Moog Movie

museslave · Post by **museslave** » Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:55 pm

In some ways, I gotta agree with Pelican.
Don't get me wrong, I did enjoy the movie in many ways... I really liked sort of getting to know Bob Moog.. but in other ways, I was like... come on!
I mean, I wanted to physically ATTACK DJ Spooky for the dumb bleep he was saying!! I mean, HOW DARE HE! Why would you put someone who PLAINLY doesn't understand or appreciate Moog synthesizers in that documentary? Perhaps the editor chose footage that had nothing to do with Moogs... maybe Spooky had a lot more to say? I don't know... but what was included seemed downright offensive.
Mainly, I wanted more HISTORY. I mean, I've read Analog Days, and just about every other book concerning the history of analog synths and Bob Moog's work... but a movie can give visual examples, and more history! I was really waiting for footage from the "old days" to drool over.
I appreciated seeing the artists that appreciate Moogs, though... and overall I walked away from the movie happy.
Dang, I need to buy it.

Sweep · Post by **Sweep** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 7:11 am

Thanks. That sounds like what I remember people saying when it first appeared.

I wonder - why? They could have made a brilliant and very relevant movie. Why this stuff instead?

pelican1 · Post by **pelican1** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 7:26 am

why? - who knows? It's obviously what the director wanted to portray.

thewaag · Post by **thewaag** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 2:05 am

My own 2 cents.....

For ME, the movie could have been better, but I still enjoyed the heck out of it.

I would have loved to see longer clips of Wakeman, Emerson, Worell, etc. The little snippets weren't enough to appreciate their talent completely. Wakeman was sounding amazing--I wish that I had the full video of his performance.

For an old guy like me, there was too much emphasis to the new guys playing Moogs; simply making wierd sounds with them. I really dont' think that they needed Monkey Mark (or whatever his name was) swallowing a microphone that is plugged in to the external input while making weird noises. Like I said I am an old guy. Maybe the younger players loved this stuff.

If you talk about Moog you have to talk about Theremins. I'm not crazy about them, but they were Bob's first love, so you have to cover it in a movie about Moog.

I think that the movie tried to cover EVERYTHING about Moog, so it was pretty wide in scope--it just seemed to spend more time on the younger artists. AND NOTHING ABOUT WENDY CARLOS. That was a real omission, but maybe Wendy did not want to be a part of it.

On the other hand, it gave the viewer a closer idea about Moog the man. As I stated in an earlier thread about the movie when it first came out, I had always thought that he was kind of a serious, semi unlikeable person from all the old pictures that I had seen of him.

The movie proved him to be just the opposite. He appeard like as a sweet old grandfatherly guy, easy to laugh, and very humble. Now that Bob is gone, the movie is even more important to me, as it really gets you in touch with Bob, the man.

If you are looking for long clips of Moog synthesizer music, buy a music DVD of your favorite artist. I hope that they make a DVD about Moogfest. I WANT THAT WAKEMAN PERFORMANCE ON VIDEO. Bernie Worell looked interesting as well, but his appearance was very brief.

If you want to know Robert Moog, the man, better, buy the video in a heartbeat.

fewtch · Post by **fewtch** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 7:14 am

I ordered a copy of this movie and it's in the mail... can't wait to get it.

I can see why it focuses on the younger generation. After all, they're the ones who are now carrying the torch, more or less. From what I've heard, it's basically more about "Bob, the man" than the history of the Moogs or analog synths, and I bought it on those terms... will say something about it, if this thread's still accessible when I've seen it.

Sweep · Post by **Sweep** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 2:19 pm

thewaag wrote:AND NOTHING ABOUT WENDY CARLOS. That was a real omission, but maybe Wendy did not want to be a part of it.

Nothing about Wendy Carlos!!!!???? Or just no appearance from her? I can understand if she didn't want to appear in it, but if she's really not mentioned, that's a ridiculous omission - not just on the basis of her original pioneering recording work, but also because of her involvement with Bob Moog in the early development of the instrument.

BTW regarding these modern people being in the movie - I have no objection to that, personally, so long as they're musicans. But I'm inclined to steer clear of DJs who think they're musicians, and most of what's been said here seems to confirm that the contemporary people aren't really in the musician category.

Which begs the much wider question, of course, of where the great modern musicians are, and why we aren't hearing them if they exist. (Would we ever have heard Wendy under the conditions contemporary musicians work under? Or Keith Emerson or Rick Wakeman, or Tomita?)

Gary Smith · Post by **Gary Smith** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:15 pm

Since we are talking omissions......... I was surprised to not find anything about David Borden ! He was the first to use Bob's experimental synthesizers live in concert ! (Mother Mallard's ensembles).. I have made contact with him recently and we chatted about his latest new project since he just retired from Cornell..

Was happy to see he is on the board for Bob's Memorial fund..

.......Gary

ELPNeil · Post by **ELPNeil** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 5:41 pm

I have the movie also and find it very good but in some parts I agree with Sweep, I would have sooner seen more of Bob in the early days with Wendy or even last year filmed doing lectures etc over here in the UK.
Even more of Keith Emerson at the modular,or Will Alexander giving an inside into keeping it restored, anything rather than the guy with the microphone in is mouth which was a dreadful row!!!

Yes, it was also very interesting to see the Voyager being assembled but I was weened on modulars and that's what started it all.

If you ask youngsters of today what a Moog modular is, they have no idea and as an educational aid I think this film could help but I don't like the DJ bits.

