Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
irrelevant
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 07 2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 13382
|
Posted: September 06 2013 at 13:41 |
^ What is the first prog album?
|
|
 |
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: September 06 2013 at 13:32 |
|
What?
|
 |
Rottenhat
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 14 2006
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 436
|
Posted: September 06 2013 at 13:16 |
HolyMoly wrote:
TheGazzardian wrote:
Calling progressive rock progressive rock was the greatest disservice ever done to the genre. It created the unreliable expectations.
When people release a punk album and it sounds like punk, nobody cares, they just like it if it's good. But if people release a prog album and it sounds like prog, they complain.
Progressive rock is a style, not a mantra; I find terms like "symphonic rock", "jazz rock", and "psychedelic rock" to be much more meaningful. If your obsession is constantly hearing things you have never heard before, then latching yourself on to one genre, even one with a name like "progressive rock", will only disappoint. Move outside your comfort zone into other genres, such as noise rock, jazz, hip hop, alternative country, tropicalia, baroque, etc... there are enough genres out there you can listen to something in a new genre every day and you'll always be hearing new things. | Exactly. Thank you for saving me the time to write essentially the same thing.
|
Yes, that is my opinion too. Progressive rock is a strange name. Progressing to where? More complex? More hypnotic? More grandiose? Experimental rock would maybe have been a better name.
|
Language is a virus from outer space.
-William S. Burroughs
|
 |
HolyMoly
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin
Joined: April 01 2009
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Points: 26138
|
Posted: September 06 2013 at 12:56 |
TheGazzardian wrote:
Calling progressive rock progressive rock was the greatest disservice ever done to the genre. It created the unreliable expectations.
When people release a punk album and it sounds like punk, nobody cares, they just like it if it's good. But if people release a prog album and it sounds like prog, they complain.
Progressive rock is a style, not a mantra; I find terms like "symphonic rock", "jazz rock", and "psychedelic rock" to be much more meaningful. If your obsession is constantly hearing things you have never heard before, then latching yourself on to one genre, even one with a name like "progressive rock", will only disappoint. Move outside your comfort zone into other genres, such as noise rock, jazz, hip hop, alternative country, tropicalia, baroque, etc... there are enough genres out there you can listen to something in a new genre every day and you'll always be hearing new things. |
Exactly. Thank you for saving me the time to write essentially the same thing.
|
My other avatar is a Porsche
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased.
-Kehlog Albran
|
 |
TODDLER
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: August 28 2009
Location: Vineland, N.J.
Status: Offline
Points: 3126
|
Posted: September 06 2013 at 12:22 |
Sorry I can't get Y.T. to work. I haven't heard quite enough of the modern era. A few bands I listen to started in the early90's. White Willow and a few others, but not many. What is your definition of progressive? There are many different aspects to consider about the definition when it is in reference to music. Progressive Jazz to a musician is easily explained in simple terms of playing outside the melody. Playing outside the melody is expanding the sound and complexity of the music and so it can also be said that the act itself is to move foward. In Progressive Rock the ideology spells out the need to incorporate influences of Classical/Jazz/Folk/Asian music and even Blues occasionally ..to your own creations or writings. Usually when a musician is hired to compose for theatre or strictly performing, that combination of elements often exists. A theme is created along with sometimes a sequence of musical reprise..which is connected to the musical characteristics of progressive rock.
Being so called ..progressive on your instrument is not limited to 1 style only. It doesn't go without saying and not all of the time because some of the most amazing progressive sax solos are found in Pop songs. The reason being that musicians , if experienced and devoted..can add progressive playing to almost any style of music except Classical which is always encouraged to follow the transcribed manuscript out of respect and remorse to the composers. That being the most logical reason for reflections of Classical music being merely incorporated to a Rock music structure within the sound itself and that becoming what is defined as progressive in rock.
Regarding King Crimson...many of the musicians (not just Fripp), were students/followers of Classical and Jazz music. The combinations of everyone's style of playing/approach was scattered and when cemented as a unit sometimes charted a different type of innovative sound. Bruford was actually a kind of Classical drummer who was interested in playing Jazz. That added a unique sound to the band. Bands in the present ..not pushing boundaries may have to do with the lack of interest in just letting go of themselves in the studio. Maybe they DO cling to formulas/ideas of the past and dismiss experimentation. I'm not totally sure. Some musicians express a refusal to repeat or even listen to innovators of the past. This doesn't work either, but some musicians are under the impression that it does. You might get the impression they are repeating what other's did in the 70's , while in fact what musician's were doing in the 70's was about a concept of moving foward.
The well known prog bands like YES, Genesis, King Crimson, Jethro Tull and ELP were very diverse from each other. Why would that be? Why would that reality be so easy to exist? They had devoted long hours to it, but were confident about the outcome of sounding original. The reason being that they knew what path to follow and that didn't take them on a musical course which led to sounding like another band. If they based one of their prog albums around a period piece, the music would be condensed for a 5 or 3 piece band..which meant lots of rehearsal time in making it sound full. Sometimes even adding an orchestra for good measure. If not, there would be sections of elements in sound that derived from the 60's such as feedback from an organ (instead of Hendrix guitar) or a signature line in a Camel song that was based around a pentatonic scale. Such as one which you may have heard only briefly in a Jefferson Airplane song , yet cleaned up a bit and more pronounced. It's all about past elements contributing to new ones that evolve from being inspired. If that's not happening today, then that would be the reason why you personally do not hear anything very creative.
|
 |
TheGazzardian
Prog Reviewer
Joined: August 11 2009
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 8844
|
Posted: September 06 2013 at 12:21 |
Calling progressive rock progressive rock was the greatest disservice ever done to the genre. It created the unreliable expectations.
When people release a punk album and it sounds like punk, nobody cares, they just like it if it's good. But if people release a prog album and it sounds like prog, they complain.
Progressive rock is a style, not a mantra; I find terms like "symphonic rock", "jazz rock", and "psychedelic rock" to be much more meaningful. If your obsession is constantly hearing things you have never heard before, then latching yourself on to one genre, even one with a name like "progressive rock", will only disappoint. Move outside your comfort zone into other genres, such as noise rock, jazz, hip hop, alternative country, tropicalia, baroque, etc... there are enough genres out there you can listen to something in a new genre every day and you'll always be hearing new things.
|
 |
zravkapt
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 12 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6451
|
Posted: September 06 2013 at 12:09 |
90% of modern 'prog' bands play it safe and are cliche-ridden (and that includes some current avant-prog bands). I've found that the more original the band is, the less anyone will pay attention to them. However, the same band 20 years later will be praised as so important and influential. Go figure.
|
Magma America Great Make Again
|
 |
kingcrimsonfan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 19 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 239
|
Posted: September 06 2013 at 10:48 |
This video should explain this argument, but, my personal views on this is that these new symphonic "prog" rock bands are not necessarily bad, but, they are not pushing the boundaries like bands like King Crimson, Van der graaf Generator, and Porcupine Tree. It is kind of ticking me off that some of these "prog bands" want to play it safe and stay to the typical prog rock cliche. This is not my video. This is a video done by Darren Lock and you can find him on youtube if you are interested in his other videos. I also want to hear everyone else's opinions on how progressive in nature is "prog" in the modern era.
Here is the link to the video: http://youtu.be/V44jK3K9hMM
|
|
 |
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.