/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
|
|
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 45678> |
| Author | ||||
David_D 
Forum Senior Member 
Joined: October 26 2010 Location: Copenhagen Status: Offline Points: 15900 |
 Posted: November 16 2010 at 20:44 |
|||
|
1) "Progressive Rock": a term typically used to describe music springing from or incorporating distinctive elements of the rock genre while expanding beyond its traditional musical limitations and constraints. It is not until now that I see precisely this definition, and I'd surely like to comment it.
Should this statement be a true depiction of the use of the term "Progressive Rock"? Edited by David_D - November 17 2010 at 21:43 |
||||
 |
||||
|
progpositivity
Prog Reviewer 
Joined: December 15 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 262 |
Posted: November 17 2010 at 12:29 |
|||
|
Paravion - eMusic has 1 album by ISB and I have some credits to burn. I think it is "Changing Horses". Would this album be an adequate substitute for demonstration purposes or would yo prefer that I continue seeking out 'The Hangman's Beautiful Daughter'?
|
||||
|
Positively the best Prog and Fusion 24/7!
http://www.progpositivity.com |
||||
|
||||
|
progpositivity
Prog Reviewer
Joined: December 15 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 262 |
Posted: November 17 2010 at 13:06 |
|||
For it to be a good primary definition, it should accurately depict the way in which the term is most frequently used. But words and terms usually have more than one definition.
For example, Dictionary Dot Com provides 19 definitions for "mother". Here are 8 of them (slightly abridged for readability).
mother
1. a female parent.
2. a mother-in-law, stepmother, or adoptive mother.
3. a term of address for a woman having or regarded as having the status, function, or authority of a female parent.
4. a term of familiar address for an old or elderly woman.
5. a woman exercising control, influence, or authority like that of a mother: to be a mother to someone.
6. the qualities characteristic of a mother, as maternal affection
7. origin or source (ex: necessity is the "mother" of invention)
8. (in disc recording) a mold from which stampers are made I'm clearly aiming at crafting a definition for "progressive rock" which is worthy of sitting in the #1 position in a hierarchy like this one for 'mother'. But, who knows, perhaps I'll end up with one worthy of the #2 or #3 position? Or one not worthy of sitting in the list at all! But I currently think it deserves the #1 spot because it describes the vast majority of the music that fits under the progressive rock "umbrella" and because it conceptually informs about the rock era's genesis of the term. In my personal experience this definition has had a very very high "success rate" when applied to specific instances of music that is generally considered as "progressive rock" music.
It is useful as an "entry point" definition for someone unfamiliar with the term - one that doesn't overwhelm or confuse moderately interested parties.
Perhaps more importantly, it also can be useful for reaching out to passionate new music lovers who currently profess to hate progressive rock and thus have a very closed mind toward it. They tend to have a specific historical reference point in mind for progressive rock and think it requires odd time signatures and bombastic pretension, etc.
With this definition, to whatever extent they are willing to accept it, they become aware that some of the new music they love qualifies as "progressive rock". They then can "lighten up" a little bit and start becoming a little more open minded about other specific instances of "progressive rock" music in their outlook - whether that be music from the 1970's or the 2010's.
In terms of this definition's ability to cast a wide enough net, I suppose the jury is still out on "progressive folk" which sprang from the folk scene (not the rock scene) and which had no connection back to rock whatsoever - if such an animal truly existed. ISB may be a good example of just such a band. |
||||
|
Positively the best Prog and Fusion 24/7!
http://www.progpositivity.com |
||||
|
||||
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Offline Points: 18985 |
Posted: November 17 2010 at 15:09 |
|||
You get the obvious alert award of the year!
AND ... by far the best definition so far!
|
||||
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com |
||||
|
||||
|
Paravion
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 01 2010 Location: Denmark Status: Offline Points: 470 |
Posted: November 17 2010 at 16:45 |
|||
Changing Horses is okay, but nowhere near as good as the earlier influential albums like "5000 Spirits or the Layers of the Onion (1967)" or "Hangman's Beautiful Daughter(1968)". What you choose to invest in, I'm uncomfortable deciding.
