Anyhow, I’m actually not as familiar with the Sign O The Times album, so I’m listening to it here, and it sounds like a perfectly great song. It’s a meditative, hypnotic, building I-IV progression song, similar to things like “Heroin” by VU or “Whole Wide World” by Wreckless Eric or “Roadrunner” by Modern Lovers (although that throws in another chord somewhere in there). Of course, I’m also a sucker for two-chord songs. This one has a great emotional build to it, starting out plaintive and spiritual, with the occasional Indian-influenced psychedelic guitar fill, slowly building with a kick drum on 1 & 3 and some snare tickles, then into a full-on rock backbeat, voice projecting power, cracking, shouting. And now hitting full-on psychedelia, including what sounds to me to be an actual sitar playing that little Indian figure the guitar was playing before. Gives me chills just listening to it. And then that jazzy harmonized “the Cross” ending the song like Prince’s version of a Gospel “a-men” cadence.
This is the first time I’ve heard this song. It’s gorgeous. Now, granted, I do like repetition and builds. I’m a big fan of VU and Modern Lovers and Neu! and all of them do that kind of stuff all the time. So if you need your progressions and melodies to be constantly moving around, you may not enjoy it. But the song literally sent a chill up me once it got to the rock back beat part.
It’s the same chords and rhythm, and the guitar, the only identifiable instrumental line seems to be from the zep song.
If I hear the “same thing” again, whether it’s a riff, or a progression, or a concept, and it doesn’t get a better melody or song, then I don’t give them a lot of credit. It’s played for me, and not original enough or of good quality, and a waste of time basically. Now you can say you never heard it before, but that’s not my fault. Would you say I was “wrong” for not thinking it was good?
It’s the I and IV chords, sure, but that’s a common progression, and it doesn’t really sound connected to “Ramble On” to me at all rhythmically. The little melodic guitar lick actually puts me more in mind of George Harrison and the Beatles during his sitar psychedelic phase. (I think you’re hearing similarities between it and maybe the bass part in Zep? If that’s it, all the notes really have in common is that they have a syncopated descending part. They’re not even the same notes) The strumming and guitar rhythm sounds more more straight-ahead chugging strumming rock kind of stuff (now that I listen to it again, reminds me also a bit of U2’s “All I Want Is You,” but obviously that’s post-dated) , while Zep’s is much more rhythmic and moves around more harmonically. It certainly doesn’t have the same vibe. Prince’s is an austere, plaintive, meditative E to Asus2 progression.
The Zep song is definitely more complex. One of the best bass lines in rock music ever. Wonderful drumming. But that’s not the vibe that’s appropriate to the Prince tune.
There you go. Thanks for that breakdown, especially coming to it new and not being a fanboy. Yeah, I dig it for all those reasons. A hypnotic crescendo.
Aeschines - you are looking for good posting behavior. How are you feeling about drad dog’s attempting to trash a song offered in good faith as a way to discuss Prince in a thoughtful way?
drad - Ramble On? Because the only thing that matters about the song is that it has a two-chord structure? That’s some deep exegesis ya got there.
Consider the possibility that you are too sensitive to post here if my post hit like you a “pile on”. A serious grip needs to be gotten, because all I did was point out the incongruence in saying CS is too “staid and careful” and then complaining when people give you honest feedback about how you’ve come across to them.
Also note that an earlier post of mine probed the opinion of another thread participant. So I’m not just reading your posts, believe it or not. That is often how these things work; we are not all required to respond directly to the OP. We can engage anyone we want to.
Perhaps that was not your intent, but that’s the impression created when someone makes round after round of declarative statements about someone or something. If you don’t like the reaction you’ve gotten, you may consider changing how you communicate.
Why don’t you follow your own sarcastic advice and stop with all the “You’re breaking the rules!” business?
The more you post, the more I’m convinced that you are intentionally stirring the pot. You were looking for a fight when you created the thread, so all this pearl-clutching over every negative post makes no sense. I don’t think it is possible for a reasonable poster to really be that sensitive. So I’m questioning whether I should continue dancing with you.
The rule on the SDMB (outside of the Pit) has always been that you can attack a post, but cannot attack a poster. It can be a difficult line to draw, and some of monstro’s posts have in fact been rather vehement, but so far as I can see, she’s stayed on the correct side of it. Aeschines, if you can come up with specific examples of where she or any other poster have crossed the line, report them (which I note that you have not done). If you cannot, then don’t. Either way, do not attack said poster in the thread over such “personal attacks”.
Listen to 1:05 and 1:35 etc. in the Cross. It sounds like another take of Page guitar in Ramble on.
The song consists of the same rhythm, and chords, so you can’t complain or cry confusion if it’s gets pointed out in comparison. It’s a perfect musical analog moving at the same pace. It’s much closer than just another two chord song. That’s not me, that’s the purple ones doing. But it doesn’t go anywhere except louder. It’s not an obscure reference to point this out, when you have heard a lot of music. The melody sits there completely static, except for the self regard of the singer. If that’s “appropriate” for your tune, then you have to admit we are not in Beatles or Ellington territory.
Boy, he showed you pulykamell - you’re opinion is wrong.
drad - someone just described being *enraptured *by a first listen. They are simply wrong?
I didn’t say The Cross was his bid for Ellington compositional complexity - Prince contains multitudes. You want complex Latin Pop veering into 60’s era Miles Davis Group, try She Spoke to Me, off the Girl 6 soundtrack.
My point is it isn’t that original or interesting if you have already heard Ramble on, even if he’s black and hypersexual. You are expressing a great affection for your singer but if I am just a listener, I am going to get bored. very fast. And making another drone song 20 years after the fact, without hooks, that lasts 5-8 minutes, doesn’t give me confidence that we are in Ellington, Beatles or Stones neighborhood.
I’m honestly not trying to be difficult, but I’m just not sure what similarity you’re hearing. Like I said, the song sounds closer to something like “Whole Wide World” by Wreckless Eric than it does “Ramble On.” I’m not getting any Zep from Prince’s song.
I’m going to listen to songs in the thread, and try to comment. I wasn’t trying to dump on your pick. It just was the first one. Nothing personal.
I didn’t point out Puly as wrong. Where did you get that? I am adding my perspective.
I think you missed this: In a post above I asked “If I hear the “same thing” again, whether it’s a riff, or a progression, or a concept, and it doesn’t get a better melody or song, then I don’t give them a lot of credit. It’s played for me, and not original enough or of good quality, and a waste of time basically. Now you can say you never heard it before, but that’s not my fault. Would you say I was “wrong” for not thinking it was good?”
If I have a musical opinion why do you have to personalize it as triumphalism?
Like I said, never in a million years would I have compared it to “Ramble On.” But just because I’ve heard two chord songs doesn’t mean I don’t still enjoy listening to the shit out of two chord songs. “All I Want Is You” is another two-chord song that is, I think, more similar to “The Cross” than “Ramble On.” Even follows a similar emotional crescendo. But I don’t get sick of hearing that, either. Or the latest cover of “Whole Wide World” by Cage The Elephant. Yes, they’re all two chords, but they’re all emotionally and spiritually in different places. With “Ramble On,” I feel unsettled, my ass bounces around, I wanna groove and air drum and rock out. With “Whole Wide World” I want to scream out in joyous, romantic, idealistic ecstasy. With “All I Want Is You,” I want to crawl into a bed under my sheets and cry. With “the Cross,” I feel love, brother, hope, spirituality–it doesn’t necessarily have to be directly religious, but a metaphor for some kind of salvation and hope and desire to keep going on.
All two chord songs. (ETA: Sorry, “All I Want Is You” throws in some Ems in lieus of Gs in the prechorus). All completely different in the feelings they convey. That’s music.
I don’t. Ramble On is a folky acoustic guitar with rapid 16th note strumming. “The Cross” is – I’m not good with guitar tones, but is that a Fender of some sort? – but electric and mostly simple eighth note strumming that even I or any beginning guitarist can do. (No way can I pull off “Ramble On.”) I hear zero similarity besides the fact the progressions is I to IV.
ETA: Is there any chance we’re listening to different versions or something? I’m listening on Spotify off the Sign O The Times album. That’s about the only explanation I have how we’re hearing this so differently.
ETA2: And, goddamit, because of this thread “The Cross” has been stuck in my head all day today.
If you haven’t already, have a listen through Dirty Mind. I think that’s the one you’d most find something interesting in. I don’t have a lot of Prince albums (I have that one, 1999, Purple Rain, and Diamonds and Pearls), but I always find myself coming back to the lo-fi, raw quality and genre hopping of Dirty Mind. It’s just such a fun (and raunchy!) album and one perhaps more accessible to people who aren’t into Prince for the pure funk, R&B, and dance aspects of his music. I only really started listening to it after Prince passed and it’s jumped to become one of my essential 80s albums. On of my favorite reviews of it by Robert Christgau ended with a reference to the song “Head” and the line “Mick Jagger should fold up his penis and go home.”
I only could get the live version on youtube. It seems like the only musical passage that I can retain is that electric guitar line, and there is an electric guitar in Ramble on. Maybe Prince is recreating the bass hook from ramble on, but it is there, and it’s the only place I can orient myself musically in the song. There is nothing else but that guitar line, the two chords, and Princes holy sexiness. That is boring to me. Do you have to be a believer to get it?
I have had “The Ladder” doing a loop in my head for the past couple of days.
Everybody’s looking for the ladder. Everybody wants salvation of the soul.
The steps you take are no easy road.
But the reward is great
For those who want to go.
Drad dog, why do you think pulykamell is a “believer”? He’s certainly not describing himself as a super fan. He only owns 3 albums and this is the first time he’s heard the song under discussion.
No, I do believe you find it boring. I totally understand you look for different things in music than I do (though our musical tastes do have a lot of crossover). I just thought you were interested in finding out what we find interesting in that music. Similarly, you love Steely Dan. I find the music, for the most part, insufferable and boring myself (with a few exceptions, “Peg” being one of them.) They’re fantastic musicians, and Fagen is some sort of musical genius, I guess, but the music does very little for me. But I don’t poke my head into Steely Dan threads and argue about it. It just doesn’t do it for me. That’s fine. I mean, I might ask what people find interesting about it, and then listen and try to learn and, at the end of the day, if I still decide I don’t like it, that’s cool. Why be argumentative about it?