Most complex songs ever?
I'll start with this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4GXNzom6ik
>static rhythm
>complex
>>62400297
b&?
>>62400316
I think he means that the usage of polymeter in this song (and most of Meshuggah's work) is quite complex, and I do have to agree with him
>>62400297
I > Bleed
>>62400297
fuck that was shit.
damn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXN2NSzRAts
this music reeks of virginity lol
>>62400412
I is a fucking masterpiece.
>>62400458
>that part when the chugging stops for a second and the band goes crazy with jen screaming for 30 seconds straight
Not sure how complex it 'really' is, but Tipographica has always tickled by brain in the right ways.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=wAnOF85CwLY
>>62400297
wow this is literally music for friendless nerds
>>62400492
>by brain
*my brain
Captain Beefheart = Prophet
Yowie = God
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LwmtjcaxnY
>>62400492
This
Tipographica has a pretty unique sense of rhythm
Have you checked out Ubeltipo? Same band but with a different name it seems, and they have some even more interesting thanks to the use of tape manipulation or somthing
Read the description
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8bIgrDA8-E
fuck off with that shite mate lol
>>62400533
>Have you checked out Ubeltipo?
Heard of, but haven't listened to yet.
Currently I'm busy trying to figure out what makes some math rock enjoyable to me and some not. E.g.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=JXOEoeVODpk
https://youtube.com/watch?v=MDGEs0eVCAE
I like. I heard that math rock as a genre can get tiring after a while, and I can see what people mean by that, but I think it's refreshing from time to 'shoot some abstraction' so to say. Especially when it manages to retain some sort of human touch, which the above pieces have and which Tipo has a lot of.
>>62400602
(By the way: the three criteria I judge music by are business (how well it captures your attention, just how *much* is going on), complexity (how *many* relationships there are and how little repetitiveness), and emotional resonance. For what it's worth.)
>>62400669
>Heard of, but haven't listened to yet.
Now is the time then
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmo9GlkRIH0
Tipographica 2.0
Yeah, I get you, I used to have a similar system in the past. Now it doesn't work for me, but whatever.
>>62400602
It's a difficult thing to say, but if I had to guess it deals with how "drastic" the changes are.
>>62400486
There's a part like that in Catch 33, I think it's in Sum.
Except this time the chugs don't stop. What a masterpiece.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XLBZ8xRFeM
>>62400440
>proto vaporwave
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug0y1ZhdHT0
>>62400750
>Now it doesn't work for me
Why not? Did your criteria change, or did you stop rating music altogether?
>It's a difficult thing to say, but if I had to guess it deals with how "drastic" the changes are.
Yes, it's a difficult subject. Some metal pieces (I recall listening to a band called 'Behold... the Arctopus'; I can't confirm ATM it exemplifies this, but it might) might change a lot in terms of minor progressions and scales and so on, but those changes are theoretical, don't correspond to a violated expectation in the 'human sense'. The 'yeayea it's so complex... but boring' phenomenon. On the contrary, the way Tipo violates rhythmic expectations, throwing you off-balance, it so to say... understands the listener. It's the 'music flying above the listener's head' problem -- some music's complexity can rely on abusing expectations that are innate and come from our human physiology, the way we're wired, and some rely on violating an established musical idiom, e.g. in some kinds of metal. I think great music, as always, balances those two ways.
Then there is just the fact that I hate music that tries to entrance you (or, if we're being cynical, that tries to obscure its lack of creativity this way). The Bulletproof Tiger has managed to avoid this in the piece I linked, but I had this gripe very hard e.g. with the following, which starts with great, Miriodor-ish, oriental guitar, but then comes to an regrettably unpalatably simplistic percussion.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=jDbmUj1dkNc
>>62400983
In short, great music is a meeting point. The listener must understand music so to understand what the band is doing, but the band must also understand the human brain's weak spots, so to push the right buttons.
>>62400297
>1 rhythm
>complex
not saying it's an easy one to learn but really...most complex??? wow
>>62400983
>>62401032
But the ultimate point is, I think that, as in all art, musical quality is *surprising* the listener without *confusing* him.
>>>>>.............................. = simplistic music
>>>>>........ | ................... = threshold of understanding
>>>>>>>>> | >> .............. = interesting music
>>>>>>>>> | >>>> .......... = great music!
>>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>>. = WTF is that
It's about pattern recognition. Every genre informs you with its set of conventions, and good music is bending them without breaking them, while remaining listenable in the consonance, harmony etc. sense. Nature versus nurture, if you will.
>Bleed
>complex
>song based off hertas
>>>>>complex
OP is still in high school.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fPpciCh4i0Q
>>62401216
Then there is the old problem of first- and second-order complexity, namely being highly complex in one or two variables (AaaAaaαaaAαααALFAfirstletterofthealphabet), versus being complex in many different variables (AAaaBffZloFXzn Hi there! 123---/&%..]/+ :D =^.^=). Again, the problem is it's possible to 'pseudo-diversify' a piece in e.g. a tonal respect infinitely, but it's still uninventive. Not even genre-mixing is a solution to that, because a lot of genres can be mixed within one piece, but every time in a formulaic, copying manner. I like to refer to the thing in question here as 'inter-reference' and 'intra-reference', the piece making 'shout-outs' to another part of itself or another piece, or artist, or genre.
>>62401327
(Apologies for verbosity. I just poured myself out. Sage.)
12 tone composing
Intricately composed to the film
Thematic
time signatures and tempo changes all over the shop
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKkn-YjYmCA
>>62400297
not really a complex song, but as a guitar player I know that your arm will fucking hurt halfway through that song.
>>62401426
>guitar players being little bitches
Try being a drummer and playing that lmao
>>62401216
Pictorially.
>>62401455
>>62401426
I play both, so yeah you are right. But I think its harder for a song on guitar to fuck your arm and hand up
>>62400983
>Why not? Did your criteria change, or did you stop rating music altogether?
I started appreciating other things in music.
Still rate music
>might change a lot in terms of minor progressions and scales and so on, but those changes are theoretical, don't correspond to a violated expectation in the 'human sense'
Well, it doesn't sound very human, but it can still be very exciting thanks to all the drastic changes.
