Why classic prog faded?

progbethyname wrote: The.Crimson.King wrote: Surrealist wrote: Computers changed the game, and that is way classic prog faded.  Before computers entered the recording studios, bands had to play the stuff.. even if they were punching tracks.. still had to do it.  Now with technology, Snoop Dog is now Snoop Lion the Reggae star.  You used to have to earn your way into Prog, now it's just copy and paste your way into it. Coming into this thread late, but <span style="line-height: 1.2;">I don't see why so many are attacking Surrealist and calling him names for having a point of view...it's like a differing opinion is somehow threatening and must be quashed at all costs.  Is there no room for an opinion that challenges your own on PA?  We're talking about the art of music here and as such there is no absolute truth that can be proven in a lab, there is simply a collection of opinions and I find it disheartening when others here are not open minded and willing to accept that.</span> The.Crimson.King wrote: Surrealist wrote: Computers changed the game, and that is way classic prog faded.  Before computers entered the recording studios, bands had to play the stuff.. even if they were punching tracks.. still had to do it.  Now with technology, Snoop Dog is now Snoop Lion the Reggae star.  You used to have to earn your way into Prog, now it's just copy and paste your way into it. Coming into this thread late, but <span style="line-height: 1.2;">I don't see why so many are attacking Surrealist and calling him names for having a point of view...it's like a differing opinion is somehow threatening and must be quashed at all costs.  Is there no room for an opinion that challenges your own on PA?  We're talking about the art of music here and as such there is no absolute truth that can be proven in a lab, there is simply a collection of opinions and I find it disheartening when others here are not open minded and willing to accept that.</span> Gotta agree here 100%. It isn't fair at all. I think some people even wanted Surrealist to change a review he wrote for Gentle Giant's FREEHAND if I am not mistaken. That wasnt fair either. I wonder if Nazi's exist here on PA?    But anyway. I think their is in most cases to disagree with someone's opinions in a nice manner...it can be an art really. Lastly, To say how classic rock faded ( key word is faded, not extinct) definitively is far too difficult to say or tell because it would be a collection of variables and not just a single one. I think the sole purpose and definition of what 'evolution' is would be one variable or factor as to why classic rock is almost extinct. I will pose a question. Could the evolution of hard rock, metal and or Prog metal have played a hand in squishing the popularity of Classic rock? Lol. I really don't hear new bands in Rock sounding like TRIUMPH or BOSTON anymore.

I should make it clear that classic rock, in my opinion has very close ties to classic Prog. A lot of classic Rock bands were definitely Prog-related, so I think it's fair to include bands like blue Oyster Cult, Blue Cheer and even the Doors for that matter. It's not just King Crimson, YES and Genesis etc.

Well,

What kind of albums would modern bands make if they had to go back and do it on tape machines and leave the computers at the office?

I would argue that sometimes restrictions are good.  The Classical Symphony is restricted to using acoustic instruments in it's traditional setting.  An upright bass in a jazz combo has a certain feel that an electric bass cannot simulate.   Classic Prog had it's own set of standard instruments... and the difference between bands was mostly how the musicians interacted with those instruments... and the various compositional ideas. 

I would also argue that in the classic era, we listened to music on big sound systems.. often tube amps with speakers like Klipsch or JBL or Advents that really took us inside the music.  We all heard DSOTM on someone's system or their parents system that really took us there.  I don't think kids today and their silly earbuds are going to have the same experience.... not even close.  There was a lot of music being made for audiophiles... and many of the Prog bands were right at the forefront of that movement into high fidelity. 

Surrealist wrote: Well, What kind of albums would modern bands make if they had to go back and do it on tape machines and leave the computers at the office?

Now what, Bela Fleck and Flecktones were just computer animated objects who couldn't hold an instrument if their life depended on it?   What exactly is most bands anyway?  It's just a generalisation.   If there are bands or artists that you appreciate, go watch their shows, buy their music and support the scene.   That is the only chance it stands of subsisting anyway.   But if you decide that all is lost, all probably will eventually be lost.  

