Classical Composer Reacts to A Plague of Lighthouse Keepers
Jun 12, 2021 5:01:08 GMT
Post by noamn on Jun 12, 2021 5:01:08 GMT
There's a YouTuber called Doug Helvering who has a series of posts where he listens to classic tracks of progressive music and offers his comments. The last post that I listened to was his take on 'Tarkus' (ELP) and I remember one on 'Close to the edge' (Yes). I personally don't find his discussions very rewarding but that's probably because he doesn't "press my buttons". There is a new post where the Classical Composer Reacts to 'A Plague of Lighthouse Keepers'.
Anyway, 'Lighthouse keepers': by his own admission, Doug has never heard of VdGG, a fact that becomes apparent fairly quickly. He picks up straight away that 'Eyewitness' has different vocal sounds for each couplet but then asks whether it's the same person singing, or different members of the band. He is very impressed by the lyrics but doesn't pick up the 'paper, scissors, stone' reference. Moving further along, he's never heard of paraffin. He probably never learnt physics and so does not know the meaning of SHM. I could only listen the post through to 'Presence of the night' so I haven't heard any of his summing up comments. At one stage, he asks where 'the guitars' are - this probably came from reading the credits where PH is noted as playing 'guitars' (sic) - the acoustic guitar on 'Lemmings'. No mention of Fripp.
I found it very interesting his discussion of prosody (not that he calls it by name), how the music rises and falls, mimicking the waves and the progress of a boat. Now you see the mast - or lighthouse - and now you don't. I don't know how to read his facial expressions very well so I can't tell if he is really impressed by the music and by the arrangements.
It's clear, though, that 'Lighthouse keepers' is in a different plane of existence to 'Tarkus'.
[Edit from a few hours later] I realise that I come across as somewhat pedantic and/or snotty (well, I am). I tend to believe that if someone gets the small details wrong, how can one trust the large details? I remember when this album was released so I've had 50 years of experience listening to it whereas Doug is listening to it for the first time. I remember that a minimum of ten 'listens' was required before one could start appreciating a new VdGG record, meaning that Doug is brave in broadcasting his initial reactions and should be praised for any insights that he has.
Anyway, 'Lighthouse keepers': by his own admission, Doug has never heard of VdGG, a fact that becomes apparent fairly quickly. He picks up straight away that 'Eyewitness' has different vocal sounds for each couplet but then asks whether it's the same person singing, or different members of the band. He is very impressed by the lyrics but doesn't pick up the 'paper, scissors, stone' reference. Moving further along, he's never heard of paraffin. He probably never learnt physics and so does not know the meaning of SHM. I could only listen the post through to 'Presence of the night' so I haven't heard any of his summing up comments. At one stage, he asks where 'the guitars' are - this probably came from reading the credits where PH is noted as playing 'guitars' (sic) - the acoustic guitar on 'Lemmings'. No mention of Fripp.
I found it very interesting his discussion of prosody (not that he calls it by name), how the music rises and falls, mimicking the waves and the progress of a boat. Now you see the mast - or lighthouse - and now you don't. I don't know how to read his facial expressions very well so I can't tell if he is really impressed by the music and by the arrangements.
It's clear, though, that 'Lighthouse keepers' is in a different plane of existence to 'Tarkus'.
[Edit from a few hours later] I realise that I come across as somewhat pedantic and/or snotty (well, I am). I tend to believe that if someone gets the small details wrong, how can one trust the large details? I remember when this album was released so I've had 50 years of experience listening to it whereas Doug is listening to it for the first time. I remember that a minimum of ten 'listens' was required before one could start appreciating a new VdGG record, meaning that Doug is brave in broadcasting his initial reactions and should be praised for any insights that he has.
