Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Is Prog Getting Bigger?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedIs Prog Getting Bigger?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
Author
Message
 Rating: Topic Rating: 4 Votes, Average 3.25  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20245
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 27 2015 at 15:58
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:


One inescapable observation is that any increase in overall volume (of Prog bands) is partly due to the genre becoming broader (rather than deeper) - for example when the bulk of the new suggestions are in the crossover subgenres (Art Rock, Metal, Jazz Rock/Fusion, Prog Folk, Electronic, Avant, Psych, etc.,) which is a logical consequence of the inclusive (née eclectic) nature of Progressive Rock as a music genre, then this could (and probably does) give a false impression that the genre is in growth. That almost twenty years have elapsed since Indie bands like Radiohead and Mansun ventured into the realm of Progressive Rock and still the 'are they/aren't they' arguments persist, which suggests that this debate will continue for many years to come for the newer arrivals into the genre. Sideways expansion of a genre does not necessarily indicate that it is actually getting any bigger, as counter intuitive as that seems, it is merely another area that has insufficient data to make a claim either way. Even to suggest that the genre is getting deeper as well as broader lacks the measured data to support such a notion, but a measure of that at least would go some way towards verifying actual growth over perceived growth.

 
This was the first thing that came to mind when I read the OP's question.
Does anyone have the time to make an apples to apples comparison with new Prog versus old Prog, by stripping away all of the relatively newer connecting subgenres?
 
I believe this is the only way to answer this question without resorting to speculation.


Edited by SteveG - May 27 2015 at 16:09
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 27 2015 at 22:35
If we can't count Floyd or Tull as prog because allegedly they were not universally identified as such at the time, how is it justifiable to count Radiohead and Muse? Except prog websites hardly anybody else calls them prog and they are NOT canonical examples of it. But ELP and Yes are and their success easily eclipses that of DT, nevermind TFK.
Back to Top
Svetonio View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 01:18
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

If we can't count Floyd or Tull as Prog because allegedly they were not universally identified as such at the time, how is it justifiable to count Radiohead and Muse? Except prog websites hardly anybody else calls them prog and they are NOT canonical examples of it. But ELP and Yes are and their success easily eclipses that of DT, nevermind TFK.
Well, Jethro Tull were universally considered as an Prog band.
Actually, Jethro Tull was one of the pioneers of the Progressive Rock genre at its heydays, and as you know it's late 60s and the first half of the seventies. If nothing else, because of the flute. The flute was not a common instrument for rock music at that time, and this, along with odd time signatures, some long tracks and this and that, was Prog Rock back in the day. The fact that due to the (great) Barre's riffs (btw, Barre is a shamefuly underated prog guitarist!) Jethro Tull was loved also by Hard Rock "ruffians" as a part of a new generation of rock music addicts that appeared in the second half of the 70s and they were going strong also later (they even managed to officially award the prize to Jethro Tull, weren't they? lol) does not change anything. Jethro Tull were universally considered as a Progressive Rock band who were touched so many styles in their very rich catalogue.
But there's one other thing that should be noted, indeed slightly of the topic. All these Prog bands of the 70s Prog "big 4" (or the "big 5" or whatever, but in any case without Pink Floyd who was considered as a Psychedelic Rock band in 70s and it was nothing strange 'cause Prog wasn't a badge of honor as somebody already said) in the 70s were actually prog sub-genres per se.

Edited by Svetonio - May 28 2015 at 01:27
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 01:51
Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:


But there's one other thing that should be noted, indeed slightly of the topic. All these Prog bands of the 70s Prog "big 4" (or the "big 5" or whatever, but in any case without Pink Floyd who was considered as a Psychedelic Rock band in 70s and it was nothing strange 'cause Prog wasn't a badge of honor as somebody already said) in the 70s were actually prog sub-genres per se.
LOL Floyd were not considered to be a Psychedelic Rock band in the 70s, no one was considered to be Psychedelic in the 70s. Prog didn't become a dirty word until the 1980s. 

