10 rock albums Classical fans must own

Saab said:
They are indeed great musicians Tones,John Paul Jones was and still is a great bass player,and a highly accomplished producer to boot.I know its a bit fatuous to argue a rock bass player against say a classical pianist,but that doesn't mean that some rock musicians aren't highly talented individuals in their own right.
Click to expand...

As I said in a previous encounter, ol' spud, like Dilbert and the consultant, I admire their ability to get paid for it. Judging by other posts on this thread, it is one of the most successful cons ever perpetrated. As my countryman Mr. Wilde would have put it, the unspeakable in production of the unlistenable.
 
Samson had a drummer called Thundersticks,who never took his mask off,just like Tendo Nagasaki.I doubt Mozart could be that creative tbh.

Saxon on the hand,had one hit,and imo their lps failed to live upto that one track (bit like Boston with More Than A Feeling etc etc)
 
As my countryman Mr. Wilde would have put it, the unspeakable in production of the unlistenable.
Click to expand...

yes,very good:)

actually,I put it to you,that some of the great composers in the 18th century were as rich as todays rock stars,if not richer,so getting paid for it is irrelevant.

ps I don't like Black Dog very much either,
 
saab, it was kendo nagasaki www.kendonagasaki.com/

lordsummit,
no, i loathe wagner. i was forced to watch some dire 15 hour production of the ring cycle when i was 10 to try to jam some 'culture' into my head. you remember that bit in a clockwork orange - something like that but without the special chair. i think that this was the first time i swore at my parents, something along the lines of 'nome more ****ing dwarves and fat women please' i got sent to bed with no dinner which was kind of the point. to say that i get homicidal when i hear the ride of the valkyries is maybe an overstatement but i do get the urge to break the offending bit of kit so it cannot harm me any longer.
given a choice between wagner or 'the mouse chorus' i'd take the mice everytime.
cheers


julian
 
Saab said:
yes,very good:)

actually,I put it to you,that some of the great composers in the 18th century were as rich as todays rock stars,if not richer,so getting paid for it is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

And you would be dead wrong. With a very few exceptions (e.g., the maestro di capella in Venice or Rome, or the cantor of a major German city), music was not a lucrative profession. It was regarded as a craft, rather than an art. So Bach didn't live well in Leipzig (although all those kids couldn't have helped), Haydn wore a servant's uniform at the Esterhàzys, Mozart died in poverty. Even Handel, the successful man of the world, had a few brushes with poverty before coming good. It really wasn't until Beethoven, not only one of the greatest composers of all time but also a man filled with new and revolutionary ideas, that musicians started to do better. With Beethoven came the concept of composer as artist. No way would Beethoven eat with the servants, his place was at the main table, on the right of the master of the house. Music is before Beethoven and after Beethoven - and after things were never the same again, either musically or artistically.
 
lordsummit said:
:confused:

Help me out here, you're saying Saxon is better than Mozart? Or some second rate heavy metal band is better than a composer who scaled the heights of the age of enlightenment and rid musicians of the scourge of patronage. Give me strength. You'll be telling me next that Lemmy was better than Wagner and that Judas Priest changed the musical scene as much as Stravinsky.

Or perhaps you're just being sarcastic. :confused:
Click to expand...

Saxon v Mozart is a close one. Both pretty poor. Saxon did write 'Strangers in the Night' which is cool and might edge it in their favour for some people (was that the track you were thinking of, Saab? It's my favourite Saxon number). But Mozart probably did some nice piano stuff or something. I'd call it even.

To be fair, Stravinsky was better than Saxon and Judas Priest. I'd say Stravinsky was probably about as good as the Ramones. The Rite of Spring is very good but the first Ramones LP is equally as good.
 
excellent history lesson Tones,I will need to find another angle,back later for that,

notaclue,indeed,Strangers In the Night is that very track.I always prefered Samson to Saxon,although I liked them both.Judas Priest in a different league though,and its fantastic to think the leaders of the NWOBHM had a bloke in an outfit gayer than anything The Village People wore,brilliant stuff:)
 
just a thought.

I humbly doubt there are many classically trained violinists (violin seems to be the classical lead instrument of choice) that could play the faster yngwie malmsteen tracks note for note at the same speed on a violin.

Doubters have probably forgotten/never heard the said Malmsteen tracks.

If indeed I am right, it puts paid to any doubt that the best rock musicians are truly world class in skill, regardless of genre.
 
notaclue said:
Face it. The following 5 minutes of 'the Priest' is much better than the entire output of Mozart.
[/url]
Click to expand...

Five minutes?! Honestly, how long is your attention span? A guitar riff, comprising all of seven notes (actually only three, 1 / 7' / 1 / 3, 1 / 7' 1, but we'll gloss over that), repeated ad infinitum over two chords (1 / 3) while some guy mutters over it a bit. Then it changes to chord 5 - woooo! - and a lad plays some scales on his guitar for a while, before we're back to chords 1 and 3 again.

And I was joking about Haydn being dull earlier. Anyone who didn't listen to it, don't bother - you've heard it now :D
 
bottleneck said:
just a thought.

I humbly doubt there are many classically trained violinists (violin seems to be the classical lead instrument of choice) that could play the faster yngwie malmsteen tracks note for note at the same speed on a violin.

Doubters have probably forgotten/never heard the said Malmsteen tracks.

If indeed I am right, it puts paid to any doubt that the best rock musicians are truly world class in skill, regardless of genre.
Click to expand...

Yngwie malmsteen? What instrument does he / she / they favour then? And how fast, exactly, are we talking?

Not that note density has anything to do with anything - technical skill in terms of twisting your way up and down your fingerboard doesn't make for music. Just look at Hendrix's output ;)
 
Some intresting choices,however id recomend floyds wish you were here over dsm,it even has stephane grappelli doing a bit of violin work on it.Also worth a listen is hawkwinds space ritual
 
Malmsteen, now that is scraping the bottom of the badgers back passage after a heavy Rogan Josh :rolleyes:
He's got to rate along side Wagner for see crap factor, incepid dross of the first order, the boy can only do 500 thousand notes a second, the master can 2 million if so required :eek:
and as for Beethoven an over paid laccky (like radiohead :D )
Malhar showed promised, but just couldn't hold it all to gether on the orgy under the steinway routine :cool:
 
bottleneck said:
I humbly doubt there are many classically trained violinists (violin seems to be the classical lead instrument of choice) that could play the faster yngwie malmsteen tracks note for note at the same speed on a violin.
Click to expand...

Well, a bit of Googling later and I've browsed some Malmsteen clips. He also appears to have a strange obsession with playing scales. If you're looking for virtuosity, it has to be difficult as well as fast :D ;)
 
Pete - it IS difficult. Trust me.

WM - didnt say it sounded good - just that it was technically incredibly difficult.

NB
Classical music isnt all about scales then? (hmmm)
 

Latest posts

Back
Top