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  <1 23456 8>
Poll Question: Is David Bowie prog?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
17 [38.64%]
27 [61.36%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
Message
Svetonio View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 6614
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Svetonio Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 13 2013 at 23:25
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Mr Bowie can't be "essential to the prog related sub"; he's not an act  for example as The Who with Mr Townshend  who is an electronic music pioneer in rock music, the guitarist who created power chord and the composer who broked 3-minute mould of the pop song with Tommy;
 

 
1. How, where and when The Who pioneered electronic music in rock music




 

 
3. Which Tommy songs in particular broke the 3-minute mould. 


 


Sorry, yesterday I owed for the answers to these two questions.



Edited by Svetonio - May 13 2013 at 23:32
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Status: Offline
Points: 33149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 02:04
Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Sorry, yesterday I owed for the answers to these two questions.

1. 1971 is a little late in the day to be claiming to pioneer electronic music in rock. Electronics, electronic music and synthesisers had been used by other pop and rock artists before then. Both Won't Get Fooled Again and Baba O'Riley used a Lowery Berkshire Deluxe TBO-1 electric organ to create the iconic "synth" rhythm - it is not a sequencer, but an arpeggiator, and it is not producing modal tone sequences, but arpeggiated chords to a samba rhythm. Rather than being electronic music they are pastiches of serialism [they are pastiches because he could not change individual notes in the sequence, he could only change the whole chord]. Yes, Townshend used a VCS3 to modify the sound of the electric organ, but he used it as an effects unit [filter] just like a guitarist would use wah-wah foot peddle, not as a source of electronic sound. What you have is something that sounds like electronic music, but is not. Townshend did not even pioneer the use of arpeggio rhythms in rock.
 
3. The two examples of "breaking the mold" songs are 2 and 3 short pop songs played in sequence, these we call medleys. Many bands had produced single songs that broke the "3 minute mold" long before Tommy.


Edited by Dean - May 14 2013 at 02:27


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
Svetonio View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 6614
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Svetonio Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 02:39
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:


Sorry, yesterday I owed for the answers to these two questions.


1. 1971 is a little late in the day to be claiming to pioneer electronic music in rock. Electronics, electronic music and synthesisers had been used by other pop and rock artists before then. Both Won't Get Fooled Again and Baba O'Riley used a Lowery Berkshire Deluxe TBO-1 electric organ to create the iconic "synth" rhythm - it is not a sequencer, but an arpeggiator, and it is not producing modal tone sequences, but arpeggiated chords to a samba rhythm. Rather than being electronic music they are pastiches of serialism [they are pastiches because he could not change individual notes in the sequence, he could only change the whole chord]. Yes, Townshend used a VCS3 to modify the sound of the electric organ, but he used it as an effects unit [filter] just like a guitarist would use wah-wah foot peddle, not as a source of electronic sound. What you have is something that sounds like electronic music, but is not. Townshend did not even pioneer the use of arpeggio rhythms in rock.

 


I'd really like to hear an example that the electronic music was incorporated so majesticly in a rock song(s) before Baba and WGFA; a YouTube video will be fine. Anyway, let's see a second video from above.


3. The two examples of "breaking the mold" songs are 2 and 3 short pop songs played in sequence, these we call medleys. Many bands had produced single songs that broke the "3 minute mold" long before Tommy.


These songs are not pop songs, they are Rock at its best. These live performed parts of Tommy are not medleys. I know what you call medley. This is medley:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uY9sDk6NyQY (part 1)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9kP5_NAsBw (part 2)

Edited by Svetonio - May 14 2013 at 02:51
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Status: Offline
Points: 33149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 03:05
Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:


Sorry, yesterday I owed for the answers to these two questions.


1. 1971 is a little late in the day to be claiming to pioneer electronic music in rock. Electronics, electronic music and synthesisers had been used by other pop and rock artists before then. Both Won't Get Fooled Again and Baba O'Riley used a Lowery Berkshire Deluxe TBO-1 electric organ to create the iconic "synth" rhythm - it is not a sequencer, but an arpeggiator, and it is not producing modal tone sequences, but arpeggiated chords to a samba rhythm. Rather than being electronic music they are pastiches of serialism [they are pastiches because he could not change individual notes in the sequence, he could only change the whole chord]. Yes, Townshend used a VCS3 to modify the sound of the electric organ, but he used it as an effects unit [filter] just like a guitarist would use wah-wah foot peddle, not as a source of electronic sound. What you have is something that sounds like electronic music, but is not. Townshend did not even pioneer the use of arpeggio rhythms in rock.

 


I'd really like to hear an example that the electronic music was incorporated so majesticly in a rock song(s) before Baba and WGFA; a YouTube video will be fine. Anyway, let's see a second video from above.


