Heres the place to talk about Fish in general

Re: Upset by Marillion playing what are essentially Fish son

Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:48 am

Lady41 wrote:
jester1470 wrote:It isn't entirely personal though, there are conventions as to what makes you a better technical singer, it may not be that you have to like someone who is a technically better singer but there are conventions in place on technicality. Mariah Carey is technically a brilliant singer but i don't really get much out of her performance, I might prefer another artist but technically Mariah is a better singer, she hits her notes better, she can sustain them longer she has a larger range. You're mistaking taste with technicality and there is a difference, Steve is a better technical singer, but I prefer Fish. Steve Hogarth actually has a very good range, one of the things I haven't liked about him recently is his over reliance on falsetto in his performances. I would think most people would see Steve Hogarth as technically better because he is, that doesn't mean you have to like him more, technicality isn't a personal viewpoint, but liking someone more or less is.


But it IS personal. Some people consider Celine Dion & Mariah Carey to be 'screechers' and those people would argue that technically their voices are flawed as a result. And their 'taste' is consequently affected. The hearing range of the average person will affect whether something is 'technically' flawed or not - some have better hearing in the lower frequencies, others in the higher frequencies. Where you sit in your own personal hearing percentile - and this applies as much to musicians as anyone else - affects your perception & thus your taste. So they are interchangeable and linked in one way or another. Personally I can tolerate both Celine Dion's voice and Mariah Carey's but many cannot (and I admit I'm becoming less tolerant of Celine Dion's which, as my hearing changes with age/presbycusis affects my desire to listen to her music) - & 'taste' in music will be tinged with that. It follows pure logic.

Tolerance to sound, technical or not, is subjective & individual.


Tolerance to sound may be subjective but whether or not someone is a better technical singer is a measurable fact. Just because you don't like listening to a certain thing it doesn't make it technically wrong. The technicality is in how they hold a note, accuracy to the note, the timbre of the voice, these are all technical and measurable and not taste points. You technically tune a guitar you play it and you set the note played to the correct pitch, a voice is trained in a similar way and a technically good voice can hold a more accurate note for longer, this is measurable in a scientific method, therefore not a personal opinion, the science of whether Mariah and Celine are hitting the correct notes does not change dependent on whether or not you like their music, they're still technically doing it better than someone like me trying it, technicality like that is a scientifically measurable act therefore isn't open to personal opinions.

It's a bit like comparing Steve Vai to many other guitarists for me, I recognise Steve Vai is a great guitarist, he plays interesting solo's and does them quickly and technically is a very good and accomplished guitarist, but i'd rather listen to Steve Rothery knock out the Chelsea Monday solo than the entire output of Vai because i feel there's so much heart and soul in his stuff, to my ears it elevates it, though he isn't technically as good as Vai, he couldn't hit all the notes as quickly and probably as accurately, but it works better for me.

Re: Upset by Marillion playing what are essentially Fish son

Wed Feb 05, 2014 11:11 am

jester1470 wrote:Tolerance to sound may be subjective but whether or not someone is a better technical singer is a measurable fact. Just because you don't like listening to a certain thing it doesn't make it technically wrong. that is a scientifically measurable act therefore isn't open to personal opinions.

It's a bit like comparing Steve Vai to many other guitarists for me, I recognise Steve Vai is a great guitarist, he plays interesting solo's and does them quickly and technically is a very good and accomplished guitarist, but i'd rather listen to Steve Rothery knock out the Chelsea Monday solo than the entire output of Vai because i feel there's so much heart and soul in his stuff, to my ears it elevates it, though he isn't technically as good as Vai, he couldn't hit all the notes as quickly and probably as accurately, but it works better for me.


Spot on!

I am a bass player, so my examples tend to come from that world. Janek Gwizdala is technically flawless, but his playing leaves me cold. I find little emotion in what he does, even though I can appreciate it from a technique point of view:



On the other hand, Larry Graham is technically weak. But so are my knees when I hear him play!

