>writes pop song in 17/8
get on her level
>writes pop song in 17/8
get on her level
Other urls found in this thread:
why
it barely gets replies
it always does
never a significant amount though
just about enough for me
i am a simple man
I'm starting to like you, man
i'm gonna eat your ass
It's nice knowing OP lazy spam threads are getting no attention.
Literal waste of time.
youtube.com
>main riff, verses, and chorus in 13/4
>bridge in 9/8
so fucking what
it's literally prog rock. No one is impressed by their jazz stylings, they're supposed to have them
good post
Does this mean Bjork is prog?
it's a pop song though
>jazz stylings
come back when you know what you're talking about; could have at least said Stravinsky or Bartok or some shit
>could have at least said Stravinsky or Bartok or some shit
literally fuck off dude, you come back when you know where prog rock came from
Can't wait for the King Crimson collab
OP is a retard trying to create another spam there.
People are already suckered in.
>Fripp and Keith Emerson, the two founding fathers of prog, idolized Bartok
mhhmmmmmmm
Time signature is literally irrelevant
literally Genesis
not at all impressed
yeah I'm sure they loved Bach too, and the fucking Beatles. Who gives a toss
the trips confirm and outdigit the dubs.
t. brainlet
I'll concede that, some of Ladies of the Road sound like they were ripped straight from a mid-60s Beatles song
right
Why do people feel obliged to like a song more when they find out that it's in a weird time signature?
Probably makes them feel smart
venetian snares would like a word with u
its more progressive
you always (always) notice it when you hear it the first time