.
If we were talking about jazz then I would agree but we discussing progressive rock or strong elements of this. Which dual time signatures or contrasting sections are progressive rock features.
You disagree with all of us so really maybe talk about another group that you think is deserving. All your posts are about the Beatles frankly in a negative way. I find it frankly strange.
Yeah - technically you can say that you can't take away the fact that, Zappa having not done this, the Beatles were "different". But there are different degrees of being different from the norm - and Zappa (although not all the time) was MORE different.
It's definitely a logical fallacy to talk about this Progressive ears site. If something is true, it's true on it's own terms rather than because somebody says so.
About jazz, I was just making a point that we're talking about having "features" rather than the full-blown thing - or else, by analogy jazz would be progressive rock rather than having some of it's features.
I don't think any of my posts are talking about the Beatles in a negative way.
I think I can sum up my points this way.
They're all based on logic and applying the same logical criteria to all bands without bias:
1) almost everything they did that was considered innovative was done by someone else earlier and more extensively
2) when tackling these already-tried things (knowingly or knowlingly) they did them no doubt differently but only in the extent of adding larger doses of the more trivial end of the spectrum - resulting in a sound closer to the previously established norm than the others had been.
3) the cases in which they did manage to be no doubt innovative outside of that concept were largely in the technological realm, which in and of itself, is not "musical" since it doesn't necessarily effect the music
4) similarly, other cases involved being perhaps the first to use certain instruments - but this doesn't amount to anything in and of itself when the features "exclusive to the instrument" are not exploited (cuz then otherwise having used the instrument becomes just a factoid)
4) even if we count the times they used technology or new instruments in ways which made the music itself innovative (and not just interesting on account of the FACT that the technology or instrument was used) - and also factor in the times the music was innovative on it's on own terms (substance-wise, ouside of tech and instrumentation) - the same holds true for many bands, but it's a question of degree
5) lots of artists, hearing their music and finding it interesting, proceeded to take their ideas further, so their credited with "influencing", but this doesn't take away from the more extensive yet indirect "influencing" role of their predecessors
6) Strawberry Fields Forever is a masterpiece.
I meant to say before, but perhaps a better prog predecessor example would be the Wilde Flowers (the pre-Soft Machine band).
2) in the few cases in which they were definitely innovative, it was mostly in terms of arrangements
The problem is you have not proved anything I said wrong. They're all based on logic and applying the same logical criteria to all bands without bias:
There all based on your opinion. To that end stop wasting our time we have listed many ways the Beatles were innovative and how they changed music. Tomorrow Never Knows basically is the blurprint for many types of music. Strawberry Fields basically invented progressive rock or avant pop-rock or put it in musicians minds.
You also contradict yourself with your apt description of Revolver and Sgt Pepper. Revolver is like a less lush version of that description with the arrangements and studio techniques being used to make the music "trippier" in particular and with a full full-blown experimental or psychdelic songs thrown in. Sgt. Pepper's is like a mix of the two albums but taken to greater extremes and yet in a poppier context. Abbey Road takes Pepper further without the overtly psychedelic quality. And from there the links to Dark Side are more clear.
The thing is no one in rock music were doing what the Beatles were doing on Revovler and Sgt Pepper.
Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush Rush!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nah man. I don't need to prove anything you said wrong. You're stating facts too. It's just that I'm point out the circumstances under which your facts are not particularly relevant sometimes. For example, while you can't deny that nothing sounded quite a few of the tracks on Revolver before, the same can be said for other bands and to a greater extent - nothing to do with opinion.
But anyway..if you're into the Soft Machine or Canterbury bands in general you should check out the scant recordings of the Wilde Flowers.
What song would you vote on this list Sean?
If I had to pick from this list, I'd pick A Quick One.
Ok Sean, Let's move on let say I disagree with you especially on Sgt. Pepper Reprise/ A Day in the Life. What is your opinion on Pink Floyd Pipers at the Gates of Dawn? That album is pure psychedelic to me with pop and avant elements. Some people get confused with psychedelic and progressive rock. This album is not progressive rock. Great experimental album though at times goes overboard.
Piper is brilliant yes.
You should check out this band Raspberry Parade - an early psych pop band which influenced Pink Floyd and apparently the Beatles. They made an unreleased album in 1966 which some guy is trying to finally get released and you can hear it on MySpace. This song "Spaced Out" is like a dry run for "Interstellar Overdrive".
have you emailed scaruffi about this raspberry parade band? he might be interested.
Thank you but don't get confused with phasing with flanging their different. Variable speed tape recordings or valve oscilators were already used by a number of artists.
