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.
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: December 09 2012 at 00:01
^^^ You'd find quiet-loud contrasts in Steven Wilson's most recent album, Grace for Drowning. Also on Mars Volta, but in a rather in your face way. I personally like a balance of subtlety and contrast because the quiet-loud shifts should convey something more than just excitement or titillation. So...the problem there may be that prog has moved away a bit from its connections to 60s rock, blues etc and lost out a bit on expression. That's the kind of change you observe to some extent in jazz too. Technical is all fine and dandy but it should also express and sway one's emotions; at least that's the way I like it. A song like Fiona Apple's Get Gone is so much more expressive - and utilizes dynamics nicely to do so - than what I generally hear in modern prog. I don't think that is a particular strength of prog for any era but it was emphasised a little more in the 70s, especially in Genesis, than it tends to be today.
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7946
Posted: December 08 2012 at 23:25
Sorry, I only wrote "dynamics" but I was really referring to dynamic contrast - my apologies. I thought that was what RichardH was referring to too, but I dunno. For dynamic contrast I'm thinking of Larks Tongue pt. 1 or Musical Box. In modern times I'm thinking of Jade Warrior's "3am Meltdown", but that's a band that goes back to the golden age of the 60s/70s.
@Gerinski I was listening to Big Big Train on YouTube. They're like candy for a Prog fan, but I haven't come across any sign of dynamic contrast (though could be the simply the result of listening to YouTube through an iPhone). I thought the recordings could have benefitted from it. I'll have to listen to some more, though.
@rogerthat Loved the music on your link, but it wasn't what I had in mind as far as dynamic contrast; quiet loud quiet loud (can't tell much on the recording side through my iPhone). Also, heavier bands are even more likely to go for more narrow compression and less dynamic contrast, but again, I realize I left out the part about contrast, mia culpa.
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: December 08 2012 at 20:39
HackettFan wrote:
Yes, I would like to see more dynamics both on the playing end and on the recording end. But that's an old thing from the early seventies. We're so lacking in it nowadays that I would regard it as maybe, though not exactly innovative, an effort to move things forward. I predict though that some/many would lambast it as just copying the old.
Not really. Maybe, as richardh said it, that can be observed in new symph prog because it got heavier through the 80s and 90s. But there are still bands, prog or not, that make dynamic music. This was one artist I tried to suggest for JR/F but couldn't succeed, nevertheless a good example of dynamic music with old school values but a fresh approach (in term of Carnatic influence):
From what I remember of Kayo Dot, I don't think they lack in dynamics either.
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7946
Posted: December 08 2012 at 13:26
Yes, I would like to see more dynamics both on the playing end and on the recording end. But that's an old thing from the early seventies. We're so lacking in it nowadays that I would regard it as maybe, though not exactly innovative, an effort to move things forward. I predict though that some/many would lambast it as just copying the old.
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 16164
Posted: December 08 2012 at 13:05
richardh wrote:
...
Seventies prog had a lot more dynamics though. Yeah I know its that old chestnut but modern symph prog is a lot more in your face and I think thats what makes it so different. Classic symph prog had lots of quiet atmospheric moments.
...
I think it DID have more dynamics, simply because the time and place was more conducive to experimenting and not so many folks telling it that it wasn't this or that ... like they do here!
The freedom is there ... you take it ... the freedom is not, most folks will not try different things, because they know everyone will trash it, and in this day and age, the commercialism is the only thing that will get you some sales ... which is an important consideration.
Ex: ... I seriously doubt that a Gentle Giant, would succeed today ... too far out there and strange and the lyrics? ... how can anyone relate to that, and a metal audience or some kind of strange other audience of half the threads here would go ... wtf is that! and I don't like it!
The fact that there was no "media" in those days helped ... something fierce ... today, no one can do anything without everyone having something to say ... and this is the difference between folks trying something or not ... you end up getting intimidated and when you are young, and you want to get laid, or have some fun with a few friends, being the odd one out is not gonna help you!
The "dynamics" is another word for ... I'm not writing just a song ... I'm telling a story and the music is illustrating that story, rather than follow some rock'n'roll process or idea ... or worse ... some "progressive" idea!
