Rick Beato: Maybe musicians peaks before they are 30...

[boilk]

I don't know, I see the point to a degree that 'best work' is a subjective term, but I'd have to say that the vast majority of people (even those who like latter day Yes) are not going to say that Mirror to the Sky is Yes's best work vs Fragile and Close to the Edge.

Neil

[wilcox660]

I don't know, I see the point to a degree that 'best work' is a subjective term, but I'd have to say that the vast majority of people (even those who like latter day Yes) are not going to say that Mirror to the Sky is Yes's best work vs Fragile and Close to the Edge.

Neil

I 100% agree if there was only 1 band or artist in human existence!

[boilk]

I 100% agree if there was only 1 band or artist in human existence!

Well, of course, but that was just one example of many, in the prog rock/rock world. I could list a whole lot more. A lot of artists have done great things in their later years, and many have kept their creative juices high by working with other musicians (Fripp being a prime example), amongst other reasons. My point is simply that, subjective or not, there are a lot of cases where a very high percentage of people can agree, to at least some extent, on an artist's 'best work' phase.

Neil

[Batchman]

Well, of course, but that was just one example of many, in the prog rock/rock world. I could list a whole lot more. A lot of artists have done great things in their later years, and many have kept their creative juices high by working with other musicians (Fripp being a prime example), amongst other reasons. My point is simply that, subjective or not, there are a lot cases where a very high percentage of people can agree, to at least some extent, on an artist's 'best work' phase.

Neil

To make a huge generalization, I've concluded that groups/bands peak relatively early and rarely approach their high creative point afterward, but individual artists tend to get better with time. That applies to Classical composers as well as singer-songwriters.

[boilk]

To make a huge generalization, I've concluded that groups/bands peak relatively early and rarely approach their high creative point afterward, but individual artists tend to get better with time. That applies to Classical composers as well as singer-songwriters.

You may be on to something there. Peter Gabriel, Paul Simon...heck, our pal Steven Wilson have arguably done just that.

Neil

[Mr.Krautman]

To make a huge generalization, I've concluded that groups/bands peak relatively early and rarely approach their high creative point afterward, but individual artists tend to get better with time. That applies to Classical composers as well as singer-songwriters.

Maybe we should do a distinction between (live) performance/energy and compositional/instrumental skills. In rock (and related) music the former starts declining after 30 while the latter can last (and even sometimes improve) with age.
Maybe it's unfair, but just try to compare an early live act of bands like Jethro Tull, Yes , Genesis, The Who, Deep Purple, or even (Ouch !) The Rolling Stones... with a current (2024) gig of he same and everything is said: It's just pathetic.
Another very important ingredient is inspiration, and this also seems to quickly erode and vanish with age. Not really surprising after having recorded a string of 15 to 30 records !
For all the above reasons it's extremely rare to find a "classic" (prog)rock record made by artists in the later part of their career, most (if not all) were created at an early age under 30. I knoiw there are exceptions, but not many... (none of the P.F members have reached 30 when they composed DSOTM).

[Mr.Krautman]

Another important factor which hasn't been mentioned by Rick (or others) is something I would call "artistic virginity" (or "musical virginity") : when you start at an early age, especially if you don't have any formal musical training (which is the case for about 80% "rock" musicians) there are no set limits, no RULES to follow, no "wrong" notes: you're 100% expression free. As you learn and progress, rules are starting to set in and there are more and more "don't do this" and "don't do that" you start to be aware of, and this could severely restrict your artistic freedom. This is also true for jazz "improvisers": always be tied to the harmony. (except Free Jazz). Instinctive/spontaneous play is too often "eaten" by age and experience.
If J.Hendrix would be still with us he would most certainly have learned music notation (and rules) and became a very skilled proficient jazz guitarist today, but the outstanding and truly original music he did during his short carrer is because he was not tied to any "rules", he knew nothing about music, he was artistically "virgin" and FREE.

[Trane]

To make a huge generalization, I've concluded that groups/bands peak relatively early and rarely approach their high creative point afterward, but individual artists tend to get better with time. That applies to Classical composers as well as singer-songwriters.

Still generalizing
for 70's rock bands, I'd say that's quite evident. outside of prog, I'd even say that after the fifth album, there isn't much to hold me back, but in most case, I'd say that inspiration and ideas are mostly done from their second album onwards. I'd say that A'smth or AC/DC reached their tender youth goals & sonics by their third.

