Can the Old Legends Be Surpassed? (w/Martin Popoff)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 сер 2024
- Join Pete Pardo & Martin Popoff for a discussion of whether the legendary innovators can ever be surpassed.
💰Donate via Ko-Fi: ko-fi.com/pete...
👕Order your SoT merch: www.t8cloth.co...
🤩 Get your Cameo video: www.cameo.com/...
🖥 Visit our website: www.seaoftranq...
It's not just a question of being technically proficient, it's about the unique feel every individual musician has. Guitarists like David Gilmour and Brian May aren't the most technical guitarists, but their playing is unique.
Well said.
Very well put, feel and tone go a long way and you instantly know its them along with EVH, Knopfler and Page for example.
Agree with your take on Gilmour, but I think May is an excellent technical guitarist.
@@humphreygruntwhistle3946 He's admitted he couldn't do what a lot of the young flashy guitarists were doing. But, I love his style. I think it's difficult to shred using a sixpence!
I think both are important
You could replicate the Mona Lisa...but could you create it in the first place ?
this is exactly the point, some people get it, some don't, the creativity comes in the act of creation, exactly copying a John Entwhistle bass solo requires great skill... but no creativity...
the thing about mona lisa and high art is the world is really diferent before and after of creation of it art change minds and mind changes anything
@@MercuriusHibernicus I'm somewhat torn on the whole "copying someone else" thing - it has its place (like in cover bands & such) and many/most later great musicians start out playing covers of others' music as a stepping stone to greater things. So there's value there for sure...But ultimately to me uniqueness & creativity are major factors in being considered "great", so those artists MUST be able to move on from that & create their own style/music. Playing skills/chops are not everything - it took me a few years to realize that...
The next time you're caught in a mosh at La Louvre to see the Mona Lisa, take a step back and go and take a look at the Michelangelo on the wall to your left - I didn't know about it when I was there, but that's supposed to be really a good painting!
So that does mean if the original painter had passed that nobody else can attempt it?
I don’t think anybody is making the argument that drummer x is better than a Peart, Bonham etc. you can never get better than an originator of something. What you can do is have somebody do it justice.
That’s what I don’t get with this “outrage” about Rush maybe going out. Newsflash, Neil has passed. Who are we to tell remaining members of a band what they should or shouldn’t do. Guys like Neil will never be replaced. But they can be celebrated.
Is not only the technical aspect of classic bands or legends.is also the magic around them,the innovation,all music from today is based on the shoulders of these giants.That creativity,exploration ,pushing of boundaries is not common anymore.
I think the way that the music industry is now means you'll never reach the heights of legends. The 90s was last chance saloon for groups to create a greater appreciation around themselves to some sort of elevated level. The creative world of the music industry is a totally different thing to what it was.
Bands today can only hope for nostalgia to present them to a niche audience in the future.
I can only admire the way Martin embraces Tik Tok stuff and Peter listens to so many new albums on a regular basis. Keeping that hunger and openness is like eternal youth.
This is why lyrical writing quality has always been my priority. I’d argue that part of what makes Hendrix so extraordinary isn’t just the style and apparent ease he had with the guitar; but his lyrical words, phrasing, and how they interplay with his guitar playing are unmatched to this day.
With the instruments, it’s not the complexity or speed, but the cohesion and elevation of the lyrics and/or theme. Is the instrumentalist generating an emotive response or stimulating the imagination of the listener…or just playing skillfully?
And lyrical (and musical) writing quality belongs to Kerry Livgren, totally and completely. And he will never be replaced or surpassed.
And speaking of drums, Phil Ehart is too often overlooked as a great one.
Knowing what not to play or leave our,is just as important as what to add on and embellish 😊
An overlooked 80's bass player is Bob Daisley of Ozzy's solo career. He is overshadowed by of course Randy Rhoads and Ozzy himeself, but listen to his playing on Diary of a Madman, particulary songs like Believer and S.A.T.O.. Not to mention he did wrote a lot Ozzy's lyrics. Maybe kind of niche, but another 80's one is Lief Edling of Candlemass. His bass playing mostly pretty simple, which there's nothing wrong with that, but he is the founding member and mastermind behind the band and writes everything.
There's some overlooked 90's bass players as well. I'll start with the late Mike Starr of Alice in Chains. His playing might have been simple, but he did some little fills and slides to stand out. And he also had the tone and attitude. Ben Shepherd of Soundgarden needs to be talked about more. His bass lines can be unique and sometimes even a little complex, using chords. Of course there's Robert DeLeo of Stone Temple Pilots. I would say he's a viruoso. Just listen to Trippin' on a Hole in a Paper Heart. Scott Reeder on Kyuss's last two albums is phenominal. And last, but not least, I would like to mention Dirk Lance of early Incubus. Listen to his playing on the album S.C.I.E.N.C.E. and you will hear he's no slouch on the bass.