What?
Back to Top
Komandant Shamal View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: February 02 2015
Location: Yugoslavia
Status: Offline
Points: 954
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 04:15
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

 
LOL Floyd were not considered to be a Psychedelic Rock band in the 70s, no one was considered to be Psychedelic in the 70s. Prog didn't become a dirty word until the 1980s. 

No, no Mister Dean....LOL you have to give us a link of an article wtitten in 70s that clearly describes or just mentioned the Floyds as a Progressive Rock band.
Hey you Mister Dean what you think that we are? some imbeciles? LOL i mind you that in fact we all know that Floyds are Prog now - we can see that revisionism [or hindsight if you like] re Floyds at so many prog sites, and that wiki article also wasnt written in the 70s LOL 
If you show to us any article from 70s where the Floyds were mentioned as Prog, I promise to you that I'll be the first one who will proclaim everything you wish - what about that the 60s freakbeat Floyds were invented Prog Rock before Prog Rock bands? LOL
Back to Top
NutterAlert View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 07 2005
Location: In transition
Status: Offline
Points: 2807
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 05:17
^ Kommander Shamal and the lost planet svetonio....Do you guys have something strange in the water over there at the moment?
Back to Top
timothy leary View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Offline
Points: 5319
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 10:02
The signifying monkey^

Back to Top
Smurph View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 11 2012
Location: Columbus&NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 3167
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 11:48
Prog getting bigger?

Well depends on how you define bigger.

More fans? Sure
More bands? Sure (and unlike other music genres, MOST of the prog fans that I know are also in prog bands, which means they can't spend money on other people's music)
More quality albums? Definitely more each year imo since the early 2000's
More money? NO
More album sales? NO (I know those go hand in hand)
More label interest? Not unless they specialize in this type of music

So basically... there are too many bands and the percentage of them making money off of music is shrinking.

Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20245
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 15:40
                                                         Psychedelic Rock    Born: 1966   Died: 1970 


Edited by SteveG - May 28 2015 at 15:46
Back to Top
emigre80 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 25 2015
Location: kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 2223
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 16:07
^ it was a short life but a happy one.
Back to Top
Rednight View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 18 2014
Location: Mar Vista, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 4807
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 16:07
^Gotcha', natch'!
"It just has none of the qualities of your work that I find interesting. Abandon [?] it." - Eno
Back to Top
Bigseal View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: December 17 2008
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 19:12
Prog is becoming more progressive

Try this

https://soundcloud.com/davy-olist/second-thoughts-1/comment-220259060

https://twitter.com/Davyolistmusic
https://www.facebook.com/davy.olist
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 64238
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 20:22
Originally posted by Komandant Shamal Komandant Shamal wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

 
LOL  Floyd were not considered to be a Psychedelic Rock band in the 70s, no one was considered to be Psychedelic in the 70s. Prog didn't become a dirty word until the 1980s. 
No, no Mister Dean....LOL you have to give us a link of an article written in 70s that clearly describes or just mentioned the Floyds as a Progressive Rock band.
Hey you Mister Dean what you think that we are? some imbeciles? LOL i mind you that in fact we all know that Floyds are Prog now - we can see that revisionism [or hindsight if you like] re Floyds at so many prog sites, and that wiki article also wasnt written in the 70s LOL 
If you show to us any article from 70s where the Floyds were mentioned as Prog, I promise to you that I'll be the first one who will proclaim everything you wish - what about that the 60s freakbeat Floyds were invented Prog Rock before Prog Rock bands? LOL

He didn't say Floyd were considered Prog in the 70s, he said they were not considered Psych.   And since Dean was in England at that time and paying attention (and I was in San Francisco in the early 70s), I think I'll take it as an indication that assessment is correct.

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 21:06
Originally posted by Komandant Shamal Komandant Shamal wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

 
LOL Floyd were not considered to be a Psychedelic Rock band in the 70s, no one was considered to be Psychedelic in the 70s. Prog didn't become a dirty word until the 1980s. 

