Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Most Outlandish Prog Suggestion
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Most Outlandish Prog Suggestion
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
ThirstyFajita View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: May 21 2020
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ThirstyFajita Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 15:45
Originally posted by BaldFriede BaldFriede wrote:

A lot of what is considered to be prog in here is not prog to me at all, for example 99% of neo prog. And a lot of what is not considered to be prog in here is prog to me.
Yeah I was kind of blown away when I saw that ELO was in here as full blown prog (not related)
Back to Top
BaldFriede View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 02 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 10261 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BaldFriede Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 15:55
Originally posted by Jaketejas Jaketejas wrote:

For your own personal tastes, do you find that sometimes bands “progress” with the times to a point where you no longer care for their particular new sound? For example, if you look at your poll from yesterday, most people here seem to like that early Prog sound.

There was a time when the music industry was different. A lot more was possible back then. When a band comes up with something totally new today no producer will want it and reject it for having "no commercial potential". That's why there is hardly any true experimentation anymore.

Back in the late 60s and early 70s (roughly the decade from 1967 to 1976, though there are some earlier and later examples too) many bands had a totally unique sound that was completely their own. This is a quality that has been lost in the music of today; everything within a certain category sounds more or less the same. Digitization is another factor that made the music more uniform.


Edited by BaldFriede - June 30 2020 at 15:57


BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
Back to Top
Lewian View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: August 09 2015
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 14108 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lewian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 16:02
Originally posted by BaldFriede BaldFriede wrote:

That's why there is hardly any true experimentation anymore.

Not true. There's a lot. Except it's hard to find because these musicians are not interested in earning their money this way; some may not even care about having a big audience. Still, who has ears can find them and listen. Wink Actually it is easier than ever to market and sell your own stuff. You won't get rich this way but if you're happy to have a few hundred or thousand listeners, times were never better.
Back to Top
Jaketejas View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 27 2018
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1968 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jaketejas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 16:03
For me, at some point, and it’s probably simply aging, Prog changed to the point where I just didn’t like the new sound. It seemed either a bit too contrived or turned into some kind of competition where songwriting suffered. Like the artists weren’t focused on their own journey as much as they were trying to stay in the game and outdo their peers in terms of heaviness, technical prowess, etc. So, I have trouble appreciating much of the newer Prog. I guess I need to expand my musical horizons more though and venture out more beyond 1989.      I guess what I’m saying is that there is something about early to mid Prog that resonates with me moreso than more recent Prog. The motivations seemed different back then. But, my guess is that I need to dispel these notions by learning more about (and appreciating) newer artists and sounds.
Back to Top
Jaketejas View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 27 2018
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1968 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jaketejas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 16:15
Both points are good. It’s difficult for bands to get backing from reps to the point where they can quit their day jobs and solely write good Prog. Hence, the competition I mentioned earlier which influences sound. But, those who are experimenting as indie artists may have to rely moreso on digitizing in order to make ends meet, which is also a limitation that affects sound.
Back to Top
progaardvark View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover/Symphonic/RPI Teams

Joined: June 14 2007
Location: Sea of Peas
Status: Offline
Points: 48717 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote progaardvark Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 16:28
Bruce Willis?
----------
i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag
that's a happy bag of lettuce
this car smells like cartilage
nothing beats a good video about fractions
Back to Top
Cristi View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover / Prog Metal Teams

Joined: July 27 2006
Location: wonderland
Status: Offline
Points: 41330 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cristi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 16:31
Originally posted by progaardvark progaardvark wrote:

Bruce Willis?

I don't think anyone's ever suggested him. 
Back to Top
Prog-jester View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 05 2005
Location: Love Beach
Status: Offline
Points: 5777 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Prog-jester Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 16:51
Originally posted by Hercules Hercules wrote:

Has anyone ever suggested Big Country?
Apart from the fact that I absolutely love the band and think Stuart Adamson was a god, I'd consider some of their stuff to have definite prog characteristics.
Discovered them last spring and gotta agree - they're like Fish-era Marillion minus all the keyboards/acoustic parts/uncommon time signatures bits. Not like they got long compositions with multiple movements either, but this one sounds pretty prog to me:



Edited by Prog-jester - June 30 2020 at 16:52
Back to Top
Prog-jester View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 05 2005
Location: Love Beach
Status: Offline
Points: 5777 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Prog-jester Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 16:55
Originally posted by BaldFriede BaldFriede wrote:

That's why there is hardly any true experimentation anymore
there's in fact a lot
Back to Top
BaldFriede View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 02 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 10261 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BaldFriede Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 17:29
Originally posted by Lewian Lewian wrote:

Originally posted by BaldFriede BaldFriede wrote:

That's why there is hardly any true experimentation anymore.