To clarify a bit: A prototype is not an entity - i.e. it's not a concrete album or a concrete band. Rather, it's an immaterial understanding of what prog typically is. My central claim is that the category 'prog' show prototype effect in that I find a center/periphery organization appropriate and cognitively realistic. Take the example with furniture. The best examples of a piece of furniture were judged to be a chair and a sofa. This doesn't mean that a chair or a sofa is the prototype of the category furniture that other pieces of furniture are rated central or peripheral to. A second, and rather important note. To accept prog as a radially structured category that shows prototype effect, it's important to abandon a view of prog as a category of a certain value, and that an instance central to a prototype (a good example) equals something that is more valuable and artistically better than a peripheral instance. Again, the furniture example provides reference for this point. It would be absurd to think that "telephone" gets subjected to some wrongdoing by being a bad example of a piece of furniture. This accounts for an appropriate clear-cut division between category status and artistic value. Prog doesn't equal good.  This table shows average 'goodness of example ratings' (1= good example, 7=not a good example) of members of the category furniture. It revolutionized my thinking when I first saw this in a linguistic textbook some years back. Prior to that, I wrongly assumed that something either is - or is not - a piece of furniture. Source: Rosch, Eleanor (1975): Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of experimental psychology: General 104: 192-233 Edited by Paravion - November 17 2010 at 16:59 |
||||
|
||||
|
progpositivity
Prog Reviewer
Joined: December 15 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 262 |
Posted: November 17 2010 at 17:52 |
|||
Oh - don't worry about that. It isn't expensive and I'm not even really looking for a recommendation per se.
I'm primarily interested in it as it relates to our discussion. In that regard, it doesn't even matter whether I "like" it or not. Besides, I get to hear plenty of promos for airplay and review consideration - quite a few that I "like" and some that I don't "like" so much.)
I was just hoping to find out whether you considered "Changing Horses" to be a decent substitute example of an album containing progressive rock music that doesn't fit my suggested definition for progressive rock.
For example, if from your perspective, "Changing Horses" is more closely connected in any way shape or form with "rock music" than "Hangman's Beautiful Daughter", then I'll want to continue seeking out "Hangman's Beautiful Daughter". Otherwise, I'll jump at the convenient opportunity to quickly download "Changing Horses".
|
||||
|
Positively the best Prog and Fusion 24/7!
http://www.progpositivity.com |
||||
|
||||
|
David_D
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 26 2010 Location: Copenhagen Status: Offline Points: 15900 |
Posted: November 17 2010 at 18:47 |
|||
On basis considerations like this, I must admit that I'm to a certain degree sceptical about a sufficient utility of the definition here as I consider it to include a number of genres which in my opinion by most people are not included in the Progressive Rock idiom: Industrial, Experimental, Post Rock, Math Rock and maybe partly some other too, like Alternative.
Am I right in this interpretation of the definition in question, will its use assume a big change in the non-mainstream world of Rock, and I'm sceptical if that change is going to happen.
Therefore, as far it concerns the question of utility, it appears to me as the definition which I have proposed and which in a short form can sounds as
Progressive Rock : music which makes complex or otherwise experimental synthesis of Rock and at least one of the other main genres: Classical, Jazz, Ethnic, electronic or other Avant-garde
...as this definition is to prefer.
Why? Because, while it in my opinion is broader than the definitions most used, it still is not so including as the definition in question, does not assume so big changes in the non-mainstream Rock world and therefore is more likely to be accepted and used. Edited by David_D - November 18 2010 at 17:12 |
||||
|
||||
|
progpositivity
Prog Reviewer
Joined: December 15 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 262 |
Posted: November 17 2010 at 18:59 |
|||
|
Thanks Paravon.
I've made some changes below. I'm no longer calling an album or a piece of music a "prototype". I am calling it an "instance". Even so, I'm still calling a piece of music that is relatively close to the "prog" category a "prototypical instance". Is that accurate?