Definitely not "complex for complexity's sake"
>I think great music, as always, balances those two ways.
Great music, as far as I understand it, is music that posses originality, nothing more and nothing less.
As for your link, sound cool. Maybe they are just trying their own ideas where you think they are doing just simple percussion.
>>62401327
>>62401216
Isn't this more about originality than complexity though?
For a pattern to be complex, it has to be new to you, right?
>>62401513
Complex patterns don't need to be new.
The most complex you'll ever get is afrocuban musi and those beats have been around for thousands of years.
>>62401513
Yes, originality is a better word, sorry. Artistic quality is always relative to what we've come to expect. We like to see inverted sentences or novel metaphors, we like to see abstract art, we like to listen to uncommon chords or something. Except, again, with music (and all art except perhaps literature) there are evolutionary boundaries largely, though not unavoidably, determining what we find music and what we find noise.
For the record, let me post my top two pieces of music ATM.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=UwhS0htex9Q
https://youtube.com/watch?v=QXbHy9ZwTOY
>Maybe they are just trying their own ideas where you think they are doing just simple percussion.
I don't know, as soon as a beat lasts for ten seconds or so, I become wary of it.
>>62401550
>The most complex you'll ever get is afrocuban musi
>saying that
>not posting examples
Fuck off.
>>62401550
How would you define complex then? If complex music is music that is difficult to play, I can understand, but is black midi complex, for example?
>>62401622
I don't have to spoon feed you retard. It's well known to any musician that afrocuban music is the most complex especially in rhythm because of its mixing of African polyrhythms and Latin polyrhythms. Fuck off and learn something about music idiot
>>62401659
>I don't have to spoon feed you retard.
'Burden of proof' will not become known as 'spoonfeeding' no matter how hard you try.
>>62401607
>with music (and all art except perhaps literature) there are evolutionary boundaries largely, though not unavoidably, determining what we find music and what we find noise.
Why the literature exception?
Also, Noise is already music at this point in the same way abstract art is, for example.
Well, there is certainly a "human aspect" (maybe evolutionary?) to Gates of Delirium (the inspiring moment at around ~13 minutes, just skipped to that part, was almost blown away).
>>62400297
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt9X8eXboZ4
>>62401665
Lmao?
Pretty obvious you're not a musician mate
>hurrr it's so difficult to type afrocuban music on Google hurr burden of proof
I bet you've never heard any west African drumming in your life. I doubt you can even name a country in west Africa.
>>62401711
>the inspiring moment at around ~13 minutes
Ah yes.
This is where I say that music becomes psychology. The band just somehow guessed how to synergistically (no, this word *is* warranted here, fuck off) combine *variations* of so many things here, making them contribute to each other. Timbre, speed, moving instruments from foreground to background, and aligning it with the anti-war epic narrative to boot. This is a prime example of what I say jazz always lacks.
>>62401665
Because you're too dumb to look anything up.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdYO64axCCM
>>62401792
(It's, so to say, 'lateral' composing. Jazz, for instance, always seems to me to be locked in its narrow 'micromanagement' of every note, into a set of manipulations which loses sight of the broader goal of communicating something, of tapping into the larger-level (in terms of duration and coherence of the whole piece) musical units, of reaching out for a broader palette. Yes did it fantastically here.)
>>62401829
> Jazz, for instance, always seems to me to be locked in its narrow 'micromanagement' of every note, into a set of manipulations which loses sight of the broader goal of communicating something
You've never listened to jazz critically
Jazz is communication between the players, just as you, I, and others are communicating right now. I am not micromanaging my words, I am just typing out a stream of consciousness and your response varries based on my actions/words. That is what jazz is.
I find it hilarious that you think yes communicates better than than masters did because that's horribly incorrect. I challenge you to transcribe any great jazz album from the drums, piano, solo instrument, and bass to see first hand that communication because it's there and improvised on the spot on one take, and not predetermined. That's true communication.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTE5WGrexys
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gv9prjYgQNk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi2uETFYybE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piBqsmYcj0s&list=PLoRpTbWXBTvyTJHDniJL-t5TcBYM9yxAn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQdhzQkddCc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ7jpKh_UF0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71hNl_skTZQ
Also.
>>62401711
>Why the literature exception?
Because literature is the extension of the evolutionarily newest function, namely, well, thinking, in which 'most goes'. Visual arts are based on compositional principles of symmetry, free space, and so on, which are rooted in evolutionary desires to find healthy, non-malformed mates, to find a high obervational point from which to look for prey, and so on. Music is actually pretty visual too, in the sense that we wouldn't want to hear too radical changes in tempo (20 BPM/120 BPM/5 BPM/...) either. Now I think of it, perhaps this is related to evolutionary hatred of hearing people scream incoherently in pain, and getting us to expect clear, comprehensible speech from each other. But literature, literaure is conceptual and even, I'm not well-read, I'm sorry for the lack of a better example, even 'Finnegans Wake'-tier stream-of-consciousness shit doesn't offend us on the visceral level.
But this is getting off-topic, and it's guesswork anyway.
>>62401931
Oh Jesus fuck.
>You've never listened to jazz critically
No, I just refuse to like the laziest, safest genre of music there is.
Jazz is not 'communication between players', it is exactly the opposite. It is playing as inoffensively and insularly as possible, so that every player has space to tinkle on his instrument without the possibility getting in any other player's way. That's exactly why there is no variation, no story, to any jazz piece. Because a story, a piece that evolves, requires shifting the spotlight from one player to another. In jazz there's none of that, it's just a couple of guys standing and pretending that taking care not to accidentally play too loud and take the spotlight is 'cooperation' and 'reading the mind of all other players'. It is literally the most player-uncooperative genre there is.
>>62402044
>>62401931
In other words, sure there is 'a lot' of structure to every shitty jazz piece, because every player has theoretically 'infinite' capacity to tinkle on his instrument of choice in any way he fancies. But again, just because the other players don't take the spotlight and let him do that in peace doesn't mean that there is any teamwork. It's like saying that getting five people to work in the same room in peace because they're all typing on their PCs peacefully is 'teamwork', because no one gets in each other's way. Nonsense.
