A Lark Ascending

Love in a G.U.M. clinic! Well, not quite. Strange, disquieting stories, all about musicians.

In the end, from my perspective, it was all just very enjoyable pop music, often so well crafted that it's still fun to listen to 40 years later. Whilst I can see that worrying whether something is prog or "psych prog" (not sure what that is or was) might matter to some I just enjoy it for the tunes and the colours and, above all, the nostalgia.

............... Good post, Robert I beg to differ with a lot of your points though.(Ive not included all.) .... About the lines Ive parsed - probably half those bands you mention are in fact PROTO-prog, not prog proper. Charm - most certainly. But about the whimsey and lightness of touch -there is actually not over-much of that in prog (of the period you detail.) Yes, ocassionally there is Lear/Carollian nonesense-type prog lyric (to give example, Gryphon "Flash In The Pantry",Stackridge "Snark",Yezda Urfa "My Doc Told Me I Had Doggie Head", Crimson "Catfood") but whimsey was really to the fore in the UK POPSIKE of late 60s, not prog. Prog lyrics tend towards darkness/seriousness.Subjects of (dark)fantasy/mythology, social concerns,nature. Even something as silly-sounding as Genesis' "Willow Farm" has more sinister overtones on re-thought (and connected to the bigger picture of that particular epic.) Sure Caravan is full of lightness, but Caravan were at the later point where prog melded into the more overt playfulness of Canterbury and one or two more subgenres.(I suppose Family has light elements but, admittedly contrary to most progheads pidgeonholing, Ive never really rated them Prog. They seem more Queen/Supertrampish to me.) Out of curiosity, what example of lightness can you ascribe to VDGG??? When you talk of lightness/frolicksomeness in INSTRUMENTAL prog a good example is Bo Hansson. His music stands out unique from the rest of progdom because of this un-ponderous composition. Prog was more-than-often dark. Lyric-wise, one of the darkest lps I know is not some abrasive punk or noise band like Swans, but Procol Harum's "Home". You have to remember that 'prog' is a retrospective label. I can recall the term 'progressive' being used around 1970 but the diminutive came later - used either mockingly by the unsympathetic or defensively by musicians/fans trying to stress that they weren't taking themselves too seriously. The bands and musicians who were later compartmentalised into particular genre boxes were, at the time, part of a broad swathe of rock music that we selected from as it took our interest. In 1970-72 I was buying the Moody Blues alongside Chicago, King Crimson alongside Fairport Convention, Genesis and Yes alongside Deep Purple and Led Zeppelin, Caravan alongside Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young. Others had Clapton, Hendrix, the Grateful Dead and all manner of things in the mix. They all seemed part of the same rich tapestry. Therein lay dark and light, whimsy and attempted seriousness, the gazelle-like and the turgid. The idea of 'prog' as a genre comes later - partly a historic term used to tidy up the period, partly a term used by the next generation of bands to describe their music. I think that's what often happens. The sense of a definite genre is a second-generation thing. The first period is much more messy (and, dare I say, interesting). Might look different from abroad*. * abroad = beyond the British Isles

Good luck Alex. Would have liked to make Derby but sadly I have to wrestle with coal mining in 19thC West Yorkshire tonight!

No rain since the start of June. An unusually dry spring and early summer. Expect the heavens to open in 2 1/2 weeks as the school holidays start!

Hmm - not on my Vol 1 paperback. Bought back in 1976 (or was it 77?) when it first came out. Price label £2.90 - which seemed a small fortune at the time. It was my favourite review book for many years and helped to put together the 'core' of a collection. Mine is an unabridged reprint of the 1984 version. Maybe they changed it between 1976 and 84 adding Thacker's sections. I like the essay like discussions of several recordings at once. Though the verdicts can be somewhat high-handed. But as with Penguin, you learn to steer around the writers' prejudices.

Eric Thacker? He did the later Vol 2 of the 'Essential Jazz Records' I think. There was also a Ralph Laing who used to do discographies in Jazz Journal. Was that the RD Laing of alternative psychiatric medicine fame and hippy guru in a low-key pipe and slippers alternative sideline? My copies have him on both. Stuart Nicholson replaced Charles Fox on Vol 2. Says Fox died in 1991, Thacker in 97.

I think a fair few ECMs were bought blind - I loved the covers and those strange Scandinavian names!

There was often something of the imperious High Church Anglican vicar in earlier British jazz writing. Lots of that in 'The Essential Jazz Records'. Actually one of them WAS a vicar!

I'm not one for buying endless remasters but the wobbliness of that opening on my CD is off-putting. Don't imagine I'd upgrade it - but it would be nice to know it was put right for future listeners. A cheaper option would be to make a copy and then graft on the opening of 'Rikki Don't Lose That Number'.

Hard to think of anything I've bought blind in the sense of being completely clueless about who the performer/s is/are. But I suspect that 50-75% of my purchases have been bought without hearing anything off the record prior (bought deaf, perhaps!). These two had a huge impact in making me realise that I could listen to rather odd music outside my comfort zone: Both had me scratching my head at first. I knew the first King Crimson album but bought this next on spec - didn't sound remotely like that first record. Most people I know can't believe I'd buy even one record without listening to it first to make sure I was going to like it!

An excellent player though no grand innovator. Very keen on 70s prog-rock (although I think he was just too young to experience it first hand). He's toured with the likes of Gong as well as working with Fripp. Strongly recommend this record: I love this one too, though you probably need to have a taste for the whispier Canterbury sounds of early 70s UK rock to enjoy its bucolic beauties:

Keith Tippett, of course! With a dash of the London Jazz Composers' Orchestra at the back!

