Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Well if you are a traditionalist then I guess they're not because it's not rock that progresses. To be more specific it's not 70s style rock that progresses...
If you want to take a more liberal view, than prog rock isn't just rock that progresses and is technical. It's tough for me to personally describe but I guess it's more about the nature than the music. A progressive nature. This more loose view can lead to problems..,because there's a floodgate tendency (omg this is slightly different from the norm so it's progressive) but I like it better than a strict definition. I mean how prog is that anyway??
The technical aspect is a big one to many people and it kind of bugs me because pretty much technicality = prog and that tends to be the extent of debate.
Just rambling elitism...I really don't care and Sigur Ros is certainly prog rock :D
Joined: August 18 2008
Location: Anna Calvi
Status: Offline
Points: 22989
Posted: April 29 2012 at 17:54
Progressive is more about development of form rather than technicality, and there's a huge amount of music based on technicality and virtuosism that isn't progressive, see guitar shredding music. It's sure nice to have both in one package, but it's still progressive when Sigur Ros (and many psychedelic, krautrock, fusion, electronic prog acts) rely on a songwriting that develops form in a subtle manner based on minimal contrasts and slow "narration", less assertive lines and more textures, etc.
Joined: March 16 2008
Location: Biosphere
Status: Offline
Points: 22774
Posted: April 29 2012 at 17:52
dtguitarfan wrote:
I still haven't listened to a whole Sigur Ros album. However, I did listen to Gobledigook and now I see what it is that people are saying is progressive about them.
I would however, disagree that Progressive has little to do with technical - how is it possible to make music that uses compound time signatures and is composed in a narrative style without being even a little technical? I think the genre is by nature more technical than most musical genres.
Technical ability is common in prog but not absolutely necessary, and is only one of the components of progressive music, along other elements of compositional sophistication.
Joined: April 19 2009
Location: Kansas
Status: Offline
Points: 21795
Posted: April 29 2012 at 17:39
But Sigur Ros isn't technical and normally doesn't have music with narratives and odd time signatures, they simply take music further than any other band has previously which is what makes them progressive.
I still haven't listened to a whole Sigur Ros album. However, I did listen to Gobledigook and now I see what it is that people are saying is progressive about them.
I would however, disagree that Progressive has little to do with technical - how is it possible to make music that uses compound time signatures and is composed in a narrative style without being even a little technical? I think the genre is by nature more technical than most musical genres.
Joined: March 08 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2755
Posted: April 29 2012 at 14:28
Proletariat wrote:
Progressive in y opinion has very little to do with technical... it is possible to be highly technical without being progressive. Progressive is about taking sound in different directions and combining sounds in interesting ways. Often this tends to be technical but that isn't the point. For a band like sigur ros it has more to do with the fact that they take classical jazz and electronic structures and translate them into rock music that is barely recognisable as rock.
I'd agree with all of this except the last six words.
I don't think "technical" necessarily constitutes as progressive. Sigur Ros simply has compositions that progress beyond standard song structures, the song "Glosoli" being a good representation of that. Their music tells auditory stories with a beginning, middle, and end, usually without typical verse-chorus-verse structure, and they rely heavily on the progression in a certain atmosphere that they establish rather than with the use of explicit vocalizations (though the vocals are there, they are used more as another ethereal instrument than a means to convey a verbal message).
Joined: April 01 2009
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Points: 26133
Posted: April 27 2012 at 17:57
The specific sub-genre that Sigur Ros is considered part of , by the way , is "Post-Rock". It's a dumb name, but it seems to encompass a progressive style of rock that bears little resemblance to the prog bands who use a lot of notes, and/or complicated keys and meters. This stuff is still complex in its own way, but not in the sense of being difficult to play, more like being difficult to achieve the right texture, blend of sounds, and control of dynamics. Achieving the right atmosphere with these tools is the ultimate goal, and that's harder than it may seem.
I don't know of any Sigur Ros that resembled electronica, rather I hear a lot of pianos, tuned percussion, clean guitars, and oh-so-high vocals. My favorite album is the untitled one known as ().
Edited by HolyMoly - April 27 2012 at 17:58
My other avatar is a Porsche
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased.
Joined: March 30 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1882
Posted: April 27 2012 at 17:12
Progressive in y opinion has very little to do with technical... it is possible to be highly technical without being progressive. Progressive is about taking sound in different directions and combining sounds in interesting ways. Often this tends to be technical but that isn't the point. For a band like sigur ros it has more to do with the fact that they take classical jazz and electronic structures and translate them into rock music that is barely recognisable as rock.
who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob
I don't think "technical" necessarily constitutes as progressive. Sigur Ros simply has compositions that progress beyond standard song structures, the song "Glosoli" being a good representation of that. Their music tells auditory stories with a beginning, middle, and end, usually without typical verse-chorus-verse structure, and they rely heavily on the progression in a certain atmosphere that they establish rather than with the use of explicit vocalizations (though the vocals are there, they are used more as another ethereal instrument than a means to convey a verbal message).
See, this is a good argument, and you provided an example, which is what I was asking for in the first place. I will go listen to Glosoli now. All I was saying before is that the music I was listening to sounded sparse and ambient and pleasant, but I didn't hear any characteristics that seemed progressive, and this statement was no cause for a patronizing remark about my conceptions of what Progressive is. When people make remarks like that, it makes me wonder if THEY know anything about music at all or are just trying to be an all inclusive club. Which isn't a club at all. Musical genres are defined by musical characteristics, and if those characteristics are not present an artist should not be classified as part of that genre.
Joined: March 16 2008
Location: Biosphere
Status: Offline
Points: 22774
Posted: April 27 2012 at 16:20
I don't think "technical" necessarily constitutes as progressive. Sigur Ros simply has compositions that progress beyond standard song structures, the song "Glosoli" being a good representation of that. Their music tells auditory stories with a beginning, middle, and end, usually without typical verse-chorus-verse structure, and they rely heavily on the progression in a certain atmosphere that they establish rather than with the use of explicit vocalizations (though the vocals are there, they are used more as another ethereal instrument than a means to convey a verbal message).
I don't think you need to look up more Sigur Ros as much as you need to expand your notion of "progressive".
Ok, what is YOUR notion and how does Sigur Ros fit into it? If I pulled out some Moby and said "progressive", what would you say? I mean, Sigur Ros sounded nice...but they just sounded to me like some nice, ambient electronic music. Nothing technical going on, no compositions that took a melody and turned it around and upside down, expanded on it and told a story with it...but like I said, I haven't listened to the whole album. So maybe another song is more progressive.
Sorry, but I'm not of the opinion that "anything goes" for the genre - I believe certain musical characteristics that ARE identifiable have to be present.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.160 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.