How about Adam Clayton of U2 lol
"Can the old legends be surpassed"
I suspect - no.
Not at what it was that they did.
But there will be new legends, doing new things never done before.
Also the term "surpassed" has to be defined - it what way? Popularity, sales, virtuosity, style, headline-making, groundbreaking, vibe, impact/influence on others, etc
I love it!! I own so many Martin Popoff books. That was an interesting topic.
"Some people prefer simplicity." That's true, but I think it often comes down to the people who play more complex music do so without including a lot of passages that are 'hooky' or memorable. That confuses the issue, where the term 'complex' gets equated with 'boring', when it doesn't have to if a little more effort is put into giving the listener something to grasp.
Also, I draw a distinction between 'guitarist' and 'guitar player'. There are countless people capable of playing amazing feats of dexterity, but I say they're actually lousy guitarists if they can't play music that makes us care. Isn't that the point of playing music?
" if they can't play music that makes us care" - absolutely, but there are some (including me in my early years) that primarily/only care about (guitar) chops/speed. For them virtuosity is everything, both aspects of music are the same, so there's no difference between the two as far as they're concerned. Someone who can do 'guitar gymnastics' for them IS making music that they care about. I now see the limitations of that viewpoint but it does exist
It's all about being a great composer/songwriter, that's it, whether you are closer to Frank Zappa or closer to Kurt Cobain (who I believe was a great songwriter). Your skills only matter if it has a place and a purpose within the piece you created.
Amazing bass players from 7os late greats Burke Shelley, Jimmy Bain, even Lemmy, Gary Thain.
Popoff and Pardo are at it again with quite an interesting topic and look forward to reading the other commenters remarks at a later time. My personal view is somewhat simplified by perhaps three different points on the same thought. First, All Things Must Pass [George Harrison]. Second, Ozymandias [the poem by Percy Bysshe Shelley]. The third, a quote attributable in many forms to many but essentially say we all die twice - the first when we physically pass and the second time when our name is uttered or remembered for the last time. Technically, people can be replaced. Artistically, people may have similar attributes, but it would seem their backgrounds and abilities are unique to them. Really appreciate Martin's point about the singer's cult of personality and similarly the band but the whole conversation was interesting. That said, planning to see Kansas in concert early next year and lookigng forward to that. Thanks to Martin and Pete for discussing this idea and fleshing out some thoughts. There ya go!
"Technically, people can be replaced" - yes. On a personal/human level every individual is different because we're all the sum total of our experiences plus our genetics, and that makes everyone unique. That's also the same reason why there exist so many different opinions about music
@@wolf1977 Thanks, Wolf. Enjoyed reading your detailed discussion. Tried to keep mine brief. Ozymandias meant little to me when read in - I believe - junior high. The years accumulated continue to make it more meaningful
One discussion topic: The channel often falls back on the 1970's. Led Zeppelin, Gentle Giant, Van Halen, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, Yes, Rush, Uriah Heep, King Crimson, Heart and endless amount of other bands. One other big thing in the 1970's was soul/disco/funk. James Brown, Marvin Gaye, The Commodores, Stevie Wonder, Barry White, Curtis Mayfield, Gladys Knight, Diana Ross, Smokey Robinson, Funkadelic and all the others. How did you feel about that THEN and how you feel NOW?
Good idea, but I just don't ever hear Pete or Martin talk about soul artists, I wish they would. Not their bag. There are some awesome artists coming from the soul genre - Maxwell, Angie Stone, Raheem Devaughan, John Legend, D'Angelo, Jill Scott, Pharrell...
One of the best shows for a long time. Very interesting.
Not hearing bass in the mix is a pet peeve for me. As a bass player, I would point to more recent greats Steve DiGiorgio and Chris Wolstenholme from Muse. I also agree with you guys on David Pastorius at the Fall Festival... incredible player. Great topic!
Excellent point, DiGiorgio's fretless bass is front and centre whoever he plays with be it Sadus, Testament, Death, or even Megadeth.
Digiorgio rules, his work on the Çontŕol Denied album is awesome especially when you find out how quickly he did it, it ,at times ,dominates that album
Again, Dave Hope is an excellent bass player. So full and anchoring the songs strongly.
There is no reason to be original . So...no to the question
Such a good discussion. I’m sick of older guys saying glorifying the eighties and everything later is garbage. Romanticising is the word. Martin you are a pleasure to listen to. Pete keep them coming. 🙏
Prog died in 1978. I hated the eighties, with the exception of Talking Heads Speaking in Tongues and Fear of Music.