The.Crimson.King wrote: Guldbamsen wrote: The.Crimson.King wrote: Dean wrote: ^Ah, I surmise from that you haven't tried to converse with Mr Surrealist before Dennis.   Heigh-ho. To be honest, I've just read through his posts in this thread and I mostly agree with his opinions.  While I don't think computers in the recording studio is the sole reason for classic progs fade, it did drastically lower the level of musicianship necessary to create a viable/sellable musical statement (or "product" as it was soon about to become).  I think that is something that was lost in the fade out of classic prog...the virtuoso player.  I went to prog shows in the 70's to see something amazing.  Emerson, Fripp, Squire, Wakeman, Palmer, Howe, Banks, Bruford, Wetton, Gabriel, Moraz, Minnear...these were players that a young musician could look up to, a high standard of musicianship to aspire to and measure yourself against. With the advent of recording studio computer wizardry, the virtuoso became as necessary as an 8-track tape.  Can't hold a tune?  No problem, we'll auto-tune you to sound like Jon Anderson.  Can't play 8 measures of 16th notes on a creaky ARP Pro Soloist at 130bpm?  No sweat, our software can increase speed without altering pitch.  Mess up a note?  No need to punch-in and rerecord, we'll fix it in Pro Tools.  Can't compose music?  Simple, we'll just take a sample of 21st Century Schizoid Man.  Other factors also rang the death knell of classic prog...changing popular tastes, the music industry run by decision making accountants rather than music lovers, and the video revolution which wouldn't tolerate a 20 minute prog epic as it would keep MTV from running commercials every 5 minutes. However you slice it, classic prog (like all musical trends) was inevitably doomed.  It's fate was sealed the day Greg Lake set foot on that priceless Persian rug  I may have come on a bit strong before, but only because Surrealist's points weren't delivered in a thoughtful and empathetic manner like you just did I tend to agree with a lot of what you guys have to say, but when these points are delivered to put every new prog act under one roof, it bugs the hell out of me.  It is very plausible that pro tools and similar electronics have lowered the standard of current musicians (I don't believe that in a heartbeat though. There are just as many fine musicians out there now - and some of them are perhaps even more skilful imo, the sonic expressions have just changed into all these different branchings (Metal, Math, Post and what-have-you). The problem for me is when these skills turn into showmanship for the sake of just that instead of musical "feel". Metronome musicians, where the players turn into these pseudo-robots, but then again that's just my tastes), but in the end it has something to do with the very person taking shortcuts - ie deciding to make use of it. This is not pro tools fault or any computers for that matter, it's the musicians utilising them. It's like saying that weaponry are responsible for wars.  I think I understand your point of view.  As for myself, I'm not advocating that there are only two types of prog - pre computer recording tools and post (kinda like a prog BC and AD   Certainly there's no reason I would write off a 2013 prog band if I liked the sound just because they recorded in a digital computer studio.  It's the end result reaching my ears that matters...just as I don't care if my home is built by a carpenter using a hammer vs a compressed-air-powered-super-hydrolic-nail-gun-dispensing-5000-cement-coated-nails-per-minute.  I follow Frank Zappa's concept..."If it sounds good to you, it's bitchin.  If it sounds bad, it's sh*tty".     I mostly concur with your statement that puts the ultimate responsibility for the use or misuse of these tools in the hands of the musicians but with one twist.  I believe often times it's pushed by whoever is ultimately paying the recording studio bill.  It's clearly cheaper to "fix-it-in-the-mix" with 30 seconds of mouse clicks than crank up the band for 20 more takes looking for magic.  I think this is a bigger problem with young bands who don't have much weight to throw around and are just insanely happy to even be in a recording studio.  Can you imagine a record company exec showing up at a Crimso session and telling Fripp, "we can't afford any more guitar takes on Thrak, we'll just fix your solo with pro tools"  My experience as a prog musician sadly watching classic prog fade in the late 70's was that the huge labels changed from being driven by A&R reps who loved music, to MBA's who only cared about turning profit.  If you were doing something innovative and different (or dare I say, "progressive")  the labels would no longer take a chance on you because there was no guarantee you'd "move" 1,000,000 "units" of "product" with your 1st album.  However, if you sounded like a Led Zep clone, it was, "Come in here dear boy, have a cigar, you're gonna go far".  Further, studio time is always crazy expensive so cutting corners became the labels mantra and the pro tool era was a godsend for them...but in many ways a curse as well. I don't think pro tools etc...has lowered the standard of "all" current day musicians, but I do think it's made it much easier to "manufacture" music rather than organically "create" it the hard way.  It's also quite tempting to record one great take of a chorus and "cut and paste" that to all the chorus sections rather than doing it the long way (something I've done a few too many times myself ).  Because of that, I think it's made many musicians lazy.  The days of 5 guys in a practice room hammering out ideas for months that evolve into epics like Suppers Ready, Awaken, Tales, Subterranea, The Light, etc...are on their last legs and are the exception not the rule.  Because of that, for better or worse, I find that by far the biggest percentage of prog in my collection is from the classic period.  I have explored many of the modern prog bands that are praised on PA, but I just haven't really found anything that knocks me out.  That doesn't mean I don't think it's great that modern prog bands are carrying the banner and have lots of fans on PA.  Nor does it mean I'll never check out a modern prog band again because as long as prog lives there's always a chance to find something amazing

