Showing posts with label pianists. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pianists. Show all posts

Monday, April 6, 2009

The Dark Side of Pink Floyd


From
March 22, 2009

The dark side of Pink Floyd

It’s rock music’s most complicated saga, involving ego wars, madness and death. Robert Sandall explains why nothing — not even $250m — can put the pieces of Pink Floyd together again


Pink Floyd fans are an optimistic lot. A year ago the band’s blogging followers were talking up a putative tour in 2009 that would reunite the so-called “classic” 1970s line-up — the one responsible for their 40m-selling magnum opus The Dark Side of the Moon — for their first proper concert since 1980.
To a large extent, this represented the triumph of hope over experience. Of the many attempts to get the four members of Pink Floyd back on stage together, only Bob Geldof’s had come off. After the fractious foursome re-convened for an historic 18-minute slot at Live 8 in 2005, the world’s largest concert promoters, Live Nation, offered them a record $250m — pure profit, net of all production expenses, which the promoters would cover separately — to tour North America. This figure valued Pink Floyd as a bigger live draw than the Rolling Stones, and was more than twice what Live Nation shelled out to sign Madonna to an inclusive concert-and-albums deal in 2007.
True to form, the Floyd declined, mainly at the behest of David Gilmour. The band’s guitarist, who compared their Live 8 performance to “sleeping with your ex-wife”, was planning his most ambitious solo tour yet, to run from 2006 until the end of 2008. Prominent in Gilmour’s band was the Floyd’s keyboard player, Rick Wright, whose ejection from the group in 1979 led to years of discord in which the three remaining squabbled over who owned the band’s name.
It was Wright’s rehabilitation as Gilmour’s new buddy —coupled with the conciliatory noises emanating from drummer, Nick Mason, and the previously hostile bassist, Roger Waters — that helped to raise hopes of a 2009 Floyd tour. Once Gilmour’s solo tour had wrapped at Gdansk in November 2008, the feeling among the Floyd faithful was that the long-awaited reunion might be back on the cards.
Sadly, it wasn’t. Rick Wright died of cancer last September, a tragic loss which, like the death of Pink Floyd’s prime mover, Syd Barrett, in 2006, inspired an avalanche of obituaries unusual for the passing of a pop musician. It also brought to light aspects of the shifting alliances that have characterised the career of Pink Floyd, one of rock’s most complicated soaps.
Tellingly, none of his bandmates seemed to have known how ill Wright was, a fact that confirms how the members of Pink Floyd have long kept each other at a distance socially. Waters, who now lives mainly in the Hamptons, New York, hadn’t spoken to Wright all year. A fortnight before Wright’s death, Gilmour received a message that his keyboard player would not be able to take part in an upcoming TV broadcast for Jools Holland’s Later. When I spoke to Mason in Islington, the day before Wright died, he had no inkling of what was unfolding in the organist’s Kensington home. Mason was talking about “the faint possibility” of a Floyd reunion. “My bags are packed,” he said.
The public tributes the other three paid to Wright after his death revealed as much about their view of the group as they did about him. Waters, the former self-appointed leader who kicked Wright out of the band in 1979, said his “thoughts were with his family”. Conventional enough, but the family Waters named was the one Wright broke up when he divorced his first wife in 1982, shortly before Waters himself left the group. The subtext made it clear that Waters was hankering for the Floyd’s heyday in the 1970s and early ’80s. This was the period when he effectively ran the group — a situation flagged on the last record he made with them, The Final Cut, subtitle A Requiem for the Post War Dream, by Roger Waters, performed by Pink Floyd. Twenty-five years on, and following a so-so solo career during which he often resorted to billing himself as “the creative genius behind Pink Floyd”, Waters clearly wanted his old band back. After expressing gratitude “for the opportunity that Live 8 afforded me to engage with him [Wright] and David and Nick that one last time”, Waters’ farewell to Wright ended: “I wish there had been more.”
Mason’s tribute told another story. He praised Wright as “the underrated one”, adding that his swirling, layered keyboards were the band’s true hallmark sound, which “tended to get forgotten among the welter of guitar solos”. This less-than-flattering reference to the Floyd’s guitarist was in keeping with Mason’s recent memoir, Inside Out, a book whose jaunty and disrespectful tone greatly annoyed the serious-minded Gilmour and disrupted an alliance dating back to 1985, when Mason and Gilmour fought Waters for the right to carry on as a duo after he walked out and tried to prevent them from using the name Pink Floyd.
At that point they could have reinstated Rick Wright, but chose not to. Although they recalled him to play in their squad of backing musicians and to co-write some songs — “because I thought it would make us stronger legally and musically”, Gilmour once said — Wright’s days as a full band member were over. To the end he remained, in effect, a paid employee of Pink Floyd. Notwithstanding Wright’s technical status, nobody could doubt the sincerity of the tribute Gilmour posted on his website. Of the three, it was the most personal and heartfelt. “No-one can rep
lace Richard Wright. He was my musical partner and my friend. He was such a lovely, gentle, genuine man.” This was followed with a belated apology for having deprived this lovely character of his membership of the band he loyally served for over 40 years: “In the welter of arguments about who or what was Pink Floyd, Rick’s enormous input was frequently forgotten.”
Like most issues relating to the band, the “forgetting” of Rick Wright’s contribution boils down to a personality clash. Sensitive, fragile and, according to the Floyd’s first manager, Peter Jenner, “dithery”, Wright was ill-equipped for the ego wars that came to dominate Pink Floyd after the departure of Syd Barrett in 1968. A self-taught multi-instrumentalist who grew up in thrall to classical music and modern jazz — “I never liked R&B very much,” he said — Wright was the one most in tune with Barrett’s maverick, improvising talent.

