Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Topic: Why isn't prog as successful as metal as an indus Posted: March 06 2015 at 14:59
I wonder why in the metal world every year you see a dozen os albums "praise as wonderful" while in the prog scene is hard to find the same sense of expectation. By wich means would you attribute that?
Joined: May 12 2009
Location: Coolwood
Status: Offline
Points: 6393
Posted: March 06 2015 at 15:57
We could argue that metal heads are less discriminating that proggers. Our expectations are higher and thus are more difficult to please. To me, much of contemporary metal sounds the same no matter how awesome the chops may be or how fast they are played (and speed does not equal quality). But I think the previous responders have some good observations. Metal tends to be more image conscious than Prog, at least these days, and that leads to greater recognition and promotion. Overall, too, the target audience is younger and thus less experienced and more prone to promotion. Prog artists tend to let the music speak for them, which is less effective. When I was a teenager in the 70s one of the things that attracted me to Kiss was their image, so that when I listen to them, I visualized their outlandish outfits and makeup in my mind. It made the music sound better. I know better than that now, but many contemporary artists, including metal bands, learned from that. Much of the music biz is, and always has been, promoting an image. Some Prog artists may be more image conscious than others, but the emphasis is more on the music. Maybe if more were more image conscious they would be more well known.
The world of sound is certainly capable of infinite variety and, were our sense developed, of infinite extensions. -- George Santayana, "The Sense of Beauty"
Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10837
Posted: March 06 2015 at 16:59
Progosopher wrote:
We could argue that metal heads are less discriminating that proggers. Our expectations are higher and thus are more difficult to please. To me, much of contemporary metal sounds the same no matter how awesome the chops may be or how fast they are played (and speed does not equal quality). But I think the previous responders have some good observations. Metal tends to be more image conscious than Prog, at least these days, and that leads to greater recognition and promotion. Overall, too, the target audience is younger and thus less experienced and more prone to promotion. Prog artists tend to let the music speak for them, which is less effective. When I was a teenager in the 70s one of the things that attracted me to Kiss was their image, so that when I listen to them, I visualized their outlandish outfits and makeup in my mind. It made the music sound better. I know better than that now, but many contemporary artists, including metal bands, learned from that. Much of the music biz is, and always has been, promoting an image. Some Prog artists may be more image conscious than others, but the emphasis is more on the music. Maybe if more were more image conscious they would be more well known.
Less discriminating than proggers whose expectations are higher?... I doubt it: it's forgetting that a lot of prog fans tend to obsess over 70's classics or Neo-Prog, and that the metal scene is split up between many subgenres. Furthermore, the generation gap can play a great role: the older generation of metalheads can't care or even bear bands like Slipknot... A band whose image is quite important! Some people don't like bands which are too much "image conscious"! I remember having talked with the manager of French industrial band Treponem Pal who explained she was somewhat disinterested into modern metal because she felt that there was an annoying dominance of death metal nowadays.
Joined: May 12 2009
Location: Coolwood
Status: Offline
Points: 6393
Posted: March 06 2015 at 17:54
CPicard wrote:
[QUOTE=Progosopher]
We could argue that metal heads are less discriminating that proggers. Our expectations are higher and thus are more difficult to please. To me, much of contemporary metal sounds the same no matter how awesome the chops may be or how fast they are played (and speed does not equal quality). But I think the previous responders have some good observations. Metal tends to be more image conscious than Prog, at least these days, and that leads to greater recognition and promotion. Overall, too, the target audience is younger and thus less experienced and more prone to promotion. Prog artists tend to let the music speak for them, which is less effective. When I was a teenager in the 70s one of the things that attracted me to Kiss was their image, so that when I listen to them, I visualized their outlandish outfits and makeup in my mind. It made the music sound better. I know better than that now, but many contemporary artists, including metal bands, learned from that. Much of the music biz is, and always has been, promoting an image. Some Prog artists may be more image conscious than others, but the emphasis is more on the music. Maybe if more were more image conscious they would be more well known.
