Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Proto-Prog and Prog-Related Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Is David Bowie prog?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Is David Bowie prog?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 8>
Poll Question: Is David Bowie prog?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
17 [37.78%]
28 [62.22%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
Message
The Mystical View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 20 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 604
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Mystical Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Is David Bowie prog?
    Posted: April 30 2013 at 15:52
I am currently digging:

Hawkwind, Rare Bird, Gong, Tangerine Dream, Khan, Iron Butterfly, and all things canterbury and hard-psych. I also love jazz!

Please drop me a message with album suggestions.
Back to Top
The Doctor View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8462
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Doctor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2013 at 15:56
Originally posted by The Mystical The Mystical wrote:

 
 
 
 
 
 
This.  QFT.  LOL
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
Back to Top
Stool Man View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 30 2007
Location: Anti-Cool (anag
Status: Offline
Points: 2517
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stool Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2013 at 15:58
Progressing through different styles over the years - yes
Concept albums about space aliens - yes
Instrumental experiments with Brian Eno - yes
Silly voices - yes
Imagery, art, Robert Fripp guesting - yes
rotten hound of the burnie crew
Back to Top
smartpatrol View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 15 2012
Location: My Bedroom
Status: Offline
Points: 14164
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote smartpatrol Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2013 at 16:03
He's had some prog leanings over the years but definitely not 
Back to Top
CPicard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Lŗ, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10628
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CPicard Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2013 at 16:54
David Bowie is Art Rock.
End of the thread.
Back to Top
HolyMoly View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: April 01 2009
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Points: 23107
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote HolyMoly Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2013 at 16:59
No

Doesn't mean he's not good, though.


Edited by HolyMoly - April 30 2013 at 17:00
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.

-Kehlog Albran
Back to Top
Stool Man View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 30 2007
Location: Anti-Cool (anag
Status: Offline
Points: 2517
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stool Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2013 at 17:00
Everyone who was Art Rock is now Prog, a simple name change
rotten hound of the burnie crew
Back to Top
wilmon91 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 15 2009
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 698
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wilmon91 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2013 at 17:05
I was thinking "art pop". But not prog.

David Bowie is David Bowie.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37008
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2013 at 18:00
Originally posted by darqdean, in another thread, 3rd October 2007 darqdean, in another thread, 3rd October 2007 wrote:

For many Bowie typifies what has been descibed in the Progressive vs. Prog thread as a progressive artist who is not Prog. Almost everything he does is simultaneously eclectic and progressive - his albums generally arrive from the leftfield and land slap bang in the middle of the mainstream. And that's where the problem lies.
 
He produced some Prog songs, but maybe not whole Prog albums, he did Concept albums (albeit within fairly a standard rock format) and even ventured into the realm of Art Rock and Art School Rock. He has created fusions of every school of music you can care to imagine: minimalism, krautrock, jazz, soul, hip-hop, electronic, hard-rock, folk... and of course prog... (He is also pretty unique in suceeding in influencing some of the people he was influenced by - the only other artist to do that I can think of is Trent Reznor...) yet he remains a mainstream performer in the eyes of the world, even when producing non-mainstream albums.
 
Nothing ch-ch-ch-changes.
"You know what uranium is, right? Itís this thing called nuclear weapons. And other things. Like lots of things are done with uranium. Including some bad things. But nobody talks about that."
Back to Top
humor4u1959 View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: April 02 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 97
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote humor4u1959 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2013 at 21:35
He was but not since Low and Heroes. Those are the only 2 albums I would consider prog.
Back to Top
Fox On The Rocks View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2011
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 5012
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fox On The Rocks Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2013 at 22:13
Of course he is. He's more "progressive" then half of the bands that get labelled as that. No, he doesn't have that classic 70's prog sound, Hammond organs, instrumental prowess, etc. But as artist and a visionary, he's extremely forward thinking. Low and Heroes are some of the greatest albums of all time, and what's great about them is that they haven't been able to alienate a certain audience or fan. They're pop albums, but with immense experimentation and creativity.
Back to Top
Gerinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 4079
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gerinski Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 01 2013 at 02:56
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

For many Bowie typifies what has been descibed in the Progressive vs. Prog thread as a progressive artist who is not Prog

Quite this. Perhaps a critical factor is that he was not really an instrumentalist and it was not a 'band'. It was the music conceived by a singer-songwriter. Had he been a competent instrumentalist, or had he been just the composer and singer in a stable band with virtuoso musicians, his output might have been closer to proper Prog.
I find it not too different from the case of Peter Gabriel's solo output, progressive and with some Prog leanings but not archetypal proper Prog.


Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

 He produced some Prog songs, but maybe not whole Prog albums, he did Concept albums (albeit within fairly a standard rock format) and even ventured into the realm of Art Rock and Art School Rock. He has created fusions of every school of music you can care to imagine: minimalism, krautrock, jazz, soul, hip-hop, electronic, hard-rock, folk... and of course prog... (He is also pretty unique in suceeding in influencing some of the people he was influenced by - the only other artist to do that I can think of is Trent Reznor...) yet he remains a mainstream performer in the eyes of the world, even when producing non-mainstream albums.
The point is clear but this formulation seems to imply that anything "mainstream" can not be "Prog" by definition, which I do not agree as a matter of principle.