>>62401792
>This is a prime example of what I say jazz always lacks.
Different goals, different means
>>62402037
Bucephalus looks weird there in that list
>>62402044
>laziest and safest
Uptempo jazz breaks 400bpm regularly. Nothing lazy about that.
>jazz is not 'communication between players', it is exactly the opposite. It is playing as inoffensively and insularly as possible, so that every player has space to tinkle on his instrument without the possibility getting in any other player's way.
Lol you're thinking about SRV blues
You've obviously never heard Miles Second Great Quintet with Tony Williams. Oh so soft and safe, especially thy Tony, it's like he's not even playing.
>no variation or story in jazz
>A love supreme
>Romantic Warrior
>Footsteps
>Anything by Wanye Shorter
>Ornette Coleman
>Ayler
>it is literally the most player-cooperative genre there is
Spoken like someone who's never played jazz before.
I get it, you're a rush fanboy and stuck with that style of music growing up. But to be the blatantly ignorant and think you're not is just straight up retarded.
You literally don't know what you're talking about.
>>62402137
>you're a rush fanboy
Literally today I Googled "all rush songs sound the same".
I have listened to a lot more jazz artists than I should have. I happen to hate scams and hoaxes, you see. I refuse to pareidolically see 'structure' and 'interaction' that isn't there.
>>62402099
>Different goals, different means
Yes well, I will continue to hold that five musicians meeting and DISCUSSING a piece for a couple of hours before settling on its structure and playing it will always yield a richer musical experience than five musicians meeting and playing on the spot. As I said once, I refuse to be impressed by jazz improvs just because they are hard to perform; I care about the end effect, and without the bonus points for effort, the jazz end product just never holds a candle to rock compositions. I don't give points for effort.
>>62402096
>>62402044
And once again, I challenge you to transcribe a jazz tune (can you even read music, let alone dictate it?) because the communication between players is evident in rhythmic comping, passing solo ideas from either the front to the back of the back to the front, catching and playing in the spaces of the solos, etc etc. it's all there for you to discover whether or not you believe it to be true is irrelevant becauses it has been and will always be there. Yes is literally the antithesis of that, throughly composed and predetermined rock music. Where's the communication in something that's been written out already?
>>62402195
Name the artists you have listened to. I doubt it was much and I doubt you actually listened because you have the opinion of a high school teenager who doesn't understand jazz and thinks metal is the only real music in the world. It's pretty funny actually.
>>62402195
Jazz is a genre that really has to be played to be fully understood. Going to see a live jazz show is probably the next best thing.
>>62400297
I know this is bait but this song still kicks ass
>>62402223
>I challenge you to transcribe a jazz tune
I have already addressed this.
There is infinite room for MICROmanagement in jazz. The jazz 'ideas' you speak which musicians 'swap' of are vacuous, pointless microalterations that are then smugly claimed to effect a 'wholly new piece' and a 'wholly new musical experience' every time as per >>62402276, in a con man manner, while never encompassing anything truly novel. I have grown out of this. There is so much more broader sonic ideas which to express in compositions waiting for me to listen.
>>62402247
>Name the artists you have listened to.
I neither remember nor keep track of artists that all sound the same. At least two from your list though, Davis (on more than one record) and that 'A Love Supreme' guy whoever he was.
>metal
The only metal music I've liked is, aside from the metal bits of Estradasphere, Unquestionable Presence. Keep trying, though. Maybe you'll guess my tastes accurately finally, and display this sort of mythical preternatural jazz 'mind reading' that's being hyped.
Kindly fuck off now, this had been a good thread if I may say so.
>>62402276
He's a rockist. a stupid one at that. Leave him to his pretend world. Everyone knows those cats couldn't hang with even collegiate jazz musicians. Let him run off into his pretend land where he's right about everything and he's the only true pratician.
I like this one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKNOlDtZluU
>>62402329
I have always thought that pretension of fans of jazz was only a myth, but to my surprise, I'm seeing it isn't.
>>62402314
Literally retarded.
How old are you? Be honest.
My guess is no more than 19. I'd say 17
>>62402359
28.
It took me ten years, and a fair share of listening, to grow out of sympathy for jazz.
>>62402350
>>62402314
>in a con man manner, while never encompassing anything truly novel. I have grown out of this. There is so much more broader sonic ideas which to express in compositions waiting for me to listen.
??????
>>62402044
>Why the literature exception?
I don't agree with any of what you said, but you might want to check out this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFZe-oCHFwM
>>62402393
!!?!!!???!!??!!?
Here, I just displayed the equivalent of the kind of 'communication' that purportedly happens in jazz bands, in textual form. What a profound art we are in the process of creating in those two posts. Takes true connoisseurship to appreciate I dare say.
>>62402398
I once read a theory that rhythm has evolved from rhythmical dancing so to keep warm, which was beneficial from survival.
>>62402379
You're 28 and have militant views on prog and think jazz is nonsense. Holy fedora 4chan
What instrument do you play? I've been playing drums since age 3 and jazz since age 12. Wanna tell me more about how I don't know anything about music and how in the moment for the moment is a con and how predetermined music is better? I play in orchestras too, I know all about playing throughly composed complex music and know from my experience jazz is the better choice to express oneself. Playing the same notes the same way night after night is not at all a true expression of the self, rather an expression of a period in time, in a lot of prog rock bands that time is well over 30 years. Where's the modern voice? No where? That's what you like though right, the same stuff played to a T?
>>62402455
That's pretty far off according to that video (which makes a lot of sense)
>>62402460
I don't agree with his views on jazz, but you are acting ridiculous.
>>62402478
>words are ridiculous
Oh okay master tripfag
>>62400497
I'm a friendless nerd and I don't even like it
>>62402460
>You're 28 and have militant views on prog and think jazz is nonsense.
The style of rhetorics of jazz fans, right here, QFT.
>Playing the same notes the same way night after night is not at all a true expression of the self
Playing them? No.
