I'm not sure that the production and mastering are the issues.

 

Being that this whole technology is so NEW, I am not sure that we can yet have a reasonable concensus for another 20 to 30 to 40 years, before we stop thinking that one is this and the other isn't.

 

Again, this is a transitional time period for the arts, and music ... and the technological advances help add/subtract a lot of things to the music ... I mean, it's difficult for an orchestra to do a sequencer thing ... but a synthesizer can do this with one click! ... and that makes for a different musical sense that will take years to settle down, and learn how to control and use ... within a context that makes it more interesting ... than just meandering.

 

The question is ... will Tony Banks be composing ditties and 3 minute pieces and lose his "talent" and many of the little things that helped him become famous as a part of Genesis? ... or Keith Emerson? And we won't really know this, or determine it so, until a long time after they leave us ... mostly because we never accept new artists (in any discipline!) unless they are the top ten variety, most of which will never be remembered because they did NOT offer the history of the art anything important ... and sales will not be a determining factor 100 years from now ... no one will sit here and discuss Elton John ... other than ... nice songwriter (the word "poet" will likely be forgotten by then!) ...

 

In the end, the technology has grown UNBELIEVABLY fast ... to be able to get a good determination ... violins took 200 years to get cleared up and cleaned up, and now you can get the synthetic violins that sound even better and cleaner than a Strat! It's just time we get caught up with the technology!

 

Remember that for many years ... there was no "technology" the way we know it ... all instruments were ACCOUSTIC ... and thus the music history had depended on the notes and the staff ... electricity changed all that ... plain and simple!

 

Give it some time!

another issue is that these bands have just got to bite the bullet and tour and tour and tour if they want to get popular. there is absolutely no reason Neal Morse, Flower Kings etc not to draw crowds like dream theater or steven wilson.  

another issue is that these bands have just got to bite the bullet and tour and tour and tour if they want to get popular. there is absolutely no reason Neal Morse, Flower Kings etc not to draw crowds like dream theater or steven wilson.  

 

I would like to make the suggestion that the title asks a question that is kinda getting lost in the translation and loads of comments.

 

In essence it is NEITHER an advantage or a handicap ... !!!! It is a TRANSITION for the orchestral/symphonic days of 100 years ago.

 

The number of folks for symphonic and orchestral works has diminished severely for 100 years, and it is now down to one person or two (if that) ... and this is a new dawn of composition and music design ... that we're seeing. How it implements in the future is another story and good conjecture that is fun to discuss ... but 100 years ago, Genesis or ELP would not be able to do what they do, or did ... but today it is possible, and you don't know, or think, any better or worse, for its symphonic, or orchestral appeal and design.  Their work, to me, is the literature, the music and the art, of the time period in life and human history. They are remembered, no different than the same way that many were 500 years ago, or 400 years ago, or 300 years ago.  And I think that we just need to see it from a longer (time sequence) perspective, that would help understand that process better.

 

It is only a handicap, for the person that can not compose, or create a piece, with 30 lines on a music staff!  And most rock musicians can not compose! ... they can create a riff and some parts of it, but not complete it. And melody, is but a part of a bigger picture in music!

 

It is a serious advantage for the crazy nook, neek, and geek, that will create 42 lines on a staff with the weirdest array of instruments to rival all ideas out there ... !!! because too many composers only do "rock'n'roll", "jazz", or some other bs out there ... instead ... of music!

 

Tomorrow, it will be different.

 

Time moves on ... it's a new day ... and tomorrow, yet another day ... it's neither a hindrance or an advantage or a handicap ... the earth still turns around and if the clouds are not hanging around, you might see the sun, or not see the sun! And if it is different, and the sky is red or black for 3 days, or 4 or 5 ... you're already dead!

Exactly. Well put. I find decently original modern bands in symphonic as much as say, avant-prog (and much more than in prog metal or Radiohead-ish alterna-prog slop ("new prog")... and much more than in basic modern pop music. It's even hard for completely free/avant music to be original at this point in history, so the expectation you people have here is just goofy). To name just a few (outside of the obvious Transatlantic, SB, Morse, TFK, Echolyn, IQ, Pär Lindh Project, Anglagard etc. and the best-known veterans that continued past the 80's like Hackett, Camel, Keith Emerson Band, etc.):

After Crying, Big Big Train, Ciccada, Rocket Scientists, Isildurs Bane, Holding Pattern, Glass Hammer, Versus X, Sunchild, Asturias, Tempano, Nick Magnus (of the Enid), Proto-Kaw, The Box, Outer Limits, Gerard, Kotebel, Anekdoten (early) / Morte Macabre, Pallas (late), Thieves' Kitchen, Minimum Vital, Apple Pie, Moth Vellum, Frost* (neo style production, but mostly symphonic composition), La Maschera di Cera / Finisterre / Aries, Lady Lake (older band but with amazing 2005 album, their best), Cast, Luca Scherani, Nick May, 5bridgeS, Izz, Unitopia, Advent, Amagrama, White Willow (at times prog folk), Karnataka, Cairo, Discipline, Sky Architect, oG Musique (possibly, don't remember quite), The Watch, TEE, Knight Area, Time Traveller, Khatsaturjan, Il Bacio Della Medusa, Simon Says, Barock Project, La Coscienza di Zeno, Nemo (in parts), Solaris, Devil Doll, Kenso (some), Mr. Sirius... I suppose one could count Yezda Urfa's '89 album even. The 80's weren't completely blank, but here I am going loosely with 90's and after.