Re: Upset by Marillion playing what are essentially Fish son

Wed Feb 05, 2014 10:59 pm

jester1470 wrote:to my ears it elevates it, though he isn't technically as good as Vai, he couldn't hit all the notes as quickly and probably as accurately, but it works better for me.


So, it's subjective & personal. ;)

Re: Upset by Marillion playing what are essentially Fish son

Wed Feb 05, 2014 11:30 pm

been reading this thread with interest but how about marillion songs that should have been sung by fish? how much better would king of sunset or uninvited guest sound sung by the big man? not sure if it would work with the later stuff. dont know if fish wrote them or not or whether theyre marillion property but would love to hear him sing them. discuss???

Re: Upset by Marillion playing what are essentially Fish son

Thu Feb 06, 2014 8:27 am

Lady41 wrote:
jester1470 wrote:to my ears it elevates it, though he isn't technically as good as Vai, he couldn't hit all the notes as quickly and probably as accurately, but it works better for me.


So, it's subjective & personal. ;)


Yes, the fact that i like that is subjective and personal, but that's not what I'm saying, I've never doubted that what you like is personal, but technically Vai is better, it can be measured that he is better technically, he can play the notes quicker and is technically a better guitarist. Someone being technically good has nothing to do with whether you like them, that's the point I'm making. Being a quick, faster guitarist who doesn't make mistakes probably makes you a technically better guitarist as you're playing the guitar to a higher standard but it isn't always what it required for a song to have meaning or work, that's what I've been saying your personal opinion has nothing to do with how good something is technically.

Re: Upset by Marillion playing what are essentially Fish son

Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:40 pm

Very interesting topic and one I thought a lot about at one point about 20+ years ago

Its a difficult one as the original Marillion was all about the marriage of the incredible lyrics and superb music that accompanied them. The performances were very intense and captivating.

I saw Steve Hogarth's first gigs with Marillion and I have to say that I was surprised and impressed by him. He was and is a good singer and at the time he did justice to the Fish songs. However the songs felt empty as Fish wasnt singing them and as we know most of Fish's songs are deeply personal to him.

The current Marillion are still a great band. Of course they are. They are the same guys who were there at the beginning. When I saw them last year at the Marillion Convention in Holland they were playing at the top of their game. Very impressive. And to be honest when they did the old Marilion songs they were sublime and musically closer to the originals than Fish's band manages but thats no surprise. When I hear Fish doing the old material I long to hear Mark Kelly's swirling keyboards and Steve Rothery's beautiful guitar tone.

However for me Fish's character, lyrics, performance and vocal delivery is what I love most.

The current Marillion have left me cold a with a number of albums. Steve Hogarth's lyrics are often wishy washy in comparison with Fish. Having said that they have produced quite a few sublime songs over the years.
I like Seasons End, Eden and Afraid of Sunlight. They lost me around Brave but regained me last year with the excellent STCBM.

So we have two bands. Neither of them are quite as good as they were when they were one, however we are richer for having them both. :D
Thanked: 7

Re: Upset by Marillion playing what are essentially Fish son

Sat Feb 15, 2014 8:25 am

sorry it's in french but for those who still have doubts about the quality of Marillion's today albums,here are some critics from a french magazine in 1994(the year of the "brave" album)



titre de l'article et de l'interview:MARILLION LA SEPTIEME MERVEILLE
Intro:"(...)avec leur septième album,le grandiose "brave",MARILLION frappe fort,très fort(...)"

en intro des critiques:"oui,nous plaidons coupables!la rédaction de Rockstyle reconnait qu'elle voit dans ce nouvel album de MARILLION une oeuvre phare.Evènement rare.Voilà pourquoi nous nous sommes mobilisés pour vous parler de ce disque.Parce qu'il le mérite,parce qu'il marquera peut-être l'année 94.Tout simplement."