I just want to retain something from the previous posts as we continue moving forward in order to help new readers who "drop by" to better understand your third suggested definition for "prog". My concern is that some may not read far enough back in the thread to have a full appreciation of what you are suggesting. --------
And we have a 3rd approach which - albeit slightly off-topic - is fascinating and certainly worthy of note nonetheless. (Thanks Paravon! I hope I don't fundamentally misunderstand or mis-state regarding your thoughts below...) It starts with a broad designation we are calling "prog". This designation is a Radial category that is mind-internal with instances of music centered around a group of prototypes that are more or less central and others which are more or less peripheral. The best way for someone to learn about "prog" is to have them actually listen to music which is centered around the radial category named "prog". The human brain is so amazingly complex that it will tend to automatically perceive the many characteristics of these prototypical instances to "make sense" of them in relation to one another, setting the stage for further comparative analysis of future instances of music.
While this approach is not really interested in defining prog per se, it could perhaps be willing to submit the following for pragmatic usage:
3) Prog is a genre of music which typically incorporates styles from other domains of music in an attempt to expand beyond the musical limitations of those domains. -------
1) "Progressive Rock": a term typically used to describe music springing from or incorporating distinctive elements of the rock genre while expanding beyond its traditional musical limitations and constraints. Or if we are particularly comfortable with the understanding that no single definition captures 100% of Or if we are particularly comfortable with the understanding that no single definition captures 100% of the usages of a term, for ease of use we could boil it down to… 2) Progressive Rock: Music springing from or incorporating distinctive elements of the rock genre while expanding beyond its traditional musical limitations and constraints. |
||||
|
Positively the best Prog and Fusion 24/7!
http://www.progpositivity.com |
||||
|
||||
|
progpositivity
Prog Reviewer
Joined: December 15 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 262 |
Posted: November 17 2010 at 20:09 |
|||
I'd like to preface this post by saying that I am not "lobbying" to include any extra bands or to exclude any existing bands from within the hallowed halls of PA. That just isn't at all what I'm concerned about. I'm not lobbying to include extra genres or to exclude existing genres from PA. I'm very content in that regard.
This post in in relation to how functional it is to have a definition of progressive rock which potentially allows representatives from genres as varied as Experimental, Post Rock, Math Rock, and Industrial to qualify.
First, let me address the easiest objections. For I already see Math Rock and Post Rock commonly referred to as forms of Progressive Rock by journalists and other writers. This is not uncommon at all. It is even worth noting that Math Rock and Post Rock are listed here in Prog Archives. There are quite a few people already thinking of these genres in relation to "progressive rock". If anything, a definition that excludes them could generate some controversy as well. It certainly is far from unthinkable for Math Rock or Post Rock to qualify as members of the "progressive rock club".
Next, I really don't understand why one would feel the need to exclude "Experimental rock" entirely from the domain of "Progressive Rock". I may even struggle a bit with the difference between "avant garde rock" and "experimental rock" as those terms are often used interchangably. A lot of avant garde rock seems very easily accepted by the general public as 'progressive rock'. So while I'm not saying that 100% of experimental rock is "progressive rock", I don't think there is a problem with some of it qualifying as such. Again, I would view it as suspicious if a definition felt the need to disqualify it solely on the basis of it being "experiemental rock".
Alternative rock would not qualify unless it brought something to the table which transcended the traditional limitations and boundaries of rock music. I'm sure there is someone out there who wears the "alternative" tag that could also qualify as "progressive rock" - but the vast majority of "alternative rock" would not. It actually strikes me as odd to think it impossible for someone to create "progressive rock" that also had some alternative flourishes or twists and turns.
Before I go any farther, I have a concern that we may soon run into a situation where we "don't like" something and therefore think it should not fit into a category. Or conversely, we "do" like something, therefore we think it should be included in a category. If there is a category of music that is supposed to mean "no crappy music allowed", then there will always be a raging controversy about what is and isn't included - which coincidentally there seems to be in relation to progressive rock music... hmm...
That said, it appears that I need to listen to some "Industrial Rock" music. I must confess that I didn't really hear the term until the 1980's. At that time, the music I heard which was described as 'Industrial" fit well within the boundaries of the rock genre. So I can state with certainty that not all "Industrial Music" would qualify as "progressive rock" according to my definition.
A quick glance into the genre's history, however, reveals that it evidently traces its roots back to musique concrète and the Fluxus art movement (which inspired Frank Zappa and Joe Byrd & the Field Hippies) so one would suspect that there should be some creative and ambitious "Industrial Rock" music out there somewhere that might qualify. I just haven't heard it.