Finding he had little in common with his Regent Street Polytechnic bandmates, Mason and Waters, Wright bonded with Barrett; and once the Floyd’s psychedelic poster boy began to lose his mind to LSD, Wright stuck by him. While the rest of the group plotted to remove their increasingly unreliable leader from the touring band — swiftly replacing him with his Cambridge college-mate, David Gilmour — Wright moved into a flat with Barrett in Richmond to try to hold him together. When he would disappear in the evening to play gigs, leaving the addled Barrett behind staring at the wall, Wright would tell him he was popping out to buy cigarettes. “It was awful,” he later said of this deception.
Believing Barrett and Wright to be the more musically gifted half of a disintegrating group, Pink Floyd’s management contemplated forming a breakaway band to rescue Barrett from his demons. But it never happened. Wright, who said he “would have left with him like a shot if I had thought Syd could do it”, stayed on with Pink Floyd where, like new recruit Gilmour, he came under fire from the band’s emerging bossy-boots ideologue, Roger Waters.
Jenner ascribes this to simple jealousy: “Rick was Roger’s real rival. He was better looking and he had a better voice.” Having lost his musical foil, and his friend, Wright became progressively isolated. He made a decisive contribution to the 1973 breakthrough album, The Dark Side of the Moon, whose subtle balancing of soft and loud passages owed much, Wright believed, to his “being brought up on classical music, in which the symphonies have huge dynamics”. But he argued with Waters over the subject of their next album, 1975’s extended elegy for Syd Barrett, Wish You Were Here, taking issue with Waters’ preoccupation with madness “something I didn’t feel so strongly about”. He was spooked by an incident at the end of the Abbey Road recording sessions when Barrett turned up, unrecognisably overweight, brandishing a toothbrush and demanding to play guitar on the track Shine On You Crazy Diamond.
Wright’s natural diffidence made the acclaim that accompanied the Floyd’s meteoric ascent after Dark Side — soon to become the biggest-selling album of the 1970s — difficult for him to deal with. His bandmates didn’t help. Persistently ragged for his alleged stinginess — “Rick wasn’t really a skinflint,” Mason admitted later, “we just decided to turn him into the Jack Benny of the group” — Wright found touring an increasingly lonely experience. To counter the stress, he took up ocean sailing, a hobby that put even more distance between him and his fellow Floyders.
By the late 1970s Wright was in trouble. His marriage was on the rocks, and, having written classics such as The Great Gig in the Sky, he now had writer’s block. Word within the Floyd camp had it that Wright’s failure to come up with any new material was not helped by his increasing consumption of cocaine — a habit frowned upon by a group that, unlike the rest of planet rock at the time, steered clear of all drugs.
Things came to a head in 1979 while recording The Wall at the Super Bear studio in the south of France. The band’s recent loss of £2m with the investment company Norton Warburg had left them heavily in debt and forced them into tax exile. It also put pressure on their next recording sessions, a tense situation made worse by a growing feud between Waters — who had devised the album’s storyline and written most of the songs — and Gilmour, who complained that Waters’ music was “incredibly naff”. Wright sided with Gilmour, who asked him to help improve it. Wright, however, failed to deliver. “We’d all go home at night,” Gilmour recalled, “and we’d say to Rick, ‘Do what you like, here are these tracks, write something, play a solo, put something down. You’ve got all evening, every evening, to do it.’ But he wasn’t capable of playing anything.”