Composing them in the first place? Yes.
Pretending to have been composing a piece while in reality one is just employing a gratuitous stretch of relative silence during a jazz performance so to play a minor variation of a phrase? No.
>>62402513
You're only proving my point about your militantism
>HURR LE FANS LOL AMIRITE GIYS
What on earth makes you think jazz doesn't have compostion in it? Like how dumb do you have to be to actually believe this shit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yE2ulYKK56U
>>62402545
>What on earth makes you think jazz doesn't have compostion in it?
It has traces of it. It's just you have to be positively prejudiced in the first place to extol them rather than to see them for pretty uninspired rehashes of the same couple of ideas. Rock/classical is a library; jazz is just one old used 'choose your adventure' novel that's entrenched in the notions of its own 'uniqueness' and 'superiority to ordinary, fixed literature'.
>>62402612
>uninspired rehashes of the same couple of ideas
>what is prog Rock
Alright I'm done. Enjoy being musically illiterate.
>>62402640
>Enjoy being musically illiterate.
Enjoy confusing your random sequences of phrases for literature.
>>62402654
>unironically believes progrock is literature
>>62402766
I don't even listen to much classic prog nowadays. It tends to be too sparse.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=2C0F7eFxhXM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBEesrdaRog
Faggots think that it has to be "extreme" or "badass" as in shitty metal to be complex (Meshuggah is actually really good though).
The harmonic complexity of aguas de marco is insane, seriously look into it. It's sort of a good Bach fugue, crazy to think of the composition process.
>>62402044
(In fact, I'm listening to >>>>62402137's 'Miles Second Great Quintet' right now (though this is something I've observed in all jazz pieces), and I realized that for the jazz facade to fall apart one only needs to follow a single instrument. It's then painfully transparent that the players' sole concern is to make an inoffensive, decent background for every other player. I mean, nothing wrong with a couple of guys wanting to play together -- but it takes more than that to impress me. Again, I don't want to see a couple of blind guys who through years of training and sensing each other's location through extravisual means manage to run around in a room without crashing into each other -- I want to see a ballet.)
>>62401387
Underrated.
>>62403359
(I have been compared for my views on jazz to 'Steve Albini'. I looked him up today and, as far as I understand, he says that his gripe with jazz is that it focuses on individual players' performances at the expense of the band as a unit; that it stresses musical isolationism, 'every member on his own', at the expense of the total quality of the outfit. I couldn't agree more. Which is why I find the irony in jazz fans' claims that unity is what it is about particularly bitter.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZXJLQntCP0
Rosetta Stoned uses 4/4, 5/8, 5/4, 11/8, 3/4, and 6/4 time signatures
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_Stoned
>>62403524
I think Larks' Tongues in Aspic Part 1 integrated ambient vocals into itself better, and over a more inspired instrumental too.
>>62400790
Dont remind me of my ex. ffs.
>>62402096
You never played jazz. You never seriously listened to jazz. For obviously, you lack the ability to understand it. Now stop making a fool of yourself.
>>62404172
>You never seriously listened to jazz. For obviously, you lack the ability to understand it.
'You don't understand it unless you like it! If you don't like it, it means you don't TRULY understand it!'
K.
>>62404188
>>62404172
In other words, show me a jazz piece that shows the emotional premeditation of 'Starless' and I will change my mind.
But I won't because you won't.
>>62400297
That's literally one of Meshuggah's simplest songs.
>>62404206
>inb4 I'm a pleb listening to music for its emotional impact
Not that there's anything wrong with that, but that's wrong. I listen to it for the thinking that was necessary to come up with musical vectors of that impact.
>>62402827
You realise this sounds like (very) watered down jazz fusion?
>>62404465
'Fusion' makes all the difference. I'm all for fleshing out the skeleton of a composition with various kinds of fills; but jazz is taking a heap of flesh and pushing ribs and bones in it in hopes of creating a critter.
>>62404503
In normal words, composition + a bit of variation = fine, variation + a bit of composition = crap.
>>62400486
>>62400766
The only thing that chugs and is complex is a fucking train, debate me
>>62403423
THANK YOU
I love you anon
>>62404821
>I love you
That's a rare sentiment, but you're welcome.
>>62404206
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aJxOjdu6uk
>>62404503
You do not know what jazz fusion is. Quit talking out of your ass and accept the limits of your knowledge. Jazz is extremly diverse and innovative. Much more than Rock. There are forms of jazz where composition is big. There is jazz that is pure improvisation. There is everything in the middle. Ther is acoustic jazz, electric jazz, jazz that mixes both. Jazz musician frequently take ideas from classical music, indian music, rock and electronic music. You are pretentious and think you can judge jazz because you listened to a few albums that you, most obviously, didn't even come close to understanding.
To have listened to A Love Supreme and not have been left in awe, one truly must be deaf, dishonest or a fool. In your case it seems to be a mix of the three.
>>62404837
You've perfectly summed up how I feel about jazz, it was all I could do and more to not fall in love with you. N-no homo.
>>62404895
>Jazz is extremly diverse and innovative.
Correct
>Much more than Rock.
Definitely not
>>62404895
>To have listened to A Love Supreme and not have been left in awe, one truly must be deaf, dishonest or a fool.
thumbs up! xD
>>62400448
hahaha those virgins, right bro? hahaha XD
>>62400440
This is p.good
>>62404895
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aJxOjdu6uk
Since it is 'Starless' we're comparing it to, I'll give it a full listen. (>inb4 I was supposed to give full listens to every single jazz spaghetti monster thrown at me in threads like this)
...It's above-average (in terms of composition, not emotion), but sounds too 'less is more' movie-ey adult-ey ambient-ey for me so far.
...And now the electronic bits came in, whose presence is disappointing to be honest.
...The finale is good, but still...
I hardly had the sense of journey I had with the following:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhbV5pY2nuY
And then again, isn't jazz (fully, partly) improvised by definition? I wouldn't call that jazz, and would like to see the genre other people would call it in a blind query.
>>62400297
Jesus, that's complex for you?