Oddly enough, Nine Inch Nails is included right here in Prog Archives! I'm not even convinced Nine Inch Nails qualifies according to my definition of "progressive rock". But if they are included, can it really be so very controversial to suggest that there might be a few "industrial rockers" artistic enough to have created something that expanded beyond the boundaries of rock?
I'd encourage the gentle reader not to immediately discard a highly functional way of thinking about "progressive rock" music simply because it might allow a little bit of "riff-raff" to join the beloved category-club. Nobody says we have to like all rock music which is progressive in nature. Nobody said all "progressive rock" has to be "good".
It does bring up an interesting point though. One I should look into. It may even call attention to the shades of difference that emerge if one wishes to place a microscope upon the terms in order to create some sense of contrast between the common usage of "prog" and that of "progressive rock". Edited by progpositivity - November 17 2010 at 21:02 |
||||
|
Positively the best Prog and Fusion 24/7!
http://www.progpositivity.com |
||||
|
||||
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Offline Points: 18985 |
Posted: November 18 2010 at 16:38 |
|||
...
I would still be concerned with considering "prog" a category, as it's own definition is vague and varied.
I would think that your work would show a lot more stamina and study (and design) when you can make a description from a musical stand point, not a style. Or it all becomes a sub of another sub of antoher sub ... and the whole translation (and transition) gets lost!
If all those folks want is a Cliff Notes version, I'm not sure that they are in the right place. I think that Kmart, or WalMart is better for them!
Be scholarly, and if some folks here don't like it, they are the ones not looking at the mirror ... you did your best ... and many of them were too lazy to even appreciate scholarly work ... and sometimes I like to be cynical and even say ... expect all musicians to be nothing but idiots that do not know music and could not even know the difference between a note and a chord, enough to make something progressive.
That is simply not the case!
Most of it is conditioning. But for someone to appreciate progressive music, in general, almost all of us have to let go something in the ideas department, in order to be able to appreciate new concepts and designs into the human condition that we call "art". If they don't they all become Rush fans, is my joke, because it always gets them all jumped up in arms!
Again, expand this definition a bit ... "distinctive elements that can be found in music, from rock, to jazz, to folk, to experimental and then incorporate some of these with other elements of creativity that expand beyonf the traditional music limitations and constraints" ... would be a lot more accurate and detailed than the generic wording you have. Edited by moshkito - November 18 2010 at 16:38 |
||||
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com |
||||
|
||||
|
progpositivity
Prog Reviewer
Joined: December 15 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 262 |
Posted: November 19 2010 at 15:07 |
|||
|
I enjoyed listening to Incredible String Band's "Changing Horses"! Very nice progressive folk IMO!
I do believe I heard a few rock and roll influences here and there - even an electric guitar (albeit clean and not distorted) toward the end of one track if I wasn't mistaken. But it could have been a different stringed instrument being played in manner which evoked the sound of electric guitar I suppose.
I certainly see where you are coming from in that this music is much more firmly entrenched in "Progressive Folk" territory. I would not call the extent to which The Incredible String Band incorporated distinctive elements from the rock genre on this album pervasive nor extensive. I'm left wondering whether these characteristics might have been even less evident on their earlier albums. And yet, the music on this album has a certain "vibe" to it that is very compatible and akin to that of much "Progressive Rock".
A couple of options immediately spring to mind for this music as it relates to this proposed definition for "Progressive Rock".
1) "Progressive Rock": a term typically used to describe music springing from or incorporating distinctive elements of the rock genre while expanding beyond its traditional musical limitations and constraints. Option A) There were really cool Progressive artists rising from the Folk scene whose Progressive Folk music sometimes incorporated rock characteristics into their music, thus intersecting with the categorization I have defined as "Progressive Rock", yet at other times remained more firmly rooted in the category of "Progressive Folk". Because fans of the music I've defined as "Progressive Rock" were opening their minds to new sounds and ideas, these "Progressive Folk" bands naturally had a distinct appeal to many fans of "Progressive Rock" music. (As a general observation - for what it may be worth - as these bands "matured", most of them tended to integrate additional characteristics from the rock genre into their repertoire).
