[ Originally posted to What’s Rattlin’? Yahoo! Group on November 4, 2011 ]

Mark,

Seriously? Judging by your use of all caps you must be upset in your taking “deep exception” to my post and that is fine. You feeling the need to protect the reputation of multi-national corporations like U2 is also fine. But here is the deal; not everyone is great, not everyone is above criticism regardless of how “committed” you perceive them to be or how well they are reviewed and revered in mainstream press.

Think of it as physics: if we can talk endlessly about how great bands like the Softs are underappreciated it necessarily means that an equal mass consisting often of very popular, huge money making empire-bands are overrated. The degree to which you think they are “committed” while important to you is irrelevant to me because I can’t hear in the key of commitment, I can only hear the notes.

Admittedly, looking back if I had been writing with more exactitude I would have used the word “overrated” about U2, “crap” is just more fun to type.

Finally, two things:

While not germane to this but to answer your question I have played drums in bands since 1969, still actively play and record, played in Merz Pictures for 12 years which performed original music including Soft Machine covers (which as Jeff of Glass also mentioned are a bitch to play).

A last thought on commitment and criticism; there were a lot of posts on Lol Coxhill. Now I don’t really like Lol’s playing that much, a little for me goes a long way. But I would never normally offer that up because here is a guy who really is committed to his art and has scraped by financially for years to do what he loves and what he feels he needs to do. That to me is commitment. I respect the hell out of that. But in contrast, leaving U2 out of it I will instead mention Karl Jenkins. Karl works my last nerve; Karl Jenkins is a terrible woodwind soloist. Period. He has exactly one oboe solo that you can hear on song after song. He became an Industry with the success of Adiemus and promptly shamelessly recycled more than even Phillip Glass. Maybe Karl is committed, I don’t know, but he is unlistenable now as much as his oboe solo is on “All White.” I can freely offer that “rude and nasty” opinion not only because I am convinced of it but also because I don’t feel sorry for millionaires.

[ Originally posted to What’s Rattlin’? Yahoo! Group on November 2, 2011 ]

Michael,

I absolutely understand the emotion on Soft Machine. I will also freely admit that trying to define rock and roll is not unlike trying to hammer mercury. Maybe it’s the “roll” part that trips me up, they have Marshall stacks and fuzz tones and Fender Jazz bass guitars so it looks like rock, it smells like rock and so on.

But here is how I view them, here is how I view anyone in a post-modern world trying to make a living playing primarily instrumental music: Kamikaze Pilots. I’ll upgrade it to “Cultural Kamikaze Pilots” to make it more palatable.

Anyone who decided their life’s work and aspiration is to play largely instrumental music that does not include auditioning for classical orchestras is no longer responding logically to either the odds of “show biz” success or financial reality. They are doing it because they simply have to do it, they are driven to do it and have no choice. I have never read this but I bet the Softs were initially very surprised that they got as much exposure, as much television as they did. The luck-timing of the psychedelic era did not hurt this nor did the fact that all the initial tunes were vocal so it wasn’t that far out of bounds to the viewers and early adaptors.

I think of Soft Machine, and have expressed this here, as a vocal band that chose largely not to sing. Robert’s vocals or threat of vocals coupled with their instrumental ability made them unique as a form, separate from Jazz. Maybe this does tilt them back into the rock hemisphere. But the classic line-up recording Third/ Fourth and I’ll throw in Fifth has exactly one vocal tune as we all know. So to the masses they are instrumental, they are the dreaded jazz or jazz rock subset.. This is also why the demographic fan base of Soft Machine essentially all male.

Financially they are screwed but they had to know that going in, regardless of how great they were. You have to have vocals to sell, as stupid and limiting as that is we all know that to be true. Not that you need more proof because I am kind of Captain Obvious here but…

Two quick examples:

Frank Zappa…in the US his real exposure other than just a label-name- freaky guy was on the stupid pandering vocal crap like Don’t Eat theYellow Snow, that is how non-musicians knew about him or heard him for the first time because it brought airplay. One of the greatest modern American instrumental composers known for vaguely profane throw-away ditties.

The second example is more vexing; Pink Floyd. How in God’s name you might ask did they become insanely popular worldwide, eventually making millions, coming out of the exact same scene as the Softs at the exact same time? They weren’t initially more show bizzy, but their music in addition to seemingly always being the easy – dreamy tempo (is there really an up tempo Floyd tune?) highlighted the vocals. Vocals = possibility of airplay = possibility of hits = possibility of Financial success.

Without vocals, playing new original music that equation is gone and you are …let’s say it together…”Cultural Kamikaze Pilots.” You know you are doomed, you know that you won’t be able to do this long, but you are so committed to the music that choice now has nothing to do with it, you are driven and therefore happy to start up your Lowrey – Zero and Hit it! Because you are all in…

[ Originally posted to What’s Rattlin’? Yahoo! Group on November 2, 2011 ]

Pushing for the Soft Machine to be placed in the rock and Roll Hall of Fame implies something that I can’t really get my head around; namely that they played rock and roll. Does anyone out there really believe that the Softs played rock and roll? Do yourself a favor and Google the list of bands “enshrined” in this pretty ridiculous construct. There will be exactly two names with any relevance to the Softs: Jimi Hendrix (which I get) and Miles Davis ( which I don’t get) everyone else…they are all fine bands etc. etc. but have very little to do with the music we have been discussing here since inception.

The real issue which I have total sympathy for is we would all like to see Soft Machine recognized for their art. The good and bad news wrapped up in an overwhelming cultural dichotomy is that it is never going to happen.

Quick: in your head make a list of ten famous crap bands (I will accept both U2 and REM) that no one should care or even know about and then quickly list ten bands that you can’t believe are not part of the musical vocabulary, bands everyone should both know and adore. Then breathe out slowly. You have now completed your personal enshrinements without invoking additional negative energy about the cultural failings of the masses. Because, maybe other than the Beatles in 1964 where one measly time “best art” intersected with “mass – commercial art” (you can insert Rolling Stones if you need to) that battle is unwinnable which might not be all bad.