I think the best combination is having feel and technique on any instrument and then most difficult is to have your own sound and style
For me it''s always been does the musician work well and gel with the band they're in. The Beatles didn't need a a ripper of a drummer. Their music needed someone who knew where to play and how to add to a song. For example Ringo's drumming on A Day in the Life is picture perfect for the song. Put, let's say, Ginger Baker or Keith Moon's drumming on it and you'll get more, but the song would become too busy. So yes, modern drummers can do these people but their feel would be wrong in any of those bands. John Bonham was perfect for Led Zeppelin and his son Jason is perfect for his bands. BTW, John would be damn proud of Jason. 🙂
It is individual style that makes an artist great . Many out there now have the technique and speed but not their own style.
Eric Clapton may have gotten the press but the absolute trend setter in the U.K. guitar scene before Hendrix was Jeff Beck.
I'm not from Britain - wondering how influential someone like Brian Jones was back in the early days. I've read that Bert Weedon influenced many later UK players (Clapton, Brian May, Lennon/McCartney/Harrison, Page, Richards, Towshend, Hank Marvin) back in the late 50's/early 60's
@@wolf1977 All of which is probably true but I'm talking the rock scene of 65-66. I kind of see Pete Townshend and Jeff Beck being the major innovators as far as power chord slashing, pick scraping, feedback, Marshall amps, etc. They would be among the top rated players before Hendrix came.
@@markkonzerowsky8871 Interestingly about Marshall amps - I've read they were first imported into the US around early '67 as a result of Cream touring the US (just before Monterey)...Absolutely agree on the influences of Townshend/Beck during the mid 60's. I've seen 1960-63 referred to as: "The Great Guitar Drought of 1960-1963", broken by The Beatles in '64. I think Dave Davies was also right there (early use of heavy distortion)...
Jeff Beck came after Hendrix
@@clivemoney1762 Beck joined the Yardbirds in '65.
There's a couple of things going on here, we're seeing the classic bands gradually over time become tribute bands to themselves like the Beach Boys, McCartney and the Stones as original members pass away. I think the death of stadium rock in the near future can only be a good thing, like everything else the future needs to be local not global, people need bands to see in their hometown instead of consuming anodyne corporate culture...
There are many talented young musicians out there who have the talent of Hendrix, Clapton, Bonzo etc... the difference is that the original generation of rockers in the 60's/70's got to do everything first like Hendrix wailing away on a wah wah pedal etc and there is an inherent creativity in those who pioneered rock/prog/fusion compared to what comes later... the problem for young musicians is that they have the incredible ability to share their music on UA-cam/Soundcloud/Bandcamp but they have no ability to promote their music to an audience who have any idea they exist so what they do often just falls into an online void... so they can't compete with dreadful soulless tripe such as Foo Fighters who are sold like Coca-Cola...
the future of music can only be local not global, people creating and building their own scenes and sharing their success online, the alternative is purely a corporate-fascist system where everybody, regardless of where you live on the planet consumes an ever blander entertainment product packed with propaganda... it all comes down to... how much do you care?
Well said, I like your analysis.
Right, local scenes it's where is at
"who have the talent of Hendrix" - not sure I'd go that far but agreed that there's a lot of new talent out there...
@@wolf1977 here's a local psych band with a guitarist as good as anyone (no, its not me), great band ua-cam.com/video/R5rZa4BXED0/v-deo.html
@@wolf1977 here's a local psyche band with a guitarist as good as anyone (no, its not me), great band; ua-cam.com/video/R5rZa4BXED0/v-deo.html
I am sure that you guys get a crazy amount of suggestions and I'm sure you have video ideas a mile long so I don't expect you to actually do this lol but I'll throw it out there. I think it would be cool to see you both pick out as many genres of music that are not your norm maybe ones that you feel that you may even hate and see if you can find even one artist or band where you say ok my mind on that genre is the same and will never change but this one band or artist that's lumped into this genre has great albums or even an album that you can dig.
I had a similar idea. That they pick their favorite pop albums. Not songs, but albums. I think that would be interesting.
This is a excellent conversion excellent because there is absolutely no right or wrong answer but the conversation can !literally go on and on and on and every minute is exciting edu seating I love it great job
Another great interesting video guys. Keep making quality product with your excellent reviews and discussions. All the best from Liverpool in uk 🇬🇧
Back in the 80’s here in Hawaii there was so many guitarists that could play Van Halen note for note
But 90% couldn’t write an original song ..
Until I met Marty Friedman in late 1981
He already had the Mistress demo pre Vixen.
The songs were heavy and original..
Great discussion. Really enjoyed this one!
Great discussion! Everyone else pretty much said it best. It's not just about being a technical player, it's about feel and making listeners care about the music. Steve Clark, for example, he was a big Jimmy Page fan, wore his guitar low like him, and even kinda dressed like him. But, he developed his own style and he played from the heart. Steve brought fire and passion to Def Leppard's sound, and when he died, the band never quite got that spark back. They can play the classics live and still sound great, but the fire isn't there anymore.