No, no Mister Dean....LOL you have to give us a link of an article wtitten in 70s that clearly describes or just mentioned the Floyds as a Progressive Rock band.
Hey you Mister Dean what you think that we are? some imbeciles? LOL 
You said it, not me. Tongue

btw, it is time you dropped this charade, no one was ever fooled by it. It got tiresome sometime ago, now it's just somewhat sad.
Originally posted by Komandant Shamal Komandant Shamal wrote:

i mind you that in fact we all know that Floyds are Prog now - we can see that revisionism [or hindsight if you like] re Floyds at so many prog sites, and that wiki article also wasnt written in the 70s LOL 
Pink Floyd were regarded as a Progressive band back in the 1970s by some people. I recognise (and have previously stated) that this term was slow to spread out of the home counties of England into the rest of the world, but as I also explained to you before, the Tyrannosaurus Rex remained the same creature no matter what it was called. Just as now, in the 1970s Pink Floyd were only thought of as a Psychedelic band for their first two albums.

February 15, 1969, Disc and Music Echo, (article titled "How Pink Floyd defeated psychedelia") Talking about the fact that the Pink Floyd had come a long way since they were a hit group with See Emily Play on the charts...

Originally posted by Komandant Shamal Komandant Shamal wrote:

If you show to us any article from 70s where the Floyds were mentioned as Prog, I promise to you that I'll be the first one who will proclaim everything you wish - what about that the 60s freakbeat Floyds were invented Prog Rock before Prog Rock bands? LOL
You would be hard pressed to find any articles written in 1970 that contained genre tagging for any well known band, while I am often casually offhand in my disregard for music journalists I do accept that they were capable of granting their readership with a modicum of intelligence in recognising the genre of music that popular bands of the day where playing. They were not prone to glibly throwing around genre buzzwords as freely as you appear to be so rarely used them in their articles, when apparent genre names were used they were actually being used as adjectival descriptives rather than noun phrases (e.g., techno-flash ~ that was never a genre, nor was it ever intended to be a musical style name, it was merely used as a prosaic descriptive). Through much of the late 60s and very early 70s the word "progressive" was used in this way, for example:

November 29, 1969 - Melody Maker advertisement for AFAN Festival of Progressive Music featuring Pink Floyd.

December 14, 1969 - New Musical Express (by Nick Logan): Asked if he foresaw the progressive music boom, Wright explained, "I knew it would happen sometime"

August 1st, 1970 - Disc and Music Echo (letter from reader Mark Ditton-Kelly on Pink Floyd's 60minute set on the John Peel radio programme): "I'd rather listen to The Archies or Pickettywitch, and that's a sad thing for a progressive music lover to say"

June 10th 1972 - Melody Maker (by Simon Stable): What's your opinion of Radio One? Wright replied, "Well, there's plenty of bad pop on it and very little progressive."






Now if you insist on being anally pedantic over musicological pigeon-holing then Pink Floyd embraced practically every subgenre of Progressive Rock that youse care to name during the late 60s and early 70s, itemising each one here for your education is too tedious for the little reward that it would give since clearly this is something you are close-minded about.

What?
Back to Top
Komandant Shamal View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: February 02 2015
Location: Yugoslavia
Status: Offline
Points: 954
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2015 at 23:54
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Komandant Shamal Komandant Shamal wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

 
LOL Floyd were not considered to be a Psychedelic Rock band in the 70s, no one was considered to be Psychedelic in the 70s. Prog didn't become a dirty word until the 1980s. 

No, no Mister Dean....LOL you have to give us a link of an article wtitten in 70s that clearly describes or just mentioned the Floyds as a Progressive Rock band.
Hey you Mister Dean what you think that we are? some imbeciles? LOL 
You said it, not me. Tongue

btw, it is time you dropped this charade, no one was ever fooled by it. It got tiresome sometime ago, now it's just somewhat sad.
Originally posted by Komandant Shamal Komandant Shamal wrote:

i mind you that in fact we all know that Floyds are Prog now - we can see that revisionism [or hindsight if you like] re Floyds at so many prog sites, and that wiki article also wasnt written in the 70s LOL 
Pink Floyd were regarded as a Progressive band back in the 1970s by some people. I recognise (and have previously stated) that this term was slow to spread out of the home counties of England into the rest of the world, but as I also explained to you before, the Tyrannosaurus Rex remained the same creature no matter what it was called. Just as now, in the 1970s Pink Floyd were only thought of as a Psychedelic band for their first two albums.