I'm not even a huge Zappa fanboy, but that's nowhere near as complex as The Black Page
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5FUxqnoHDU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MshUFnfEfeA
>128 time signature changes
>>62405169
I was about to say it is not as complex as
https://youtube.com/watch?v=LmXMy4p5Mto
https://youtube.com/watch?v=FOC_LO8UMlw
but it picked up some steam.
>>62405018
lmao you sound like a virgin taking his high school metal too seriously
Timpfag here
Jazz was a verb before it was a noun, you jazzed up this popular tune, you jazzed up that phrase. Let's jazz this up a bit.
While you're not wrong that jazz took from composed piece (you neglect to mention composing over already composed pieces) it was a way to chew through hours worth of club music without getting bored, in your words random variation. Randomness to an extent, jazz is focused on improvisation of the singular and unique voice of the players who get together, play a tune, and voice their opinions and interact with one another. That guy saying you don't understand jazz unless you've played it isn't lying. You don't understand the joy of freedom of creative though right then and there. The thrill especially with other great players beats any drug I've ever taken. The purpose is always to explore the music within the perameters that were established, if any. You are always playing the music for the music. I play a lot of classical music and a lot of jazz as well as many other styles of music. I've yet to meet a classical musician who isn't always pissed off. They're always cranky about something and I get the same way when I'm having to read someone else's work and never get to voice my artistic voice. Throughly composed pieces can be and are masterpieces. But they're nothing to the freedom jazz allows. And jazz is far more diverse than rock. People started to play open sloshy hihats because of Tony Williams, one of the masters of Jazz. Jazz stretches into literally every kind of modern music imaginable, including rock and prog and just about anything that has improvisation. The best musicians period are jazz players.
You like music that's "thought out" without realizing the amount of thought that went into figuring out what harmonies and colors fit over certain chords, changes, rhythmic patters and being able to pull them out into cohesive melodies and lines without actually THINKING about it. In the moment for the moment.
>>62405582
>muh changes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqqfnfcE7Rw
>>62405582
and to say the collective suffer as a result in wrong and completely subjective either way. Listen to any of the fusion bands from the 70s. Return to Forever, Weather Report, etc etc. that's prog before prog was a thing. Why do you think prog even exists today? Classical music? Lol
>>62405610
>muh comprehension
>>62405633
>Why do you think prog even exists today? Classical music? Lol
Well, it is.
The first progressive rock artists were The Nice and Moody Blues; both heavily influenced by classical music and almost no jazz (if at all).
>>62405582
>>62405633
Seriously though, your argument is literally 'I enjoy it so it's good' plus the old as the hills 'it's about the feeling' and 'it's about the musicians being in the moment, it's about the experience of freedom while one's playing'. So, as always, jazzfags are reduced to appeals to the subjective, 'it's good as soon as you convince yourself that it is good' i.e. blind yourself to objective judgement of it, instead pointing to the abstract 'it's good because it allows infinite liberty'. This is a non-sequitur.
>>62405735
This, too. I remember seeing a page with Keith Emerson's classical quotations he'd done in ELP's pieces; ethics of it aside, it was a pretty long list.
>>62405775
What is your argument? It's composed therefore inferior? Objectively!!!!
You fucking retard
>>62405775
(In other words, jazzfags are literally guilty of judging their own music for its non-musical merits: 'it's about the feeling' means fuck all if the music's shit.)
>>62405839
>means fuck all if the music is shit
OBJECTIVELY
Jesus Christ the hypocrisy
>>62405822
>What is your argument?
Glad you asked.
My argument -- I mean, I came into this thread with no jazz argument at all, I came to say that I like Tipographica, but -- my argument now is that jazz is objectively a simplistic genre of music as decided by algorithmic complexity of its generation: namely, the amount of code needed to programmatically generate a piece of jazz vs progressive rock to the effect of people judging it as belonging to either genre in a double blind study.
>>62405775
That's how it works for all music, not just jazz...
If people like it, it's good. Now, you can have better music, but that depends on how you define better
>>62405870
>hypocrisy
I never said that music quality is subjective. I believe otherwise.
>>62405881
Tipographica is almost literally a jazz fusion band, who takes a lot of influence from Frank Zappa's jazz fusion albums.
Jazz is just a different way of playing the game of music.
>>62405898
>>62405921
>Tipographica is almost literally a jazz fusion band
Well yes, I know. To be honest, most of my currently favourite music -- Tipo, TMV, Estradasphere, Niacin, 'Valentyne Suite', even Unquestionable Presence, have been claimed to be jazz-influenced. But I insist that fusion is still a far cry from pure jazz.
>>62405958
(Plus, you could just as well reverse >>62405633's and >>62405582's argument and say that it is prog, which all those bands arguably are, that draws from and integrates every single genre, including jazz.)
>>62405881
You also never told me what instrument you play. Surely such strong views about objectively simple music can master said music and therefore making you an authority in this argument.
But if you don't even play music yet walk around thinking your taste is objectively good and prog is objectively more difficult (lol) then why are you even here when you haven't yourself experienced the growing pains of a musician?
>>62406000
>prog is objectively more difficult
To perform? Possibly not*.
To compose? Obviously.
*Even if I think https://youtube.com/watch?v=PZKIh5aCYCI is no mean feat.
>>62400448
Metal like OP posted actually has some pretty sick rhythmic complexity. A lot of metal is a bit immature in the sense of it just being grim-dark, but there's also a lot of really authentic musicianship.
>>62405775
It is good because accomplished musicians like it. They like listening to it, they like playing it. Skilled musician like pushing limits of their instrument and of music.Jazz gives it to them.
And you're the one who appeals to subjective. Musical and technical excellence is of interest to any subject. It is objective since it can be understood and appreciated regardless of the subjectivity through which music is always given.
>>62400602
Best math rock i've heard is Toe.
Toe manages to have interesting, fast paced rhythm based songs but still retains some nice melody and groove.
Math rock just seems to get too esoteric and mechanical to me. But sometimes that can be appealing too.
>>62406092
>It is good because accomplished musicians like it. They like listening to it, they like playing it.
No, that's just pretension so to be politically correct because jazz performers used to be black.