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com
[QUOTE=progbethyname] [QUOTE=richardh] [QUOTE=progbethyname]] The Wake is one of my favourite albums. I think they 'got to the point' on that album. At the time I was blown away by the sheer intensity of it. Shades of later seventies Genesis but with almost a punk/new wave sensability. I was gutted when Nicholls left shortly afterwords... but thankfully he was to return.
Right again. NOMZAMO and ARE YOU SITTING COMFORTABLY are god awful in my opinion and I didn't even bother buying either album. Nicholls is the heart of the band and EVER was an epic return. I almost cried.
Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26171
Posted: December 08 2012 at 02:35
progbethyname wrote:
richardh wrote:
progbethyname wrote:
^ no you can't. Your right. I mean compare something like NEAL MORSE's SOLA SCRIPTURA to say GENESIS's FOX TROT. The only similarity there could be is that they both adhere to the genre specifics in terms of style of music, but the music is entirely different from a listening standpoint. Technology has a bit to do with that I think. But yeah, good point.
Seventies prog had a lot more dynamics though. Yeah I know its that old chestnut but modern symph prog is a lot more in your face and I think thats what makes it so different. Classic symph prog had lots of quiet atmospheric moments.
Neo prog in the eighties did draw heavily from the seventies with IQ's Tales From The Lush Attic the best example I can think of. However by the ninteties they had completely reinvented their approach on the Ever album where you will struggle to link what they are doing then with what came earlier although they were almost exactly the same band line up wise. There did seem to be a general divergence around that time with Angalard coming onto the scene with a much more retro approach BUT also with a highly distinctive sound and style of their own. Hybris is no copy for certain.
The last 10 years I would say the natural evolution of seventies symph prog has happened with Neal Morse and other artists who have a heavier sound.Its interesting though that BBT have garnered so much praise with an approach that is much closer to the seventies. The seventies will always be a comfort blanket for prog fans and artists like BBT and TFK perhaps understand that and are ahppy to exploit it?
Good point Richard. The model of the 70's symphonic prog is definitely still in place and I don't think it's hanging by a thread either. I also like your example of IQ. I think it perfectly explains musically how a band has grown and changed over a 30 year period while still keeping the traditional fundementals of 70's symphonic prog, but losely of course. Tales From The Lush Attic was definitely in tune with 70's sounding prog, but then their next release....oh my goodness what a jump away sound wise from tales. THE WAKE still to this day I feel is a real land mark in the Neo Prog Movement. Such a dramatic turn sound wise.
The Wake is one of my favourite albums. I think they 'got to the point' on that album. At the time I was blown away by the sheer intensity of it. Shades of later seventies Genesis but with almost a punk/new wave sensability. I was gutted when Nicholls left shortly afterwords... but thankfully he was to return.
^ no you can't. Your right. I mean compare something like NEAL MORSE's SOLA SCRIPTURA to say GENESIS's FOX TROT. The only similarity there could be is that they both adhere to the genre specifics in terms of style of music, but the music is entirely different from a listening standpoint. Technology has a bit to do with that I think. But yeah, good point.
Seventies prog had a lot more dynamics though. Yeah I know its that old chestnut but modern symph prog is a lot more in your face and I think thats what makes it so different. Classic symph prog had lots of quiet atmospheric moments.
Neo prog in the eighties did draw heavily from the seventies with IQ's Tales From The Lush Attic the best example I can think of. However by the ninteties they had completely reinvented their approach on the Ever album where you will struggle to link what they are doing then with what came earlier although they were almost exactly the same band line up wise. There did seem to be a general divergence around that time with Angalard coming onto the scene with a much more retro approach BUT also with a highly distinctive sound and style of their own. Hybris is no copy for certain.
The last 10 years I would say the natural evolution of seventies symph prog has happened with Neal Morse and other artists who have a heavier sound.Its interesting though that BBT have garnered so much praise with an approach that is much closer to the seventies. The seventies will always be a comfort blanket for prog fans and artists like BBT and TFK perhaps understand that and are ahppy to exploit it?
