Jeff B wrote: >If you (the non-specific "you", of course) don't have the kind of >ideas that are best put into "song" packages, that might just be the >luck of the draw. On the other hand, exposure to some actual good >songs might open up your head a bit. When I was a little kid, I >listened to Chicago a lot, as much out of availability as anything >else; still, they were the rare band that could write a Good Song and >a Musical Workout and be equally convincing with both. Often you'd >get both in the same piece of music. You are indeed getting the very nub of my gist. Chicago is a great example. The aforementioned Steely Dan is another. Many of the "pure" prog groups of the past were just plain better at melody, I think. Frank Zappa -- another one who can blow your whole face off while inducing you to hum a tune. I agree that some prog musicians just may not have that "melody gene", but I think it's more frequently the case that anything approachable is considered beneath them. So it's a choice (albeit maybe an unconscious one), not a natural tendency. Just because it's catchy, I suppose the reasoning goes for some, it must be trash. :?p