Not true. There's a lot. Except it's hard to find because these musicians are not interested in earning their money this way; some may not even care about having a big audience. Still, who has ears can find them and listen. Wink Actually it is easier than ever to market and sell your own stuff. You won't get rich this way but if you're happy to have a few hundred or thousand listeners, times were never better.

I should have phrased it differently. It is simply a schedule of values. Is the time I have to spend to find something truly new and original a worthy investment or would it be better spent for some other endeavour like for example reading a book?

Of course there is always the random find. Jean and I were for example very happy to have discovered B for Bang who made two highly original albums in 2008 and 2010. They were absolutely unique. But a find like them is like finding a needle in a haystack.


Edited by BaldFriede - June 30 2020 at 17:29


BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
Back to Top
Awesoreno View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 07 2019
Location: Culver City, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 2886 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Awesoreno Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 17:44
Originally posted by AFlowerKingCrimson AFlowerKingCrimson wrote:

Originally posted by Awesoreno Awesoreno wrote:

Prog is a style. "Progressive" is an idea. The word "prog" comes from progressive because the style birthed in the classic era WAS progressive for the time. The two words were one and the same in, say, 1971. Not necessarily so today.

Here's a good video on what I mean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b71l47FhSHY

I know what you mean I just don't really agree with it(or at least I don't agree with using the two terms in a different way when we already have different subgenres for that). I will say that much prog isn't progressive in the truest sense of the word and that a lot of music that is progressive isn't considered to be progressive rock(let alone "prog") by most people(maybe some of it isn't even really rock like say Tangerine Dream). Also, a band like the Doors were very progressive in their day(same thing with the Beatles and Beach Boys)but most people typically don't consider them to be either prog or progressive rock. The same can be said for other bands typically labelled psych or even later genres such as post punk, post rock etc. Other than this site most places won't categorize them as prog or progressive rock etc. Anyway, everyone has their own definition and parameters of what they consider to be prog, progressive rock, art rock etc. I remember a bunch of fans on another site trying to differentiate between big P prog and little p prog(which is essentially the same thing you are saying). Yeah, there is retro prog(much of neo prog and probably a good amount of crossover prog)and more boundary pushing prog but it's all prog/progressive rock imo. For me it's like trying to differentiate between fusion and jazz rock fusion or metal and heavy metal. It gets to be a bit silly after a while. However, in my opinion prog is just a nickname for progressive rock(which again has many different subgenres). If you disagree fine but that's how I see it and I'm not going to budge. ;) Also, this site is called progarchives(not prog/progressive rock archives ;)). So for now I'll just stick with what wikipedia says:" Progressive rock (shortened as prog; sometimes called art rock, classical rock or symphonic rock) is a broad genre of rock music[8]  ."


As for that video, that guy was in diapers when I was a full fledged prog fan well aware of the genre, subgenres and underground. I'm no spring chicken when it comes to this stuff and I won't be lectured by 20 somethings on the semantics of prog.

Sorry, didn't mean to come off as antagonistic. I subscribe to the difference because I have found too many people arguing, especially on this site, about what to like and what's prog and what's "progressive" and blah blah blah, and often aren't even really understanding each other (though some are just a$$hats I suppose). To me, defining a difference reduces misunderstandings. But I understand if that seems pointless to you. I guess I shouldn't really care if people keep talking past each other and recede into their echo chambers (not accusing you of that, to be clear, you're pretty chill). I thought that guy in the video had interesting points, and I respect him because he not only likes a diverse set of music, but is unafraid to share his opinions (that are occasionally controversial among prog fans). I understand you have more experience, and I don't mean to lecture. Though I will say that things change, even definitions. Just because I'm 22.5 years of age doesn't mean that I wouldn't also understand the semantics. I'm a musician myself, and I love to research this stuff. But I'm probably being too pedantic anyway. I also don't know why I tried writing this while listening to Fish. Took me way too long.
Back to Top
Awesoreno View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 07 2019
Location: Culver City, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 2886 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Awesoreno Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 17:48
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Meanwhile, in other news, Boris Johnson was attending a press conference today. When asked precisely how progressive his new “build, build, build” policy was, the Prime Minister responded that the question was absolutely typical of the backward looking BBC.

Said Johnson, “this policy is quite clearly prog. Prog, not progressive, prog. We have discussed this many times, and I have always been very clear about the difference between the two”.