For 60/70's prog bands, when starting out, they had no idea how far out their bettering composition skills would take them and of course, technology came in to help extend their grace period.

Maybe we should do a distinction between (live) performance/energy and compositional/instrumental skills. In rock (and related) music the former starts declining after 30 while the latter can last (and even sometimes improve) with age.
Maybe it's unfair, but just try to compare an early live act of bands like Jethro Tull, Yes , Genesis, The Who, Deep Purple, or even (Ouch !) The Rolling Stones... with a current (2024) gig of he same and everything is said: It's just pathetic.
Another very important ingredient is inspiration, and this also seems to quickly erode and vanish with age. Not really surprising after having recorded a string of 15 to 30 records !
For all the above reasons it's extremely rare to find a "classic" (prog)rock record made by artists in the later part of their career, most (if not all) were created at an early age under 30. I know there are exceptions, but not many... (none of the P.F members have reached 30 when they composed DSOTM).

On tour, like on stage most bands do tend to get better until they stagnate (but we don't realize it yet) and sometimes become a parody of themselves.
But generally that comes later on after their creative peak in the studio has waned/faded.
It looks like experience works against inspiration/creativity.

Another important factor which hasn't been mentioned by Rick (or others) is something I would call "artistic virginity" (or "musical virginity") : when you start at an early age, especially if you don't have any formal musical training (which is the case for about 80% "rock" musicians) there are no set limits, no RULES to follow, no "wrong" notes: you're 100% expression free. As you learn and progress, rules are starting to set in and there are more and more "don't do this" and "don't do that" you start to be aware of, and this could severely restrict your artistic freedom. This is also true for jazz "improvisers": always be tied to the harmony. (except Free Jazz). Instinctive/spontaneous play is too often "eaten" by age and experience.
If J.Hendrix would be still with us he would most certainly have learned music notation (and rules) and became a very skilled proficient jazz guitarist today, but the outstanding and truly original music he did during his short career is because he was not tied to any "rules", he knew nothing about music, he was artistically "virgin" and FREE.

can't object to any of the first paragraph of this post, but I wonder how long Hendrix might've stayed interesting to us, whether he'd stayed in rock (not likely) or wandered in other realms (jazz in a first step)

[auxfnx]

Another important factor which hasn't been mentioned by Rick (or others) is something I would call "artistic virginity" (or "musical virginity") : when you start at an early age, especially if you don't have any formal musical training (which is the case for about 80% "rock" musicians) there are no set limits, no RULES to follow, no "wrong" notes: you're 100% expression free. As you learn and progress, rules are starting to set in and there are more and more "don't do this" and "don't do that" you start to be aware of, and this could severely restrict your artistic freedom. This is also true for jazz "improvisers": always be tied to the harmony. (except Free Jazz). Instinctive/spontaneous play is too often "eaten" by age and experience.
If J.Hendrix would be still with us he would most certainly have learned music notation (and rules) and became a very skilled proficient jazz guitarist today, but the outstanding and truly original music he did during his short carrer is because he was not tied to any "rules", he knew nothing about music, he was artistically "virgin" and FREE.

while there is an element of this, i kind of disagree with being totally free to express at the beginning of one's musical journey. this is all from my experience of course, but when you start out you don't necessarily have the skill to express whatever it is you want to. there's an element of experimentation with your limited vocabulary or ability that may be the source of ideas that, yeah, perhaps you just wouldn't come across when you approach the instrument in a more learned way. these ideas may come across more exciting to listeners, and part of creating what is the unique and peak early years of an artist or band, but this being indicative of a more pure expression i feel is a bit of a false equivalency. maybe because we tend to think of our favourite works by an artist as their most pure. some may feel that their works created with more experience can more accurately portray what they want to express. It all depends on the selection process of the individual musician of course, and many may retain their ability to create those types of ideas whilst progressing, and they just choose not to repeat it. I think more than anything, musicians get tired of approaching their music in the same way every time, and will seek out novel ways of approaching the creation of their music, and change in taste and their artistic wants are a simple and big factor for bands and artists 'losing their touch' so to speak, as 'fans' (as a generalised grouping, not all individuals obv) will generally want more of the same while most passionate musicians will want to continue exploring avenues.

