What do you guys think of this

Post Reply New Topic

vimeo.com/103317489
https://soundcloud.com/atlaspeak/flying ... ie-hancock

This is a link to an album teaser by an interesting artist called Flying Lotus. He's a remarkable producer but when I first discovered him it just when right over my head. To be honest it sounded chaotic and claustrophobic. It was only after a few more listens that I realised how intricate how detailed how complex and how inspired his music is. Herbie Hancock (One of the greatest jazz pianists of all time) collaborated with him which gives an idea of the calibre of the musicianship.

Wondering what you guys hear when exposed to this for the first time!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipQIXbCByCU[/youtube]

I don't dislike in completely, but there is something in the timbre and pitch that is like strobe lights to my ears and it hurts.

Coherent multilayered order.

It's boring. Background music. I like melodic complexity, and this has none. There seems to be no melody at all, actually.

I didnt see that coming... listen to the bass for starters. I think you're experiencing what I experienced years ago. Which piece are you referring to also?

I listened to both the song that played at the link and the youtube video embedded into the post. They both sound monotonous, the first moreso than the second.

Ok fair enough its actually a really interesting opinion because most people describe his music as either sublime or stark raving mad. What sort of music would you consider melodically complex btw?

Sibelius. Kullervo Symphony. Just the first minute is an excellent example.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zpXPq-lHSM[/youtube]

Especially the beginning of the 3rd Movement:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzEdN4gG1ys[/youtube]

For something more mainstream, The Beatles. I could give you an example from almost any genre, actually.

I think I see where you're coming from now. You prefer melodies which are more focused and have more linear progress. Flying Lotus' melodies are more insubstantial and fragmented. I disagree that there is no complexity there. Its just a different kind. Schoenberg might have a tone row from which he extrapolates and develops melodic material but Flying Lotus' melodies are not nearly as important as the atomsphere of the whole. His compositions are all about how textures timbres rhythms and motives can all be atomised to the point where it feels like chaos but as Humanaut says somehow out of that emerges order

That's exactly why it sounds like elevator music. Background music is all about atmosphere.

Muzaaaaac the problem with the comparison is that elevator music has no depth of field. Flying Lotus' music is motivically very very complex. If you listen you'll hear that all the seemingly random whirrs buzzing bleeps ticks and phitt phutt whizz bangs are sequenced painstakingly and form part of the percussion. Its polyrhythmy on a mass scale. Not only that but you have polytonality some whole tone stuff going on. Flying Lotus; melodic complexity is all in the walking bass. Then there;s the saxophone improvisation which is constant melodic development throughout (im talking about the soundcloud link).

If you want melodies which start at point A end at point B with lots of mathematical complexity in between listen ot moments of hesitation again and focus on the bass the sax and then the keys in turn. Just because the direction and shape isnt perceptible on first listen doesn't mean that it isnt there

It doesn't sound random to me at all. Exactly the opposite: it sounded too regular.

But thats completely inconsistent. The Sibelius link and the Beatles are firmly in the tonal zones. The Jazz Fusion example pushes atonality. Mathematically the latter is more complex both rhythmically and melodically.

Ahhhhhh I know what you mean. The Kullervo example has a really angular shape. Its like watching a series of complex polygons being interwoven. The Flying Lotus is more like watching complex curves winding round and round each other. The FL just seems undifferentiated. Perhaps this is more to do with familarity with those shapes?

I meant that it sounded repetitive. I can tell that the rhythm in the link is complex compared to most music; it was interesting for a few seconds, but it sounds like it is repeating over and over again. Maybe it changed up a bit, but the change was too subtle or came too late to catch my attention after the zoning out effect caused by the repetition.

I don't know that I have much aural sophistication when it comes to tonality, but the saxophone snippets, though not technically repetitive, never go anywhere, so it creates a repetitive effect.

Were on the same page. Lol I respect your opinion as its reasoned and thought out but I just needed to understand it. I do agree with you in a sense too. If I were to compare this to In a Silent Way by Miles Davis or any of Hancock's fusion work I believe i'd find a similar overall shape and atmosphere but a far far deeper level of mathematical complexity. This is by virtue of the fact that we're dealing with genius musicians in charge of their respective parts. Here were dealing with a producer who is just discovering fusion music and is trying to combine it with his own voice. If you were to listen to his first albums and then work up to this you'd see an incredible upward curve. Hopefully the next album will bring even more to the table. For the moment im just awestruck by the integration of his "Pure" electronica and jazz fusion.

It made me want to rip my hair out and destroy my computer