Why classic prog faded?

Dean...WOW video...seriously

Dean wrote: [QUOTE

[/QUOTE]

Amen to that.
Certainly true for me. I got so busy with life in the eighties, I stopped listening to new music. It's only now, in my mature age, that I've started to pick up the threads again.
And what a wonderful time we live in, with this interweb, everything is served on a silver platter. A forum like this, Youtube and Spotify, wow! 
 

Neelus wrote: Dean...WOW video...seriously

try this one (I'll not post it directly it, this isn't the place for that)

richardh wrote: progbethyname wrote: richardh wrote: Dayvenkirq wrote: ^ He said "a great album in the '80s", not ... "an album in the '80s".   indeed   The bands that made prog recognisable simply got old and the bands that should have replaced them were largely ignored after punk. Be Bop Deluxe and Lone Star were two interesting bands that just stopped around 1978 for commercial reasons yet had made some really interesting music. Coloseum 2 were another example. ELP,Yes and Genesis just didn't evolve at all and very few people believe there later albums get close to their earlier albums. Therefore the writing was on the wall regardless of punk happening or not. The baton was never passed on. I think GENESIS evolved immensely. As the 80's loomed forth GENESIS ushered in a new and fresh sound by blending pop and prog together. I said it once and I'll say it again, DUKE is a masterpiece because it shows the promising evolution of GENESIS all together. In my opinion, GENESIS evolved greatly actually I'm very fond of Genesis in that immediate post Gabriel era inc up to Duke. I nearly cried when I first heard Abacab and hated Mama. The thread title is about classic prog and Duke is rarely thought of as that. It was even the butt of a joke in the film American Psycho where Christian Bale's character hales it as their masterpeice. I can't help but sn****r a little. (sorry)

I remember that part in American Psycho!! Laughed my head off! I believed he used the words intense or trancedental meditation to describe DUKE. lol. Anyway. I love Duke and will always defend its honor, but that was a cracking good joke!!!

I loved that part in American Psycho. Literally couldn't stop laughing for a minute. Great movie. And great album, too!

But if it was actually sustained by drugs, then it was probably not very sustainable at all.   So that means prog was simply the soundtrack to a freewheeling generation...which makes sense, because the 70s were the only period in which prog (rather, some prog) was popular.  

HackettFan wrote: . I also don't get the notion bandied about that teens aren't interested in the music of their older siblings. For myself and everyone I grew up with, we always wanted to be more adult. No, it wasn't lack of interest or changing interests. It was those with the stranglehold on the record deals that were the agents of change.

^ He said "a great album in the '80s", not ... "an album in the '80s". No kidding. And you think my choices are worse than the self titled Genesis album from 1983?

Dean wrote: HackettFan wrote: . I also don't get the notion bandied about that teens aren't interested in the music of their older siblings. For myself and everyone I grew up with, we always wanted to be more adult. No, it wasn't lack of interest or changing interests. It was those with the stranglehold on the record deals that were the agents of change. I didn't say they weren't interested in the music of their older siblings, I said they wanted the new music made by the artists of their generation. Of course this is difficult to prove or demonstrate, especially since 40 years later we tend to see "the 70s" as one single time period when in reality it wasn't, and that Prog was the dominant music force when in reality it wasn't.   I bought Voyage of the Acolyte when it was released - I was 18 at the time - if you were my 9 year old brother would you have listened to it then in 1975? (I'd be impressed if you did, but slightly annoyed as that would make the rest of this paragraphy pretty meaningless). Or did you first hear it when you were 14? or when you were 18? or even later? And when you did first listen to it (whenever that was) do you think you would have been interested in listening to the music I would have been listening to at that time? If you were 17 then I would have been 26 - still an avid music fan and record collector, but now living in an expensive rented flat in London while desperately saving for the deposit on my own house - I bought exactly 5 albums in that year - 2 of them were Prog.   I also have to ask what drives the record labels to become the agents of change - if they already had a fatted calf then why kill it off? While the record labels do actively go looking for new talent, that is a gamble for them, they would prefer to keep making money on the "dead certs" that have sold well in the past. Labels do not start new trends in music, they follow them.

I take your distinction, Dean. But I have to testify otherwise. I listened very little to music from musicians of my own generation. The only artists I went to see live in highschool were at big venues. Most of the big artists playing big venues were older simply because they had to be somewhat well initiated to make it to a big venue. I saw Genesis, Jethro Tull, and Van Halen in highschool. Even Van Halen were quite a bit older than me. I had a friend in highschool who was big into Yes, and I think he saw them live. I knew others who went to see the Moody Blues. Later while I was college one of the dominant radio platforms in the 80s was regurgitated 60s and 70s classics. During this period I distinctly remember young teenagers scouring through, not their older sibling's records, but their parents'.

I was indeed 9 in 1975. Good guess. I hadn't discovered Voyage of the Acolyte until I was much much older. I did have a friend my age who bought the Lamb Lies Down on Broadway and played it for me when it first came out. He was admittedly pretty hip about music for his age. By the time I was 17 or 18 I was partying around bonfires with my friend's older brothers and sisters. They played lots of Zeppelin and Tull, and some occasional miscellaneous Prog and folk rock. I went as a group with them twice to see Shawn Phillips. There could be a cultural difference, but I always regarded older people as just plain cooler. They could drive. They could drink. And they had seen Steve Hackett live way before I did. I would certainly have been interested in what you were listening to during a good portion of my youth. And now too.

As far as the music industry goes I really don't perceive them as simply reflecting what people want. I think they mould and shape popular music more than any underground scene does. I can't prove this. It's just my perception. Admittedly, I might have been influenced by having read too many Robert Fripp interviews.

Prog_Traveller wrote: No kidding. And you think my choices are worse than the self titled Genesis album from 1983?

 ... That's not what I said AT ALL! I said "... he said 'a great album in the 80's', not 'an album in the 80's'." As far as I can see, "Yes 90125 and Drama" and "a few more by Rush and Emerson Lake and Powell" are not widely regarded as "great albums".

Edited by Dayvenkirq - November 11 2012 at 02:08