Ha! I remember being really annoyed by 'Moonchild'. I'd bought ITCOTCK by mail order. Couldn't believe half a side was taken up with bumbling around. Really like it now - I even hear the Jimmy Giuffre trio in it these days! +++ Steve is right in that our preferences will vary enormously. Downloads work perfectly for me but I can appreciate why others like the physical product or/and the packaging (it took me a while to ween myself off the packaging and I still make a home made sleeve for the CD-R!). The thing is that these things are usually stated in rather black and white terms - vinyl-lites will insist the medium 'is' superior (rather than a personal preference), that mp3s have rubbish sound (may have once been true but things have moved on). I like exploring music. I like having access to music I've got to know and being able to pull it out when I want. I like having that collection around me. So yes, I'm a collector. But I don't buy more than one copy of things (except in cases where an early CD reissue was poorly remastered); I rarely buy more than one version of a classical piece and certainly don't chase original pressings and the like. So maybe I'm not that sort of collector (the sort who buys toy cars and then keeps them in their boxes!). Though I can understand why that kind of collecting might be enjoyable. One thing that has proved I'm a collector is Spotify - despite all it offers I've found I use it infrequently. For things where I really am uncertain, yes. But I've found I feel that listening on Spotify first will spoil the impact of the first play of the acquired product. So the industry has got me good and proper!

There was more than just limited availability keeping you from your treasures in the early days of record buying. I can still remember in the summer of '73 mulling over whether it was worth taking the risk on 'Bitches Brew' and 'Live Evil'. I'd just seen Mahavishnu and had their first two albums and was intrigued by what I read. McLaughlin was the attraction, but I was intrigued by this Miles Davis chap I kept reading about. But my purchasing power was so weak that every buy had to count (and those double LPs were expensive) - so I didn't take the risk. Didn't buy BB until late '76 and found I didn't much like it (that changed 15+ years later). Maybe when we're struggling on our pensions we'll find ourselves back in the glory days when we had to wait for the treasure.

Can't compete with Jazzjet's Cornish Versailles but I thought these three were interesting showing 6 months in a suburban 'free jazz' garden: January, March and this morning.

I seem to recall reading about arguments amongst the various factions at the Khmer Rouge end of the European free jazz spectrum about whether recording a free performance could be tolerated. The performance itself was all - if you weren't 'in the moment' the power was lost. I think they rationalised it in the end by deciding that recordings 'documented' the music. Not so much items for others to enjoy (or collect!) but a form of minute taking!

But is it the easy availability that has taken 'the thrill' away? Or the fact that 35 years down the line you (and I!) have so much in so many different areas that we're just much harder to surprise? Someone coming new to music may have vast amounts available - but where to begin? And finite resources! I think the thrill of discovery will still be there but it will take a different form. The big difference, for some, is the social aspect of going out and shopping for music. It can be a solitary pursuit on the web where many people talk of the social nature of interacting with shop-keepers/other specialists. I never experienced that a great deal, though I know lots of people did. But I suspect the pining for the good old days of record buying has more to do with shopping than music. Is it really that different than going out looking for shoes and stumbling on a handbag you must have (apologies for the sexist analogy!)? In the end this is all part of a much bigger issue. We have been and continue to be part of a consumer culture that conditions us to acquire, to be disatisfied with (or be unfulfilled by) what we have and want more. From our earliest days we are conditioned to collect things - football cards, World Cup minature figurines etc. The idea that the 'pleasure is in the hunt' mentality is exactly what the commercial world wants to instil in us. Traditionally it has been controlled by the release and then withold approach, building up our desires for the next release. It will be interesting to see how the commercial powers settle on this. I can't imagine they are happy with the prospective 'everything available everywhere all the time' model. It would be interesting to interview someone attending a first performance of a Haydn Symphony c. 1790. Chances are it would be the only time they'd hear it. And I'm sure some of them would tell us their experience was all the more powerful because there was little prospect of ever hearing it again. I'd not want to change places with them.

Well, there's a new hobby. Collecting misplaced apostrophes. The 'hunt' should be never-ending.

I am pretty sure Berg had his mojo working when wrote down the concerto. I think you'll find that the tune for 'She's Nineteen Years Old' is an inversion of the opening bars of the Berg concerto. Though I suspect Muddy's memory of his angel was somewhat different to Berg's. Now how did that happen? Can't have been concentrating. One of those smiley face things.

I wonder if Muddy Waters had the Berg violin concerto in his head.

Why? I suspect the majority of people on this board (outside those with a parallel interest in classical music) have never heard the Berg violin concerto. Does that mean they are 'falling short of any serious interest in music AS SUCH'?

Me too. I'm not convinced my enjoyment of music is any the less for having it much easier to locate. The only difference between now and 40 years ago is that everything was new and sparkly then because I knew virtually nothing. There's a difference between having things there when you want them; and using the possibility to buy everything all at once. The sensible listener still has the ability to ration their listening to a performer in order to enjoy it step by step. However much the record companies might want you to swallow it whole in a 'complete works' box.

Just realised...1907! Whoops!

Still got plenty of those - they sound damn good. With their 'Specially Priced 2LP set - £2.99' stickers on the front. They were a good deal, even back then. The first Sonny Rollins twofer was the first one I received (as a gift - and what a GREAT gift). Yes, I got that Rollins very early on - my only Rollins for a long time. Those twofers were also my way into the Bill Evans Riverside music - I think I had 5 of them.