I've fallen in love with Paatos

mghiotti wrote: xtopher wrote: ^ I don't think you understand the point I'm trying to make. I would've appreciated it more if you'd taken into consideration my entire reply instead of one isolated clause. But I guess you're entitled to your viewpoint, so you can do whatever. Hi, well I do not know if you refer to me, but if so, I'd never say that DT are a bad band or unlistenable or even out of the "label". What I intended to stress was that it seems to me that, as they are most probably The prog band at the moment, due to their mediatic success, it's becoming natural to associate to them the official definition of prog band. As you could teach me, there are many different subgenres, and this because this kind of music is naturally lending to be manifolded, this is its beauty I presume. Your point is well clear to me, and I'm not trying to compare two completely diametrically different bands. I was amazed by Images and Words and Awake, and in particular Metropolis is just thrilling and exciting as few others, but their last performances are too heavy metal to me. That's all.

I apologize; I wasn't really referring to you. You were just using Dream Theater as a reference. It was the other people in this thread who just felt they had to start using your DT reference to start bashing DT. That seemed kind of pointless in a thread entirely devoted to Paatos, and it seems like DT is just a big, easy target to use as an all-purpose "prog-scapegoat."

But you weren't doing that. You were just using DT as a measuring stick. I just wish it could've been left at that.

^ I don't think you understand the point I'm trying to make. I would've appreciated it more if you'd taken into consideration my entire reply instead of one isolated clause.

But I guess you're entitled to your viewpoint, so you can do whatever.

mghiotti wrote: xtopher wrote: Quiet Drops wrote: Incredible band, and you are right their music is 100 times more important than DT's It never ceases to amaze me that in a thread solely dedicated to an art rock band from Sweden, someone will find a way to bash Dream Theater. They're different bands. Different styles. How can you compare them? Well, some people can find a way. As a matter of fact, there's no such a huge correlation indeed. The point I wanted to make was that, and DT is just the first example popped into my mind, prog music is also Paatos, and most of all, prog music, since I consider it one of the highest form of expression in music history, should be "cleaned" and  "purified" a little bit as far as the terminology is concerned. DT, as well as Tool for instance are moving towards a genre which is not prog any more. As I said before, odd rhythms do not make mucis be called progressive. I would like to give you a practical example of what I consider prog music in a broader sense: here in this web-site radiohead is considered as such and I couldn't be more in agreement with that, but also, to me, Miles Davis was a pioneer "sui generis" of such a genre. Do yo agree with me?

I had an awesome 6 paragraph reply to this, but then the forum logged me off and I lost it all...

So I'm just gonna say this, which won't be anywhere near as convincing as the thing I just lost:

Music always changes. And "prog" music, as structured as many people sadly want to make it, always changes. Dream Theater was influenced by many, many artists, most of them prog. They listened to what they love, then put their own spin on it, and made it their own. They make it new. But it still carries characteristics of the classic stuff they grew up listening to. And people notice that. In fact, it's not the artist that makes something "progressive", it's the audience. The artist gets his influences and does his own thing with those influences. The audience is what makes it "prog", whether consciously or not. They are the ones who will listen to Yes because they like Genesis, or so on. And then they make the artist relevent. We sure don't hear about bands from the 70s whom nobody listened to, do we? Even if they would be considered much more progressive. It takes the audience to make the movement, it takes the audience to keep the music alive. Times change, and music changes. And with new bands and new movements, the boundaries of progressive rock expand, because the music has changed. If music stops changing, it dies. Every band would still be trying to be Yes or Genesis from the early 70s (which, in and of itself, wouldn't be a bad thing, but then nobody would listen to prog!!). Radiohead or Paatos are other examples. They are influenced by bands both inside and outside of "prog", and thus the boundaries grow wider, more inclusive. They progress. This, I think, is the greatest thing about prog rock: It's hard to categorize, because it means so many different things to so many different people. Well, I say, keep it that way. You want people to be open to new things, right? Well, if the network of prog was kept loose and kept expanding, then more people would be introduced to prog (as I was mostly through DT) and thus introduced to other types of prog through that increasingly large network.

xtopher wrote: Quiet Drops wrote: Incredible band, and you are right their music is 100 times more important than DT's It never ceases to amaze me that in a thread solely dedicated to an art rock band from Sweden, someone will find a way to bash Dream Theater. They're different bands. Different styles. How can you compare them? Well, some people can find a way.

As a matter of fact, there's no such a huge correlation indeed. The point I wanted to make was that, and DT is just the first example popped into my mind, prog music is also Paatos, and most of all, prog music, since I consider it one of the highest form of expression in music history, should be "cleaned" and  "purified" a little bit as far as the terminology is concerned. DT, as well as Tool for instance are moving towards a genre which is not prog any more. As I said before, odd rhythms do not make mucis be called progressive.

I would like to give you a practical example of what I consider prog music in a broader sense: here in this web-site radiohead is considered as such and I couldn't be more in agreement with that, but also, to me, Miles Davis was a pioneer "sui generis" of such a genre.

Do yo agree with me?

Jeje, I've also been introduced to many unique bands (Marillion) through progarchives...I've actually never heard Paatos, I'm going to go listen to some of their samples, you might have just introduced me into a new amazing band...let's see...

Sean Trane wrote: Dimle's main claim to fame would be that he was a member of Landberk

No, not really. His main claim to fame is that he runs Mellotronen, one of the world's best Prog stores and a record company that re-releases lost Prog classics (I'm still eagerly awaiting the Friendship Time album).

Quiet Drops wrote: Incredible band, and you are right their music is 100 times more important than DT's

It never ceases to amaze me that in a thread solely dedicated to an art rock band from Sweden, someone will find a way to bash Dream Theater.

They're different bands. Different styles. How can you compare them? Well, some people can find a way.

Thanks Antennas. I'll play it by ear (pun intended)

Timeloss is excellent. Kallocian doesn't appeal to me as much, but is still very good. I've yet to hear any new material, but unfortunately it's been given poor reviews thusfar; so I don't think I'm going to buy it when it comes out. If I can hear it elsewhere, or at least some clips, I will be glad to give it a shot.

Timeloss is awesome, but IMHO the latter two, Kallocain and Silence of Another Kind, have been major disappointments. Timeloss had some really interesting experiments and the band let loose a little more; the newer albums never stretch out as much and just kind of wallow in mid-tempo melancholy. It's evident that Huxflux Nettermalm is a freakin' awesome drummer, but he doesn't really do much of interest except on Timeloss.