if we say, prog rock is rock music with progressive elements, then we have to ask what exactly is progressive.

What elements used in music can be described as progressive?

One idea could be, that the progressive element can be restricted somehow.

To the „kind“ of music that were played by some bands back in the 70s.

So for coincidence a rock with some kind of experimental symphonic folk jazz electro influences.

No matter what you say now, it is some kind of that music and if it doesnt sound like one of the glorious prog gods from back then or isnt listed by the official prog publishes and social communitys, it is no prog.

Another idea of PROG ROCK or just PROG could be that

the additional composing and playing form is free and wanted

the additional song structure is free and wanted

the additional use of genres is free and wanted

the use of additional instruments is free and wanted

an additional unrepititive and free use of all musical elements is wanted

so we are not talking about EXPERIMENTAL and AVANT music, we are talking about an exclusive and enhanced (fusioned/recombined and maybe experimental) form of ROCK. RIO could be very similar to PROG but it differs in the exclusion of (NORMAL) ROCK structures in general where PROG could be open to that.

So now we have our definition, we can ask if modern prog rock isnt that or absolutely not progressive.

Rock in itself develops. So if we look at the rock in general, we can easily say it is progressive i think. You have massive rock bands that use any of the things we use to define prog rock.

They are not repititive, they use other instruments and genres and so on. You have all kinds of rock crossover acts, bands that fuses other genres and at the same time are being very progressive in their composing. And it goes and and on. There are coming more and more doing a lot of crazy things, you just have to explore - you will find everything you cant imagine. There are so many bands out there, you cant listen to all of them in your whole life. There is still repitition, but there is also a lot of development and the usual rock listener is already searching a lot for new and creative bands and they find them. They maybe dont know that this is progressive, but it is.

Best example are all the young people that listen to prog metal, and new rock like Muse, Mars Volta, Radiohead etc. This is prog rock.

If we look to those rock subgenres, that we list in Prog Archives, we can also say that all elements are still there but how much - and is this list representative of what we think is prog rock or prog music today and for all?

a) Are some bands who fulfill some kind of prog definition also very repititive in some other way?

b) How much can we progress the prog rock as a style? Can and do we (the doers and consumers) progress it?

a) can be very relative. As the progressivity also depends on the musicians and listeners background. But specially with the help of the subgenre of retro-rock we can say, that some elements of prog rock are not that fulfilled by some bands which we call progressive.

Not because they are technically bad musicians, its because the stuff they play isnt new to many others. Its complex, it combines different genres, but it is still a repititon of something that was already there. And it makes it not better if they are bad musicians.

But somehow, i would say they are still progressive, but maybe not that much then a band that is just labeled as a post-rock or indie band. And in relation to all possibilitys of music and all the elements you can use today and back then, they are also not that progressive maybe. But to answer this question precisely, you have to know how much bands there were back then and how much usage they made of the freedom they had back then.

But so it is extremely important to understand i think, that the definition of prog rock is „common rock definition“ today, or should we say, part or the problem of defining rock and mainstream music in general. And so there are bands outside the common prog rock genres, that are very progressive and maybe rock too and who are somehow, in relation to the expectation and musical consciousness of the listener, much more progressive then a symphonic rock band.

That brings us also to b)

and you should answer that for yourself!

:)

i just want to remember

“It is music that does progress. It takes an idea and developes it, rather than just repeat it.“

Keith Emerson

Its more an attitude then a stringent style as Robert Fripp would say.

omhomunculus :) now im gonna chill to death!