Most inaccessible Prog?

I am inclined to agree with you.  VDGG, KC, maybe their albums aren't likable straight up from the first listen but wouldn't call it inaccessible.  If you compare even Wetton-KC with a Morton Feldman or Terry Riley, the latter are much tougher to listen to and demand that you concentrate hard on the music rather than looking for a 'lick' to latch onto.

For me it's King Crimson's most abrasive atonal output (the mid-1970s LPs with Bruford/Wetton as well as their 1990s records) and Voivod that come to mind. Both took me a long time to really understand, several years indeed passed before me comprehending what was going on in their music.

In both cases, listening to other musicians they either were inspired by or had inspired was the key to grasping either. In KC's case I didn't understand their noisiest material until after I had gotten into black/death metal and hence become accustomed to that abstract an approach to playing heavy guitar music. Voivod only clicked for me after I had become familiar with their punk and indie-when-indie-meant-something influences.


Edited by Toaster Mantis - March 22 2014 at 05:38

By the way, what particularly worthy stuff were Pink Floyd making in 1997? 1994 was their last studio album with the previous one being released in the mid 80s.

Edited by rogerthat - March 22 2014 at 00:57

rogerthat wrote: uduwudu wrote: TDSOTM for the 90s? Hardly, imagine a PF album sounding like that!  Yeah, PF melodies don't get as beautiful as Airbag or Tourist.    On the other hand, there is a bassline in Exit Music which is a lot like that on the Money interlude (where Gilmour picks up his solo just after the saxophone) and also a guitar riff in Lucky that evokes Dogs.  It's a very layered album with a wide array of influences...if you can get past how 90s it sounds superficially.

Harumph, more like Tourist class and vomit bag. It's not the '90s sound - whatever that is. It's the badly arranged clutter, the unique vocals which are more or less in tune - from time to time anyway, yet manage to be indistinct and still clearly painfully over emote. The rhythm section hold things together which is more than can be said for the guitars. Fripp and Belew showed how to interlock... this is like a freeway jam of cob webs. How I missed hearing this a lot then I don't know. Luck more than judgment I suppose. Either that or I was distracted by Floyd, Sabbath, Rush, KC, Yes Page and Plant all releasing material more worthy of attention. A clear case of pop generations desperately wanting a pop cultural icon and ... settling for this.

I had heard this before- and The Bends but finally made time to sit down and see what it is really made of. Contemporaries Nirvana sounded ok (I gave Nevermind a 3 stars rating to myself- i.e. a good rock album - probably has pop cultural significance that would elevate it above the norm rating wise. Roughly the same as Never Mind The Bollocks! which I can both not stand yet enjoy a "tune" or two now and then, if sufficiently stimulated...

OK Mac PC promised a lot but public opinion and mine differed yet again.I suppose it is consistent. Plus it depends what one expects or decides is "good".

Heh, ok indie rock varies yes, it has done for many years.  There's the great (Stone Roses e.g Made Of Stone, a number I think is stupendous - nice original augmented harmonies used as well) and the interesting spacey stuff (GYBE) but imagine any prog rock band worth their triple neck guitars turning out this! 1 star for the titles and reasonable art work, album title and the occasional semblance of melody. Clearly popularity by group think rather than a thinking group.

Manuel wrote: This thread has a lot to do with personal taste I guess, which makes the whole thing quite interesting. Most prog musicians are very good, but for some reason, fans rate them good or bad, mostly depending on their personal taste. I'm not into the Metal side of things, since it's the type of music I don't really like, but I like heavy, melodic rock. All the screaming/growling is something I cannot relate. But I could not dare say they are not good musicians, or that they have no feelings/emotions into their music, it's simply that is not my kind of music, and I'll leave it at that.

Yes, this something that sounds like my dear old parents reaction. They didn't like it was bad. Though my dear old duck was very hypocritical about Zeppelin. She even liked the drum solos (!) but felt obliged to deride my taste in polite society.