The BBC later issued an apology on Twitter apologising for any offence they may have caused by confusing the two and potentially seeming progressivist, but, in defence, stated that they had examined debates on Prog Archives prior to the interview, and that the reporter in question was, understandably, none the bloody wiser.

Continued on page 94.........

Definitely grinned reading this. I'd make a similar story on my leader, but I don't think the orange man even knows what "policy" is.
Back to Top
AFlowerKingCrimson View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2016
Location: Philly burbs
Status: Offline
Points: 16187 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AFlowerKingCrimson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 18:11
Well, we can call it anything we want but wikipedia and allmusic(not to mention progarchives) make no distinctions between prog and progressive rock and ultimately that's the bottom line as far as I'm concerned.

As for definitions changing that's debatable. If prog changes too much then it's no longer prog. It becomes something else. For me it's about having song structures that go beyond verse chorus. Since even neo prog tends to do that it falls within the definition of prog rock. I used to think prog has changed. Ultimately the template hasn't changed though(again otherwise it wouldn't be prog)but certain sounds and styles within it have. For example, many modern bands have indie, metal, post rock and other modern influences within the context of progressive rock. There's still something in it to make it progressive. If too much of it becomes too song oriented then it falls out of the prog box imo. 


Edited by AFlowerKingCrimson - June 30 2020 at 18:17
Back to Top
AFlowerKingCrimson View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2016
Location: Philly burbs
Status: Offline
Points: 16187 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AFlowerKingCrimson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 18:25
Originally posted by Awesoreno Awesoreno wrote:

Originally posted by AFlowerKingCrimson AFlowerKingCrimson wrote:

Originally posted by Awesoreno Awesoreno wrote:

Prog is a style. "Progressive" is an idea. The word "prog" comes from progressive because the style birthed in the classic era WAS progressive for the time. The two words were one and the same in, say, 1971. Not necessarily so today.

Here's a good video on what I mean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b71l47FhSHY

I know what you mean I just don't really agree with it(or at least I don't agree with using the two terms in a different way when we already have different subgenres for that). I will say that much prog isn't progressive in the truest sense of the word and that a lot of music that is progressive isn't considered to be progressive rock(let alone "prog") by most people(maybe some of it isn't even really rock like say Tangerine Dream). Also, a band like the Doors were very progressive in their day(same thing with the Beatles and Beach Boys)but most people typically don't consider them to be either prog or progressive rock. The same can be said for other bands typically labelled psych or even later genres such as post punk, post rock etc. Other than this site most places won't categorize them as prog or progressive rock etc. Anyway, everyone has their own definition and parameters of what they consider to be prog, progressive rock, art rock etc. I remember a bunch of fans on another site trying to differentiate between big P prog and little p prog(which is essentially the same thing you are saying). Yeah, there is retro prog(much of neo prog and probably a good amount of crossover prog)and more boundary pushing prog but it's all prog/progressive rock imo. For me it's like trying to differentiate between fusion and jazz rock fusion or metal and heavy metal. It gets to be a bit silly after a while. However, in my opinion prog is just a nickname for progressive rock(which again has many different subgenres). If you disagree fine but that's how I see it and I'm not going to budge. ;) Also, this site is called progarchives(not prog/progressive rock archives ;)). So for now I'll just stick with what wikipedia says:" Progressive rock (shortened as prog; sometimes called art rock, classical rock or symphonic rock) is a broad genre of rock music[8]  ."


As for that video, that guy was in diapers when I was a full fledged prog fan well aware of the genre, subgenres and underground. I'm no spring chicken when it comes to this stuff and I won't be lectured by 20 somethings on the semantics of prog.

Sorry, didn't mean to come off as antagonistic. I subscribe to the difference because I have found too many people arguing, especially on this site, about what to like and what's prog and what's "progressive" and blah blah blah, and often aren't even really understanding each other (though some are just a$$hats I suppose). To me, defining a difference reduces misunderstandings. But I understand if that seems pointless to you. I guess I shouldn't really care if people keep talking past each other and recede into their echo chambers (not accusing you of that, to be clear, you're pretty chill). I thought that guy in the video had interesting points, and I respect him because he not only likes a diverse set of music, but is unafraid to share his opinions (that are occasionally controversial among prog fans). I understand you have more experience, and I don't mean to lecture. Though I will say that things change, even definitions. Just because I'm 22.5 years of age doesn't mean that I wouldn't also understand the semantics. I'm a musician myself, and I love to research this stuff. But I'm probably being too pedantic anyway. I also don't know why I tried writing this while listening to Fish. Took me way too long.

It's cool that you like Fish. I met him once and let me just say there's a reason they say to never meet your heroes. Lol.