Edited by Gerinski - May 01 2013 at 02:57
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37008
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 01 2013 at 03:04
Originally posted by Gerinski Gerinski wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

For many Bowie typifies what has been descibed in the Progressive vs. Prog thread as a progressive artist who is not Prog

Quite this. Perhaps a critical factor is that he was not really an instrumentalist and it was not a 'band'. It was the music conceived by a singer-songwriter. Had he been a competent instrumentalist, or had he been just the composer and singer in a stable band with virtuoso musicians, his output might have been closer to proper Prog.
I find it not too different from the case of Peter Gabriel's solo output, progressive and with some Prog leanings but not archetypal proper Prog.


Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

 He produced some Prog songs, but maybe not whole Prog albums, he did Concept albums (albeit within fairly a standard rock format) and even ventured into the realm of Art Rock and Art School Rock. He has created fusions of every school of music you can care to imagine: minimalism, krautrock, jazz, soul, hip-hop, electronic, hard-rock, folk... and of course prog... (He is also pretty unique in suceeding in influencing some of the people he was influenced by - the only other artist to do that I can think of is Trent Reznor...) yet he remains a mainstream performer in the eyes of the world, even when producing non-mainstream albums.
The point is clear but this formulation seems to imply that anything "mainstream" can not be "Prog" by definition, which I do not agree as a matter of principle.
I tend to write whole sentences rather than well chosen phrases because they mean so much more thus negating any need for the reader to search for any implied meaning, subtext or hidden message burried between the lines.
"You know what uranium is, right? Itís this thing called nuclear weapons. And other things. Like lots of things are done with uranium. Including some bad things. But nobody talks about that."
Back to Top
Man With Hat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Jazz-Rock/Fusion/Canterbury Team

Joined: March 12 2005
Location: Neurotica
Status: Offline
Points: 98704
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Man With Hat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 01 2013 at 03:14
Absolutely not.
Dig me...But don't...Bury me
I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive
Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.
Back to Top
The Mystical View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 20 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 604
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Mystical Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 01 2013 at 03:23
I consider "Heroes", "Low" and "Scary Monsters" prog. I also think that all of his 80s pop albums have strong prog influences.
I am currently digging:

Hawkwind, Rare Bird, Gong, Tangerine Dream, Khan, Iron Butterfly, and all things canterbury and hard-psych. I also love jazz!

Please drop me a message with album suggestions.
Back to Top
someone_else View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: May 02 2008
Location: The Castoreum
Status: Offline
Points: 16788
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote someone_else Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 01 2013 at 03:41
I'd say No in general, Yes occasionally. Yet most of his work can be called Art Rock.
Back to Top
Gerinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 4079
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gerinski Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 01 2013 at 03:43
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

 
I tend to write whole sentences rather than well chosen phrases because they mean so much more thus negating any need for the reader to search for any implied meaning, subtext or hidden message burried between the lines.
OK, no need to get pissed off Embarrassed
Back to Top
Stool Man View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 30 2007
Location: Anti-Cool (anag
Status: Offline
Points: 2517
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stool Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 02 2013 at 03:15
Originally posted by Gerinski Gerinski wrote:


Perhaps a critical factor is that he was not really an instrumentalist and it was not a 'band'. It was the music conceived by a singer-songwriter. Had he been a competent instrumentalist, or had he been just the composer and singer in a stable band with virtuoso musicians, his output might have been closer to proper Prog.

To quote from Bowie's wikipage:
"Bowie plays many instruments, among them electric, acoustic, and twelve-string guitar; alto, tenor and baritone saxophone; keyboards including piano, synthesisers and Mellotron; harmonica, Stylophone, xylophone, vibraphone, koto, drums and percussion, and string instruments including viola and cello"
Not really an instrumentalist?

He was in several stable bands - The Spiders and Tin Machine among them.
rotten hound of the burnie crew
Back to Top
ole-the-first View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 03 2012
Location: Russia
Status: Offline
Points: 1530
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ole-the-first Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 02 2013 at 20:43
Originally posted by Man With Hat Man With Hat wrote:

Absolutely not.

Sir, are you really sure about that? The word 'absolutely' would mean that Berlin trilogy is not prog too.
This night wounds time.
Back to Top
Gerinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 4079
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gerinski Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 03 2013 at 02:15
Originally posted by Stool Man Stool Man wrote:

Originally posted by Gerinski Gerinski wrote:


Perhaps a critical factor is that he was not really an instrumentalist and it was not a 'band'. It was the music conceived by a singer-songwriter. Had he been a competent instrumentalist, or had he been just the composer and singer in a stable band with virtuoso musicians, his output might have been closer to proper Prog.

To quote from Bowie's wikipage:
"Bowie plays many instruments, among them electric, acoustic, and twelve-string guitar; alto, tenor and baritone saxophone; keyboards including piano, synthesisers and Mellotron; harmonica, Stylophone, xylophone, vibraphone, koto, drums and percussion, and string instruments including viola and cello"
Not really an instrumentalist?

He was in several stable bands - The Spiders and Tin Machine among them.

Sure he could play several instruments, but I meant that he was never a fully dedicated and highly competent instrumentalist. His approach to songwriting was more akin to the singer-songwriter approach (many if not most singer-songwriters can play some instruments too).
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 8>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.082 seconds.