Who's afraid of Fusion?

[gearHed289]

I was a huge fusion and prog guy when I was younger. I learned a lot, and advanced my technique by leaps and bounds trying to cop lines by Stanley, Percy Jones, Jeff Berlin, Ralphe Armstrong and others. Brand X, Bruford, Return to Forever, solo SC, solo DiMeola, Jean Luc Ponty, Jeff Beck (Wired is a virtual bass lesson put to disc) were my favs. The genre pretty much died around 1980 as far as I'm concerned. I rarely listen to any of it now (but I'm still a prog geek), and I rarely use much of what's left of the technique I had developed. I've found more joy in serving a good song than being the "look at me!" guy.

[gweimer]

I wouldn't say that I hate fusion.  The fact that I'm a borderline Crimhead kinda makes me unable to hate it, but I find that I can only take so much of it, and also find that a lot of it doesn't catch my interest when it seems to be wanking for wanking's sake.  I much prefer songs with structure and themes.

[nofi]

interestingly enough is that of all the people who passed through his band ponty was the only guy who zappa truely disliked. or so i have read.

[Dave W]

I know this isn't going to convert anybody, I guess I'm a little surprised at the venom with which people are putting down "fusion". Actually, I don't care about labels, there is specific music I like and nobody else has to like it, I could care less about a label, which often gets in the way of music.

I find labels useful even though they can sometimes mislead.

Normally I'll just refrain from commenting when somebody starts a thread about a band or a musical style I don't care for. This is different. It's an outgrowth of comments in the Jeff Berlin thread, and I take it as an attempt to force-feed fusion to those of us who don't like it. So I'll speak my mind.

[SKATE RAT]

you tell 'em Dave.

[SKATE RAT]

most of this stuff doesn't sound like songs.it's just too free form to me.like a musical amoeba.

[Barklessdog]

most of this stuff doesn't sound like songs.it's just too free form to me.like a musical amoeba.

Funny when say that I think of Mike Watt- He is someone who is not gymnastic chopsmeister, but does some crazy, almost fusion/prog music, but with a punk attitude.

Thats the kind of music I find so cool, funny aint it. I never cared or really listened "real " punk till recently from a lot of the guys here and elsewhere. I'm a sponge and will try any kind of music if it has balls, great musicianship, or downright weird.

I grew up with fusion when it was cool & new. It died when it took two paths, smooth Jazz & Noodle gymnastic music

[n!k]

Normally I'll just refrain from commenting when somebody starts a thread about a band or a musical style I don't care for. This is different. It's an outgrowth of comments in the Jeff Berlin thread, and I take it as an attempt to force-feed fusion to those of us who don't like it. So I'll speak my mind.

Making a thread and posting a video is force feeding? Surely this is being a bit dramatic!

most of this stuff doesn't sound like songs.it's just too free form to me.like a musical amoeba.

Funny that fusion (at least in its well intentioned infancy) was like punk rock in trying to abandon those old forms, rules, and traditions. I'd say a band showing up on stage for noodling is no less defiant and snotty than a 2 minute, 3 chord burst from the Germs, it just pisses off a different set of scene police / musical authorities.

[SKATE RAT]

punk didn't piss off "the scene police".they pissed off the real police.

[chromium]

I can appreciate any music, if its good.  Blow by Blow, Hymn of the Seventh Galaxy , Hot Rats, Imaginary Voyage...  those IMO are just great works - even if they're considered fusion.  There's even some post-fusion 80s stuff that still sounds good to me.  Flim and the BBs Tricycle, for example.  Just like any genre, there's plenty of crap out there too.

I think I've outgrown my interest in virtuosity for the sake of virtuousity.  If someones talents contribute musically to a song, then I'll be drawn to it.  If it is just a bunch of folks on stage being virtuosos, or if the song is nothing more than a platform for some virtuoso soloist, then once you get past the "wow look at that" factor it gets boring pretty fast.  Most of the time the wow factor only goes noticed by other musicians anyway, so that kind of music doesn't have much staying power.

Those albums I mentioned do have wow factor, but can stand on their own musically too.  That's why I like 'em.

[Barklessdog]

Its like Victor Wooten leaves me cold, His last CD Palmystery was better, but he is really more of a Circus act, bass gymnastics, if you will. I just can't get into that.

I never got into Jaco either, but still recognize (good & bad) what he did for bass playing.

[patman]

I never liked the virtuoso thing either---it's about groove, feel and spontaneous creativity

Ginger Baker did some cool trio work / I think big parts of the old Mahavishnu Orchestra were pretty cool--

I really really don't like it when the music becomes a circus act---you know, when Jeff Beck plays a fast lick and everyone claps like its an athletic event

[Barklessdog]

Yet, Entwistle was excepted & lauded for overplaying, being a lead bassist 

[chromium]

Yeah but compositionally the Who's songs interest me, and Entwistle's playing gives it an idiosyncratic flare that makes the music even more endearing.  I rarely listen to "bass player music" anymore - unless the music is just good holistically. 

An example of that is an older solo album I have by Victor Bailey (cheesy name - "Bottoms Up") that features some "hey look at me" playing, but the compositions are excellent, and his lead bass playing suits the songs well.  That seems to be the exception to the rule for instrumental solo albums, though, most of the time.

[chromium]

Here's an example of a bunch of fusion-branded virtuosos who can groove together, and make some cool music (IMO, of course):



Dats wha I likey