Option B) Generally the entire output of The Incredible String Band is best viewed as "Progressive Rock" even their songs which did not incorporate distinctive elements from the rock genre. Even though this band integrated very few characteristics associated with "rock music" into their music, because Progressive Rock fans were opening their minds to new sounds and ideas, these Progressive Folk bands naturally had a distinct appeal to many fans of Progressive Rock. As these bands increasingly performed for and associated with rock audiences, many of them tended to integrate additional characteristics from the rock genre into their repertoire.
Of course, there are countless other options as well. But those are two very viable options I see at the moment.
I wanted to test the limits of the promosed 'primary definition' for Progressive Rock and I think we are now doing a pretty good job of it.
Good stuff! I look forward to additional examples to explore!
And just to show we haven't forgotten about our radial category named "prog"...
Paravion may wish to rightfully call our attention to an advantage of the approach to defining "prog" as a radial category. It needs no sense of distinction between "Progressive Rock" and "Progressive Folk"!
I'm left with the distinct impression that some music listeners who "dislike" folk, however, may exhibit a tendency to exclude such bands from their radial categorization of "prog" - which I am thinking would result in the music being "prog" to me but "not prog" to them. Edited by progpositivity - November 19 2010 at 15:26 |
||||
|
Positively the best Prog and Fusion 24/7!
http://www.progpositivity.com |
||||
|
||||
|
progpositivity
Prog Reviewer
Joined: December 15 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 262 |
Posted: November 19 2010 at 15:37 |
|||
|
I wanted to give the primary definition a chance to "stretch itself" to see how far it could reach.
Continuing in my very "rock-centric" way of framing a definition for "Progressive Rock", and very much relating back to my own personal interpretation of the "radial category" called "rock music", I'm now adding a secondary definition.
For completeness, I'm adding a third one which, while striving to remain very short and concise, will probably focus in on a few of the things a lot of people would expect from a definition of progressive rock.
"Progressive Rock":
1) A term typically used to describe music springing from or incorporating distinctive elements of the rock genre while expanding beyond its traditional musical limitations and constraints.
2) Music which expands beyond the traditional musical limitations and constraints of its own genre while simultanously achieving a distinct appeal to the rock music audience. Note: This includes essentially non-rock music "target marketed" to the rock music audience (distributed through channels which specialize in reaching out to the rock audience, performed in venues and contexts described as "rock concerts", and/or advertised in publications or reported on charts devoted to measuring the sales or radio airplay activity of popular rock music).
3) Popular music which exhibits stylistic characteristics commonly associated with the Progressive Rock genre. (Ex: odd time signatures, exotic instrumentation, virtuosic instrumental performances, extended instrumental solos, complexity of composition uncommon to its genre, symphonic rock instrumentation, conceptual albums, etc.) |
||||
|
Positively the best Prog and Fusion 24/7!
http://www.progpositivity.com |
||||
|
||||
|
Peter
Special Collaborator 
Honorary Collaborator Joined: January 31 2004 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 9669 |
Posted: November 19 2010 at 22:23 |
|||
|
Six pages on (and many such threads before) it is clear that "prog" is a highly personal, subjective (and thus near-meaningless) notion. You can't pin it down with mere words like some dead bug in a display case.
|
||||
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
||||
|
||||
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2007 Location: Penal Colony Status: Offline Points: 11420 |
Posted: November 20 2010 at 06:30 |
|||
|
Although I admire the laudable attempt to take the ineffable mystery out of a phenomenon that thrills us, once you have defined same, will it continue to thrill I wonder?
|
||||
|
||||
|
Icarium
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member Joined: March 21 2008 Location: Tigerstaden Status: Offline Points: 34099 |
Posted: November 20 2010 at 09:28 |
|||
 Edited by aginor - November 20 2010 at 09:30 |
||||
 
|
||||
|
||||
|
resurrection
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 08 2010 Location: London Status: Offline Points: 254 |
Posted: November 21 2010 at 02:05 |
|||
|
Personally I think the original post contains an almost - perfect definition; I'd only perhaps look for something that also took account of beauty, perfection, art. But it stands as a very fine and thoughtful definition.
|
||||
|
||||
|
David_D
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 26 2010 Location: Copenhagen Status: Offline Points: 15900 |
Posted: November 22 2010 at 14:51 |
|||
|
Peter wrote:
"Six pages on (and many such threads before) it is clear that "prog" is a highly personal, subjective (and thus near-meaningless) notion. You can't pin it down with mere words like some dead bug in a display case."