The film as I said is very good but I feel last years moogfest seems to pad it out in extra time where old film footage or even black & white stills could have been used.

Neil

Rest in Peace - Bob!
Your the best - respect.

OysterRock · Post by **OysterRock** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 8:01 pm

Have any of you actually listened to any of Money Mark's music? I think you should before say that any of the contemporaries in the movie aren't "in the musician category", alot of his work is actually pretty good. Especially since he produces and plays almost all the instruments on his albums and he is quite a good keyboard player.

I'm not saying that he should have really been in the Moog movie, I was kind of scratching my head at that, too. But don't be so quick to dismiss.

Sweep · Post by **Sweep** » Tue Sep 06, 2005 2:14 am

OysterRock wrote:Have any of you actually listened to any of Money Mark's music?

There are audio samples on Amazon of an album called Change is Coming. Is that representative?

If it is, I can't see how he represents new music. It seems to be very derivative jazz, the sort of thing you might get from a warm-up act in a jazz club - though some of it you wouldn't get away with in any self-respecting jazz club, I hope.

I've just had another look, and there's also something called `Push the Button.' I listened to as much of that as I could stand. The only good thing I can find about that album is that it's a limited edition. Different style to the other album, but again nothing new about anything he does - and most of it is so bad I can't understand why he does it at all.

Is there some other album where he justifies his existence?

Sweep · Post by **Sweep** » Tue Sep 06, 2005 2:53 am

While I was at it I had a listen to DJ Spooky on Amazon. Hard to believe that anyone would make an album called `Drums of Death' - and the track titles are even worse.

Hard to believe, too, that anyone thinks this rubbish is worth releasing. It certainly confirms my initial comment about being wary of DJs who think they're musicians.

There's a more listenable album called Optometry. Some of it still sounds pretty awful, but there's music in there, provided by a jazz quartet and not by DJ Spooky. DJ Spooky's contributions are vile, but the presence of music in the mix makes it almost palateable.

But no-one needs to take my word for any of this. This total crap is there on Amazon for anyone who wants to listen to it. But have a CD of real music handy to take the bad taste away.

OysterRock · Post by **OysterRock** » Tue Sep 06, 2005 3:01 am

Sweep wrote: Is there some other album where he justifies his existence?

I really haven't listened to anything new from him in at least 4 years, and I certainly don't think he "represents new music" as you put, but those seem like rather harsh words. Questioning someone's existence just because thier music doesn't appeal to you seems a little egocentric, don't you think?

In your earlier post you question why you aren't hearing any new good musicians. Have you really looked with an open mind? There is a ton of good stuff out there, you simply have to look and not wait to be told where to look. Go to a record store and start listening!

Can you explain what you think a musician is? Or is someone a musician only if they play music you like. I'm not defending DJ Spooky or 99.9% of the DJs and DJ wannabes out there, you are right most of them are god-awful. But there are some excellent producers that would make your head spin! And if your head doesn't spin, you're too old!

Indeed · Post by **Indeed** » Tue Sep 06, 2005 4:46 am

I loved the movie, thought it was real inspiring...
felt proud to be a voyager owner!!! I'm totally stoked on the theremin! I thinks that's my next instrument!!

I didn't really care for the performances except for Wakeman, the various Thereminists, and um.......Bob.

I really liked how they showed Bob in his garden, all the angles and curves to his personality, preferences on design, intention, and his spiritual side as well. He's a real deep cat. I'm gonna buy this movie for myself and a coupla friends too!!!
great history...Yeah, it could have been done better...but this one is it, you can take it or leave it! I derived much value from watching it, and am inspired ten-fold since I watched it!

Bon Appetit!

Sweep · Post by **Sweep** » Tue Sep 06, 2005 7:26 am

OysterRock wrote:I really haven't listened to anything new from him in at least 4 years, and I certainly don't think he "represents new music" as you put, but those seem like rather harsh words. Questioning someone's existence just because thier music doesn't appeal to you seems a little egocentric, don't you think?

....

Can you explain what you think a musician is? Or is someone a musician only if they play music you like.

I was being more tongue-in-cheek with that than seems to have come across, but I meant justifying his existence musically. I wasn't questioning his right to exist as a person - just as a musician.

The new music comment was because of his inclusion in the Moog Movie, as this discussion took off from the issues with that. To bring the movie into the present generation it needed people who are playing new music with Moog synths, and on the basis of those sound-clips this guy isn't playing anything new at all. Hence my comment about that.

Re what I consider a musician to be - no, I don't just mean someone who plays music I like. I've always heard music I respect but which I wouldn't choose to listen to myself. My definition of a musician is someone who plays with expression and sensitivity. It seems a reasonable enough definition, but it doesn't apply to a surprisingly large amount of so-called music.

On your other points - I do have to say I've not had an awful lot of luck finding good new music. But I've looked so much that I've heard promising new people who are at the very beginning of their career - first CD on an independent label stage. I know people on both sides of the Atlantic who that applies to. So that took quite a bit of looking.

But there really is a problem with the major labels and what they consider worth signing and marketing. And I've also noticed a very worrying inability among younger musicians when it comes to writing new music. I was brought up in the late sixties and seventies when people were creating all sorts of new things. Even some of the really talented younger musicians I meet seem to have trouble relating to that music, and much of what's being written now is remarkably derivative. Maybe these things go in cycles, but it still concerns me. I expect younger people to come up with stuff that stretches me and makes me need to develop to keep up, but the reality is that they seem to be the ones in need of development to appreciate stuff I was listening to (and plenty of other people were listening to) thirty years ago.