River Rock

This came up because I was searching for ‘very Prog’ music. I raised a version of Dharma for One by Jethro Tull which effectively starts, as edited on the album Living in the Past, with a ten minute piano composition quoting all kinds of history music, called ‘By Kind Permission Of’. Talking to a friend, I threw in,

Tell me I’m wrong, but I don’t think (Pink) Floyd would do that?

Back at me, a ton of information. No, Pink Floyd would not do that. Middle‐class, but not trained. Avowedly non‐virtuosos. Started playing long songs because they didn’t have material enough to fill out the sets. I asked if there were references?

…my own observation, and the odd thing they’ve said themselves… Mason… plays down their musicianship… Gilmour… has often commented that much of his style comes from not having very fast fingers…

Secondhand quote, but Wikipedia notes that at the time of Pink Floyd’s second album “…neither Waters nor Mason [players in the band] could read music”.

Allmusic have this issue too. In the teaser for the Pink Floyd articles they write ‘…known for superlative musicianship’. But in the article on Prog,

(Prog is) …oriented toward classically trained instrumental technique (with the exception of Pink Floyd).

Ok, this can be resolved—musicianship may not include instrumental technique. Though I wonder if the confusion should be resolved—maybe it needs explanation? Also, there are other groups in this category—Pink Floyd are not an exception. Yes there are, though they go unmentioned. Camel for one, and likely a host of other small groups that came and went, maybe not on disc.

So what is this music? As my friend said of Pink Floyd,

Maybe they get judged prog by default?

Yes, and we can do better. Not knowing where I was going, I said,

And Overdrive (Interstellar Overdrive, Pink Floyd) etc. are a sort of freakout, not so much an epic.

‘Freakout’ is a word from the Psychedelic era, and maybe not good elsewhere. I was also thinking of the Yardbirds, and a ‘Rave up’. You can see how this grows. Whatever the cultural root, these are extended instrumental jams. Also, they are not ‘jams’ in the Jazz sense, one soloist and a group swing. They are rock jams, more awkward, with full instrumental (inter)engagement. Usually, some kind of melody or groove sympathetic to the band will be needed, though some bands know how to chuck away what doesn’t work, or latch onto moves that give them grip.

We are not talking a string of solos. Or, more structured, a band that assumes a shape within which solo contributions politely occur—though there may be hold‐back if someone lays down fire …or makes the others laugh. It is a commitment to keep playing, affording space for contributions at whim. The instrumental shape will find shapes which, at best, the instrument itself and player will assume helplessly. For example, a cheap sample keyboard is best at adding squiggles of outside references, or pad sounds. Breaking those music lessons takes a kind of (un)learning. There is no need for virtuosity, but a good ear, an open mind, and a sense of architecture help. Dexterity may help the final expression.

And there is a set of bands in drum/guitar small‐group music that are like this, They range from the late‐night free‐play that lead to surf‐music (United States, not Brit), to the longer‐form blues numbers driven by the same impulse (every rock‐blues band in the 1960’s had one), the drug‐intent of Quicksilver Messenger Service (only partially documented), the psych‐jams of the late 1960’s, the more alcoholic long‐form rock of Mountain, and so forth. What I think is important is that some bands major in this. This is what they do on stage, not for a number, this is what they do. Pink Floyd in their second phase, post‐Syd Barrett, pre‐Dark Side Of The Moon, were this kind of band. And so were/are well‐known bands like Hawkwind, The Allman Brothers, and Soft Machine.

The bands are easy to identify. Live, they don’t play a song, they ebb and tide. If you know the band, when they get an extra instrument, they got a new player in the band. They may tighten up on disc, but even on disc you can probably spot the group interplay and lack of interest in extra instrumentation, if not overdubs. Call that the Grateful Dead effect (well‐named, huh?). And their either shaky or odd rhythmic attack. And then the live disc arrives, or the B‐side, or the single where they didn’t know what to record, which is a dead giveaway. I got a thought for you—Steppenwolf. Magic Carpet Ride for us all. What a stew.

Aside, we are oblique to most people’s calls of ‘prog’. Away from the Allmans who, as Joe Carducci noted, needed good soloists, nobody much talks about instrumental prowess. Sure, the listeners may follow some players, but that is not the purpose. These bands are about group interplay, and sometimes about spontaneous composition. So the instrumental skills of the players are not the point. The Jerry Garcias and Duane Allmans are part of the band. The interest in instrumentation is limited to what people may naturally pick up and play, and how it slots into a small‐group format. And any claims of bombast are probably gonna be met with, like “Hey, you know, dig this xylophone section” or, “Think there may be a blowout on guitar when the record hits that black patch”.

As for another mark of prog, there may be a story structuring the music, but it’s in the music, right, like in Snow Goose by Camel? Only one I can think of with an explicit story is Moon in June by Soft Machine, lovely props, but what a ride! And Moon in June is not an ‘epic’ story, nor is it direct philosophical musing.

You can argue with me about the extent of the improv. In truth, it’s interesting, and I suggest you get on with it. For example, the Allmans pretty much only had six songs or something, and it was all they needed (this may be a signal). On a couple of live versions you can hear them switch, effectively, to new inner compositions. Hawkwind knew what song they were playing or, at least, one or two of them did. Phase Two Floyd moved through sections of rattles and pulses. Even at it’s most composed, this is long‐form, largely instrumental, and based in gathered improvisation.

So this music isn’t prog. Not only that, those who pay entrance know it. Most bands mentioned so far—and are going to be mentioned—somehow, are not called as prog. And those who are, we are gonna have to assume that they may be a bit prog, but mostly they are something else. It’s clear people have doubts about Pink Floyd. As they may have about Can. Soft Machine are the only band I can think of who are both extended group improv and may be called prog. They are namechecked as prog by Allmusic, but perhaps that is not the story? Yes (the band)? Not of this discussion—for all the group simultanacity, they are composed with solos. Step out and look back, are Dale and the Del‐Tones in here? You can see how this discussion raises that possibility. So is Dick Dale ‘prog’? No.

Well that explains that, Hurrah! Biggish question, what are we going to call it? Rock it is, for sure, in fact none of it can exist without rock (further down I’ll suggest some units that are not rock but similar, however, rock was/still is the small‐group music of pop). There’s connection with the idea of Jam Bands. Jam Bands is an important definition that ought to have more devoted to it, but the definition gets messed up—check the Wikipedia entry—what have Euro‐words like ‘genre’, or bootlegging, got to do with it? And the coverage is Dead. But the lists will be useful. I want to call the music ‘RiverRock’ or something. Long‐form rock that is either improvised or retains the loose form of an initial improvisation (you can see this as a strength in the commercial explosion of Phase Three Pink Floyd).

Also, with this we can talk about some output as ‘river’. Some multiple‐solo songs, they’re river, or brook, but not perhaps gripping as the group efforts. I mean, the short‐form Iron Butterfly turned out In A Gadda Da Vida, which is somewhat ‘river’ isn’t it? Or whatever we are going to call it. More of the main flow, river by a band mostly set on the short form is Spare Chaynge by The Jefferson Airplane. Then A Sailor’s Life, by Phase Two Fairport Convention, is one only of many late sixties long tracks that arrived as the extended blues numbers were inflected by the San Francisco jams. Stretching out a bit, river is Going Home by the Rolling Stones, and Diamond Sea by Sonic Youth. Conceding, much of Sonic Youth is river. And I think people might be with me on this one. I think someone who likes Meddle by Phase Two Floyd might hear out Dark Star by the Grateful Dead. Maybe Dick Dale would be pushing it, but they might have a copy of Snow Goose under the sideboard.

Any definition has edges. For example, do we include minimalist groups? I’d pull up the formal ones like Spaceman3/Spiritualised, and the Swans—then say say no, they may have odd harmonics but there’s no grind in them, and where’s the group listening? They may even be unriver. Godspeed_You!_Black_Emperor?. Maybe the rule is you need to get wasted to it, not spaced? Talking of grind, does a group that grinds on the riff count as river? Yeh, you’re going to pull up Led Zeppelin. But that raises the Jimi Hendrix Experience who, off of albums and when they got going, were sure river. Though nowadays don’t get a mention, or dissed, as a band. The group that brought ‘riff’ home was Flipper. Since the idea was riff, I’d count them in—they went on long enough. After all, the Joe Carducci pick of Universal Congress Of are a formally rigorous and unique approach to river. And then there are groups outside rock that will be full engaged in collective improvisation of musical structure. In conversation, my friend suggested Tangerine Dream who used live improvisations as part of the process of composition, though it’s mostly too slow to hear on disc. Ash Ra Tempel alloy propulsion is the bridge and, for all the cut ’n paste, Faust fit better here than anywhere else. Some modern‐art music—Il Gruppo, and if you wonder if it’s river or not maybe you should tune up on Il Gruppo. Worth noting that Faust and Il Gruppo had rock moments, and Prime Time are useful rock music.

So, so. River Rock is rock music composed in long‐form collective improvisation. The recordings likely bear the marks. Opening out on stage and having only six songs are giveaways (Prime Time kicked off with one song). So, are you in or not? Are you Phish–Can?