Talk:Frank Gambale: Difference between revisions

}}

 

==Untitled==

::::::::::::Regarding leaning him over into certain spectrums, that's far from what I'm doing. By having jazz fusion and instrumental rock, one after the other, I'm merely describing the two fundamental genres into which his work can be classified—the first of which should indicate the most prominent style, and the other perhaps not as much but is still present. If others start thinking of Gambale as some shred rock guitarist just because they see the word "rock", then that is their problem and they are free to make that preconception. It's not the fault of instrumental rock itself. Those in the know will know better and not be swayed by its inclusion, because it could mean something like ''Wired'', ''The Great Explorers'' or even ''Surfing with the Alien''. One should let the listener make their own mind up by providing both genres to describe the music.<br><br>So in the case of around 80% of Gambale's albums, I had naturally placed jazz fusion ahead of instrumental rock because of reasons I've already discussed. They are primarily comprised of jazz fusion, but also contain the basis of instrumental rock as well—especially when Gambale chooses not to play in such a jazzy style (i.e. more straightforward moments like "High 5"). This whole Gambale/Beck/rock/fusion argument can be applied to various other groups or musicians, such as Rush/Genesis or Mariah Carey/Whitney Houston. Is it progressive rock or pop rock? R&B, pop or hip hop? I say it's just better to include at least the two most prominently descriptive genres present in the music. It satisfies everyone that way.<br><br>And yes, I had seen that Holdsworth video before (in addition to his REH instructional video), but the artists themselves are often not the best indicators of what they actually play—i.e. Lemmy from Motörhead claims to play just "rock n' roll", but it's obvious to any fan that the band plays heavy metal. So whilst Holdsworth claims to lean more towards to jazz in his playing alone, there is a lot of rock stuff going on in the background and foreground in each of his solo albums. The straightforward solo in the ''Atavachron'' title track, for instance, could almost be straight out of an 1980s guitar album. The distorted chords intro to ''Metal Fatigue'' is probably the heaviest thing he's ever done. Many of his songs containing vocals (at least with Paul Williams) have a pretty basic rock blueprint behind them, with Holdsworth laying on the jazz solos in his own way.<br><br>Going back to Gambale, though—yes, I'm happy with how they are labelled now. It's the best of both worlds, and I'm in agreement if you are. I just regret that it had to go this far in the first place! Perhaps you should consider creating a Wikipedia account so that you can participate in editing more efficiently in the future. It'll make it easier for you to join in with talk pages if any similar disagreements arise along your travels. [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 03:10, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

 

Hello, here are some albums that Frank has participated on that are labeled with "post-bop".

 

To me, Inside Out and To the Stars are the only true post-bop/fusion albums. I took a jazz class a couple years ago and in our book it discussed how Inside Out was more post-bop than jazz-rock.

Personally, I feel that labelling Frank with post-bop is kind of weird and wrong. Considering that you labeled Petrucci with these types of sourcings, it kind of MAKES ME HAVE to label everyone on my watch list this way. So, I guess if an artist plays on an album that is jazz/rock/classical, this artist must be labelled as jazz/rock/classical???[[User:Sprecher|Sprecher]] ([[User talk:Sprecher|talk]]) 04:06, 9 September 2011 (UTC)