Wright blamed the overbearing personality of Waters: “He was making it impossible for me to do anything.” Others blamed the drugs. With a deadline looming, Waters summoned Wright to LA where the band had relocated, to finish his keyboard parts. When Wright refused to interrupt his sailing holiday around the Greek islands, Waters called a band meeting at which he demanded his dismissal. At first Wright refused to leave, but after Waters threatened to walk out, binning the unfinished album, he panicked. “That meant there would be no money to pay off our huge debts. I was terrified. I had two kids to support. So I agreed to go.”
Wright later regretted the decision. “It was Roger’s bluff. But I really didn’t want to work with this guy any more.”
Wright’s dismissal marked the end of Pink Floyd as a mutual creative force — for the next five years they were the Roger Waters band — and the beginning of a struggle for control of the brand. As the individual members have long since discovered in their less successful solo careers, there is a commercial magic in the name Pink Floyd that transcends the performers it describes. This is partly down to the faceless nature of their son et lumière presentation. The vast light show, the visual stunts such as the inflatable pig, and the sound effects — clanking cash registers and all — tend to take precedence over the musicians on stage. As Mason puts it, “We’re lucky in that we don’t have to promote a Bono or a Mick Jagger.”
But names can be tricky to manage too. In his typically self-deprecating fashion, Mason said recently of the sacking of their organist: “Dave and I decided to gang up with the school bully rather than fight for truth and justice.” But slack as they might have been in resisting the expulsion of Wright, when in 1985 Mason and Gilmour fought Waters in the High Court for the right to call themselves Pink Floyd, record an album and set out on a four-year tour (the longest of their career to date), they won. And so it came to pass that the only people currently entitled to use the name Pink Floyd are David Gilmour and Nick Mason, when both are together on stage or in the studio. Aside from Live 8, the last time that happened was in 1995, on the tour for what is, and may well remain, the final Pink Floyd album, The Division Bell. When Gilmour toured his recent solo album, On an Island, it was noted that he didn’t invite Mason to play drums. The simmering row over the drummer’s memoir wasn’t the half of it. With Mason present, Gilmour would have reconstituted the legal entity known as Pink Floyd.
The tenacity with which the members of Pink Floyd have remained at loggerheads is remarkable. At its heart lies the fraught relationship between Waters and Gilmour, two men who are often called “arrogant” and “obstinate”. Creatively, this conflict has been summarised by Mason as “a tension between Roger’s wanting to make a show, and Dave’s desire to make music” — a reference to the fact that Waters is stronger on album “concepts” while Gilmour is the more talented singer and technician.
Its roots, however, go back to their shared upbringing in Cambridge. As teenagers, Gilmour and Waters were on nodding terms, but their connection was forged after both, separately, became friends of a magnetic boho character, Roger “Syd” Barrett. Gilmour and Barrett spent a summer busking in France. Waters, two years older, attended the same grammar school as Barrett and sought him out after they both moved to London to study. It was apparent in the first incarnation of Pink Floyd that Waters hero-worshipped Barrett, the band’s leader and main songwriter. According to Peter Jenner, “Syd was the only person Roger Waters has ever really liked and looked up to.” At a Barrett tribute concert held after his death at the Barbican in 2006,
