Prog genres that you dislike

Logan wrote: A few of my favourite acts included in Experimental/Post Metal at PA (regardless of how well my favourite albums fit) are Boris, Uboa, maudlin of the Well and Neurosis.

So far I've been really enjoying maudlin of the Well, Intronaut and Sight.

With the exception of Dream Theater—personally, I find them the epitome of cheesy symphonic prog metal. That said, Petrucci is undeniably an incredibly skilled guitarist.

I agree with your take on the rest of metal, though. I wouldn’t call myself a metal enthusiast by any stretch, but I’m definitely more drawn to its experimental side.

Regarding neo-prog, I mostly agree—though I wouldn’t go as far as calling Marillion my favorite band.

As for jazz-rock, that’s actually what introduced me to prog in the first place. I’m also a big fan of classic jazz, so I can’t really agree with your stance there. Just listen to Holdsworth’s solo on Fred with Tony Williams—absolutely phenomenal!

Edited by Gnik Nosmirc - 16 hours 8 minutes ago at 20:25

moshkito wrote: richardh wrote: ... Prog is an offshoot of rock music but too often the simple fact of this is denied. The natural evolution of prog was through Rush and metal with many bands in the 80's doing what the seventies prog bands did. ... Hi, I'm not sure that this is right, if we look at the history of music going back some 500 years or more. Music has always been an evolution and to suggest that this came from that is weird ... so Mozart came from the ridiculous idea of what baroque music was? I think that the time and place has a lot to do with it all ... and the late 1960's and early 1970's was a very inspirational time for music and all the arts (very important part of it that the Internet refuses to acknowledge!) where the freedoms were celebrated, instead of the commerciality of the whole thing, and as such, it gave us a lot of music that ... just like today ... can't make it or be seen ... witness some folks wondering where/what their band does ... and not realize that music is not about a particular theme/genre, but about YOU, and how you interpret it, and at that point you can say that the person/group lacks personality of its own if it has to rely on an outdated idea and concept that even lacks a proper/good definition!

The term 'progressive rock' exists for a reason. It was rock progressing into other areas not classical music progressing into rock music. Classical music had pretty much progressed as far as it could go probably about a 100 years ago. Rock music may employ some classical instruments but ultimately its about amplifying a small number of instruments behind (normally) a human voice. The sixties is indeed an amazing time for art and culture coming out of the post war boom and leaving behind austerity. Rock music is invented partly because of better technology combined with the rise of the festival and the hippy culture. Our beloved genre is really only an ofshoot. Guys like Keith Emerson are important but none of them reinvented the wheel. They saw an opportunity to get away from the 9-5 grind and took it but it's still ultimately rock music first and foremost. Just imagine ELP without Carl Palmer. It's just not happening and Keith Emerson is back to working in a bank.

When I claimed I don't like Neo-prog because of the vocals, I wondered if there was such a thing as "instrumental neo-prog" or is that an oxymoron?

It is the conscious labelling of prog genres that I dislike. For example, I often think the word 'metal' gets slipped in to appeal to a wider audience. It is like a form of commodification.