Different prog fans of different age groups have different experiences and different perspectives. I wouldn't be one bit suprised if there's way more younger people discovering prog these days through Haken, Dream Theater, Porcupine Tree, SW, Opeth etc than through Yes, Genesis and King Crimson like I did. They also tend to be much more into metal. I wasn't into metal much at all as a teen in the 80's when it was at it's commercial peak. 

I was actually referring more to the guy in the video who is probably around your age. 

Anyway, I get it. I think we are just coming at it from different angles. I don't take the term progressive literally like some people do or think it has to always live up to it's name. I think it's just an unfortunate term that stuck that many fans think has to always live up to it's name. In that sense Prog might be better but ultimately I see it as all the same thing. Or maybe just call the non "progressive" stuff art rock. At this point I just prefer to call it all prog though. I'll leave it up to this site to sort out all the particulars(subgenres).


Edited by AFlowerKingCrimson - June 30 2020 at 18:27
Back to Top
cstack3 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: July 20 2009
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Status: Offline
Points: 6748 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote cstack3 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 21:12
Originally posted by twosteves twosteves wrote:

Gang of 4---I think I got into a lot of arty bands and confused arty with prog.

Not the worst suggestion....Andy Gill (RIP) sounds a great deal like Adrian Belew on this song!   Bassist Sara Lee went on to join Bob Fripp in the rather amazing prog-punk band "League of Gentlemen"
I am not a Robot, I'm a FREE MAN!!
Back to Top
AFlowerKingCrimson View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2016
Location: Philly burbs
Status: Offline
Points: 16187 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AFlowerKingCrimson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 21:35
^Sara Lee also played on the second Summers/Fripp collaboration called "bewitched." 
Back to Top
Awesoreno View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 07 2019
Location: Culver City, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 2886 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Awesoreno Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 30 2020 at 23:29
Originally posted by AFlowerKingCrimson AFlowerKingCrimson wrote:

Originally posted by Awesoreno Awesoreno wrote:

Originally posted by AFlowerKingCrimson AFlowerKingCrimson wrote:

Originally posted by Awesoreno Awesoreno wrote:

Prog is a style. "Progressive" is an idea. The word "prog" comes from progressive because the style birthed in the classic era WAS progressive for the time. The two words were one and the same in, say, 1971. Not necessarily so today.

Here's a good video on what I mean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b71l47FhSHY

I know what you mean I just don't really agree with it(or at least I don't agree with using the two terms in a different way when we already have different subgenres for that). I will say that much prog isn't progressive in the truest sense of the word and that a lot of music that is progressive isn't considered to be progressive rock(let alone "prog") by most people(maybe some of it isn't even really rock like say Tangerine Dream). Also, a band like the Doors were very progressive in their day(same thing with the Beatles and Beach Boys)but most people typically don't consider them to be either prog or progressive rock. The same can be said for other bands typically labelled psych or even later genres such as post punk, post rock etc. Other than this site most places won't categorize them as prog or progressive rock etc. Anyway, everyone has their own definition and parameters of what they consider to be prog, progressive rock, art rock etc. I remember a bunch of fans on another site trying to differentiate between big P prog and little p prog(which is essentially the same thing you are saying). Yeah, there is retro prog(much of neo prog and probably a good amount of crossover prog)and more boundary pushing prog but it's all prog/progressive rock imo. For me it's like trying to differentiate between fusion and jazz rock fusion or metal and heavy metal. It gets to be a bit silly after a while. However, in my opinion prog is just a nickname for progressive rock(which again has many different subgenres). If you disagree fine but that's how I see it and I'm not going to budge. ;) Also, this site is called progarchives(not prog/progressive rock archives ;)). So for now I'll just stick with what wikipedia says:" Progressive rock (shortened as prog; sometimes called art rock, classical rock or symphonic rock) is a broad genre of rock music[8]  ."


As for that video, that guy was in diapers when I was a full fledged prog fan well aware of the genre, subgenres and underground. I'm no spring chicken when it comes to this stuff and I won't be lectured by 20 somethings on the semantics of prog.

Sorry, didn't mean to come off as antagonistic. I subscribe to the difference because I have found too many people arguing, especially on this site, about what to like and what's prog and what's "progressive" and blah blah blah, and often aren't even really understanding each other (though some are just a$$hats I suppose). To me, defining a difference reduces misunderstandings. But I understand if that seems pointless to you. I guess I shouldn't really care if people keep talking past each other and recede into their echo chambers (not accusing you of that, to be clear, you're pretty chill). I thought that guy in the video had interesting points, and I respect him because he not only likes a diverse set of music, but is unafraid to share his opinions (that are occasionally controversial among prog fans). I understand you have more experience, and I don't mean to lecture. Though I will say that things change, even definitions. Just because I'm 22.5 years of age doesn't mean that I wouldn't also understand the semantics. I'm a musician myself, and I love to research this stuff. But I'm probably being too pedantic anyway. I also don't know why I tried writing this while listening to Fish. Took me way too long.