>pushing limits of music
That's can be done both to the good side and to the crappy side.
>pushing limits of their instrument
Oh? I hardly recall a jazz instrumentalist ever coming close to e.g. Shawn Lane's intensity, but then, you're lucky he's a jazz guitarist, so you have a case... Oh, wait. 'Genres: Instrumental rock, jazz fusion, world fusion'. That pesky fusion, it always pops out just when you think pure jazz is good.
>>62406027
>possibly not
It isn't
>to compose. Obviously
You're literally thinking of early bebop.
I used to be a huge prog consumer till I found out how simplistic it was after listening to jazz fusion in my early teens. As I've grown and listen to more and more jazz, the spontaneity definitely appeals more to me. There certainly is jazz that is throughly composed but it has improv as the foundation. Modern jazz is a great example of that. So is Tony Williams.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fDjz9BzJ4cM
>>62406122
>Best math rock i've heard is Toe.
Odd, haven't heard of them even though they have extremely high ratings on Prog Archives. Will def look into.
Most complicated piece to play?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McUQ7aj2E5g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prnW7UA-K8E
Or close to it anyways.
>>62406122
>>62406262
Toe is pretty bad, mango
Giraffes? Giraffes! and LITE are better if you want similar sounding stuff.
>>62405958
You know, just because you don't like jazz doesn't mean it's bad...
Also, improvised music isn't inherently bad to composed music.
>>62401819
This is fucking great.
Thanks m8
>>62406295
>Giraffes? Giraffes!
L M A O
>>62406376
I mean, it was as a reply to Toe, what were you expecting?
>>62406092
>you're the one who appeals to subjective
Forgot to add this is a lie, cf. >>62405881 in which I give an objective measurement.
>>62406295
>You know, jut because you don't like jazz doesn't mean it's bad...
Sure. It's the other way round.
>improvised music isn't inherently bad to composed music
True, but experience shows that in practice improvs just don't measure up. Just today, I might have listened to the best improv I've heard and it's still only good. (Starts at 1:50.)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=tiJstUNFM3g
>>62406418
>True, but experience shows that in practice improvs just don't measure up
That's because your own system to meassure it is the one you say that's not valid. See below
>Sure. It's the other way round.
>>62400533
yowie are awful shit you might as well be listening to Hehold the Arctopus
>>62406530
Both are cool
>>62406547
no theyre not
>>62406563
My opinion is better than yours, so you are wrong
Jesus Christ, everyone in this thread has such extreme opinions on everything. It's insanity.
Seek the middle way, y'all.
>>62406520
No, I don't dismiss both jazz and improvs because I assume they're bad; I dismiss them because they are lacking in terms of coherence of the piece (gradual, precise alteration of its compositional subunits in terms of e.g. minutes, i.e., amount of cross-references) and in terms of amount of stylistic devices employed (e.g. choosing a specific device to elicit some specific sense of wistfulness or regret or whatever, e.g. a timbre or an effect). Humans just cannot come up with those at a whim during a performance, this comes from raw IQ limits. We aren't machines. Improvisations are impoverished compared to compositions; again, I'm not going to applaud them just for doing their best.
>>62406618
>Seek the middle way
'Fall not into the chasm either too far to the left nor too far to the right; fall squarely into it!'
>>62406718
>'Fall not into the chasm either too far to the left nor too far to the right; fall squarely into it!'
What did he mean by this?
You can't cross a chasm in two steps!
>>62406394
>>62406295
What makes Toe bad exactly?
I mean, I'm no expert on the genre as a whole, but Toe seems like a nice middle-ground / intermediate. I listen to esoteric 12 tone and serial music when I want to be pretentious, i listen to metal and math rock when i want sick drumming and rhythms.
>>62406589
haha i get this post i get jokes
>>62406718
In other words, it always comes to the old problem of 'what? it's still complex, look at all the changes we're doing!' with the person failing to see that those cherished changes only happen on one level of music (strictly executive, so to say) while neglecting all the other levels (viz. back too >>62401792 for what I mean by that). Music is too extensive a framework for a genre *never* to allow *some* kind of variety; so there's always going to be variety to point out. So the question becomes, again, that of the *number* of *different* varieties a piece makes use of.
>>62406832
>What makes Toe bad exactly?
>Toe seems like a nice middle-ground / intermediate
There is your answer.
No, but seriously, it's because it's very "flavorless". I mean, I love flavorless math rock too (like Bulletproof Tiger), but I wouldn't call them good and wouldn't recommend them unless it's pretty clear they want to listen to that specific kind of stuff.
>i listen to metal and math rock when i want sick drumming and rhythms.
Yowie and Sajjanu
>>62406837
:3
>>62406890
>mfw someone on /mu/ qualified their condemnation of a band being because their "middle ground"
Its nice to see people not shit all over anything other than what they deem is "the best".
>>62406890
math rock is flavorless by definition
>>62406982
Yeah, well, that's because there are thousands and thousands of good bands, so if they are not the bests (unless you are asking for something very specific), it's not worth your time.
>>62406991
What definition?
>>62406991
That's a neat thought, but I still think it's possible to infuse it with some feeling. Cf. >>62400602.
>>62400297
holy fucking pleb. love me some shuggah but bleed is easily their worst song. dunno why it's so damn bobular tbhfam. >muh double pedals
>>62407025
What are some bands better than Toe? I like faster paced stuff if that helps
>>62407138
See >>62406295 and >>62406890
Is this a recommendation thread now?
Give me the memeist math rock you can find
>>62407199
Constant Cronological Apparatus
>>62407199
Gentle Giant.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=-_wrhRlyB6A
https://youtube.com/watch?v=NLWvj6VyYGg
>>62407199
tera melos
https://youtu.be/dUKfbgp4p-4
This is such an motivating and energetic song. I listened to it so many times, especially when I was really depressive. It helped me through depression and supported me by finding myself. This is a real masterpiece of mankind and I could hear it all night before falling asleep. I really think you will love it to so give it a try
>>62407292
Yea theyre memey as fuck take a look at this video for a start https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYXhD2U2dTI
>>62406718
Sounds like you're saying jazz isn't as safe as composed works because composed works have all the twists and turns written out on the page, vs taking a chance and organically making those twists and turns.
