Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum

At The Back => Time Out => Topic started by: Ian Price on August 20, 2009, 12:42:33 AM

Title: Return to Forever
Post by: Ian Price on August 20, 2009, 12:42:33 AM
Listened to these today on recommendation from a friend. All I can say is that I thought it was a complete load of pretentious guff and unlistenable at best.

Am I missing anything? Apologies to any fans on here but I just don't 'get' it.

Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: il˙ti on August 20, 2009, 12:49:42 AM
That's okay, you don't have to. I don't get the Sex Pistols, you don't get Return to Forever, to each his own.

What I will say though is that I took my jazz hating girlfriend to see Al di Meola and she enjoyed every minute of it. So there you go, minds can change.
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: Jonny on August 20, 2009, 12:52:08 AM
I don't get the Sex Pistols either. Who are Return to Forever?
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: Ian Price on August 20, 2009, 12:56:24 AM
I don't get the Sex Pistols either. Who are Return to Forever?

Look them up on you tube. Mainly Al Di Meola, Chick Correa, Stanley somebody (I think Clark) and some other guys. I'm bound to get a slating for calling the other 2 Stanley somebody and another guy.

Not sure what genre but probably Jazz Fusion or something.
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: MrBump on August 20, 2009, 06:52:15 AM
Not my cup of tea either, Ian - although I do like some Fusion.  Holdsworth is very cool.  And Santana and Gary Moore both had interesting Fusion periods.

Mark.
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: Philly Q on August 20, 2009, 09:57:50 AM
I don't think it's pretentious, it just doesn't float my boat, at all.  Exactly the same with the Mahavishnu Orchestra (anything by John McLaughlin in fact).

I do like Al Di Meola's early solo stuff, though.  And some Dixie Dregs stuff (is that fusion?).  And Jeff Beck with Jan Hammer (is that fusion?).  And Billy Cobham's Spectrum album with Tommy Bolin.
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: Ian Price on August 20, 2009, 10:49:24 PM
Maybe pretentious was the wrong choice of word. I'm just not impressed by it at all. On an academic level they are obiously very, very accomplished players but I prefer feel over technique most of the time.
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: il˙ti on August 21, 2009, 11:39:08 PM
I don't think it's pretentious, it just doesn't float my boat, at all.  Exactly the same with the Mahavishnu Orchestra (anything by John McLaughlin in fact).

I do like Al Di Meola's early solo stuff, though.  And some Dixie Dregs stuff (is that fusion?).  And Jeff Beck with Jan Hammer (is that fusion?).  And Billy Cobham's Spectrum album with Tommy Bolin.
Dregs I'd call prog. Jeff Beck with Jan Hammer as well as Gary Moore and Santana's fusion periods I'd call fusion light. Or Diet Fusion for you (2 or 3) Americans out there.
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: Philly Q on August 21, 2009, 11:45:02 PM
Prog is fine.  And fusion light is OK.  I need to cut down on the fat and sugar anyway.   :wink:
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: nfe on August 22, 2009, 12:32:23 AM
I don't get the Sex Pistols either.


Nobody should "get" fake punk.

Everyone should dig real punk though. Actually, no they shouldn't, not everyone should like great music, it's just too damn good for some people.

I don't like fusion, though I liked it as a young teenager when I thought complexity = quality. I do like jazz a lot though, just not the showy-off for the sake of it stuff. (I'm aware plenty people will say that just because someone is playing something difficult, technically or harmonically, they aren't necessarily showing off.)
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: il˙ti on August 22, 2009, 12:39:13 AM
Everyone should dig real punk though. Actually, no they shouldn't

Indeed, it does kind of defeat the purpose, doesn't it?
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: Philly Q on August 22, 2009, 12:53:07 AM
Nobody should "get" fake punk.

Everyone should dig real punk though. Actually, no they shouldn't, not everyone should like great music, it's just too damn good for some people.

I really don't want to ask, but curiosity gets the better of me.... go on then, what's "fake" punk and what's "real" punk?


(Although I suspect they're both "too good" for the likes of me, eh? :roll: )
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: nfe on August 23, 2009, 02:40:15 PM
Nobody should "get" fake punk.

Everyone should dig real punk though. Actually, no they shouldn't, not everyone should like great music, it's just too damn good for some people.

I really don't want to ask, but curiosity gets the better of me.... go on then, what's "fake" punk and what's "real" punk?


(Although I suspect they're both "too good" for the likes of me, eh? :roll: )

If it geniunely means something, true people's music, then it's real. I should mention I consider a lot of black metal, gindcore, folk and country to be punk. And lots of blues. Lots of stuff generally, I think it's a mindset, attitude and approach that defines it, rather than sounding like the Sex Pistols. Music that's trying to say something about real life. Hank Williams and Johnny Cash were punk before anyone started using the term connected to music.

Fake is anything that purports to be punk but is considered otherwise by me  :lol:
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: Philly Q on August 23, 2009, 11:49:57 PM
Fake is anything that purports to be punk but is considered otherwise by me  :lol:

That's the answer I was waiting for.   :lol:

 :drink:
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: il˙ti on August 25, 2009, 02:04:16 AM
That's funny. To me punk means "we can't play our instruments, that's why we're cool".
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: Plexi Ken on August 25, 2009, 10:35:29 AM
I play with my instrument every opportunity I get, starting to get pretty good too. Folk on the bus are starting to complain though  :P
Title: Re: Return to Forever
Post by: nfe on August 27, 2009, 02:36:34 AM
That's funny. To me punk means "we can't play our instruments, that's why we're cool".

It's a shame you adhere to the aloof, uninformed buffoon's interpretation.