3. The two examples of "breaking the mold" songs are 2 and 3 short pop songs played in sequence, these we call medleys. Many bands had produced single songs that broke the "3 minute mold" long before Tommy.


These songs are not pop songs, they are Rock at its best. These live performed parts of Tommy are not medleys. I know what you call medley. This is medley:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uY9sDk6NyQY (part 1)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9kP5_NAsBw (part 2)
Nice try but no coconut.
 
Baba O'Riley and Won't Get Fooled Again are not incorporating electronic music, I don't need to produce anything to show that electronic music was incorporated into a[nother] rock song since those two songs didn't, you said "Mr Townshend  who is an electronic music pioneer in rock music". He wasn't.
 
A medley is a longer sequence constructed from several shorter ones, it matters not whether it uses all or part of each song as long as they seamlessly seque together, Live renditions of short songs segued together do not "break the mold" on the three minute pop song as you claimed The Who did with Tommy. It is immaterial whether you think they are pop or rock songs, you said " the composer who broked 3-minute mould of the pop song with Tommy". He didn't.
 
 


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
Dayvenkirq View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 25 2011
Location: Reno, NV, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 9751
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dayvenkirq Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 03:20
^ So, if you have an organ on marimba repeat, it does not give an electronic sound to the song?
"People tell you life is short. ... No, it's not. Life is long. Especially if you make the wrong decisions." - Chris Rock
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Status: Offline
Points: 33149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 03:38
Originally posted by Dayvenkirq Dayvenkirq wrote:

^ So, if you have an organ on marimba repeat, it does not give an electronic sound to the song?
The marimba is a percussion instrument, the organ is replicating that sound, just as it does on a Hammond. Using that is not an "electronic sound" as such. Townshend created a homage to Terry Riley inspired by Riley's A Rainbow in Curved Air, but he did not recreate the electronic music of Riley, he remained within populuar music strictures of standard chord structures (using the inbuilt one-key chords of the Lowery played arpeggio), he did not use the modal sequential serialism of Riley, nor did he use atonal layering or shifting rhythmns. One is a pioneer, the other is a pastiche. I love Baba O'Riley and it is my favourite Who track, but it is not the melding of electronic music and popular music that people claim it to be,


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Forum & Site Admin Group
Forum & Site Admin Group
Avatar
Site and Forum Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Dolly Parton
Status: Offline
Points: 13205
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guldbamsen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 03:55
It would be nice, if you somehow could relegate to us your definition of prog Svetonio, because I don't think I understand where you are coming from.
You would like to see both The Who as well as the Grateful Dead included in proper prog categories, yet you deem Bowie unfit for PA altogether. You see, that makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever...

No denying that these bands were experimental at times, especially The Dead, but being experimental - heck even being progressive doesn't necessarily mean you should be on PA. Wutang Clan were progressive - do we really need to include them as well?
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
Svetonio View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 6614
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Svetonio Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 07:25
Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

It would be nice, if you somehow could relegate to us your definition of prog Svetonio, because I don't think I understand where you are coming from.
You would like to see both The Who as well as the Grateful Dead included in proper prog categories, yet you deem Bowie unfit for PA altogether. You see, that makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever...

No denying that these bands were experimental at times, especially The Dead, but being experimental - heck even being progressive doesn't necessarily mean you should be on PA. Wutang Clan were progressive - do we really need to include them as well?

No artist / band can escape very far from their artistic nature. Mr Bowie has always been fashionable pop artist. So, at the time when prog rock was fresh and bold, he was linked with that; this link would be a good reason why Mr Bowie is in PA' Proto Prog / Prog Related section. A little problem is that that those two different sections are in one. Imo, Mr Bowie deserved to be in Prog Related, not in Proto Prog because he wasn't an inventor.

The Who were the inventors. All four of them, although in my previous posts I mentioned Mr Townshend only. The Who are among those group of acts that made it possible for progressive rock. The Who deserved 100% to be in Proto Prog section; also, they are Prog Related because of Her Majesty Quadrophenia. The similiar thing is with The Dead. As a part of Psychedelia movement what was one of the most important Art movement in the last century - what made it possible for progressive rock - the Dead deserved to be in Proto Prog section and in PR because of Blues For Allah, Terrapin Station and maybe Mars Hotel (my fav album by them).

It doesn't metter that Mr. Bowie is a pop singer-songwriter, not rock. This genre addopted so many acts who weren't played rock music, for example Miles Davis and Tangerine Dream; they were great inventors in Jazz and Electronic music, they were contemporaries, so prog rock audience accepted them and that is that.

Definition of Progressive Rock? I think that the name of the genre is that definition per se.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Status: Offline
Points: 33149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 07:32
Confused The two sections are not in one, they are seperate. The Who is in Proto Prog and Bowie is in Prog Related.
 
Frankly, I don't see what you are moaning about.