Seems the band influenced Pink Floyd. Interstellar Overdrive was first demoed on Nov of 1966 and then recorded properly in 1967. Spacing Out started as a simple guitar song in 1965 and it was finished recording in California late 1966. The music is more related to Pink Floyd So who influenced each other would be interesting. The Beatles first heard about Pink Floyd at around the time they were recording Carnival of Light Jan of 1967. So the times are sketchy.
yeah but we don't know what they sounded like in concert at this time. Maybe they influenced both bands earlier in '66.
Phasing and flanging are when an audio signal is split and into two which go in and out of synch with each other, making a "whooshing sound". I forgot which one happens at regular and which one is at irregular intervals and I'm not sure which one the Raspberry Parade used with that Over the Sky song.
Are you accusing Floyd of taking this unknown bands song to create Interstellar Overdrive. A dry run to me is only a tame version of Interstellar Overdrive. What ever Rasberry Parade does not take anything away from Floyd and especially the Beatles
I find it hypocritical of you to point out that ADT was not big deal because the Beatles used it first. Yet you point out that phasing was used by other bands first. There is proof that the Beatles used phasing on Lucy In the Sky With Diamonds. It's not a big deal to me. Also your replies on Pink Floyd are short. To me you are intent on saying the Beatles did nothing when it's the contrary you have been proven wrong or you make point just on your opinions.
oh no I'm not accusing the Floyd of anything like stealing. Just saying you might like that song because it's similar in it's "surfy timbre plus bleeps and bloops" idea (sounds like the Mission Impossible theme too). [Seems this band played in the early days of the UFO club right before they broke up, by the way].
I wasn't really saying anything judgmental about ADT - just that, seems to me (I could be wrong) this is the effect used on Lucy. I was just saying it's an unimportant point as to exactly how the sound was techncally achieved.
As for ADT, the Beatles did use it first - since it was invented for them for Tomorrow Never Knows. ADT is "automatic double-tracking" a way to double-track a vocal by duplicating the original and overdubbing it onto itself with a predetermintd delay. It's a technological innovation rather than a musical one since it's theoretically the same as the "manual" way of re-recording the vocal.
I don't think any of my points are based on opinions. Instead their based on an honest spin of the facts. But whatever, I didn't really mean anything by my short reply about Pink Floyd.
Piper is a total masterpiece and introduced a surreal, atmospheric "soundscape" style which is a major reference model for lots of subgenres even outside of "space-rock", which it probably invented. The title track on the next album and Set the Controls For the Heart of the Sun were equally as intense, but then after that they gradually became more of the "pop with studio enhancements" band (logical extension of Pet Sounds and most of Revolver) that they're well known for.
ADT was invented on John Lennon request it was his idea so gets credit for the idea at least. I hate to burst your bubble surreal, atmospheric "soundscape was done on Tomorrow Never Knows which influenced Syd Barret to know end. Revolver psychedelic sound was the reference models for many bands after the album that came out. How many bands after this album were using the things Revolver was known for. Pet Sounds is not a psych-pop album or nor does it use Classical Indian or Stockhausen avant style music like Revovler does. The albums are different not to take away from Pet Sounds.
I know it was Lennon's idea, but like I said ADT is technological thing rather than a musical thing, so it's all a moot point here.
And yeah, Tomorrow Never Knows should probably get the same description as I gave Piper, but that's only if we give both the simple 3 word description I did (surreal atmospheric soundscape). Those words don't really do justice to Piper's significance.
I know Pet Sounds has nothing to do with the EARLY Pink Floyd style. I was referring to the later Pink Floyd stuff which transitioned them into their Dark Side of the Moon era (a "studio as an instrument" approach which uses state of the art production and sound effects and lush instrumentation to embellish what are more or less pop songs).
ADT is a variant of phasing so I agree it's a moot point. I think Piper is a great album but why compared it to the Beatles Revolver. Pet Sounds was a influential album to many albums I agree. I always thought Abbey Road and Sgt Pepper was a bigger influence on Dark Side of the Moon. Never heard this about Pet Sounds and Pink Floyd.
Yeah - ADT is similar to phasing in the sense that both involve splitting a signal. But the former involves playing the second signal slightly after the first (to create more depth) and the latter involves constantly varying the distance between the signals (going in and out of sync), creating a whooshing sound.
Pet Sounds was the start of the evolution which led to all of those the albums because...
It uses state of the art "production quality", fancy production techniques which affect the arrangements by changing the sounds of instruments, both plentiful and eccentric instruments for the arrangements to begin with as well as sound effects....all in the context of what are fundamentally pop-rock songs.