You seriously think humans can't come up with music collectively as a whole on the spot? That's completely wrong because I've seen it happen time and time again. I have even been apart of groups that catch a turn and completely change the direction of a song numerous times. It sounds like you're not an instrumentalist, you've never jammed with anyone and don't know what it's like and as a result have this warped view about improv (you have no improv skills) simply because if you can't do it, we'll surely no one else can! So to combat this you champion sitting down and writing out every note for everyone in the band to play (not your band, you don't have a band)))))
>>62407403
>you're saying jazz isn't as safe as composed works because composed works have all the twists and turns written out on the page, vs taking a chance and organically making those twists and turns
>those
Here's your error.
No. Not those.
Inferior ones.
>>62407431
>>62407431
What instrument do you play? What experience do you have playing music? Can you read music? Can you notate music?
>>62407431
>>62407403
Not to mention, you're again appealing to extramusical factors. First it was 'jazz is good because it feels good to play', now it's 'jazz is good because it transcends compositional barriers'. I don't give a fuck how it feels for the producer or what it entails for him. I care about the quality of the product I get. >inb4 some 'jazz is good because the listener is a part of the playing experience' shit
>>62407510
>>62407490
'Jazz is good because its detractors don't have the skill x!'
Your arguments are getting more and more entertaining.
>>62407535
You've avoided the question for, what, a couple of hours now?
>I care about the quality of the product I get
Subjective
What instrument do you play? What experience do you have with music? None? Oh okay, opinion discarded.
>>62400297
>tfw never be able to play this fast and clean
>>62407659
STILL avoiding it
Once again, your opinion -> discarded
You can't talk about objectively good and bad when you yourself don't know the ins and outs of proficiency of music. Fucking idiot.
>>62407659
gee whiz music knowledge on a music board
Who knew
>>62407743
>>62407775
I have never used the 'don't criticize unless you make something better' pseudoargument at anyone because it is glaringly retarded. It fails even on the most basic syllogical level. 'All creators are competent. | Therefore you are not competent unless you are a creator.' Nonsense.
>>62407828
The only nonsense here is you talking about objectively good and bad music without knowing anything about music.
Who you gonna listen to, some random telling you to not eat this that and such or a nutritionist who studied that shit for years? You have. No authority you dumb fuck and for prog too of all genres to being an idiot about. You had to for that stereotype.
>>62407890
>Who you gonna
>>62407890
>not eat this that
>>62407890
>No authority you dumb fuck
>>62407890
>to being an idiot
>>62407890
>You had to for that
Holy shit. I'm not the one to point out one typo or even two or three, but five? You must have been really mad typing that.
>>62407937
Or maybe I'm on my phone retard
>>62407991
I wouldn't know. I don't know how smartphones work because I don't have one. I listen on a SanDisk Sansa when I'm on the go; I think listening to music on a phone is a travesty.
>>62400297
SECRET CHEIFS 3 - POSSIBLY THE BEST CONCERT I'VE EVER BEEN TO.
sorry for caps, i just feel strongly. these dudes have explained their time signature as a rotating geometric shape, and seeing them perform it live was like watching something i didnt even know was possible. bear in mind that i'm just a lowly folk musician from NY, working on my shit and trying to get better, but i know i dont hold a candle to classically trained musicians.
>>62407991
You're still able to see your posts before you post them r-tard
>>62400497
/mu/ is mostly comprised of friendless nerds
>>62400533
yowie is an example of 100% skill 0% passion for music
It's 3 extremely talented musicians wank off in a circle to their own intelligence and skill. There's nothing in it, no emotion, no soul, no humanity in it.
Fucking awful band
>>62408125
Not when your phone is seconds from dying and not at an outlet to charge it
>>62408429
>not carrying your charger around for shitposting emergencies
>>62400297
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piBqsmYcj0s
This. Now fuck off with your gay metal you faggot.
![6494d9a65195279d35717e6d97375037c34660e076011dc05bcc67011a212df0[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/cTcAjsK.jpg "6494d9a65195279d35717e6d97375037c34660e076011dc05bcc67011a212df0[1].jpg")
>>62401387
>anything written by Ron Jarzombek
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYlzPWEQhLg&ab_channel=RonJarzombek
If I want rhythmic complexity Frank Zappa usually does the job for me. The opening of "The Ocean is the Ultimate Solution" fucked with my head for a while.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCNRgfkeWXs
And then there's The Black Page, which he intentionally wrote to be difficult so he could challenge his drummer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YP8O1vo14y8
And then there's his Synclavier works:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFFpSVmjAEs
>>62400297
i´d say pop music with dancing and live show is the most complex and rewarding genre of songs, checking out how michael jackson did it really made me appreciate mainstream artists like million times more. It´s about love and doing stuff together, genuine feelings. Not just the beat. The core of music is hope and the message and escapism, people want something amazing and pop music simply delivers that epic feel.
![gentle_giant_fullbandlive_1975_portsmouth[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/bZ6lWDU.jpg "gentle_giant_fullbandlive_1975_portsmouth[1].jpg")
>ctrl-f "polyphony"
>nothing
Alright, children, this is complex fucking music:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfLGpPw6vfc&ab_channel=sabucatuloco
Any of you ever tried to write a goddamn four-voice fugue? Time signature changes a-la Dream Theater are pretty arbitrary. Writing a melody and then writing another that sounds distinguishable yet agreeable- and then another- and then ANOTHER is something you pretty much have to go to school to learn how to do
>>62406191
>No, that's just pretension so to be politically correct because jazz performers used to be black.
what the shit am i reading lmao
>>62409044
absolutely spectacular
>>62409370
any more polyphony in a rock/pop context like this?
>>62409370
>go to school to learn
frank zappa said music school was a mistake, would he agree in this case?
>>62401819
what the fuck
>>62400297
What is the complexity on that? Its repetitive as fuck, the rhythm is nowhere near complex and you cant even say there is any sort of harmony knowledge there. What the fuck? Do you even music?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGXxcC344NY
This is as complex as I can listen to.