Steve was known as a unique player who combined unusual, but highly melodic notes. His distinctive style was never going to be duplicated or captured again by any other player. Miss him in a big way - Lepps were never the same! RIP Steamin' Steve Clark.
After just catching the current "BEA CH BOYS" show here in Connecticut the original group isn't around anymore but their set and sound was awesome......😊
Really enjoyed the premise and discussion of this episode. I think we often look to musicians and celebrities as being above-us, being able to produce something that only they could - to say that someone else could do it the same or better can feel like an attack on the 'art' that someone created and its impact on us.
I get that, but I don't think that's what the idea is - Yes, the recordings and performances we have could ONLY have come from that time and person and place, but just because this is the ONLY version we have does that make it the objective best. Moreover, some musicians overtime simply can't keep up with the abilities they once had it actually makes more sense to have others fill in or take their place, sort of like how artists or craftsmen have mentors and mentees.
Romanticizing is the key idea. Those old guys were back when popular music was young. People had the TV and radio for main source of entertainment. Radio was king and we heard these guys there. Now us 60-70 year olds fell in love with these bands and people as if they are part of our family they’ve been around so long. Todays bands are just as good, and there are a lot more of them except nobody knows about them because they are scrolling instead of listening.
It's not about the idea that a person can't replace someone; it's the idea that replacing someone may destroy chemistry or synergy or creative spirit. Therefore, in changing or destroying chemistry, the previous person was irreplaceable.
The "team" concept & that that team is greater than the sum of its parts
Bill Ward was the world's first Jazz metal drummer. This is why the other guys can't do iot: they don't swing.
Unfortunately rock will never come back to where it was. It’s all been done and while yes, technically it can be played to a higher standard, something is still missing in the “feel” of it. I think a lot of it is down to us existing in a far less creative, and for want if a better term, far less romanticised era. Everything now sounds mechanical and leaves me cold. It’s not just the music, it’s the lyrics too. When I think of the huge changes that society, in fact civilisation, is now going through, I find it unbelievable that there aren’t any lyricists in rock that are able to capture what’s going on. Basically what I’m saying is the decline is not just confined to music, it goes way beyond that.
Because technology had made us lazier. You can say the same about film.
There are still some great lyricists: Jason Isbell, Conor Oberst, Alex Turner come to mind.
A talented kid may be able to easily play Van Halen riffs and solos as good as Eddie, but can they write and compose as good as Eddie? Can they write new, original riffs that have never been heard before that rival those of Eddie? Usually not. There are many organists and pianists who are more proficient than Bach as a performer, however, there will never be anyone who surpasses Bach as a composer. There are 6 year olds today that are technically as good or better than Chopin was as a performer, yet they never compose anything of their own even when they are older. They are simply trained to perform at a high level. Composing and performing are two entirely different things.
Surprised you covered the bass player part of this subject but did not mention Burton/Newsted/Trujillo. Was a perfect exemple for this topic!
Pete, Steve Walsh was still in superb form in the early 80s. Perhaps you were thinking early 90s?
Hi Pete and Martin, thanks for the great show as always! Have you come across Sophie Lloyd? She's an extremely talented young guitarist from England who's done the whole UA-cam/Social media thing but now as a brilliant solo album out called Imposter Syndrome (which kinda fits in with today's theme), where she's written the songs and has a different guest singer on each one. Check her out, yes we need to keep the flame of the old legends going, but we need to get excited by new artists too!
Have a wonderful weekend guys 💯💯💯🤘🤘🤘🫸
OK so I did really enjoy the discussion, my take is who cares what the proficiency level is high low it doesn't matter a good song is a good song regardless. I personally as I imagine most viewers also have is a very very wide and eclectic taste in music some is very technical some not so much but enjoy it all for different reasons. To the other point are the old Legends better my answer is no they were great for the songs they were on then the others afterwards were great for theirs back to my original statement a good song is a good song. For a replacement in bands who had classic lineups yes it will sound different then it is up to whether you can take the new player or not I don't think either answer there is right or wrong it's up to the listener.
22:59 Let’s not forget Cliff Burton
Nobody comes close
Appreciate your conversation on this interesting topic.
As a silly aside to Martins opinion that a 15 year old can master and eventually better their predecessors made me think of the film Crossroads when Ralph Machio's character turns the tables on Steve Vai.
I can't agree there, the magic of say a Jimi Hendrix will never be surpassed.
I think you really nailed the issues here.
There is no doubt that, generation after generation, there will be better and better instrumentalists technically - in line with the sports analogy - but will they be both leading-edge instrumentalists and great songwriters?