Good point Richard. The model of the 70's symphonic prog is definitely still in place and I don't think it's hanging by a thread either. I also like your example of IQ. I think it perfectly explains musically how a band has grown and changed over a 30 year period while still keeping the traditional fundementals of 70's symphonic prog, but losely of course. Tales From The Lush Attic was definitely in tune with 70's sounding prog, but then their next release....oh my goodness what a jump away sound wise from tales. THE WAKE still to this day I feel is a real land mark in the Neo Prog Movement. Such a dramatic turn sound wise.
Joined: December 08 2011
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 502
Posted: December 07 2012 at 12:34
progbethyname wrote:
You know, I've been thinking about this one a bit lately.
I think that symphonic prog probably died off around 1976-1977 and then came Neo prog, which is a direct carry over from the traditional symphonic 70's prog movement set by YES and GENESIS. My overall opinion is that the innovation is certainly there and not hindered in any way. Such examples can be shown in IQ, GALAHAD and Marillion. Their music is extremely innovative from what traditional 70's symphonic used to be. But that was the 80's and 90's. 2000 and on we haven't seen too much difference or innovation just yet. I mean you can't be fooled by the use of technology in symphonic music today. The instruments and recording process sound far more polished and clearer on a digital scale than ever before, but that doesnt mean technology makes the music itself all together that innovative or unique. It just sounds a bit different in terms of the instruments that are used.
In any case, the base of the symphonic prog genre is still in place because Neo prog is a direct carry over of that genre.
So overall the innovation and unique has occurred but only in the 80's and 90's so far. 2000 and on there hasn't been a different movement yet, but it will come. Usually all things turn over a new leaf.
I think you're right. Symph genre has absorbed a lot of musical elements in these years, from metal, 80s music, alt rock and so on, but I think the approach of symphonic prog bands hasn't changed, and still strongly refers to 70s. I mean, it's blended with other genres, but it is still symphonic prog. Instrumentation contributed to make it sound a bit different, of course, but I think this genre still follows the 70s model (luckly).
Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26171
Posted: December 07 2012 at 01:54
progbethyname wrote:
^ no you can't. Your right. I mean compare something like NEAL MORSE's SOLA SCRIPTURA to say GENESIS's FOX TROT. The only similarity there could be is that they both adhere to the genre specifics in terms of style of music, but the music is entirely different from a listening standpoint. Technology has a bit to do with that I think. But yeah, good point.
Seventies prog had a lot more dynamics though. Yeah I know its that old chestnut but modern symph prog is a lot more in your face and I think thats what makes it so different. Classic symph prog had lots of quiet atmospheric moments.
Neo prog in the eighties did draw heavily from the seventies with IQ's Tales From The Lush Attic the best example I can think of. However by the ninteties they had completely reinvented their approach on the Ever album where you will struggle to link what they are doing then with what came earlier although they were almost exactly the same band line up wise. There did seem to be a general divergence around that time with Angalard coming onto the scene with a much more retro approach BUT also with a highly distinctive sound and style of their own. Hybris is no copy for certain.
The last 10 years I would say the natural evolution of seventies symph prog has happened with Neal Morse and other artists who have a heavier sound.Its interesting though that BBT have garnered so much praise with an approach that is much closer to the seventies. The seventies will always be a comfort blanket for prog fans and artists like BBT and TFK perhaps understand that and are ahppy to exploit it?
^ Well strange comparison Foxtrot is one word but I think that some early Flowerkings could be favourably compared with Foxtrot era Genesis.......I think that Stardust We Are (Track) is very reminiscent of Genesis Foxtrot/Nursery Cryme with some elements of Floyd & ELP blended in....Thats why I love modern Symphonic prog - the multi influences of the classic prog bands of the seventies.....
^ no you can't. Your right. I mean compare something like NEAL MORSE's SOLA SCRIPTURA to say GENESIS's FOX TROT. The only similarity there could be is that they both adhere to the genre specifics in terms of style of music, but the music is entirely different from a listening standpoint. Technology has a bit to do with that I think. But yeah, good point.
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: December 06 2012 at 09:42
^^^^ In a certain sense, it has happened but, once again, genre classification obscures it. In the 90s, Spock's Beard began to utilize alt rock/grunge elements in a more symph prog base and Kevin Gilbert did likewise. In the 00s, as metal became more and more ubiquitous, symph metal became very popular. Some of these symph metal bands are even on progarchives but they tend to get clubbed with prog metal. Not saying they shouldn't be but if you look at it in a certain sense, it is like symph prog for the 21st century. If you take Six Degrees or Octavarium, you can even hear sections of music that are reminiscent of 70s symph prog.
You know, I've been thinking about this one a bit lately.
I think that symphonic prog probably died off around 1976-1977 and then came Neo prog, which is a direct carry over from the traditional symphonic 70's prog movement set by YES and GENESIS. My overall opinion is that the innovation is certainly there and not hindered in any way. Such examples can be shown in IQ, GALAHAD and Marillion. Their music is extremely innovative from what traditional 70's symphonic used to be. But that was the 80's and 90's. 2000 and on we haven't seen too much difference or innovation just yet. I mean you can't be fooled by the use of technology in symphonic music today. The instruments and recording process sound far more polished and clearer on a digital scale than ever before, but that doesnt mean technology makes the music itself all together that innovative or unique. It just sounds a bit different in terms of the instruments that are used.
In any case, the base of the symphonic prog genre is still in place because Neo prog is a direct carry over of that genre. So overall the innovation and unique has occurred but only in the 80's and 90's so far. 2000 and on there hasn't been a different movement yet, but it will come. Usually all things turn over a new leaf.
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7946
Posted: December 06 2012 at 08:35
Gerinski wrote:
HackettFan wrote:
The problem I'm having is that the direction of the discussion in it's outward appearance is focused on genre as if that's the only kind of innovation that can be made. I don't know if it's intended that way. If someone ushers in a new genre, they deserve kudos (perhaps), but I'm also I interested in new timbres, new approaches to phrasing, new playing techniques, new scales, new arrangements, new approaches to rhythm, new math, new... Whether this is done in one genre or another (Symphonic Prog included) is something to be openminded about, I think.
Well the discussion was intended on the importance that many people seem to give to "genre innovation", when I fully agree with you that more minor innovation within one genre can be equally satisfying. But as written in the previous post, I feel that some people (myself possibly unconsciously partly included) seem to put modern bands in a second tier not because of the quality of the music they make but simply because of the timing they happen to live in.
Not a timely reply, I've been a little occupied over the last few days. Yes, I agree with your premise. Did so in fact in my first post. Symphonic Prog is at a disadvantage in these times. I had to object to the idea that it should necessarily be this way. Symph Prog seems like unfinished business to me. It needs to be "carried forward" in an innovative fashion as some have said, but it's not at all like there's nothing that can be done with it. I think Steve Hackett's 00 work is a great example carrying it forward. He uses the genre, but as anyone who knows his solo work can confirm, he brings numerous other genres to bear.
Joined: March 23 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2446
Posted: December 05 2012 at 08:12
The Quiet One wrote:
Gerinski wrote:
When writing my recent review of Moon Safari’s Blomljud I reflected that comparing a modern band who makes a certain style which descends directly from music already done in the 70’s (symphonic in this case but the argument would apply to other sub-genres as well) is necessarily unfair.
The 70’s pioneers will always have the advantage of being considered as original and innovative, they created the genre after all. Modern symphonic can of course retain a certain level of originality but unless it goes very far from traditional symphonic (which probably some people would no longer consider symphonic) it will necessarily be derivative to certain extent and will sound familiar in the structures, the sounds used or whatever. It would seem that modern bands doing symphonic will always be in disadvantage even if they make music intrinsically as good as your favourite 70's stuff. It’s doubtful if any modern symphonic band can ever achieve the same timeless status as Yes, Genesis or ELP.
On the other hand, modern bands have 40 years of music to get inspiration from, plus all the new technology, and this might be considered as an advantage for making their music compared to the pioneers who had to come up with their music from pure inspiration, with very little existing music to base themselves on and limited technology.
For a band trying to make symphonic in the 00’s / 10’s, is it an advantage or an unavoidable curse?
To the question, I believe it depends totally on the musicians and what the musicians want to do and what they listen to.
