choginga wrote:The really cool bass riff that has more effect because of the signature.
I disagree completely. Like I said, even a song in 4/4 can have an incredibly tricky, syncopated and challenging rhythm; and man, I wouldn't even doubt that what some sycophantic maniac claims is "6/8 + 15/32 + 3/16 + 9/64" is not mathematical wizardry, but mere syncopation. In either case, I'm always skeptical of music that focuses on the numerical complexity of the rhythm -- the biggest challenge is to make it sound good and make sense.
choginga wrote:Also, on what basis are you calling Tool less intelligent and misguided? They actually have something to say and they try to say it with both the music and the words.
A lot of bands do that. Tool are not some unique entity in the world just for trying to make both elements match. And you know what? I am much more impressed by a band like Stereolab, whose songs sometimes sound like they try to make the music as isolated as possible from the words, and yet it all works like a charm. And they pull off odd time signatures and you can dance to it!
choginga wrote:The signatures are not as complicated and superfluous as you are claiming. Schism changes signatures halfway through to create a "schism" and lateralus starts with a push pull effect. AND YOU LIKE THE MUSIC. What are you on about?
Exactly that: I like the
music, but not the gimmicks. And when I listen to them and read what people say about them, it's like the gimmicks are more important than the music, or worse: like the gimmicks turn the music into something much more intelligent and important than anything else.
choginga wrote:You also got your analogy wrong. It's not like trying to find the trivial things in films frame by frame, it is like figuring out a Lynch film and pointing out the foreshadowing and hints that made it have it's effect.
No, that involves
watching the film and paying attention to the directorial style and everything else.
Deep_Thought wrote:To me, the mood and feelings Tool evoke are the important bit. Finding out that there are these little clever trickses and technicalities in their music is just icing on the cake, even if there is a lot of icing and I happen to like icing*. If I'd first listened to them by someone saying "Check out the crazy time signature in this song" I'd probably find it annoying too.
I hear you. I guess I'm just sensitive to what the fans make out of the band, because when I listen to the music after I get in contact with the raving and drooling, I start questioning where the pandering ends and the actual music begins. For me, the trickses and gimmicks per se are utterly meaningless, and they need to be justified
by the music. So if the artist decides to use an "irrational" time signature, either he must have great music to back it up with, or he must show he can work with it with the same dexterity that others work with 4/4. When it comes to Tool, those little bits never feel at ease in me: "wait, are they trying to show off or what?"
The first I heard of Tool, I heard them as "prog". When I listened, I was puzzled, because there was nothing prog at all about it. Then, later, I watched videos of folks going wild about how every nanosecond of
Lateralus is built on the Fibonacci sequence, and I was going nuts with
WHAT'S THE FUCKING POINT??. I guess it spoils me too much.
.