Waters made the surprise announcement: “Without Syd I’d probably have been a property developer or something.”
Though Gilmour’s Cambridge background made him the obvious choice to replace Barrett — and he soon became a key player in repositioning Pink Floyd as a mainstream, rather than an “underground” act — Waters often treated him like a junior. “It’s that old playground thing,” Gilmour once said. “If you’re a couple of years younger, that’s the way you stay.” Others have speculated that Gilmour’s teenage friendship with Barrett and his family made Waters jealous. Surveying 40 years of internecine wrangling, the juvenile nature of much of it is what strikes Mason: “If any of our children behaved in the way we have to each other, we would be very cross with them.”
As things stand, their lives barely cross, personally or professionally. Mason recently got back on speaking terms with his old pal from Regent Street Poly, Roger Waters, for whom he has occasionally played drums on his solo shows. But none of them needs to set foot on a stage again. The most recent Sunday Times Rich List estimates that Waters, Gilmour and Mason have fortunes of £95m, £85m and £55m respectively. Former band member Wright didn’t feature on the list, but with houses in Kensington and the south of France and a large yacht in the Bahamas, he was clearly surviving comfortably on the royalty cheques from Pink Floyd’s glory years in the 1970s.
In fact, money is about the only thing this contentious combo haven’t argued about. Waters never went to war over it during his legal moves to stymie Mason and Gilmour. Whatever arrangement they came to with Wright, he never uttered a word of complaint about his treatment financially. In a gesture that helped to earn him a CBE in 2003, Gilmour donated the £3.6m he got from the sale of his London home in Little Venice — which was bought by Earl Spencer — to a charity for the homeless. “I don’t need that money, I have more than enough,” he commented, grandly.
Their lifestyles are — by the standards of most 60-something squillionaire rock stars — impeccably haut bourgeois. They each own tasteful country piles. Mason’s Wiltshire pad previously belonged to Camilla Parker Bowles. Gilmour’s farm in West Sussex is one of the most substantial spreads in what is informally known as “the rockbroker belt” — near Keith Richards’s infamous old haunt of Redlands. Waters’ main residence is in one of America’s toniest addresses, the Hamptons on Long Island.
The yachtsman Rick Wright wasn’t the only Floyder to favour posh pastimes. Mason loves collecting and racing vintage sports cars — his Ferrari GTO is his pride and joy — and most days he runs a company, Ten Tenths, that rents them out to film-makers. Waters spends much of his spare time over here shooting pheasant in the Welsh borders and deerstalking in Scotland. Gilmour is often seen out and about at London book launches with his wife, the former Sunday Times journalist Polly Samson.
The chances that these wealthy musicians of leisure will join forces again under the Pink Floyd banner seem remote for three reasons. First they are, as Mason says, demonstrably unbribable. “Bob Geldof and a good cause could make it happen whereas $250m couldn’t.” Then there are the musical differences, which were glimpsed in the rehearsals for Live 8. “At this point, to get Roger and David to play each other’s songs,” says Mason, “is unspeakably difficult.”
Finally, and decisively, there is the implacable hostility of David Gilmour to a plan that now enjoys the full support of Roger Waters. Having spent years denigrating the contributions of his old bandmates, Waters is now a born-again team player. “David doesn’t get how important the symbiosis between us was,” he commented recently.
A close associate of Gilmour’s takes a different view. “David has spent half his life fighting over Pink Floyd. Nothing will ever make him go back there.”