The key to preferences and "good" and "bad" is understanding objective versus subjective, though many here do I see.  My idea of bad music is really incoherence.  much of what is mentioned here I like, playing some Dream Theater now, love Magma (though one does have to choose the starting point wisely), Miles Davis is all fine with me as well. Henry Cow too. Space rock and Hawkwind... um, well, I have tried you know... I don't dislike, it's just not necessarily my cup of green tea though.

Oh re-  the copy and paste thing - Miles and his producer used to do things like remove melodies and then issue those post-bitches Brew live albums. This was angular music at it's most determinedly inaccessible and I recall struggling with it as a kid. Now I'm older I can more easily remember struggling with it as an adult. I was amazed at how edited and retaped In A Silent Way was pieced together  - not until I heard the Sessions CDs. Same with Yes and CTTE. Now people use PCs as they would have back then...

Love the Agharta and Pangaea material but I do prefer the more jazz drumming to the beat oriented fusion like some Stanley Clarke material. Sounds too easy for what he could be doing...

For trying to "get" some of these challenging musics perhaps just start listening to one instrument e.g. the drums and "get" that, and mentally add in other instruments until the picture is complete. Some music does take a while , but we recognise it's worth and persist until 'the moment" Click!

TODDLER wrote: Padraic wrote: Is this really "most inaccessible" or "music I hate"?

Bit of both perhaps. While a little negative it is born from a desire to see behind the various music curtains prog and it's wide varieties (death growls to Japan...). Not as bad as sl*g.ing off genres butt focusing on actual examples.

I find this thread quite illuminating.

Oh while I remember, I was glancing through a book about popular music a while back and found something some might appreciate.

It was a disco thing. It went something like "The Bee Gees were so false. They weren't real disco at all. It was just ... pop music."

So disco and prog have a connection!

Man With Hat wrote: ^ Radiohead is very accessible, so it's just plain drudge.

Actually, for me Radiohead was one of the hardest bands to get into.

Well I have no idea why Radiohead is included ont his site. (Same with Japan but there we go). I have heard OK PC a few times over the years but decided to give it one more go. I borrowed a copy. I am left with tht horrible feeling that .. should I try CD2; shudder. This was like the worst aspects of Oasis, VDGG (over-emotive vox for me VDGG fans, I appreciate some of their music) and sub-par REM indie rock jangles all stuck together. No Surprises was the first indication of music - a melody. Yet an album so highly regarded - I thought what is it I am missing? The space age sounds... not much of that, bit disappointed there, some synths for orchestral backing (is this the prog bit) and some vocoder... Interesting lyrics? Not really, Some of the low star reviews on PA seem right to me. And I wanted to like this album. I really tried. Inaccessible or just plain drudge?

TDSOTM for the 90s? Hardly, imagine a PF album sounding like that! That honour might go to P Tree's Signify perhaps, now the former Japan keyboardist Richard Barbieri and his buddies know how to make an interesting and listenable album. (I included this a reference point; the releases were roughly analogous) to give an illustration of what I mean (assuming readers have heard and like the P Tree album). OK Mac/ PC to me was a horrible experience. I've heard Dylan at his vocal worst making me wonder what I am listening to at times. But this album was supposed to be a high point in a band's career.

Nogbad_The_Bad wrote: progrockdeepcuts wrote: For me? Neo prog. Can listen to RIO, Kraut, Zeuhl, etc all day, though.  Well we have similar tastes but I don't think of neo as inaccessible, it's just that as soon as most bands start singing I have to shut it down.

Well, I was mostly being facetious, but I do find a lot of neo impossible to get into. It simply does not hold my attention.

progrockdeepcuts wrote: For me? Neo prog. Can listen to RIO, Kraut, Zeuhl, etc all day, though.

Well we have similar tastes but I don't think of neo as inaccessible, it's just that as soon as most bands start singing I have to shut it down.