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
Svetonio View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 6614
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Svetonio Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 08:35
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Confused The two sections are not in one, they are seperate. The Who is in Proto Prog and Bowie is in Prog Related.
 

Frankly, I don't see what you are moaning about.

Yes I know it's separated on the PA' list of the bands but not separated forums for Proto Prog bands and Prog Related bands make it quite simple to be confused.

My point is very simple and please let me repeat that - Mr Bowie is artistic pop, not Progressive Rock at all.

Enough here.
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Forum & Site Admin Group
Forum & Site Admin Group
Avatar
Site and Forum Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Dolly Parton
Status: Offline
Points: 13205
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guldbamsen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 08:38
So this isn't progressive rock?



“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
jude111 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 20 2009
Location: China
Status: Offline
Points: 1265
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jude111 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 09:33

Cool, I didn't realize till just now, reading Dean's post, that Bowie is on PA. I thought all this talk was about getting him on PA... I'm a happy camper :-)
Back to Top
dr wu23 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 4399
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dr wu23 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 11:06
I agree with Svetonio that The Who could be called proto prog.....but not that Townshend was any kind of electronic innovator. Many early bands of that time were using electronic sounds and keyboards...doesn't make them innovators per se.
But I also don't think Bowied is true prog.....prog related certainly, but not progressive rock imho.
Many here have mentioned artists/bands just as proggy that have not been included here.
Et In Arcadia Ego
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Status: Offline
Points: 33149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 13:39
Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Confused The two sections are not in one, they are seperate. The Who is in Proto Prog and Bowie is in Prog Related.
 

Frankly, I don't see what you are moaning about.

Yes I know it's separated on the PA' list of the bands but not separated forums for Proto Prog bands and Prog Related bands make it quite simple to be confused.

My point is very simple and please let me repeat that - Mr Bowie is artistic pop, not Progressive Rock at all.

Enough here.
O RLY. Stern Smile


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
jude111 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 20 2009
Location: China
Status: Offline
Points: 1265
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jude111 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 13:59

I suppose in England many may consider Bowie to be 'pop.' In the US though, particularly in the 70s, he had maybe 2 'hits', and generally his music was not considered to be accessible or radio-friendly pop music.



Edited by jude111 - May 14 2013 at 14:00
Back to Top
dr wu23 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 4399
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dr wu23 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 17:19
Speaking as an American who grew up in the 50's, 60's ,and college in 70's , Bowie was pretty popular and had more than 2 hits imo.
He was played regularly on fm radio and his pop songs on am.
Et In Arcadia Ego
Back to Top
The Dark Elf View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 2385
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Dark Elf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 17:53
Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

My point is very simple and please let me repeat that - Mr Bowie is artistic pop, not Progressive Rock at all.




Hmmm....let's see here: nine minutes long, symphonic, avant-garde and Brechtian influences without a trace of blues-based rock forms, extended musical themes, fantasy-like ambience and lyrics, ample, rich sounds and productions, part of a concept album, experimental, and varying time-signatures.

Please, explain to me how this is "pop" music.

Please pay a visit to my blog...The Dark Elf File...a slighty skewed journal of music reviews, literary comment, fan-fiction and interminable essays.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Status: Offline
Points: 33149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 17:56

Bowie is a rock singer-song writer and musician and he has had pop hits, but that is not is "primary genre" so to speak. Since he has dabbled in practically every style of rock music going it is impossible to say he fits into a one particular genre - Art Rock comes closest as that is an eclectic genre that covers a broad spectrum, but that would exclude his plastic soul and acid-house influenced albums - Art(istic) Pop is woefully inaccurate.

 


Edited by Dean - May 14 2013 at 18:00


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
Dayvenkirq View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 25 2011
Location: Reno, NV, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 9751
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dayvenkirq Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 18:00
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:


Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

My point is very simple and please let me repeat that - Mr Bowie is artistic pop, not Progressive Rock at all.
Hmmm....let's see here: nine minutes long, symphonic, avant-garde and Brechtian influences without a trace of blues-based rock forms, extended musical themes, fantasy-like ambience and lyrics, ample, rich sounds and productions, part of a concept album, experimental, and varying time-signatures. Please, explain to me how this is "pop" music.
This is just an exception.
"People tell you life is short. ... No, it's not. Life is long. Especially if you make the wrong decisions." - Chris Rock
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Status: Offline
Points: 33149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 14 2013 at 18:16
^^ LOL While I was writing and posting my post, Mr Elf posted the same track.
 
Originally posted by Dayvenkirq Dayvenkirq wrote:

  This is just an exception.
And Cygnet Committee, Wide Eyed Boy From Free Cloud, Memory Of  Free Festival, Width Of A Circle, Quicksand, Bewley Brothers, Time and Station to Station are also exceptions. As is this:
 
A great piece of Frippery...


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 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 0.109 seconds.