Tuesday, November 4, 2008

THE STAGE HECKLER: Cecil Taylor = Freeform Genius

When I glanced at the calendar to see who was passing through town for the Earshot Jazz Festival some time back, the one performer that caught my eye as a must-see was the legendary free jazz pianist Cecil Taylor.

Last week presented a rare opportunity to see him perform as a solo pianist at Seattle's Town Hall, and perform the free jazz magic ball of yarn he's spun throughout a career spanning over 50 years...that's right, 50.

I arrived about a half hour prior to show time, and caught myself a second row seat at stage right, so I'd be able to see what he was doing with his hands.
Not long after 8PM, the director of the Earshot Jazz Festival gave his introduction.

To thunderous applause, a shorter man then shuffled onto the stage with a folder of papers, sporting a black button down dress shirt, blue pajama pants, and rainbow colored foot stockings.
He gave a short nod of acknowledgment to the audience as he shuffled through some paperwork, standing over the side of the Steinway grand piano onstage.

He then proceeded to read...and my brain cells started to fry like sausage on a griddle.


Cecil Taylor started shouting what sounded like various numbers, and at first came across as someone with Teret's. He then morphed into a diatribe for about ten minutes about mathematical definitions, Western metaphysics, and other theories that were barely understandable through his machine gun rate of speech...somewhere in there he also spoke of the definition of velocity. This went on for about 10 minutes.

I soon figured out that he was framing the tone for the show, especially for those who weren't familiar with his work...he was explaining to the audience that his theory on the piano involved partly that of mathematics; a concept first brought out by jazz pianist Thelonius Monk in the 1940s, and furthered by Taylor and some of his peers in the avant garde free jazz movement of the 1960s.

One might say he brought all that magic out of the top hat last night.

For more than an hour and a half, Taylor led the audience through the most dynamic and dramatic free form piano improvisation that anyone could ever serve witness to.

It's hard to describe the piano work of this man...but the one concept that keeps coming back to me is this: unadultered freedom.

He did not speak to the audience, nor announce the titles to any of the songs; perhaps because they had no real titles. His work on the keys is all about improvisation; it spanned from blinding fast movements across the piano keyboard to light delicate textures emphasizing the space between notes...then back to dramatic pounding.

Taylor's style features an ebb and flow quality...he binds mayhem together with tonal passages and patterns. One can pick up on the different movements tying it all together...

...but it requires your undivided attention.


In all, Taylor put together a 40 minute passage, flanked with two passages of about 15 minutes apiece. He then came out for two encores spanning about 10 minutes apiece. At the end of the regular set and both encores, he bowed to the audience as they showed him the great appreciation this legend deserved.

Needless to say, my brain felt like mush by the end of all of this. It was -- hands down -- the most exhausting musical exercise on my senses that I've ever experienced.

Friday, October 10, 2008

The guts and magic of Andrew Hill

Every October in Seattle, the Earshot Jazz Festival rears its head. It's the largest festival of its kind in the Pacific Northwest.

I usually catch two or three acts every year, depending on who's coming through. There have been some magical moments (in the case of acts like Jason Moran, Matthew Shipp and Bobby Hutcherson), and one questionable one too (if you look through posts from last fall, you can read about the John Zorn fiasco).

The most memorable event came during the 2006 festival, when
pianist Andrew Hill came through town. The album covers shown throughout this post are his most recommended works.

At the Showbox in Seattle, we arrived early and grabbed a seat at the front of the stage...I wasn't going to sit in the back to watch my favorite jazz artist. On stage right (performer's perspective) sat a large Steinway piano, and a drumset adorned
the middle of the stage.

A face soon peaked out from the behind the stage left curtain.
Andrew Hill emerged, walking very, very slowly. It was obvious that something was off, but it was hard to place what was happening with him.