That's the thing - most of the great guitarists of yore were/are excellent songwriters as well, and their songwriting informed their playing. This was forcibly brought home to me watching John Mayer playing Jerry Garcia in Dead & Co. John Mayer is a great instrumentalist, but his soloing was nowhere near Jerry's because Jerry was always writing a new version of the song as he was playing it.
The whole speed vs. feel debate has been around a long time. Mozart was an early shredder, albeit on keyboards, and the Emperor of Austria supposedly said to him, "Very impressive, but too many notes." To which Mozart replied, "So which ones should I take out?" To which the Emperor could have hit back, "Well, most of them, to be honest," because Mozart's music is never at its best when he is showing off his instrumental virtuosity.
At least that's my opinion because I am very much in the 'play one note and mean it' school, exemplified by Neil Young's one-note guitar solos played with huge passion. I think vast flurries of notes confuse the melody, or perhaps serve to disguise the lack of melody in the first place - 'lipstick on a pig' syndrome.
If you are into metal or modern prog, you will probably disagree with me, because, in those fields, virtuosity is the thing - as is true of hip-hop, where (speaking of vocalists) verbal virtuosity is the thing and the music is sampled or phone-in, generally speaking.
Personally, I find the music of all the big technical guitar players - Steve Vai, Joe Bonamassa, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Eric Johnson, John Petrucci, even Jeff Beck - distinctly lacking in composition. It's not unpleasant, it is very impressive in terms of runs and guitar effects, but it's mostly bland, formless under the weight of all those notes ... or, as was once said of Gilbert and Sullivan, "full of fire and fury, and signifying nothing," although I think that would be to go too far.
I think most songwriters would say that who they admire most are songwriters who can write with deceptive simplicity, John Lennon being a classic example. But live, yeah, all that fire and fury is really exciting, usually much more so than a great songwriter, like Gordon Lightfoot, just strumming an acoustic.
As for the blues, sure, anybody can play the blues if they try. The blues scale was devised so that forcibly illiterate share croppers could sit down and put together a powerful tune. You just have to remember that it is a simplified system of playing, so you had better counterbalance that with strong emotions.
It's not technical ability but the aesthetic of an era. The genres we love represent the counter culture of the 60's and 70's and all these artists were part of that firstly and mostly as persons. If you take that out of the equation, what notes or what parts they played can of course be succesfully copied but will always sound sterile because the basic ingredient behind every art form is missing: the concept. So, in that sense old legends are indeed unsurpassed. Now, as far as technical ability there is also the argument that the old guys were starting something that evolved from then on. Music has been there for thousands of years and I bet you that there was a guy in ancient Rome who could move his fingers faster than Guthrie Govan. Make no mistake, these old guys were as technical and proficient on their instrument as new guys are, the objective was different. I wonder how long would take an uber talent like Hendrix to move his fingers a little faster if he got down to it. Maybe six months?
Part of the problem is US, the music consumers. We fall all over ourselves with the lastest Stones album (with good reason), etc. but all we want is the old stuff of our youth. I have seen lots of newer successful bands/artists doing their best to openly copy the music of the past because that is what sells. I watch a high school/college band on UA-cam from St. Cloud Minn. that specializes in Rush and not the simple stuff. Anybody that can adequately cover La Villa Strangiato deserves credit but the other part of me wants to see what they can do with their own creativity.
One bass player for me that brought it out front and centre was Phil Lynott, not a virtuoso but there are not many that did what he did, and has that happened since? Being the main focal point of the band, the singer, main songwriter and the bass player. Geddy Lee comes to mind but was he the main focal point?
Lemmy
Steve kilbey as well.
@@StrappingOldLad Lemmy was great but for me he was nowhere near as charismatic and talented as a songwriter as Phil.
@@paulcollins5586 not aware of him, will check him out thanks!
No, they can't, but it's a matter of how the music industry itself is constructed. The 90s were the last decade where any mystique was involved with rock bands.
When you talk about drums, Mickey Cavs from King Gizzard and The Lizard Wizard is definitely doing special things in current music. As is the band as a whole
And they do a lot of acid, which was my point elswhere. Good prog does not exist without good acid. Just a fact. Love that guys drumming. Obviously took the Ringo lesson to heart. Plays what the song needs.
This is good stuff. Please, ramble on. Seriously. Great show!
Aerosmith's Rocks and Sad Wings of Destiny may be heavier and grittier than Presence and Rainbow's Rising, whether the songs are greater is a different topic.
Reminds me of the fact that "heaviness" seems to be a synonym for quality according to a lot of metalheads, especially in extreme metal (and I love extreme metal), when in fact you can have extremely heavy albums that are, to put it mildly, extraordinarily underwhelming as far as creativity/songwriting goes. So many modern technical death metal and deathcore bands are spectacularly dull and boring.
Mark King of Level 42 made waves on bass in the 80s.