Edited by Guldbamsen - October 01 2013 at 14:53

The problem is some of the same people who ushered in studio perfection and used to rave about the power of synthesizers have turned their back on it and started grumbling about its results. e.g The Steely Dan duo, Steven Wilson.  When I was growing up, I would hear artists saying that with modern keyboards, you no longer needed an orchestra in a positive way.  Now, they want to go back to live instruments and mistakes.   There seems to be some confusion in music culture right now.  It's not mistakes or lack thereof that made the music great earlier, it was their creativity.  So is this new found obsession with old production techniques a reflection of a dearth of creativity for these artists?

rogerthat wrote: The problem is some of the same people who ushered in studio perfection and used to rave about the power of synthesizers have turned their back on it and started grumbling about its results. e.g The Steely Dan duo, Steven Wilson.  When I was growing up, I would hear artists saying that with modern keyboards, you no longer needed an orchestra in a positive way.  Now, they want to go back to live instruments and mistakes.   There seems to be some confusion in music culture right now.  It's not mistakes or lack thereof that made the music great earlier, it was their creativity.  So is this new found obsession with old production techniques a reflection of a dearth of creativity for these artists?

Edited by jude111 - October 01 2013 at 21:14

Neo-Romantic wrote: Unfortunately it's just a sound. You can be just as creative with the crystal-clear sound of this decade as you could have been 40 years ago. The opposite is also true where you can be just as uninspired whether you imitate the overall production of a classic 70s prog album or not. It really is just an aesthetic choice at the end of the day. The real determining factor in a work's artistic depth is and always should be the level of genuine creativity invested by the musicians themselves.

The drugs changed.  Instead of sitting around, stoned off of our asses on weed in dark rooms, folks started to use more up-tempo chemicals like speed, MDA, coke etc.  

cstack3 wrote: The drugs changed.  Instead of sitting around, stoned off of our asses on weed in dark rooms, folks started to use more up-tempo chemicals like speed, MDA, coke etc.   Disco, punk and other music is more conducive to dancing (if that's what you call it).   If Video killed the radio star, then dancing killed off classic prog.  That simple.  It still had a few kicks left with Asia, Rush, etc. but for the most part, Mellotrons ceased to exist.

Very interesting point actually. Yes. Their was a time where drugs/music were a very strong merriment with one another....well actually there still is!! I think this is a good point. Funny too. :)

The war on drugs....pitiful and a waste of money. :(