The drummer and bass player came out after Hill found his seat at the piano. For nearly 45 minutes, the band went through a set of new and old material, the latest of which came from an album released earlier that same year, Time Lines. Between every song, he would announce the titles, although he was very difficult to hear since he was speaking in a low whisper. The thanked the audience for being there.

Hill was in top form throughout the set...the ethereal sounds emerging from his fingers emitted a sort of magic...sounds audible on his records, which I'd collected over the last few years to my CD collection, but not quite the same as in the flesh.

While the set seemed a bit short, it was definitely not short on quality. One of the things I love about Hill's music is the way he can fly into a protracted off-the-wall jam session, but then bring thing
s down into a light groove that bounces across the stage like a feather. His style is full of complexity and mystery.

After Andrew Hill left the stage and the performance ended, little did I know that at approximately 70 years young he was dying of lung cancer and playing through shortness of breath and unimaginable suffering.

He died in 2007, less than six months after the performance I attended.
Once again, I had been blessed with the opportunity to see a legend live right before their passing. I'd had the same opportunity in 1994 when I saw the Grateful Dead right before Jerry Garcia passed away the following year...except Garcia wasn't suffering from a terminal illness.

What Hill pulled off was nothing short of miraculous. That guy had indescribable determination, along with tons and tons of guts...forget tha
t the performance was as close to perfection as one could have it...anyone listening that night who didn't know about Hill's cancer or couldn't see how he was struggling to get across the stage would have thought that he was perfectly fine. What a stud.

That's the stuff of legend...and that's exactly what Andrew Hill is.


Here's a biographical overview from Amazon.com:


Andrew Hill was a great and even groundbreaking composer and pianist, yet the relatively circumscribed scale of his innovations might have originally caused him to get lost in the shuffle of the '60s free jazz revolution.

While many of his contemporaries were totally jettisoning the rhythmic and
harmonic techniques of bop and hard bop, Hill worked to extend their possibilities; his was a revolution from within. Much of the most compelling '60s jazz was nearly aleatoric; Hill, on the other hand, exhibited a determined command of his materials, however abstract they might sometimes be.

His composed melodies were labyrinthine, and rhythmically and harmo
nically complex tunes like "New Monastery" from his Point of Departure album exhibit a sophistication born of mastery, not chance or contingency. As a pianist, Hill had a flowing melodicism and an elastic sense of time. Like his composing, Hill's playing had an ever-present air of spontaneity and was almost completely devoid of cliché.

He began playing the piano at about the age of 13. As a youngster in Chicago, Hill was encouraged by pianist Earl Hines. Jazz composer Bill Russo also took an interest, and introduced Hill to the renowned classical composer Paul Hindemith, with whom Hill studied from 1950-1952.

While in his teens, he gigged with prominent jazz musicians passing through the Midwest, Miles Davis and Charlie Parker among them. In 1955, he recorded So in Love with the Sound of Andrew Hill for the Warwick label. He moved to New York in 1961 to work with singer Dinah Washington. After a brief foray to Los Angeles with Rahsaan Roland Kirk's band in 1962, Hill moved back to New York, where he began his recording career in earnest.

He made several records for Blue Note from 1963-1969, both as leader and sideman. Hill's Blue Note work featured some of the best and brightest post-bop musicians of the day, including Eric Dolphy, Joe Henderson, Woody Shaw, Tony Williams, and Freddie Hubbard.

Like many jazz musicians, Hill eventually turned to academia to make a living. He received his doctorate from Colgate University and served as the school's composer in residence from 1970-1972. Hill relocated to the West Coast, teaching in public schools and prisons in California. He eventually landed a teaching position at Portland State University, where he established the school's Summer Jazz Intensive.

In addition to his teaching, Hill continued to perform and record in the '70s and '80s, making records for the Arista-Freedom and Black Saint/Soul Note labels. In 1989 and 1990, Hill recorded twice more for Blue Note, Eternal Spirit and But Not Farewell.