[Rarebird]

while there is an element of this, i kind of disagree with being totally free to express at the beginning of one's musical journey. this is all from my experience of course, but when you start out you don't necessarily have the skill to express whatever it is you want to. there's an element of experimentation with your limited vocabulary or ability that may be the source of ideas that, yeah, perhaps you just wouldn't come across when you approach the instrument in a more learned way. these ideas may come across more exciting to listeners, and part of creating what is the unique and peak early years of an artist or band, but this being indicative of a more pure expression i feel is a bit of a false equivalency. maybe because we tend to think of our favourite works by an artist as their most pure. some may feel that their works created with more experience can more accurately portray what they want to express. It all depends on the selection process of the individual musician of course, and many may retain their ability to create those types of ideas whilst progressing, and they just choose not to repeat it. I think more than anything, musicians get tired of approaching their music in the same way every time, and will seek out novel ways of approaching the creation of their music, and change in taste and their artistic wants are a simple and big factor for bands and artists 'losing their touch' so to speak, as 'fans' (as a generalised grouping, not all individuals obv) will generally want more of the same while most passionate musicians will want to continue exploring avenues.

On the other hand, if you have learned the rules, it's in a way easier to break them, because you know what you are doing and how you can break or bend the rules.

[Batchman]

I think more than anything, musicians get tired of approaching their music in the same way every time, and will seek out novel ways of approaching the creation of their music, and change in taste and their artistic wants are a simple and big factor for bands and artists 'losing their touch' so to speak, as 'fans' (as a generalised grouping, not all individuals obv) will generally want more of the same while most passionate musicians will want to continue exploring avenues.

Another distinction between individual artists and groups. What you write above rings true for the individuals (both solo artists and those who are the driving force behind their groups, e.g. Fripp), but groups tend to be motivated more by financial survival and therefore seek to work the same formula or try to get back to whatever worked during their most successful period, or else modify their style not for artistic growth but to be more in tune with what will sell.

[auxfnx]

Another distinction between individual artists and groups. What you write above rings true for the individuals (both solo artists and those who are the driving force behind their groups, e.g. Fripp), but groups tend to be motivated more by financial survival and therefore seek to work the same formula or try to get back to whatever worked during their most successful period, or else modify their style not for artistic growth but to be more in tune with what will sell.

i don't think any of that mindset is necessarily more prevalent in bands than in individual artists. the main difference is that there are more fingers in the pie so to speak with a band, so how the sound changes / progresses has lots more variables. multiply what i said about change in taste and artistic wants by the number of members in the band and you can imagine how much more easily you can end up with a poor result than if an individual artist gets to execute their vision without committee. an individual may be more likely able to make great works out on their own than with their old band because each members taste or ideal for the band may change over time, some wanting to preserve an old sound, others wanting to do something new, others losing interest, others wanting to chase commerciality, etc. and just the general interpersonal problems that come with being together so much in a band.

[Proghound]

I have always thought that a young artists have written music since they began to play. I did the same thing. Thus, for the first few "albums" artist draw from this massive personal library of music that had been tested and played over years. After that, they run out of ideas, the library is empty, and start to sound samey samey. In some cases I think its obvious some bands completely run out of new ideas and put out BS albums.

[ca1ore]

From a creative/composition perspective, the vast majority of my favored bands do their ‘best’ work early on. After that it’s either derivative or uninspired. Whereby it’s a chronological age thing, or simply exhausting of ideas, I cannot say. I also recall reading an article on Supertramp where Roger Hodgson had written many of their hits many years previously, so timing of an album release isn’t necessarily the same thing as creating the song. Performing is a little different for me. I actually prefer old Peter Gabriel as singer.

[Trane]

I also recall reading an article on Supertramp where Roger Hodgson had written many of their hits many years previously, so timing of an album release isn’t necessarily the same thing as creating the song.

Hodgson indeed claims that he wrote some of his huge hits as a pre-teenager.
I can see that in some of his wanker chorus melodies like Dreamer, Lady, Give A Little Bit, BIA and Raining Again.

[zombywoof]

I feel silly and embarrassed for having done so, but as a 67 year old (next month) working and learning every day in my musical craft, I was COMPELLED against my better judgement to watch.

If musicians peak before 30, I peaked playing bass in woeful cover bands for a few drunken bar patrons in middle-of-nowhere saloons, and my entire body of continuing solo work, as well as all the bands I've made albums with (Thinking Plague, 5UUs, Science Group etc) are all post-peak.

So if you are reading this and you are a 29-year-old musician, don't get too worried

Bob
www.bdrak.com