Less discriminating than proggers whose expectations are higher?... I doubt it: it's forgetting that a lot of prog fans tend to obsess over 70's classics or Neo-Prog, and that the metal scene is split up between many subgenres.Prog is split into many subgenres as well. 70s symphonic seems to be the core and the root. The thread on the longevity of Prog is pertinent here. And who is to say that interest in 70s classics represents a lack of discrimination? Does age diminish quality? Is that music less than contemporary metal, no matter the genre? Furthermore, the generation gap can play a great role: the older generation of metalheads can't care or even bear bands like Slipknot... A band whose image is quite important! Some people don't like bands which are too much "image conscious"!I will admit to the generation gap - I am 54 years old and I don't care for Slipknot at all. I am not sure what you are saying here. Are you comparing Slipknot to classic 70s Prog favorably? I remember having talked with the manager of French industrial band Treponem Pal who explained she was somewhat disinterested into modern metal because she felt that there was an annoying dominance of death metal nowadays.
I am not interested in death metal either, nor do I care for industrial.
/QUOTE]
The world of sound is certainly capable of infinite variety and, were our sense developed, of infinite extensions. -- George Santayana, "The Sense of Beauty"
Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10837
Posted: March 06 2015 at 18:09
^Fine, I will take some time tomorrow to re-formulate my speech (I can't watch TV, browse the forum and play a game in the same time).
Just one thing: if prog fans have so much "high expectations", I wonder why they don't drop progressive rock in favor of composers such as Xenakis, Scelsi, Stockhausen or Anthony Braxton.
^Fine, I will take some time tomorrow to re-formulate my speech (I can't watch TV, browse the forum and play a game in the same time).
Just one thing: if prog fans have so much "high expectations", I wonder why they don't drop progressive rock in favor of composers such as Xenakis, Scelsi, Stockhausen or Anthony Braxton.
Call it a wild stab in the dark if you like but maybe because they don't sound like Prog because they ain't Prog?
Special Collaborator
PSIKE, JRF/Canterbury, P Metal, Eclectic
Joined: October 05 2013
Location: SFcaUsA
Status: Offline
Points: 14710
Posted: March 06 2015 at 22:29
Becsause they are two different elements on the periodic table. Metal is a sound. A feel. Prog is complexity. The two obviously overlap as evidenced on this here holy proginess expression of PA. Really, everthing in life is a spectrum. Metal can be as simplistic as Poison's glam rock from the 80s or as sophisticated as Gorguts with "obscura".
Bascially don't think of it as a competition. They are two different aspects of music that occasionally join hands and create babies. OOooooo. That makes me wanna hump someone's leg :O
Joined: October 24 2007
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 2505
Posted: March 07 2015 at 08:03
Because metal is considered to be cool by its listeners and functions a part of a counterculture lifestyle. Music is not about esthetics, its mostly a social phenomenon.
Joined: September 03 2013
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Status: Offline
Points: 1607
Posted: March 07 2015 at 08:51
Curiosity stuck me wondering here, wouldn't it be too because a fair amount of prog lacks some of that 'energy' commonly found as well in punk and post-punk music, albeit differently orientated in today's metal music in general, i.e. quite a bit more aggressive sound which has proved to be more commercially successful, especially nowadays?
"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy." LvB
Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
Posted: March 07 2015 at 10:06
I remember reading somewhere, not sure exactly what book though, that the reason the original psychedelic/progressive rock movement of the 1960s/1970s lasted so short was that it didn't have the same cultural infrastructure of independent record companies and underground concert venues which the late-1970s punk scene would build up. The New Wave of British Heavy Metal picked up that way of organization pretty quickly, being almost contemporary with the punk explosion looking at that for a successful model of how to get a music scene running, and you do the rest of the math. The rock business world was somewhat more corporatized before that, so when a style went out of fashion the industry effectively ended up pulling the plug on it. Punk and metal, on the other hand, built up their own network of independent business circuits to rely on so that wouldn't happen.