Hill moved back to the New York area in the '90s; a series of performances and new recordings helped place him back in the jazz spotlight. Hill formed a new Point of Departure Sextet for the Knitting Factory's 1998 Texaco Jazz Festival. The band included saxophonists Marty Ehrlich and Greg Tardy, trumpeter Ron Horton, bassist Scott Colley, and drummer Billy Drummond. The band went on to play New York club engagements to much acclaim.

In 2000, Palmetto Records released
Dusk, which was named the best album of 2001 by Down Beat and Jazz Times magazines. It was followed by A Beautiful Day in 2002, Passing Ships in 2003, and Black Fire in 2004, as well as a solid series of Blue Note reissues of his '60s work that included bonus tracks and new liner notes. His 2006 album, Time Lines, reunited him with both trumpeter Charles Tolliver and the Blue Note label. Hill also participated in a 17-piece big band, and a January 2002 engagement at New York's Birdland was filmed and recorded by Palmetto for future broadcast.

After battling lung cancer for many years, Hill succumbed to the disease on April 20, 2007, leaving behind a stunning legacy of work.

~ Chris Kelsey, All Music Guide

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

ISSUES FOR IDIOTS -- Keyboards & synthesizers according to Sweva, Part 1

It's a very long and complicated debate.

They have the power to enhance a listening experience to ethereal levels that defy description, and can also come in from left field to obliterate a perfectly crafted song like a bulldog in a china shop.

They're called synthesizers...love 'em or hate 'em.

There's a wide variety of "synth" out there...today I'll put my spin on what is "cool synth" versus "cheesy synth."

...and don't think for a minute that there isn't a difference.

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE, DAMMIT! Don't question me, gentle reader, until you read what I have to say.


Generally speaking, the following are "cool" synth instruments that tend to have a minimal cheese factor:
  1. The piano. Classic, elegant, beautiful, indisputable.
  2. Most organs, specifically the Hammond B3. Not the one at the ballpark.
  3. The mellotron. Some may find it a bit dated, and yes it's out of the 60s, but I think it sounds really cool. It can bring great emotion to music; it's sorta the cello of the electric keyboard family.
  4. Most electronic synth since the 1990s. I don't know if the sound improved, or if it was the way bands employed the use of synthesizers since the 1990s...maybe a little of both...but the cheese factor seemed to essentially go away around the mid-90s. The emergence of hip-hop and post-grunge alternative rock bringing the use of some more obscure keyboard sounds into the mainstream may have helped to eliminate the stigma that cheesy synth was associated with prog-rock bands in the 1970s and 80s. You could probably draw several variations on this from many variables...ask me again in 10 years; perhaps I will have changed my mind on this.
The following synth instruments tend to "bring the cheese out" in any artist, for the most part:
  1. The mini-moog. Sadly, this instrument has destroyed more songs than I care to name. Whoever invented this should be shot.
  2. Most MIDI mechanisms from the 1980s. That thing that makes a song sound like a Bugs Bunny cartoon.
  3. Most loops and sequencers out of the 1970s. Generally I'm not much of a fan of these, due more to the fact that they stifle creativity and show laziness on the part of the musician, unless they have NO hands and feet free, then using them sparingly might be understandable. Generally, however, they annoy too...especially something out of the 70s.
The following are examples of "cool" synthesizer use.

  1. Anything by Jimmy Smith. The jazz master of the Hammond B3... he's the one who brought the instrument into the jazz forefront, which in turn heavily influenced other music mediums.
  2. "The Speed of Sound" by Coldplay. Great example of colorful synth use that adds incredible depth and mood to a song.
  3. "Lazarus" by Porcupine Tree. Modern song using the good 'ol piano...beautifully and artfully, I might add.
  4. "Good New First" by Rush. A good example of the mellotron being dusted off and brought back into modern rock for great effect. It's in the background, but adds to the dark flavor of desperation in the tune.
  5. Voyage 34 by Porcupine Tree. I hate to bring up a band twice in the same example, but Porcupine Tree's 1993 album focused almost completely on synthesizers, in a new age sense. An excellent example of well-crafted synth as it was emerging out of the 80s and into new frontiers in the 90s.
  6. Enya's catalog. I can think of no other artist who helped to "de-cheese" electronic synth in the 1990s more than her. Enya gave key instruments an almost ethereal quality.
  7. "Green Onions" by Booker T. & the MG's. A perfect example showcasing the soul of the Hammond B3, and how it works in a classic rock setting.
The following are examples of "cheesy" synthesizer use.