It's cool that you like Fish. I met him once and let me just say there's a reason they say to never meet your heroes. Lol.

Different prog fans of different age groups have different experiences and different perspectives. I wouldn't be one bit suprised if there's way more younger people discovering prog these days through Haken, Dream Theater, Porcupine Tree, SW, Opeth etc than through Yes, Genesis and King Crimson like I did. They also tend to be much more into metal. I wasn't into metal much at all as a teen in the 80's when it was at it's commercial peak. 

I was actually referring more to the guy in the video who is probably around your age. 

Anyway, I get it. I think we are just coming at it from different angles. I don't take the term progressive literally like some people do or think it has to always live up to it's name. I think it's just an unfortunate term that stuck that many fans think has to always live up to it's name. In that sense Prog might be better but ultimately I see it as all the same thing. Or maybe just call the non "progressive" stuff art rock. At this point I just prefer to call it all prog though. I'll leave it up to this site to sort out all the particulars(subgenres).

For the record, despite my age, I got into prog with the classic artists as well. When I was younger, I had a phase where I only liked music from a certain time period, and I was a bit elitist about it. I now try to listen to a couple new albums every week (mostly prog and fusion) from all different time periods. A friend got me into Haken a couple years ago, and I only started listening to DT by the end of last year in preparation to play the entirety of Metropolis Pt. 2 in a backyard (same friend's idea). COVID cut that short unfortunately. I also had an aversion to metal, but I can appreciate it more now, at least if it's prog metal. Still not into a lot of the classic metal bands, or any that use unclean vocals for a majority of their tunes. But there was a period of time where I had my nose in the air about most music that wasn't from the 70s. Glad I've moved passed that. Will check out PT/SW soon. It's on the list.
Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26151 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote richardh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 01 2020 at 00:00
There is absolutely no reason in my book why progressive rock music has to be ''unique'' , ''experimental'' , ''challenging'' or any other words like this. In fact I find this irritating. Music doesn't evolve in a vacuum. The ability to actually write music that is not stuck on verse, chorus and standard time signatures for me is a clear indication of what 'prog rock' is. Of course you can like what you like but please don't hijack the definition just because you look for certain attributes. Its basically a 'hang up' to not like music because it sounds like Genesis not some moral high ground. Enjoy music or not that is the choice you have . There is nothing else to say. What is included on the site has to conform to at least the idea of what bands were trying to do between 1970-1973. When Keith Emerson created a rock piece that lasted 29 minutes and was in 3 movements that was clearly what 'prog rock' was and where it had headed. It wasn't a bunch of random noises! (well some might argue otherwise lol) 
Back to Top
BaldFriede View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 02 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 10261 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote BaldFriede Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 01 2020 at 00:08
Originally posted by AFlowerKingCrimson AFlowerKingCrimson wrote:

For me it's about having song structures that go beyond verse chorus.

That definition is way too narrow for me. You can be prog in many different ways but still maintain that "verse chorus" structure. It can be polyphony, unusual instrumentation, atonality, harmonic shifts and a lot more.

And actually a lot of famous and beloved prog (probably beloved by you too) is basically verse chorus.


Edited by BaldFriede - July 01 2020 at 00:10


BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
Back to Top
Lewian View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: August 09 2015
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 14108 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lewian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 01 2020 at 01:43
Originally posted by AFlowerKingCrimson AFlowerKingCrimson wrote:



Anyway, I get it. I think we are just coming at it from different angles. I don't take the term progressive literally like some people do or think it has to always live up to it's name. I think it's just an unfortunate term that stuck that many fans think has to always live up to it's name. In that sense Prog might be better but ultimately I see it as all the same thing. Or maybe just call the non "progressive" stuff art rock. At this point I just prefer to call it all prog though. I'll leave it up to this site to sort out all the particulars(subgenres).

The "progressive" in the prog rock name is not an accident though. When what we call prog rock started, quite a bit of it was pretty progressive indeed. Arguably, if you go by the attitude behind the music, much of what is experimental or "arty" after 1980 up to these days is closer to the prog spirit than neo-prog. (But as I said, personally I don't mind much; it's just words and I expect some chaos when dealing with language.)  
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.225 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.