| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
rogerthat 
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
 Posted: January 17 2009 at 10:09 |
-With reference to Peter's posts, I was just browsing through George Starostin's essay section today and found him using the term heavy prog with relation to Heep and Rush, and these are essays dating back to 99 or not earlier than 2001 or so at any rate. So it doesn't seem to be a revisionist tag -not a PA revision anyway - , but I agree that it hardly seems helpful to me. It looks like at least among the 70s bands, crossover, proto-prog/.PR and heavy might converge far too often. Not to mention that the tag suggests that this is heavier than normal prog, which is also not really true; it seems more like rock that's somewhere between heavy rock and prog, which is same as PR/PP. 
Anyway, as for the poll, I simply voted for my favourite from the list because I am not any the wiser which of them can be considered heavy prog - it happens to be Sabbath Bloody Sabbath. By the way, Pablo, Dio rocks and Rising is a wonderful album, but you're talking to a fanboy!  And I agree about BOC - Secret Treaties shoulda been there. |
 |
Raff
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24391
|
Posted: January 17 2009 at 10:25 |
 rogerthat wrote:
-With reference to Peter's posts, I was just browsing through George Starostin's essay section today and found him using the term heavy prog with relation to Heep and Rush, and these are essays dating back to 99 or not earlier than 2001 or so at any rate. So it doesn't seem to be a revisionist tag -not a PA revision anyway - , but I agree that it hardly seems helpful to me. It looks like at least among the 70s bands, crossover, proto-prog/.PR and heavy might converge far too often. Not to mention that the tag suggests that this is heavier than normal prog, which is also not really true; it seems more like rock that's somewhere between heavy rock and prog, which is same as PR/PP.
|
I suggest you have a look at the list of bands in Heavy Prog, half of which includes modern bands whose sound does not really have a lot in common with Seventies acts. The Mars Volta and Porcupine Tree are there, as well as a slew of less known bands. And I don't really understand what you mean by 'it's not true that it's heavier than normal prog" (not sure what 'normal prog' is either).
Edited by Raff - January 17 2009 at 10:27
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: January 17 2009 at 11:00 |
|
I know bands like TMV have a different style, which is why I was careful to mention that this problem is mainly with the 70s bands. I don't know what is normal prog either, lol, I meant the classic bands like Genesis, Yes, etc. I think a lot of stuff by KC, ELP, VDGG, even some Genesis songs like Musical Box/Hogweed is just as heavy and sometimes heavier than parallel heavy prog, which is why it seems more like a link between prog and heavy rock.
|
|
The Quiet One
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
|
Posted: January 17 2009 at 12:13 |
King By-Tor wrote:
moshkito wrote:
Hi,
That's the worst selection of prog I have ever seen ...
Que? How so?
That's not to say that there isn't some great stuff in there, because there is.
Yes, like some of the best, most classic albums of all time (not only in the prog world)
Sabbath Bloody Sabbath is their most progressive and hardcore album and pretty much an assault on the beginning of the punk movement that was taking place that had very little depth to it ... this album was probably the most progressive that BS ever got. I always thought that Ozzie wanted to "show'em" who could crank and who couldn't ... and actually play music ... not just hack egos.
It's a great piece of music that is a good entrance point for prog heads who aren't familiar with Sabbath or Sabbath fans looking to get into some more 'heady music', agreed. What's your beef with it, then?
Deep Purple ... was the one of the two concerts I have ever walked out of in my life. One song does not a band make! And the decibel'age was uncalled for and un-necessary.
Considering that this is the same band that made the amazing "Made In Japan" you may be the minority on this one, good sir. I'm sure that the venue didn't empty just because you walked out. Here's a tip - I bring earplugs to every show because it makes the music less loud and more bearable, and they won't even have to turn it down just for you!
Led Z ... no criticisms. It's not prog in the sense that we like to define things here, but it was quite honestly a very good "personal expression" ... and that expression helped define a very nice catalogue of music that even today is very special to many of us. It is not progressive and neither was it being competitive with anyone else. It was what it was and had its own beauty and affection.
Please argue how it's not progressive. While Houses of The Holy certainly was more Rock than Prog it's hard to say that "Stairway To Heaven" or "Battle Of Evermore" - no matter how cliche they've become - are not progressive. They feature everything that makes prog what it was, even if it was played in a hard blues style and even if it helped define "classic" rock more than it did define the progressive scene. No keyboards? Who cares! What exactly is not prog about them? While the Prog-Related subgenre does feature bands that are "not progressive" they all had moments or albums which were progressive - since in the 70s it was kind of 'the thing' to do. Like bands these days have just about all done something dark and heavy.
Thx You're welcome  |
|
WOW! Thanks Mike for "protecting" my thread! I think you said it all, and even better than I could have said it!  Also thanks Raff for clarifying this member the purpose of the poll and the title.
|
|
Alberto Muñoz
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 26 2006
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 3577
|
Posted: February 04 2009 at 14:05 |
|
oh BTW Cacho i vote for Rising
|
|
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 16174
|
Posted: February 04 2009 at 14:12 |
Hi,
Again ... these are all pop albums ... nothing progressive in almost all of these.
|
|
The Quiet One
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
|
Posted: February 04 2009 at 14:15 |
|
^Pop? Hmm, don't think so. hmmm, no....no...definitely not Pop
Edited by cacho - February 04 2009 at 14:16
|
|
Raff
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24391
|
Posted: February 04 2009 at 14:22 |
moshkito wrote:
Hi,
Again ... these are all pop albums ... nothing progressive in almost all of these. |
POP albums ?
|
|
The Quiet One
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
|
Posted: February 04 2009 at 14:23 |
|
^he won't reply back, just like he did before. He posts something stupid and then runs...
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: February 04 2009 at 18:32 |
|
They're excellent rock albums but not Prog Rock.
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
PR/PP albums which I consider Heavy Prog
