Edited by darqDean - June 07 2008 at 19:59

micky wrote: if prog rock is dying... why the hell do I have 80 new bands.. from Italy alone .. that I have been screening this week.

Just found this post.  Sums up my feeling pretty well, Mick.  There is still amazing music out there.  You just have to look for it.  All that has died is the mainstream distribution of good music.  Those channels now peddle garbage.  You have to find the good stuff on your own.  Don't despair, it's out there. 

Prog rock is dying because most modern prog rock bands are stale.  There, I said it.

You'll notice how the fresher modern prog bands (TMV, PTree) are quite successful.  Being prog isn't the problem, it's being unoriginal and derivative.

Slartibartfast wrote: I gave it some fertilizer and water, chased off the bugs and squirrels, I don't understand what is happening to Prog-rock?!?!

Like it, do you mind if i use that in my Signature  ??

I gave it some fertilizer and water, chased off the bugs and squirrels, I don't understand what is happening to

Prog-rock?!?!

I thought it was Already Dead didn't Real Prog Die in 1979 







Runs and Hides behind his Wife  

Prog Rock dying? I don't think so. Falling CD sales and poor attendances at live shows (debatable, I think) are being more than countered by the increasing ease of publication. A generation ago the only way you could get your studio work heard was to sign up to a record company, and that usually after years of gigging in the merciless environment of the small-town circuit. Pink Floyd, for example, were an overnight sensation years after forming and spending two nights out of three playing to often unsympathetic audiences.

These conditions have been short-circuited by improvements in technology both in the studio (producing a studio-quality recording costs a fraction of what it once did) and in distribution (via the internet). So the number of amateur bands has proliferated. Hundreds of small gigs to attend, thousands of CDs to buy. Note carefully that the one thing that has not changed is the need to persuade music-lovers to pay you for your work. I'm sorry, but guilt trips like the well-meaning post that started this thread just won't work. Your product ought to be your most effective tool of persuasion.

I'm very familiar with the process involved in book publishing - fiction and non-fiction - and it parallels the music industry, using many of the same processes. Most aspiring authors treat it as a hobby, and sink thousands of hours into their hobby with little hope of reward. In my view this is a very healthy attitude to have. Far from the world owing you a living, you're already gaining your reward from the buzz of creation and the praise you receive from those who enjoy your work. Honestly, we're so lucky we live in a world where we even have the spare time to pursue our hobbies, and a lucky or talented few actually end up being paid. Another time or place ...

Any other attitude is, in my view, unrealistic. I'm published by two major international publishers, but I still see my writing as a hobby. If people don't like my work (and there are plenty of them!) it's not their fault. I'm forever grateful that (at present) my hobby is a lucrative one.

Prog will likely never be as alive as it was in the 1970s. But since that time it's never been as alive as it is right now. If Darqdean means to encourage us to experiment, I'm all for that. But I refuse to be infected by a case of the guilts.

darqDean wrote: debrewguy wrote: darqDean wrote: ^ I agree with both of you.   However, in an 'industry' based upon 'performance' that is a Catch-22 situation - playing live is still a necessary means of self-promotion that is just as important as Internet-networking in creating a fan-base. I admit that times are changing, but at the moment the number of bands and artists who have any measure of success without creating a live following first are minuscule. The bands that understand this have a leg up  on the others. Radio doesn't really stray from strict formats. And even the modern rock stations aren't exactly at the forefront breaking new bands that explore new vistas in music. Even media darlings like Arcade Fire had to wait for the groundswell of fan support to get their songs played. On the other hand, if your music's not really going to get played on the radio, playing live is where you'll have fans find you. Just accept that the chances of success are based on people finding out about you, and liking your music. "cause it happens that some groups suck. Period. And no amount of whining, finger pointing, blame will make a difference. Heck, even if you're good, chances are you may not make it. "The deck is uneven right from the start and all of their hands are playing apart"   Any form of 'fame' is a lottery - more so in the world of Prog, where the odds are stacked against the band from day one: no radio coverage, no music press coverage, little internet coverage and few venues that will book them. This does not just affect new bands, but even established bands who have a following - as I said earlier - Prog Power UK was cancelled this year due to poor ticket sales. That is a sad reflection - if established Prog bands cannot attract a live audience then what chance to unknown bands have?   debrewguy wrote: Once more, let me re-iterate my point. Spending one's heard earned money to subsidize unknown groups is essentially giving these bands a free pass. Word of mouth is enough motivate me to go see a new group. But if I worked for my money, what's wrong with expecting a musician to work for his. i didn't get my job just by showing up at the office, and musicians shouldn't get an audience just by the simple fact that they managed to book a gig.  That begs the question: how does the 'word of mouth' start? DB - with people, fans, who speak enthusiastically of your show or music. If they don't exist, or rather , if you're unable to attract and build these numbers, nothing else matters.No matter how bad, good or great you may be.   While I have met some people over the years who assume that because they have a talent the world owes them a living, those kinds of people either get a very rude lesson and come to their senses or have a short careers and are quickly ejected from bands for not pulling their weight. All artists work hard to gain a following through social-networking, street-teams and flyering, (as do the promoters who stage the gigs), those that don't will never progress beyond playing in the local church-hall to a select crowd of their friends. DB  - which is all fine. The point still being that a band must still find a way to get me to spend my money. Sometimes that starts with pick up garage band jams, that become regular happenings; sometimes your band plays a small basement/town or church hall to a few friends and family. From there you see whether your name gets out there, and helps get you to the next level.   There appears to be a mythology that gigs make money - this is not true - most bands lose money on every gig they play and every CD they sell - most 'professional' musicians have day-jobs to supplement their chosen career. Spending $10 to see a band play live is not subsidising that - the only people who make money from a gig is the venue owner, the sound engineer (if he gets paid at all) and the security people (who for some strange reason always get paid ) - even the promoter will be out of pocket at the end of the evening.   When I was promoting I would waive my out-of-pocket expenses to make sure that all the bands went home with something in their pockets to cover petrol-expenses at least. I have spoken with a number of promoters over the years and they all say the same thing - one guy even refused to take free demo's and albums from bands and insisted on paying for them - no one promotes small gigs to make money or for personal gain - they do it because they love music and want to give young bands a leg-up. DB - as an example outside the music world - if I believe for whatever reason that I may be talented enough to play in the NHL, chances are that I'm going to be playing many games where there is no paid admission. Only once I get into the highly competitive leagues will I see people paying to come see me and or the team I'm playing for.   The current trend among Prog fans is to stay at home and listen to the pristine perfection of a studio recording than risk the chances of hearing something raw and less than perfect in a live setting. Getting them out of the relative comfort of their easy-chairs and into noisy environment of a sweaty club to hear a band they like is an up-hill struggle, to do it for a band they've never heard of is an impossible task. DB - again, why am I responsible for subsidizing music that I have never heard of. Unless I live in a hermetically sealed environment, I am likely exposed to music - through radio, TV, print media, the Internet (Yay PA) friends and family, cover band gigs or jams in some cases. If I have the slightest interest in going out to clubs, which not everyone does, I should be able to decide what bands I'm willing to take a chance on spending my money on. EMPHASIS ON SPENDING MY MONEY !   I'm not proclaiming that everyone should rush off and see every band that plays in their area, but occasionally they could take that risk and may be enjoy the experience.

DB - agreed, but taking the above comments in consideration. Most medium sized town & cities have a number of small time bands. Heck , in my town, Moncton NB Canada, I there are about 6 different bands playing that I either have friends or acquaintances playing in. I missed Fear of Liptstick"s album release show. I know Eric, one of their guitarist from his day job at Spin It. My Brother in Law's Brother in Law has his band, and I'm hoping to see them, even after missing their first two shows. I've jammed with most of the band (acoustically), and although they're a cover band, I would still like to see them play live; if only to show some support.
I've gone to the Venz CD release party 2 years ago, and bought the CD for $10. Listened to it once. WHy did I go ? "Cause their rhythm guitarist is a guy that jammed with the same  bunch that I occasionally play with. (that and the fact that if he's at the jam, along with his brother, that we end up playing Metallica's Fade to Black, and many Sabbath tunes)
But in these cases, I've got a reason to get out the door. I'm not just paying a few bucks to say I regretted the money spent.

Once more, let me re-iterate my point. Spending one's heard earned money to subsidize unknown groups is essentially giving these bands a free pass. Word of mouth is enough motivate me to go see a new group. But if I worked for my money, what's wrong with expecting a musician to work for his. i didn't get my job just by showing up at the office, and musicians shouldn't get an audience just by the simple fact that they managed to book a gig. 

darqDean wrote: ^ I agree with both of you.   However, in an 'industry' based upon 'performance' that is a Catch-22 situation - playing live is still a necessary means of self-promotion that is just as important as Internet-networking in creating a fan-base. I admit that times are changing, but at the moment the number of bands and artists who have any measure of success without creating a live following first are minuscule.

The bands that understand this have a leg up  on the others. Radio doesn't really stray from strict formats. And even the modern rock stations aren't exactly at the forefront breaking new bands that explore new vistas in music. Even media darlings like Arcade Fire had to wait for the groundswell of fan support to get their songs played.
On the other hand, if your music's not really going to get played on the radio, playing live is where you'll have fans find you. Just accept that the chances of success are based on people finding out about you, and liking your music. "cause it happens that some groups suck. Period. And no amount of whining, finger pointing, blame will make a difference. Heck, even if you're good, chances are you may not make it.