"(...)si cet album majeur ne recueille pas les suffrages que vous lui devez,que tout le monde lui doit,alors ce sera encore un crime contre la musique.(...)"

"(...)Ca y est.Ils l'ont fait.LE disque de MARILLION vient de nous tomber tout cuit sur le coin de la figure.(...)"

"(...)une oeuvre colossale,troublante,dérangeante(...)"

"(...)il s'agit là d'un opus dense,tourmenté,fiévreux,d'un concept album sombre et agressif(...)"

"(...)car ce "brave" est une réussite.Tout simplement(...)
8-)

Re: Upset by Marillion playing what are essentially Fish son

Sun Feb 16, 2014 9:02 am

Teddynonose wrote:Very interesting topic and one I thought a lot about at one point about 20+ years ago

Its a difficult one as the original Marillion was all about the marriage of the incredible lyrics and superb music that accompanied them. The performances were very intense and captivating.

I saw Steve Hogarth's first gigs with Marillion and I have to say that I was surprised and impressed by him. He was and is a good singer and at the time he did justice to the Fish songs. However the songs felt empty as Fish wasnt singing them and as we know most of Fish's songs are deeply personal to him.

The current Marillion are still a great band. Of course they are. They are the same guys who were there at the beginning. When I saw them last year at the Marillion Convention in Holland they were playing at the top of their game. Very impressive. And to be honest when they did the old Marilion songs they were sublime and musically closer to the originals than Fish's band manages but thats no surprise. When I hear Fish doing the old material I long to hear Mark Kelly's swirling keyboards and Steve Rothery's beautiful guitar tone.

However for me Fish's character, lyrics, performance and vocal delivery is what I love most.

The current Marillion have left me cold a with a number of albums. Steve Hogarth's lyrics are often wishy washy in comparison with Fish. Having said that they have produced quite a few sublime songs over the years.
I like Seasons End, Eden and Afraid of Sunlight. They lost me around Brave but regained me last year with the excellent STCBM.

So we have two bands. Neither of them are quite as good as they were when they were one, however we are richer for having them both. :D


Nail on the head. ;)
Thanked: 1

Re: Upset by Marillion playing what are essentially Fish son

Sun Feb 16, 2014 2:55 pm

arcademannequin wrote:
Teddynonose wrote:Very interesting topic and one I thought a lot about at one point about 20+ years ago

Its a difficult one as the original Marillion was all about the marriage of the incredible lyrics and superb music that accompanied them. The performances were very intense and captivating.

I saw Steve Hogarth's first gigs with Marillion and I have to say that I was surprised and impressed by him. He was and is a good singer and at the time he did justice to the Fish songs. However the songs felt empty as Fish wasnt singing them and as we know most of Fish's songs are deeply personal to him.

The current Marillion are still a great band. Of course they are. They are the same guys who were there at the beginning. When I saw them last year at the Marillion Convention in Holland they were playing at the top of their game. Very impressive. And to be honest when they did the old Marilion songs they were sublime and musically closer to the originals than Fish's band manages but thats no surprise. When I hear Fish doing the old material I long to hear Mark Kelly's swirling keyboards and Steve Rothery's beautiful guitar tone.

However for me Fish's character, lyrics, performance and vocal delivery is what I love most.

The current Marillion have left me cold a with a number of albums. Steve Hogarth's lyrics are often wishy washy in comparison with Fish. Having said that they have produced quite a few sublime songs over the years.
I like Seasons End, Eden and Afraid of Sunlight. They lost me around Brave but regained me last year with the excellent STCBM.

So we have two bands. Neither of them are quite as good as they were when they were one, however we are richer for having them both. :D


Nail on the head. ;)


Yep. Great post Andy! 8-)

Re: Upset by Marillion playing what are essentially Fish son

Mon Feb 24, 2014 3:59 pm

maybe to close the debate and to show that h is respectful to Fish and therefore to his work ;)


8-)
Next

Full Version