>>62409920
M mm I'd disagree, there is harmony in there.
The patterns change on the second half of the song. But meshuggah is complex but not as complex as it actually sounds.
>>62409370
>>62409985
>tfw you posted both those bands first ITT
>tfw you also got shat on by jazzfags ITT
Fuck them.
>>62410023
(Relayer is easily the best Yes album BTW.)
>>62410023
Aww mate it's okay, not everyone is pratician enough for jazz.
>>62410054
>pratician
Practician? Yes. I can see that. Jazz is all practice and no theory.
>>62410077
Jazz has plenty of theory and knowledge associated with it and classical has historically been just as improvisational as it was meticulous. Jazz and classical are fruits of the same musical aspirations.
>>62410042
>(Relayer is easily the best Yes album BTW.)
mein neger
also, fuck "patricians"
>>62410077
Pratician and practician are two different words.
Without theory, good luck know how to solo over chords and changes or playing songs in all 12 keys.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1RrVa_axRY
/thread
>>62410097
I mean, The Yes Album is very competent and Fragile evokes beautiful moods in places ('SSotS', 'The Fish'), but a reviewer has rightly said that 'To Be Over' is mellow to help the listener recuperate from the combined headfuck that is 'Gates' and 'Sound Chaser' one after another.
>>62402314
there's a good amount of metal that will appeal if ou like atheist imo
>>62410163
>he reads music reviews
Fucking lol
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ9JepPHbx8
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bXw_phbUI2g
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dqtFGaHcWRk
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yPuQFPyor9c
>>62409920
i dont think meshuggah call themselves complex, the fans just overintellectualize their music because of its associations with prog (which are very overblown)
it's good music but meant to be trance-like in its repetition and aside from krautrock prog isn't about that
>>62409370
yeah
rhythmic difficulty without melodic depth doesn't equate to complexity, it's just an element. complexity is emergent, you need to have some sort of planned goal-oriented structure to qualify as complex
whether jazz counts is a bit thorny, because the soloing and modal changes can be quite architectural, but i don't know if imrovisational dialogue is really planning
>>62410163
I've always liked To Be Over, it's a beautiful song, it's pretty solid, and it's prog as fuck. Sure it's mellow, but I think that's only by Relayer's standards. There's Relayer mellow, and there's Camel mellow.
Also, I didn't really "get" Gates at first, so like any Yes fan CTTE was my favorite for a long while. It was when I was looking for a competitor for Genesis's Supper's Ready that I really understood Gates and came to love it, making Relayer my favorite album. It's been like 4 years since, and I still use Relayer's cover as my cover or background photo in most websites.
>>62410464
do you have a rym?
>>62410464
I once read a person calling 'Gates' '"CTTE"'s evil twin'.
And yes, the cover is gorgeous too.
>There's Relayer mellow, and there's Camel mellow.
Hey, Camel rock out hard on 'Lady Fantasy'.
>>62410434
Try to solo over tunes that change key centers every bar and tell me you don't have to have a knowledge and an idea of what's going to happen and when it's going to happen.
>>62410532
i don't disagree, it's just not the same sort of planning that makes a fugue complex
>>62410464
Also, if you look out for epics, then -- not strictly epic, but listen to 'Les Porches de Notre-Dame'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuCq9n8jW8E
>>62410576
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=P0rrrj87U8Q
Id argue it's more complex seeing as it requires you to call upon all this knowledge at the very second you are playing, where as with a written fugue, you go through trial and error and ultimately can keep rewriting a single piece for years before it ever gets done.
>>62410685
perhaps correct, but complexity shouldn't be a contest. this is exactly what makes the mindset of tool fans (for instance) so immature.
>>62410515
Nope, sorry. It's too much manual work for me, but I do want to get at it some time. Here's a spoiler, though, Relayer, CTTE and Genesis's Trespass will probably be at the top.
>>62410522
Whoops, guess that came wrong. I didn't mean to bash Camel, and in fact I really do love them. Mirage is too fucking great to not be loved.
>>62410594
Nice, added to my watchlist. I'll probably go over it tomorrow during work, thanks.
>>62410785
I believe the theme of the thread is most complex
>>62410821
yeah but there's no real hierarchy. just like you can't say one branch of higher math is more difficult than another, they're not comparable. lots of complex music uses different sorts of lexicons and different extensions of basic ideas, which make parallels hard to draw.
>>62410788
Before I go to bed, here's a song
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE0zbnllEF0
>>62408280
It's really not like that, there is a lot of emotion in that album, but I won't try to convince you if you want to think you are right.
But if you actually want to enjoy the album, I could mention some emotive moments and tips on how to better grasp the album as a whole.
>>62411014
When I first heard 'Cryptooology', it literally made me laugh out loud. But I really like it.
>>62411014
>I could mention some emotive moments and tips on how to better grasp the album as a whole.
Not that poster, but do.
>>62410870
>just like you can't say one branch of higher math is more difficult than another
/sci/ disagrees
>>62411047
Wait, do you like it or not?
>>62411119
I like it, but/so I'm interested in reading/learning more about it.
>>62411143
>>62411119
Also I laughed at it because of how far out there it is, not because I found the effort ridiculous, if that's what you meant.
>>62411119
>/sci/ disagrees
they're part of 4chan, it's in 4chan's nature to treat everything like a contest
>>62400448
What does this even mean?
>>62410434
>you need to have some sort of planned goal-oriented structure to qualify as complex
by definition or in your opinion?
>>62411944
you can't even shag to the rhythm!
>>62411917
Some branches of maths are literally more difficult and complex than others. It's generally agreed by many people that Calculus is more difficult than Linear Algebra, for example.
Same goes for music with Pop and Jazz
>>62411143
Do you have a rym or lastfm or something?
I don't want to get into details now (posting from my phone), but I could later.
>>62412320
>Do you have a rym or lastfm or something?
Just post it in whenever in whichever thread and I'll search for the album name in a couple of days in the archive.
>>62412320
You could post a review to rym