Revolver is like a less lush version of that description with the arrangements and studio techniques being used to make the music "trippier" in particular and with a full full-blown experimental or psychdelic songs thrown in. Sgt. Pepper's is like a mix of the two albums but taken to greater extremes and yet in a poppier context. Abbey Road takes Pepper further without the overtly psychedelic quality. And from there the links to Dark Side are more clear.
I think you will find Rubber Soul was already using the studio as a instrument like varispeed techniques. Ticket To Ride uses varispeeding which like Rain or the way your Rasberry Parade does. The only thing Pet Sounds did was use fance intruments in a baraque way. Revovler was just as innovative in a psychedelic way and avant garde that influenced modern music.
Definitely agree here - for that matter, you can go back to Help! with the guitar plugged into the Leslie speaker on It's Only Love - but it's a matter of degree. Relatively speaking, there's not many the studio-as-instrument aspects on Rubber Soul (also Way before this were Joe Meek's productions). Pet Sounds was ground zero in the full blown "baroque pop" genre, whereas Revolver was just one of the first albums to contain songs in the nascent genre, which mostly hadn't been in album form previously.
Here are some earlier albums which ushered in emergence of the new "progressive" (loose definition, not "prog" per se) sensibility of 1966 in album format, in order of recording date:
November-January Blues Project - Live At The Cafe` Au Go Go
January Animals - Animalisms
January Love - Love
January-February Fugs - Fugs Second Album
February Seeds - Seeds
January-March Bob Dylan - Blonde on Blonde
March Rolling Stones - Aftermath
March Frank Zappa - Freak Out!
January-April Beach Boys - Pet Sounds
March Jefferson Airplane - Takes Off
March Bluesbreakers - Bluesbreakers With Eric Clapton
April ? Small Faces - Small Faces
January-May Donovan - Sunshine Superman
April-May - Velvet Undergroound - Velvet Underground & Nico
January-May Byrds - Fifth Dimension
Of all those albums that are on your list none except Frank Zappa Freak Out would be labeled as Proto-Prog. Lastly like many people who love music I don't respect Pierro Scaruffi so that list is useless to me and many music fans.
This has nothing to do with Piero Scaruffi. This is my own list of "interesting" early 1966 music.
Excellent, Icon but where not going to convince Sean. Exellent review on I am the Walrus and I learned something from this review of yours. It would be good use on another music forum I go to. Let's start focusing on the other bands.
Strawberry Fields Forever" with it's mellotron and it's classically influenced it was the egg if not quite the chicken. The big albums of 67 were the foreplay. Strawberry Fields Forever" or "I am the Walrus" are without any doubt prog songs. that there are other songs on the album they appear on which don't quite fit the definition doesn't change it a bit. if you question that these songs are prog you might as well question if a song like "I talk to the Wind" is prog. actually if I was forced to declare either "Strawberry Fields" or "I talk to the Wind" as prog and were only allowed to choose one of them my vote would go to "Strawberry Fields"
Sgt Pepper Reprise/ A Day in the Life IMHO is very prog and it has classical elements. "Because" is very classically influneced without using strings plus it uses synth. "Golden Slumbers" through the "The End" has a strong classical style. Then what about the strong classical Indian Influence on tracks like " Love You Too"
Prog broke up the standard chord patterns. the use of unusual time signatures is another thing but should not be overrated; most prog songs still are in 4/4, 3/4 or 6/8 (of course there are divisions of prog like math rock that deliberately break this rule).Well "Happiness is a Warm Gun" breaks that mold and it is sectioned form.
Progressive Rock supposedly started in 1969 so I would say the Beatles were a big influence on the start of progressive rock. These tracks show strong progressive rock traits or IMO most of these songs are progressive rock.
This is a brilliant entry Revolver. I might add Strawberry Fields. 2 different versions of a song in different keys, slowed down, speeded up and joined together, genius. Different endings also is present.
I don't think anything else ever sounded like "Tomorrow Never Knows" before or since....a truly new direction in (prog) music.
Happiness is an incredible song, but progressive rock is questionable. However, I would credit it as being one of the first "70's" hard rock/metal sounding songs. That guitar sound is ahead of it's time.
Happiness is an incredible song. I'd agree. But there were probably a hundred or so which came before which were more hard rock/metal sounding.
And the talk about the high tech way Strawberry Fields was "made" is a distraction. If it just so happened to sound that way without this technology, it'd be equally as interesting. What should matter is the way it sounds (one of their most interesting sounding songs).