  1. "Magic Man" by Heart. The best example I can think of where a great song is rolling along minding its own business, and BOOM! It gets broadsided by a tidal wave of dated synth cheese that makes a Packer game at Lambeau Field seem like mere topping on nachos. My only question to Ann and Nancy Wilson would involve this and something to the effect of "WTF?!?!"
  2. "In the Beginning" by Emerson, Lake and Palmer. Another perfectly good song - a LOVE SONG to boot - and then it takes a turn for the worse as this cornball outer space synth jam takes over the outtro like flying saucers square dancing across the sky.
  3. "Dream Police" by Cheap Trick. A perfect example of a cheesy loop and artist laziness. Not that the song is that great, but... Why? Why use this? Whenever I hear this all I can do is mock the synth loop and pretend that there's actually a keyboard player in the band by having my fingers dance over whatever's in front of me at the time...otherwise I'd probably go nuts and chew on plastic flashbulbs.
The jury is still out on the following examples... mainly because these are classic songs. I would argue that part of what makes these songs classic is good songwriting, and the fact that in most cases the synth is used sparingly.

  1. Elton John. The best example I can think of. There was a definite display of cheesy synth that he employed in the 70s, and he seemed to relish in it...this is where showmanship trumps everything else, obviously (see photo at top).
  2. "Baba O'Rielly" and "Won't Get Fooled Again" by The Who. These are classic songs, and Pete Townshend was an innovator. He employed something unique in those tunes, but they are a bit dated, no argument there.
  3. "Tom Sawyer" by Rush. Two debatable issues here... there's the opening "meeoooow" (as a good friend of mine likes to refer to it), which appears through out the tune. I actually find that to be very cool and unique. Then there's the synth jam right before the guitar solo, which was actually taken from Geddy Lee's old warmup routine. I could take it or leave it.
  4. Duran Duran's 80s catalog. 80s MIDI was the central part of their sound...but this is the ultimate 80s band, so it's hard to imagine the D's (and the 1980s, for that matter) without this sound.
  5. Bon Jovi. I'll try to keep a straight face here, as the name conjures up scary imagery of metal hair band members running rampant. Yes, it's the 80's once again, but in more of a metal sensibility (just a bit). Again, this was the synth decade, and the keys are part of the Bon Jovi sound, but sheesh. Arguably OK, but still barely tolerable. "Livin' On a Prayer" brings back memories of a friend in college who used to grab the mic at parties when he'd had too much, and a terrifying version of The Wedding Singer would ensue...I think I have permanent brain damage from that...
  6. Yes' catalog. It's a big part of their sound, and some of it does in fact sound cheesy, but Rick Wakeman and many of the other keys players in Yes were masters at their craft so it's hard to knock them. This is one of those rare cases where the virtuoso element trumps much of the cheesyness, and many of Yes' thematic elements were enhanced with the use of the cheesy synth...listen to Tales from Topographic Oceans...thematically it's a total brain melt, which tends to trump the way synth is used. It actually blends in with the overall music very well.
So let me know your thoughts on this critical issue. This post was inspired by constant ribbing over the years from various people in my life who find my pet peeve with cheesy synth to be amusing... especially one person in particular, who insists on harassing me with voice mails and text messages to the effect...so Shindog, this is for you.

...and thi
s debate has ONLY JUST BEGUN, so I'll leave it here. To be continued...
S