Prog in Norway: What's in the water?

RockHound wrote: Mix heavy water, Norwegian oil, and Viking blood, and the only possible outcome is pure magic. I had a wonderful time in Norway a few years ago, and their culture seems like a perfect breeding ground for adventurous and eclectic music. I remember a booth at a market in Oslo that had about 20 varieties of lox-I was totally inspired.

Edited by BrufordFreak - June 10 2022 at 09:27

In the early 2000s I was communicating with some musicians from Norway . At that time I was discouraged regarding my accomplishments in music because living in New Jersey was not encouraging and particularly when it came to Progressive Rock.

Although Progfest in New Jersey was supported and exciting the hope for a Prog community putting together events began dwindling away as time progressed. One particular musician in Norway emailed me and wrote..."You should move to Norway because Progressive Rock is a way of life here"

More people generally interested in that style of music. Did Norway have billboards with an advertisement that Bruce Springsteen was going to be in town? In the end I decided to remain a recluse and work on music. I just block out imposing business deals or offers that revolve around someone else's agenda. According to musicians in Norway I wouldn't even have to deal with such realities if I lived there instead.

You Norwegian prog fans are going to drool over this one! 

Norway is a wealthy nation with 20% of it's money coming from gas and oil production. They've committed to giving 1% to the arts which is absolutely huge. Would have been something like under 2 billion in the mid 10's.

Cristi wrote: I don't see the point of this thread.

I believe we are trying to prove they have better water in Norway. 

Whatever it is, we DO appreciate it!

nick_h_nz wrote: Personally, although it was never the main point of the OP, population density is completely irrelevant, as a lower population density can suggest a population is more spread out than a higher one. For example, Australia has a population density of approximately 3, while New Zealand is more like 15. (These are from memory of when I was at school, so are no doubt now changed, but their accuracy doesn’t change the point.) But, Australia has a large part of the country where next to no one lives, and their population is in more dense clumps than that of New Zealand. If you are going to use population statistics for wondering why there is so much music coming out from a country, then looking on a per capita basis is probably better than looking by density. Not that it is a particularly good way of looking at it, either, but it does work a little better, I am definitely not suggesting every country has as much music coming out of it as Norway, so it will be easy to find countries which are not. I just think that Norway seems to be getting more attention, so it seems like there is considerably more coming out from there than other countries, when this really doesn’t seem to be the case, so much as more of their bands getting more attention. Writing lists of what you have doesn’t change this. I can write lists, too.n The other thing is, of course, that once one starts to dive into the output of one country, it becomes easier to find more, and more, and more, and more, from that country. Norway has a great number of high quality music, it’s true. But it’s not alone or special in that, and it’s number isn’t considerably more than many other countries with a great number of high quality music. (Ignoring the subjectivity as to what at high quality music is, as I am using that only because it was used by the OP).

Personally, although it was never the main point of the OP, population density is completely irrelevant, as a lower population density can suggest a population is more spread out than a higher one. For example, Australia has a population density of approximately 3, while New Zealand is more like 15. (These are from memory of when I was at school, so are no doubt now changed, but their accuracy doesn’t change the point.) But, Australia has a large part of the country where next to no one lives, and their population is in more dense clumps than that of New Zealand.

Nogbad_The_Bad wrote: Not the case for me, 3% of my collection from 2000 onwards have been Norwegian dominated by elephant9, Jaga Jazzist, Hedvig Mollestad & Panzerpappa.  If I ignore UK & USA then the top countries for me are France, Germany, Belgium, Canada, Sweden & Italy before I get to Norway. If I rank them in albums per 1MM population they are a much more respectable 2nd behind the UK UK - 9.5 albums per 1MM population Norway - 9 Belgium - 6 Sweden - 5.6 France - 3.3 USA - 1.9 Canada - 1.8 Germany - 1.1 Italy - 0.8

Not the case for me, 3% of my collection from 2000 onwards have been Norwegian dominated by elephant9, Jaga Jazzist, Hedvig Mollestad & Panzerpappa.