Also, much of VdGG and GG is symphonic. "Eclectic prog" is a joke, and exists only because PA doesn't use multiple tags like RateYourMusic does.

 

Yep you are bang on right. I should have picked up on it earlier as its Pallas highest rated album on PA and easy to understand why.Powerfull modern neo prog with strong symphonic elements.I like the scope of the music which feels cimematic. 

 

I don't think he would be that impressed as you say about full blown prog rock bands. He likes Muse (but not as much as me) but he does also like classic rock such as The Who. His Stepdad has Planetrock radio on a lot of the time so that has helped a little but what he wants are newer bands making this sort of music and it doesn't really exist sadly.

 Thanks for the recommendations. I think I will give that Pallas album a go.

Showing a Foo Fighters fan Marillion, Genesis, or The Flower Kings is probably not going to change their mind about music. Think about the mind set of these 14-17 year olds who have little to no exposure to "good" music in their lives, let alone progressive rock.

Gothic Impressions also has a lovely little booklet. Interesting to see all the people involved in making it including a certain Mr Stolt.

 

Then they went into a more Pink Floyd-ish period of which The World is a good example, if you found it boring I guess this is not your cup of tea but The Masquerade Overture is another good album from this period.

 

In their last two albums Pure and Passion they have become heavier, a bit similar path to what Arena have taken, personally they are not my favourites but if you like more energetic music you may like them.  

Pendragon is a band that evolved, since Believe they changed but with Pure, they ceased to be Neo Prog, don't remind me of their great albums as Masquerade Overture, but brought a breeze of fresh air to Neo Prog.

And Neo Prog is 32 years old, but keeps evolving.

Iván

I strongly disagree

We listen prog, we shouldn't fall in the mistake of Pop stablished fashioon sense.

A healthy genre doesn't have to last 2 or 3 years, that's what the  producers and labels sold us in order to create ephemerous artists who sell for a couple of years, gain millions for the label  and vanish as fast as they appeared.

In Classical music, genres lasted centuries, 

- Blues Based Rock is at least 60 years old, 

- Hard Rock has 50 years (at least)

- Metal is about 30 something years old, 

- Pop has at least 50 years 

Punk tried to destroy it and has almost vanished.

Now...All Symphonic sounds as in the 70's?, 

Please 99% of bands are not clones of the 70's pioneers, Symphonic is richer than ever, when it appeared it was mainly Rock with Classical arrangements and some fragments taken from Grieg, Bach or Mussorgsky, today we have

- Eastern Europe Symphonic that conbines delicate ethnic music from their countries

- Latin American bands like Bacamarte that are simply unique.

- USA who have added Heavy Prog and even Avant Garde to the sound.

A 40 something years old genre is young, and musicians have a lot to offer, of course some artists will remind us of Yes and Genesis, because all play the same genre called symphonic, with many common characteristins in the 70's and today

A few minutes ago I added SoulengineE from Italy, who have nothing in common with Banco or PFM, to the point that they were not accepted in RPI, they are unique, fresh, Symphonic hasn't grown dated, by the contrary, is fresher with the new influences that have been added.

Iván

Aside from the highly subjective opinion of what band one likes ( I think you may be aware I don't rate TFK at all) I don't agree with the general idea that IQ 'kept the interest' until those various bands came along. What about Anglagard , Anekdoten, Par Lindh etc that were around in the 90's?

Symph prog pretty much died in the early eighties and its offshoot 'neo prog' emerged. It was the Scandanavian bands (inc TFK) that lead a revival of the original movement. Par Lindh Project 'Gothic Impressions' was actually conceived in the 70's but according to the sleevenotes no record companies were interested. 

My argument is that the likes of IQ, Marillion and Arena continued with their strand of prog while an actual symph prog revival occured when the time was right and in parallel. Neo prog and Symph prog both happily co exist today. I don't think IQ should have an inferiority complex though.

The differences as I see it

Neo prog - harder sound ,more emotional and grounded in style

Symph prog - more complexity and draws (as you would expect) a lot more inspiration from classical music.Doesn't need to get to the point and doesn't have to be that emotional (neo does).

But IQ - superb band that they are - are blown out of the water by bands like Galleon/Flower Kings/Spocks Beard/Transatlantic.......They kept the interest till the mighty  bands I just mentioned took symphonic prog onwards and upwards....