February 15, 1969, Disc and Music Echo, (article titled "How Pink Floyd defeated psychedelia") Talking about the fact that the Pink Floyd had come a long way since they were a hit group with See Emily Play on the charts...

Originally posted by Komandant Shamal Komandant Shamal wrote:

If you show to us any article from 70s where the Floyds were mentioned as Prog, I promise to you that I'll be the first one who will proclaim everything you wish - what about that the 60s freakbeat Floyds were invented Prog Rock before Prog Rock bands? LOL
You would be hard pressed to find any articles written in 1970 that contained genre tagging for any well known band, while I am often casually offhand in my disregard for music journalists I do accept that they were capable of granting their readership with a modicum of intelligence in recognising the genre of music that popular bands of the day where playing. They were not prone to glibly throwing around genre buzzwords as freely as you appear to be so rarely used them in their articles, when apparent genre names were used they were actually being used as adjectival descriptives rather than noun phrases (e.g., techno-flash ~ that was never a genre, nor was it ever intended to be a musical style name, it was merely used as a prosaic descriptive). Through much of the late 60s and very early 70s the word "progressive" was used in this way, for example:

November 29, 1969 - Melody Maker advertisement for AFAN Festival of Progressive Music featuring Pink Floyd.

December 14, 1969 - New Musical Express (by Nick Logan): Asked if he foresaw the progressive music boom, Wright explained, "I knew it would happen sometime"

August 1st, 1970 - Disc and Music Echo (letter from reader Mark Ditton-Kelly on Pink Floyd's 60minute set on the John Peel radio programme): "I'd rather listen to The Archies or Pickettywitch, and that's a sad thing for a progressive music lover to say"

June 10th 1972 - Melody Maker (by Simon Stable): What's your opinion of Radio One? Wright replied, "Well, there's plenty of bad pop on it and very little progressive."






Now if you insist on being anally pedantic over musicological pigeon-holing then Pink Floyd embraced practically every subgenre of Progressive Rock that youse care to name during the late 60s and early 70s, itemising each one here for your education is too tedious for the little reward that it would give since clearly this is something you are close-minded about.

OK Mister Dean, you're so kind, so now i'll fulfill my promise given to you and show what I gotLOL right now i hold in my hands a New Year's issue of Yugoslav rock magazine "Jukebox" from December 1976, what was brought to us that 12 pages long interview with Ian Anderson that was made in Morgan Studio in London at late autumn by Yugoslav journalist Petar Peca Popovic, at the time when Jethro Tull were recorded "Songs from the Wood" (BTW in the same studio, in 1977, Yugoslav Prog Rock band Smak were recorded their "Crna Dama" lp).
After moaning of "americanization of British music" and criticizing of Elton John, Rod Stewart and Mick Jagger due to their way of singing with "a strong American accent", Ian Anderson said:
 
"In the summer of 1967, The Beatles and Pink Floyd announced the British music, and those beliefs and feelings were created the bands like Yes, Genesis and Jethro Tull. It was announcement of British musical independence. That year, 1967, is marked as the adoption of universal freedom - sex, drugs and endless fun. Besides of fun, 1967 brought to us something more than three chords rock and roll heritage. Without these things launched by The Beatles, but mostly by Syd Barrett, who knows in which direction would all [British rock music] go."
 
Although Ian Anderson didnt said explicity that the Floyds were Prog Rock, now you cant say that i dont play fair and that i didnt fullfiled my promise as well. And, as more important thing, you can use now that Ian Anderson quote to continue, even better than before this post, to mislead the young readers of this forum to believe that Floyds were regarded as Prog Rock giants back in 70s, not just as a "poor" Psychedelic Rock act LOLLOLLOL
 
 


Edited by Komandant Shamal - May 29 2015 at 01:29
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2015 at 02:59
Originally posted by Komandant Shamal Komandant Shamal wrote:

...so now i'll fulfill my promise given to you and show what I got...