I love the current version of Kansas it is way better than the last period with Steve Walsh. I've seen both versions live. Secondly the two latest albums from Kansas are great.
I've been a fan since their first album.
I've heard many people say that Steve's voice was already shot in the early 80s. Maybe live that was the case but he sounds fine on those Streets albums.
Classic rock was only possible when the tools of the trade (i.e. electric guitar, bass, elaborate drum kits and other technology etc) were available and the art of playing them well matured.
So I suspect that there will eventually be another golden age of great music like the classic rock and metal eras but it's not going to happen until there are advancements or changes in music technology and instrumentation and the art of using it to create great music that reaches maturity.
Desktop MIDI production technology isn't that.
Otherwise, while there will always be great musicians and great bands, it's all going to be a matter of doing stuff that's been done before so it's never going to have the novelty and specialness of the first classic rock and metal bands etc.
We'll know it when it happens (if we're alive when it happens).
In a media saturated world, everyone is visible today. you can say today that a 15 year old guitarist is not as good as Page because the teenager is on tiktok and has 10.000 views. When Page was a reenager learning muddy waters, only his next door neighbour knew him and his guitar playing
Never say never, but I haven't come across a guitarist in the many years that could live with Frank marino... one of a kind , probably the most underatted guitarist on the planet
Regarding bass players, you can't really compare a player who keeps time in a 60's pop band with the technical fretless bass playing of Jaco Pastorius, from the journeyman to the innovators they all have there place and purpose and I appreciate them all.
A special mention for Pino Palladino who has played with too many great bands/artists to mention and is a fine example of someone who can cross many genres with comfort, Paul Youngs version of "Every Time You Go Away" being a prime example.
Everyone is standing on the shoulders of giants. But in the history of guitar or drums or keyboard or singing or ot otherwise, there will be someone who takes something to another level. As times goes on it will happen. But, it will be harder, but be different with your own personality.
Creating the music is very hard but copying isn't easy either.
I think it's EXTREMELY rare to hear something totally different in music, everyone "borrows" from prior artists. Early Mahavishnu, the first Talking Heads, the debut from King Crimson, The Beatles - yes even early Disco (which I despised but it did sound "different", just not in a good way)
I'm one of the few who would think Aerosmith should've stayed the course with Jimmy Crespo & Rick Dufay instead of the direction Aerosmith went when they reunited with Joe Perry & Brad Whitford.
In Neil Peart's case, it feels like everyone forgot that he also was a writer of all of Rush's amazing music. That music is part of his legacy, too. That's why I think it would be fine for Geddy and Alex to tour Rush music with other drummers. I think Neil would approve.
The other thing that is discounted is the vibe and vision that people lend to a group...I hope to see Geddy and Lifeson play again, but it will never be Rush
Did I miss the keyboard category? Does that mean Emerson, Wakeman and Lord, by default cannot be surpassed? :)
That Martin. He's a fire starter.
Yeah - a real 'Contrarian'...🤷♂
Just an arrogant know-it-all
🎶🤠 all of Chuck's children are out there playing his licks🎶
Robert Clark Seger
Rock and roll never forgets
There’s nothing like the first time.
Human nature.
Right, being first, or even just early, means an awful lot. Babe Ruth probably couldn't get a hit against even an average MLB pitcher these days but people will still know his name long after today's stars are gone.
@@user-re5zc2ss5h Yup. As the guys covered, in this context, relative skill would matter less than relative innovation
Black Metal bass!!!-=stand out in the mix and intricate-----Behexen - By the Blessing of Satan (Full Album)----a must know work for Black Metal
great show
for unique latter day bass players i'll add the guys from xtc,the jam,elvis costello,the stranglers....
greg lake king crimson
In what way? Because there are 2 different ways to look at it. Technically, they can't help but to have been surpassed. Humans improve. That's what we do. We take the old established best whatever and add new wrinkles to it. Do what was done before, better. It's indisputable, if you know what you're talking about. It's accepted in most other areas of life, but there is a tendency with art, to deny it. Objectivity is not a thing for nostalgists.
But artistically? That's all a matter of opinion and taste. Your 'classic' album or "irreplaceable" guy might be neither to the guy next you. The crux of it is, the inability to differentiate favorite from best. I'm sure that's what rankles Martin. The best guy at anything isn't from 50 years ago. He's your favorite, but best? Not by any metric other than your taste.
I'm not sure humans necessarily improve past a certain peak. Take tennis for example. In the generation directly after Federer, Nadal and Djokovic nobody is seen at their level, or take soccer, in the current crop of world class young players no one is seen on the level of a young Messi. Ok, this is just the immediate generation after those legends, so maybe the sample size isn't relevant here. However to always interpolate progress into the future seems naive to me. In this context haven't researchers discovered that there's been a reversal of the Flynn effect in recent years?
Anyway, who has "technically" surpassed Mahler at writing symphonies in the last 100 years? Or is writing symphonies an "artistic" endeavour, that can't objectively be judged? I kinda get your point differentiating between the two categories, but I don't think technical proficency should determine, what's seen as "best" when comparing artists, since its raison d'etre imo is to serve an artistic expression, which you established can't be judged.
Never mind Clapton, Jeff Beck or Hendrix. If you want to be blown away by a 60s guitarist spend some time looking at Roy Clark.
Absolutely, Martin! Gavin Harrison can easily out do Ringo Starr, and the reverse is surely not the case! Also, Craig Blundell doesn't match Phil Collins' finesse and jazz chops when covering '70 Genesis. As for singer's, what about two of the very best -- legends Steve Marriot and Stevie Wonder?
I don't see things getting to a point where all the music legends get relegated to just footnotes in the history of rock and roll. Artists like The Beatles, Elvis Presley, Little Richard, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, The Eagles, Queen, etc. -- they will all be legends who pushed the envelope in a way that no other bands have done before or since. That said, kudos to Adam Lambert for helping Brian May and Roger Taylor in keeping the Queen name alive, but at the end of the day, Adam is no Freddie Mercury, and that Queen back catalog will blow out of the water anything they did during the Adam and Paul Rodgers eras.
For drums, one question, do you think anyone could do what Keith Moon did in the way he did it? Basically playing lead drums…chaotic playing all over he place stuff.
Yes. Lots of guys. Would their band let them trample all over the songs like that is the doubtful part.
@@PatLBestEver trample all over? It worked though didn’t it? Mainly because Townsend would play the fills on his guitar. That’s why The Who were unique I think and far more interesting as a band than most from that era.
I think the main problem here is not finding a drummer like Moonie, it's finding a songwriter like Townshend and putting him in a band with a drummer like Moon, a bassist like Entwhistle and a singer like Roger. I feel a talent like Townshend would be a solo artist today who self produces everything in a DAW and puts his stuff on Bandcamp or Soundcloud, but he might not be in a band today, because bands seemingly aren't a favoured business model of the music biz anymore, and that's were a part of the magic in the artistic process is lost.
RIP former dream theater singer
Haven't paid this topic much thought actually, but was a very interesting hour to listen to.
Have you done shows with a similar topic, ai bands with no original members but still being active and toruing/recording under that b(r)and name? If not, that would be quite interesting.
Where did you get your Geddy t-shirt Martin? I want one!!
Okay, let the torches come out. There is a 13 year old Japanese girl drummer named Yayoko with many videos on UA-cam. She has done videos from Rush,Deep Purple Metallica etc. Note for not. She is the real deal.
She hasn't written any songs that anybody wants to hear though, is the future of rock music just repackaging everything that has already been done?
@@Veaseify maybe she is. I don't know. One thing for sure in my mind. I hope that Rush doesn't try anything new. I know some of the fanboys in the Rush camp would never accept anything that they do. Hell they hate both Alex and Geddy's Solo albums. Fanboys do not want anything that remotely deviates from Neal Peart. I think that in their case they should just move on. Fanboys will reject anything new and different from what they know as Rush. They don't accept new bands, forget about new Rush.
Can't make heads or tails of what Martin's saying in the first 10 mins tbh.
me either. to me, it comes down to he likes listening to himself talk and thinking he sounds smart. He over-analyzes everything with multiple asides, off topic tangents, it's compelling in a bizarre, perverse sort of way but ultimately seems to me a pile of BS in terms of the content of what he is actually saying. Used to like him, he just irritates me now; overexposure, perhaps. And, he can't handle criticism. Got into it with him a bit recently over the new Stones album; he comes across as someone who can dish out criticism but can't take it; not a good quality for a supposed 'critic'. Someone on another thread suggested Martin sounds like he's doing an autopsy rather than a music review; I thought it was a classic, perfect summation of his schtick.
Speaking of bass players…..Stuart Hamm should be mentioned. Days with Satriani and his jazz fusion style.
The disadvantage that the next generation guys have is only that they are not to create the music of the band of musicians like the original drummers,etc. She has been playing LED Zeppelin covers since she was 5 years old. She has some great original music as well. She is in a precarious situation. She is being known as that amazing cover girl, I hope for her that she will be able to get with some creative young of her caliber that can create original music with a similar passion as the music that she grew up loving.
While Kansas is still putting out great music, in my opinion, the classic lineup with Steve on vocals can't be surpassed.
True.
Good point, replacing a classic singer doesn't always work see Maiden and Priest too it was never the same there either so no, these classic band line-ups can't be surpassed by other members or newer bands' genre music for that matter.
people tend to look up to a certain original member of a band ..and thats fine ...it is usually for personal reasons such as that artist personality wise ..there are 2 separate things to consider then...the srtist them selves and their ability on the respective instrument ..in my mind talent with their instrument should win out followed closely by personality
Martin is obviously very knowledgeable and passionate about music, but time and time again I get the impression that the way he processes and appreciates rock music is atypical. Objective, purely academic analysis of rock music is only valuable to a certain extent. At the end of the day it is a form of cultural expression. From the most intricate prog rockers to the more bare bones punk rockers, at the end of the day its true value should be how it appeals to people on an emotional level. That quality cannot easily be identified and quantified. To equate rock n roll to sports, where there are ‘records’ to be broken, is a point of view I find highly ridiculous. Technical skill is an important component that can be measured and compared, but how do you measure feel? How do you measure cultural impact and innovation? It becomes a lot harder to measure those components of talent. For the rock stars of the past we have the value of hindsight to compare these things. For the artists of today only the test of time will give them to opportunity to stand alongside the legends of the past.
Replacement musicians are fine, but if the band changes the style it's ok if it is liked by the fans. When Uriah Heep got rid of Byron, Uriah Heep changed the bands music style. I preferred old Heep but i originally didn't like the new style. It took me several decades to come around. I like new Heep but i listened to the old Heep since i was 13. I'm 64, so...
Buchanan Rival Son has his own amazing voice.
As far as singers... take for instance Don Dokken his voice is shot, I'd like for Brett Carlisle take his place. Brett is newish, but dang the dude is awesome.
Legends Die . Music Never Dies
I value compositional skills more than technical prowess. I'd like a 15-year-old guitarist to write an album worth of songs that I like...with melodies.
And I bet a crazy number of the songs we worship were written by teenaagers!
Good discussion but no mention of Ian Pace, Bill Ward, Milky Dee they are magnicent inventive drummers. Sorry did mention Bill.
Modern musicians are great. Watts was imitating gene krupa. Bonham and other rock drummers were imitating blues drummers, George hurley was a jazz drummer in a punk band.. it is all a continuum. Bonham could be in rush and move them in a ew direction. Taylor hawkins rip could have done it too...
"
I stopped a man in the street today
And I ask him, "is BJH surpassed ?"
He just stared in disbelief
"
for guitar the extreme was malmsteen,blackmore...........but i like the more simple guys with tons of feel..............hendrix,peter green,gilmour and very simple but great randy california
steely dans guitar work is always amazing
johnny winters,steve miller
for a current amazing blues player look up my friend from tulsa 3 cat clem...............he kills
I find it a little ironic that Martin talks about new drummers taking the place of originals as a move forward but he usually dislikes a lot of modern drum sounds or drum sound technology. I'm sorry if I misunderstood.
You can't dismiss the evolution of the music and drum technology at the times of each classic era to say new drummers can play anything but old drummers can't play new music. Just depends when you grew up and started drumming.
Replacements for Joe Walsh in the James Gang?
Can the Old Legends Be Surpassed? Nah, you're still both great!
If a band was going to surpass The Beatles, they'd have done so by now. It's not like they haven't had 53 years to catch up. I'm not saying some haven't come close; there have been many great bands. But how many will crop up in almost every musical conversation like this one decades from now?
Classic rock is classic rock for good reasons, it means the peak was most likely reached once and it's all down hill from there. We still see big bands today but they're more spectacles and effects driven events like Rammstein because it pleases the masses but that's what it primarily is more than actual good music that'll last. At least a band like say Manowar, had good and well-structured songs to go with it. Same with movies, all superheroes and remakes now trying to outdo the last big event flick with even wilder CGI to lure in an audience. Was Gene Simmons on to something when he said that rock is dead, I sometimes wonder myself did good music actually die roughly 40 years ago and it never got surpassed even by the classic acts only imitated since then as all musicians do have a limit to their prime time of creation in this lifetime. Then again, we're all raving about the new Priest songs that are good but will it surpass their classics, I suspect even they know it obviously won't. A songwriter can only reinvent the wheel so many times.
Disappointed people like Greg Lake or now a days Billy Sherwood aren’t mentioned or one of the great technical guitarists off all time Steve Howe or Robert Cray are forgotten in all this. And what about keyboard players, Keith Emerson, Rick Wakeman, Geoff Downes?
Romanticizing? No, people see these legends as special. The late great comedian George Carlin said: “If everyone is special, then the word special is meaningless.”
David Gilmour & Bruce Dickinson pulled it off but aside from that it’s pretty rare.
Experience doesn’t equal better.
Wait a minute, this question isn't about Pete Pardo and Martin Popoff, is it??
Watching a lot of the drivel that is put out by many other youtube music content creators, we can certainly apply it to them.
Science. If you play a new album for a group of "old" fans and say it is one original member many of them will say it is a bad album. If you play the same album for the same people but you say it is the reunited original lineup many will like it.