Is 70's prog a nostalgia thing?

jplanet:

I like your point about sound being more important than approach for most fans. As for me--and for the record, I started becoming aware of prog in the 70s--I listen quite happily to bands from all decades in which prog was or is made. It is very much about the sound, or the feeling that the sound evokes. What I find interesting about some current bands, and yes, they are often neo-prog and therefore by definition derivative in many people's opinion--is not so much that they imitate the earlier prog but rather that they respond to it, often in ways that feels very much, to me at least, like a conversation. A specific example:

At the moment, I am listening to IQ's "Last Human Gateway" (1984). It is similar to "Supper's Ready" in a number of ways, and you can hear that the band, at that point, had not come into a full sense of themselves, much as I do enjoy the song. But the matter is quite different with their 2004 epic, "Harvest of Souls." The influences of the older bands are still there, and I do not see any shame in that, but the band is now in greater control of the sound. I hear, as I listen to that song, not just a sum of influences but rather a thoughtful meditation upon the history of a genre. I hear both "then" and "now," and the relationships between them.

         I Personally Prefer Porcupine Tree on Pink Floyd , and Dreamtheater on ELP , Opeth on Gentel Giant ,

and Ayreon on Led Zeppelin .   So , are yu Satisfied that yu're yur Father's Father ////   Please , i request yur answer  ////////////////////       Toni     /////

I like 60's sound as well as 70's, probably because I'm still a bit hippy in the deep of my heart.  I think what matters is the sensation that music makes you feel. For me prog is a sensation that other enres can't give me. This is how I define it, and maybe the reason why each time I suggest an artist is rejected by the teams .   The sound, of course, is part of this sensation: a Hammond organ can transmit sensations better than any fairlight, as well as vinyl is more "natural than CD and transistors can't give yo the same quality of valves. So not just nostalgia, there are technical reasons too.

 

... if we look closely enough, it's ALL regressive...Even the most avant garde-sounding bands are just following the same patterns as avant jazz artists of the 50's and 60's...And why is it that every time someone shows me a band that is supposedly truly progressive, it turns out they sound just like King Crimson doing "Lark's Tongues in Aspic"? Dissonant melodies and avoidance of ordinary sounds isn't anything new, Stravinski was doing it 100 years ago...

 

Not quite ... there are some schools in Europe that intentionally were doing improvisations and experiments with the idea of breaking down the Western definitions and designs. Many of these bands, were a part of krautrock, most which, later ended up doing things that sounded somewhat more conventional, which I think was a reaction to the need for speed ... ooppps ... some money to pay for things. And many of these scenes stretched to film and theater and other arts. Sadly, we are often not able to add that discussion here and someone even removed my reference to Werner Herzog on Popol Vuh at one time (with quotes) in Wiki and in one other place  ... just to give you an idea how sometimes people are not aware, or willing to actually check and find out something else ... and there are times when even here, I tend to think that someone would rather think that KC is progressive and Robert's inner world and expression and discussion of Gurdgieff has nothing to do with his music and how he works, rehearses and creates it! ... until we do, a lot of the words we discuss are somewhat empty, I keep thinking. Mostly because we are not talking about "his" music and "creativity", but merely discussing some ideas of our own and wether we like it or not -- and that discussion is subjective and infused with comments that hurt and do not in any way help the discussion here.  And there is a MASSIVE difference in that concept when you compare the artists inner works with your ideas of what prog is! ... not even close! And if I were an artist with that many albums I probably once or twice would have said ... who do you think you are to be telling me you are right and good and I am not? That your ideas about music are right and my music is NOT? Or worse, can't be because you don't like it?

 

Which is exactly what the elitist discussion is about, isn't it?

 

And some of these folks in Germany and France, were a part of one of the world's best known schools and arts for improvisation and one of these even had Ravi Shankar as one of the instructors! And one can even research bands like Agitation Free, that even got donations from the school to actually put something together involving eastern music concepts with western instruments and specially electronics. And one should note how much of an influence Ravi was on a lot of music, even going so far as to tour with Yehudi Menuhin and creating a series of things called "East meets West" ... and even my dad, who already had a collection of over 3k classical LP's at the time, thought it was extraordinary that someone had done that ... and showed people that there was other music in other places!

 

Basically it tells you that the media had not been alive yet (tv grew up and woke up with the VietNam war, btw!!!) and most people did not know there was other musics or other cultures out there, if you will. Today, with the internet one would think that there is enough for folks to realize that the scope of knowledge has changed so much ... that we can even talk about different styles, which many could not then, without a college education and hope that it was strong enough to know that there was a world out there!

 

I'm not sure that the "influence" is that important, since in the end it is all about the "inner expression", and those that can last the longest without giving up on that inner expression, rarely fail to get noticed.  The music itself might have more tendencies that are aligned with the culture the person is associated with -- pretty much the same with the way we talk here ... absolutely no different! The tough part is that some of us have travelled and lived in other parts of the world, and some folks think that Milton Nasciment is not an important composer, or Antonio Carlos Jobim, or Hector Villa Lobos, because they have never heard what that hoopla is all about .. or if I mention Egberto Gismonti ... nothing! And most of that can't even be called "jazz".  It's about the artist, and I would like to see a "prog" board take the lead in helping settle that down and make itself a real name in history for helping solidify a style of music that deserves the credit. But not sure we can when the definition is flighty and not complete and more inclusive of what the music really is all about. It's not about Genesis, King Crimson or ELP ... it's about a million other things!