... now you cant say that i dont play fair and that i didnt fullfiled my promise as well. And, as more important thing, you can use now that Ian Anderson quote to continue, even better than before this post, to mislead the young readers of this forum to believe that Floyds were regarded as Prog Rock giants back in 70s, not just as a "poor" Psychedelic Rock act LOLLOLLOL
Oh my, how shallow and duplicitous you appear to be. You must have felt rather proud of yourself after posting that. This apparent gift of mendacity coupled with your demonstrated ability to misread, misunderstand and misrepresent practically everything is a further reflection of how little you seem to know compared to how much you think you know. In the spirit of your post I thank you for your comment, which I have given the due consideration it deserved.
What?
Back to Top
essexboyinwales View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: April 27 2015
Location: Bridgend
Status: Offline
Points: 4424
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2015 at 03:38
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Komandant Shamal Komandant Shamal wrote:

...so now i'll fulfill my promise given to you and show what I got...

... now you cant say that i dont play fair and that i didnt fullfiled my promise as well. And, as more important thing, you can use now that Ian Anderson quote to continue, even better than before this post, to mislead the young readers of this forum to believe that Floyds were regarded as Prog Rock giants back in 70s, not just as a "poor" Psychedelic Rock act LOLLOLLOL
Oh my, how shallow and duplicitous you appear to be. You must have felt rather proud of yourself after posting that. This apparent gift of mendacity coupled with your demonstrated ability to misread, misunderstand and misrepresent practically everything is a further reflection of how little you seem to know compared to how much you think you know. In the spirit of your post I thank you for your comment, which I have given the due consideration it deserved.
 

You guys are a riot! 

I think I'd start watching Big Brother again if Dean, KS and Svetonio were in together....LOL
Back to Top
lazland View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 13173
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2015 at 03:52
Originally posted by essexboyinwales essexboyinwales wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Komandant Shamal Komandant Shamal wrote:

...<span style="line-height: 16.5454540252686px;">so now i'll fulfill my promise given to you and show what </span><strong style="line-height: 16.5454540252686px;">I<em style="line-height: 16.5454540252686px;"> <span style="line-height: 16.5454540252686px;">got</span><span style="line-height: 16.5454540252686px;">...</span>

... now you cant say that i dont play fair and that i didnt fullfiled my promise as well. And, as more important thing, you can use now that Ian Anderson quote to continue, even better than before this post, to mislead the young readers of this forum to believe that Floyds were regarded as Prog Rock giants back in 70s, not just as a "poor" Psychedelic Rock act LOLLOLLOL

Oh my, how shallow and duplicitous you appear to be. You must have felt rather proud of yourself after posting that. This apparent gift of mendacity coupled with your demonstrated ability to misread, misunderstand and misrepresent practically everything is a further reflection of how little you seem to know compared to how much you think you know. In the spirit of your post I <span style="font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px; line-height: 19.2000007629395px;">thank you for your comment, which I have given the due consideration it deserved.</span>
 

You guys are a riot! 

I think I'd start watching Big Brother again if Dean, KS and Svetonio were in together....LOL


Dean would have a job. He would be sharing the said house with one loony only, given that all of us know full well that KS and Svetonio are, in fact, literally, two cheeks of the same arse, given that that arse belongs to one person only.
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org
Back to Top
Stool Man View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 30 2007
Location: Anti-Cool (anag
Status: Offline
Points: 2689
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2015 at 06:34
Prog was getting bigger in the late 00s, but I think from 2010 onwards it's ceased growing and might even be starting to fade again.  Revivals inspired by fortieth anniversaries of old classics can only go so far.  And fiftieth anniversaries won't have the same impact or resonance ten years on from the last lap of nostalgiafesting. 
First time around 1967-75, this time around about the same numbers of years, and those years have passed.
We are in the equivalent of 1978 or 1979, and the new 80s are coming.
 
rotten hound of the burnie crew
Back to Top
chopper View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: July 13 2005
Location: Essex, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 19942
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2015 at 07:00
Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Actually, Jethro Tull was one of the pioneers of the Progressive Rock genre at its heydays, and as you know it's late 60s and the first half of the seventies.
Actually Jethro Tull were pretty much a blues band for the first one or two albums.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.163 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.