The Rock in Opposition movement of the late 1970s did the same thing too, for that matter.
Edited by Toaster Mantis - March 07 2015 at 10:12
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 16130
Posted: March 07 2015 at 10:25
desistindo wrote:
I wonder why in the metal world every year you see a dozen os albums "praise as wonderful" while in the prog scene is hard to find the same sense of expectation. By which means would you attribute that?
I don't know ... I'm not sure there is a ready answer ... but I tend to lean towards the thought that Genghis Khan was a Venusian Buddhist and his politics were Plutonian Crap!
I kinda think that progressive, going back to the early 1970's took such an incredible lambasting in the press ... I mean even Tangerine Dream was called "washing machine music" ... which ought to tell you what that arsenichole was listening to stoned ... certainly not Tangerine Dream .... and the rock press, for the last 45 years has little appreciation for the work itself, and a lot of appreciation for anything else that is hip and cult or a FAD.
In many ways, some of the folks in metal, are not silly and naive and musically, many of them are well disciplined enough and taught that they do not need your opinion to create their own music, and this was missing in the early days. The system then, was more about the record companies and "someone else", and it made you weary and leery and less able to give in to what the big money folks wanted. Today, things are different enough that a band can make a website, sell their CD's and not give a darn about a record company or a magazine, and still sell stuff ... and of course, by the time they sell a million, most of those magazines that ignored you now think you are a darling, and want you on their cover because you SELL.
Early KC, is a good example ... you realize that these folks only had "themselves" to go by? This is not easy, and needs a very strong internal constitution all around to be able to get that far ... and be able to take it that extra step to nail it down! I think that YES also tried, and ran into a brick wall after the incredible assault of mean spirited folks that only wanted another hit for radio! And it still happens here on this board. No respect, care, or appreciation for the work itself ...
I can look at Dream Theater, and see a band that decided a long time ago, that what they did was OK, if they stuck to their work and their ability, and made sure they were rehearsed enough that they could still do it on the stage. I think that some bands hurt themselves in this area, but in "metal" this is a lot less of a problem, not to mention that the equipment used these days is far easier to control than 40 years ago. Synthesizers were not easy to control (witness Tangerine Dream and the countless live albums in the early days and how different the pieces were), and it made a difference. And maybe this was Rick Wakeman's complaint about TFTO ... it was hard to play it live again, and a massive drain, that took away from his having fun after the show with the girls! Today, it is not an issue and can be done from one workstation alone!
I think we have to be careful in these comparisons ... we're comparing a Lincoln Continental or a Bentley to a Model T ... and that is not exactly a good comparison at all ... and the comments come out very poorly designed or thought out. A professor in college would have told you to go home and re-consider your premise, and I would not wish to discourage you with an F for a grade ... you see the problem now?
Edited by moshkito - March 07 2015 at 10:26
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
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
This page was generated in 0.168 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Why isn't prog as successful as metal as an indus
Topic Options
Our expectations are higher and thus are more difficult to please. To me, much of contemporary metal sounds the same no matter how awesome the chops may be or how fast they are played (and speed does not equal quality). But I think the previous responders have some good observations. Metal tends to be more image conscious than Prog, at least these days, and that leads to greater recognition and promotion. Overall, too, the target audience is younger and thus less experienced and more prone to promotion. Prog artists tend to let the music speak for them, which is less effective. When I was a teenager in the 70s one of the things that attracted me to Kiss was their image, so that when I listen to them, I visualized their outlandish outfits and makeup in my mind. It made the music sound better. I know better than that now, but many contemporary artists, including metal bands, learned from that. Much of the music biz is, and always has been, promoting an image. Some Prog artists may be more image conscious than others, but the emphasis is more on the music. Maybe if more were more image conscious they would be more well known.
Progosopher wrote:
