Prog vs. Punk: What was the nature of this?

timburlane wrote: And many punk artists were secret prog fans; Rotten/Lydon was a fan of Can and Van Der Graaf and later Kate Bush but they didn't talk about it because of the year zero thing.

TODDLER wrote: the ones I knew who had worked in higher corporate circles were angered, depressed, and took their own lives over this crap.

Most working original/cover prog or rock bands touring small theatres in the 70's were pressured by managers, agents, and corporate staff to mend their ways,,,,(so to speak), at least that was the experience I had being part of that scene. That was in the United States and closer to the end of 79' when this all came about. Great musicians that had been playing the music scenes since the 60's....the ones I knew who had worked in higher corporate circles were angered, depressed, and took their own lives over this crap. It seems farce and too extreme for a majority of people in society to comprehend....so you had to be there like I was to understand exactly how and why on earth this could have happened in high numbers. I survived because I settled for playing good rock music and good prog in my chambers and remaining in the fast pace music business towing the line and selling out to what was relevant then. That was in the 80's when progressive rock bands were still performing in small theatres as I toured, but it sizzled out by the late 80's and sunk further to the underground when punk changed into "New Wave".

Punk rock and prog rock - and any subgenre for that matter - are essentially the same.

Both early ELP and Pistols on Never Mind The Bollocks were young, furious, biting and clutching, wanted to change something and move forward.

I don't care if music is simple or complex - I appreciate honesty.

I don't care for "prog for the sake of being prog" and modern, diluted pop-punk.

There was a time when jazz was excellent, furious and daring. These days, God save me from the another boring combo of Berklee Scholars.

A good analisys.   There's only one error: PFM didn't stop but released its own "Love Beach"es during the 80s but if you don't know those albums I'm happy for you.  

lucas wrote: I think it is childish to claim that punk killed prog. Prog, similarly to jazz-rock, killed itself by showing-off too much and lacking a melodic approach to their music. Prog and jazz-rock tried to re-surface in the eighties by providing a more melodic dimension to the music (cf Mike Stern, Steps Ahead, Marillion...).

I think it is childish to claim that punk killed prog. Prog, similarly to jazz-rock, killed itself by showing-off too much and lacking a melodic approach to their music. Prog and jazz-rock tried to re-surface in the eighties by providing a more melodic dimension to the music (cf Mike Stern, Steps Ahead, Marillion...).  

Edited by lucas - April 14 2012 at 16:42

richardh wrote: octopus-4 wrote: richardh wrote: octopus-4 wrote: richardh wrote:   Its all 'Showbiz' folks. Don't take it too seriously!  No. It was more than this. It was shobiz in Rotten's head maybe. At the end of the 70s every sector of culture, popular and not was attacked by a wave of restoration. Punk was just a tool. One of the many. The outcomes were the yuppies. prog in its original form had blown itself out. 1977 was the end of an era for many bands. change always happens .Its the nature of things I agree with this. As well as flower-power, Maoists, and newagers have blown themselves out in the same way.  What I say is that as soon as the first weaknesses appeared somebody was ready to cancel all the freedoms conquered by the previous generation. Punk was a weak tool, heroin was a powerful one.  Punk definetly produced a more narrow minded approach to making rock music although thankfully there were artists (ie Kate Bush) that just ignored them and forged ahead regardless. On the wider point of society isn't there part of a quotation along the lines of 'freedom is something that cannot be taken for granted'. We make the world we live in. Its never been perfect has it?

richardh wrote: octopus-4 wrote: richardh wrote:   Its all 'Showbiz' folks. Don't take it too seriously!  No. It was more than this. It was shobiz in Rotten's head maybe. At the end of the 70s every sector of culture, popular and not was attacked by a wave of restoration. Punk was just a tool. One of the many. The outcomes were the yuppies. prog in its original form had blown itself out. 1977 was the end of an era for many bands. change always happens .Its the nature of things

richardh wrote:   Its all 'Showbiz' folks. Don't take it too seriously!