Roine Stolt, for example, is a big Zappa fan, and although you really can't hear much of that with The Flower Kings, the album Unfold the Future is a way more adventurous symphonic album with jazzy and experimental bits, that for me is totally great. Not saying it's something "new", but it takes the modern approach of symphonic a step ahead in comparison with the other albums that are pretty much "symphonic prog pieces" with an already defined structure, time changes, interludes, etc.
Keith Emerson said something like this, when asked about Rachel Flowers who plays his stuff perfectly well: Do not listen to me, listen to the guys I listened to (talking about classical music). (btw, it wasn't a critic to her)
I think that's the main difference, Prog bands in the 70s did have influences, of course, but they took it from the big names of classical or even from more avant-garde guys. From there they made what they did, they took ideas and reelaborated it into rock form.
Today's symphonic bands, mostly, seem to just listen to the 70s symphonic trend and since they love it, they want to do something alike, but they don't "understand" the process these 70s guys did. If they listened to other stuff, or better, if they listened to the classical guys or whoever came before the 70s, you could possibly hear a more interesting composition.
I'm generalising a bit, I know.
Well, I heard the Zappa influence right away the first time I listened to the Flower Kings (Retropolis album). However, I still agree with the rest of what you say here.
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 16164
Posted: December 05 2012 at 08:10
infandous wrote:
Evolution of instruments and electronics was indeed a large part of what made the 70's prog bands seem so innovative. ....
...
How many prog bands play 250+ shows a year these days? How many have the band as their only source of income?
...
Perfect example.
We did not have the Internet then, either ... or computers, for that matter! I think UCSB had its first computer course in 1977 or 1978, btw.
In those days, you hit the road to get known, if you did not have radio.
Today, you hit the Internet ... you do not have to hit the road!
Which, in my estimation is another issue ... the bands, then, were better rehearsed and played ... because they had to go out and show it ... today ... you really don't have to if you don't want to and you can stick to the store room, or studio.
It was a VERY different time ... and when comparing these things, you pretty much have to take a "quotidian" attitude, or the discussion becomes superfluous and silly. It's like saying today that a gun is better than the sword, and 1000 years ago they would say ... what's a gun? Your argument becomes ... silly!
Between you and I, to my ears, the main reason why so much metal is not "better" or more "progressive" is very simple ... not enough rehearsal and dedication to make it more than just loud guitar ... as an example, we had a neighbor band that was pretty good and quite progressive, but the lead guitarist did not want the "progressive" sound .. he wanted the loud guitar sound ... and this is the same thing that appears in Dream Theater at times ... and the "wholesome" and "completeness" of the band's work, suffers in my book. They can be better, but the folks involved do not always have a great musical sense, beyond the "star" thing ... they want to be heard more for the loudness than they do for their music!
Edited by moshkito - December 05 2012 at 08:18
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com
Evolution of instruments and electronics was indeed a large part of what made the 70's prog bands seem so innovative. A lot of them started out emulating their favorites (so many 70's prog bands have Beatles influences on early records, if not their whole career, as just one example), but because it was possible to have their band as a full time job, they were able to improve their art and focus on creativity. How many prog bands play 250+ shows a year these days? How many have the band as their only source of income? Sadly, I think most bands these days do what they can with the time they have for their "true love", and that often means playing what they enjoy. I guess what I'm saying is that innovation is more of a challenge now than it was then, because rock is not a relatively new thing as it was back then, new technology nowadays seems focused on recreating existing sounds and not so much creating new ones, and musicians have to spread out their creativity and skills and can't just focus on one thing to make ends meet.Still, I think symphonic prog does have a few bands that are "progressing" the genre these days. Of course, others have found their formula and stick to it because people like it and buy it (though it could easily be said that rock bands as a rule do this all the time.......especially bands that were around in the 70's). Personally I think there is still ground to be explored in symphonic rock (or prog or whatever), just as there are in other music genres.
Great point and don't forget about the gouching record companies that stick their hands down artists shirts and twist their nipples till their purple with pain.
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 0.191 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Symphonic in the 00's, an advantage or a handicap?
Topic Options
HackettFan wrote:
You know, I've been thinking about this one a bit lately.