ExittheLemming wrote:
"Although I admire the laudable attempt to take the ineffable mystery out of a phenomenon that thrills us, once you have defined same, will it continue to thrill I wonder?"
People experiences music differently. For some, it can be almost a purely sonic experience, more or less only sound. Others analyze lyrics carefully, understand them like poems, thrill over their beauty and try to see their meaning in a larger cultural and social context. Some go even further, analyzing the music itself, trying to find its characteristics, influences, what is the innovative part of it and what is merely a continuation of the music played before. The latter approach can give a deeper understanding of music and an increased enjoyment of it, at the same time requiring some more or less well-defined terms to do it possible to analyze.
It would be fined, if there could be respect and peace for all the different approaches as we don't have to bother each other. There is room for everybody here, and if someone don't see the need of discussing a certain topic, it is easy enough to keep out of it. Please, consider this. Edited by David_D - November 22 2010 at 23:29 |
||||
|
||||
|
progpositivity
Prog Reviewer
Joined: December 15 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 262 |
Posted: November 22 2010 at 17:18 |
|||
Thanks for the feedback "resurrection"!
I agree that many progressive rock artists pursue an artistic aesthetic. That is one of progressive rock's strongest appeals for me personally.
|
||||
|
Positively the best Prog and Fusion 24/7!
http://www.progpositivity.com |
||||
|
||||
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Offline Points: 18985 |
Posted: November 22 2010 at 20:45 |
|||
Robin Williamson has stated that Mike Heron came from a rock band, and had played electric for a while already when they first got together, and the grouping was quite productive and interesting. And later towards the end, he played the electric guitar again ... and if you want to hear more ... I'm on record stating that "Diamond of Dreams" has to be released again ... that's an electric delight and amazing album! (one of Mike's solo albums!)
It didn't come from folk or rock ... it came because two people got together and decided that they were going to compliment each other's work ... and it helped create something new and exciting ... and way more progressive than most progressive groups and bands listed here. But because some folks are not hearing the keyboards it will not be considered important or top notch!
Again, it's a definition based on "styles" not on the music and the work itself ... and the styles come and go and tomorrow you talk of Michelangelo and go have a hot dog! Edited by moshkito - November 22 2010 at 20:46 |
||||
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com |
||||
|
||||
|
progpositivity
Prog Reviewer
Joined: December 15 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 262 |
Posted: November 23 2010 at 13:04 |
|||
|
The folk style certainly has not "come and gone" in my lifetime. Rock too has existed throughout my entire lifetime. I'm not saying either of those two styles are always "good" or always "bad". I am only saying that they are useful descriptive terms. They - in no way - are intended to capture the fullness of a band's creative essence. Not at all!
Do we agree that Michelangelo is great? Why is he great? Because he was a "Renaissance" artist? No! There were countless artists during the Renaissance but only one Michelangelo. He is so very important because of his prolific and unique excellence. Even so, having a category called "Renaissance era art" is still very useful for general discussion purposes.
It is the same with folk, rock, progressive rock, etc.
From my perspective, Incredible String Band's music certainly had stronger ties back to the folk scene than the rock scene - but they were not entirely without some measure of association with the rock scene as well. Rock elements became more palpable as the years passed.
The primary stated purpose of this thread was to craft a functional definition for a genre. Therefore, by its very nature, it will deal with general characteristics and what you call "styles".
I am not trying to replace appreciation for artistic accomplishments by merely assigning music to styles. The central focus of this one discussion thread, however, does relate to genres and styles. As such, the discussion will revolve around those topics.
|
||||
|
Positively the best Prog and Fusion 24/7!
http://www.progpositivity.com |
||||
|
||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 45678> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Seeking a more elegant definition for Prog
Topic Options
David_D wrote:
