Is fusion meant to be listened to?

[rumborak]

Actually a serious question. I was just listening to "Red Air" by Virgil Donati, and the impression I had was "this is probably a ton of fun to play/improvise to, but it's not really a tune, more a concatenation of challenging sections". I have felt the same for stuff by Simon Philips for example.

So, are there actually people who listen to this recreationally? I'm not dissing their taste, but I just wonder whether those albums are more for the musician that recorded them than for the general public.

[ChuckSteak]

Any type of music is meant to be listened to.

I like fusion.

[El Barto]

I really enjoyed that, but it was approaching the point where I find this sort of thing annoying. I think everybody has their own threshold where things become too discordant or dissonant. It's musical up until that point and then it becomes bothersome. That's why I always liked Niacin for this sort of thing. They played close to the edge at times but never took it past the point I enjoy. 

[Kotowboy]

I like jazz fusion a lot more than that pretentious jazz where it sounds like 4 guys playing different charts...

And the trumpet doesn't sound like it has a tonal centre.

[Adami]

I really liked the Donati stuff you're talking about.

However, I agree it's basically right around the border of being unlistenable. If it went just a little further in the crazy direction, I'd have given up.

[King Postwhore]

It's something I can only take in small doses.

[Skeever]

I like Red Air a lot, but there are parts where it is about on the borderline.

[Adami]

I should add that I've never tried listening to this stuff for long periods of time. It's usually maybe 10-20 minutes at a time and that's it. Maybe that influences my perspective.

[Prog Snob]

I listen to it as I would any piece of music and treat is as it's own body of work. Listening to fusion with the mindset that it's going to be a typical song is just going to ruin the experience. To me it's not about whether or not it's meant to be listened to, because that's just conjecture. Fusion is what it is. It's meant to be listened to by those who enjoy it. I'm sure there are people who try to apply that logic to Dream Theater, Justin Bieber, and opera.

[bl5150]

Opera and Justin Bieber may be enough to inspire me to listen to fusion.

[Prog Snob]

See. My logic is already creating new fusion fans. 

[PROGdrummer]

For me, part of the joy in listening to complex jazz fusion music such as that Virgil Donati album (which is one of my favorites), is the improvisation.
It's a treat to hear how musicians can all repeatedly leave a groove and come back to it and manage to noodle over each other while still keeping in time with each other. Fusion isnt something I listen to to hear a catchy hook or get a melody stuck in my head. Fusion for me is something to observe when I really wanna see something wild from a purely technical standpoint. And yes, there is musicality in technicality. Complex compositions are still compositions, and even when its an improv, that makes in even more interesting to hear.


I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's interesting, even if it's not always groovy or melodious. You dont have to like it, but you can at least appreciate it for what it is.

[bl5150]

Seriously...............I do appreciate fusion but , like a few said above , it's a matter of degrees.  There has to be some vague sort of structure around which the improv is taking place.  When I was a young guitarist I took an interest in music from Frank Gambale , Scott Henderson ...even Joe Pass.

I was watching a YT vid the other day of a band where the singer was mumbling away , the guitarist was comping some seemingly random jazzy chords ,the drummer had his eyes closed and was feeling his way around the kit like a blind man who had never touched a drum kit before and none of it seemed related to the other members of the band.  I am sure that I am on a lower plane than they are (or insufficient drugs) but that's the sort of stuff that I have trouble with.

[Stadler]

For what it's worth, I enjoy listening to Brand X.

[hefdaddy42]

I listen to fusion fairly regularly.  But listening to that and listening to pop, or even to something like Dream Theater, are different things.  I am listening for different reasons.

[ariich]

I would also add that fusion comes in all sorts of shapes and sizes and styles. Some is incredibly wacky and technical, other is more focused on form and melody (the latter being the type that I genuinely enjoy listening to).

[Evermind]

I have nothing to say on the thread subject, but I'm really tempted to create a "Is growls-oriented music meant to be listened to?" thread.

[erwinrafael]

I am listening to Virgil Donati's In This Life album right now. One thing I found is that this complex instrumental music makes good review / study / writing music for me.

[bl5150]

I have nothing to say on the thread subject, but I'm really tempted to create a "Is growls-oriented music meant to be listened to?" thread.

Make it a poll...................NO or HELL , NO!

[SoundscapeMN]

the visual part vs the listening part, the same thing could be said about Technical Death Metal, classical performers or any acoustic shredder.

[Tomislav95]

I checked out that song expecting something totally crazy. The song is actually pretty groovy, something I could listen to. SoundscapeMN mentioned tech death metal, I can't listen to that stuff anymore and I used to like bands like Necrophagist, Origin and Nile.

[Lowdz]

I can listen in small doses.  I liked the Red Air track. Just about stayed on the right side of the line.

[Big Hath]

I checked out that song expecting something totally crazy. The song is actually pretty groovy

yeah, this.  There is a lot more wackier stuff out there than the song mentioned in the OP.  It's not far from bands like CAB and others that I listen to all the time.  And I'm not into dissecting time sigs or chord progressions or anything like that.

[Prog Snob]

I have nothing to say on the thread subject, but I'm really tempted to create a "Is growls-oriented music meant to be listened to?" thread.

That's the point I was making. Attributing it to just fusion, if that was the OP's intent, is subjective. I could say the same thing about...disco.

[MrBoom_shack-a-lack]

There's so many fusion drummers and muscians I have the up most respect for but ironically I barerly listen to their music and albums. I rarely find their music to be that interesting to listen too other than a song here and there.

Virgil is a housegod to me but I can only tolerate so much of his solo material until it gets a bit boring, which hurt a bit to say.

I don't think i've heard a complete album that Thomas Lang been featured on even though he's way up there for me.

The only fusion artist I steadily follow and also has a couple of albums by is Dave Weckl. Probably is and always will be my favourite drummer.

[Big Hath]

The only fusion artist I steadily follow and also has a couple of albums by is Dave Weckl. Probably is and always will be my favourite drummer.

 

[darkshade]

As a huge fan of jazz and fusion, I can tell you that mediocre fusion bands are a dime a dozen. How many fusion bands feature a Jaco clone? Too many metal guitarists (or guitarists with metal chops) playing fusion these days too. I like Planet X, Derek Sherinian, Virgil Donati, type of fusion, but it gets old quick, but is great in small doses. Actually, Derek's best album is Oceana which is more jazzy, in the 70s Jeff Beck way, than his other output, and he more or less dropped the mixed meter heavy metal, coincidence? Tribal Tech did that kind of fusion first, and better. TT is more musical, but they get complex a lot too.

However, I can go on and list many albums from the late 60s to present day that feature strong melodies, funky grooves, well composed sections, and isn't technical for technical sake.

[ytserush]

I enjoy most of it....especially live.