Has the definition of prog changed at some point?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=110265
Printed Date: April 24 2024 at 13:07
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Has the definition of prog changed at some point?
Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Subject: Has the definition of prog changed at some point?
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 16:12
When I say "at some point" it could be five years ago or it could be twenty or thirty. I wasn't really given enough space in the subject line to be more specific. The important thing is how has the definition of prog changed since the seventies, eighties, nineties or whatever. I know some people are still stuck in the past but over all I think what is considered prog these days is a lot wider than what used to be allowed. For example I often see Radiohead, Muse, Phish, Tool, etc etc considered to be prog(and I have no problem with that)as well as tons more bands who are really very song oriented. I know some people have a very stringent definition of prog but I don't and I'm wondering how strict your definition is and also do you think for the most part the general consensus of what is prog has relaxed a bit or does it still have to have all these hard and fast rules(long songs at least ten minutes, lots of time changes, lots of solos and long instrumental passages, capes, unicorns, dragons, fairy dust etc). 
|
Replies:
Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 16:25
|
Yeah, after about 1977 it seemed to become a moving target. Its like Jazz. There are bands linked to it by carrying an element like frequent key modulations. Then another band will have elements have the original band that maybe were not considered jazz at all, but are then somehow linked to it by association. When it gets right down to it, the concept of prog purity is a bit contradictory. Stylistic transcendence is, after all, one of the tenets of the faith. ------------- https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow">  https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 16:27
|
Capes and dragons are still crucial but yeah I'd say the professional, even the popular, definition of Prog has evolved to mean any rock that is progressive instead of just stuff that reminds us of Yes or Rush. ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: Larkstongue41
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 16:55
|
I tend to think my definition of prog is much larger than most people's. I have issues with seeing prog as a genre. Instead I prefer to consider it as an approach towards composing music. Commercially available music is either prog or pop to me. Innovative and truly original music challenging conventional structures is prog while pretty much everything else is pop (excluding traditional music and a few other exceptions). For example, King Crimson and Tangerine Dream are both prog bands although sharing virtually nothing in common. On the other hand, despite being often praised as the two most successful prog acts, Yes and Rush surely have had their pop moments. By the way I really like a lot of pop music; I don't mean to be condescending towards it. As for the evolution of the term over time, I don't think it changed at all apart from the fact that the availability of music has tremendously increased since the 70s. People's definition of prog necessarily relies on the prog music they have heard. My definition of prog was radically different when I listened to Pink Floyd, Genesis and Camel than it is right now. So obviously in the 70s the perception of prog was based on the most popular bands (due to the lack of internet most notably) therefore explaining people's tendency to associate prog with science-fiction themes and flutes, keyboards, etc.
------------- "Larks' tongues. Wrens' livers. Chaffinch brains. Jaguars' earlobes. Wolf nipple chips. Get 'em while they're hot. They're lovely. Dromedary pretzels, only half a denar." |
Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 16:55
|
Regionalism plays a huge role as well. I grew up in a city which thought Rush was way too metal for the classic rock radio station. ------------- https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow"> https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp |
Posted By: Hercules
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 16:58
|
Prog was initially a term for music that was not specifically recorded to be a hit single and which showed some combination of either a degree of experimentation, or complexity or a higher standard of technical ability than simple pop. ------------- A TVR is not a car. It's a way of life. |
Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 17:01
Well said ------------- https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow"> https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp |
Larkstongue41 wrote:Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 17:17
I don't remember hearing Metallica, Iron Maiden or Black Sabbath on the radio much for probably the same reason. Rush were never really in that boat(at least not where I lived)so they never had that problem. I heard them on the radio quite a bit(and still do actually).
|
Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 17:21
That's true and while I do feel that still applies to some degree I don't think that's the only music that is marketed as prog. I kind of blame neo prog for that(even though I don't really have a problem with it). After neo prog came around it seems like anything with a keyboard solo was considered prog. I don't think in the seventies(early seventies anyway) bands like Saga, Marillion and certainly not Asia would be considered prog. I think prog had to become more commercial sounding in order to survive(enter neo prog)and I think that is one of the reasons the genre became so expansive. Plus a lot of these newer bands while many still adventurous in their own way had a lot of the influences from these second and third wave prog bands(Saga, Marillion, IQ, Spock's Beard, PT etc). |
Posted By: Replayer
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 17:22
|
No, the definition of prog has not changed at all since October 10th, 1969. |
Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 17:24
So it's still the same as when Hot Rats was released?
 |
Posted By: Replayer
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 17:33
Good one. I had In the Court of the Crimson King in mind, but what I was subtly implying was that the definition of prog had to change simply due to more bands coming on the scene and adding new influences, while borrowing elements from their predecessors, as well as existing bands evolving their sound.
|
Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 18:09
|
This is not mathematics. Outside mathematics (and perhaps law) there are no fixed definitions. Some people introduce a term and it starts to change at the very latest when some other people start using it. Prog will change as long as it's alive. (Also, from another angle, I believe that the impression that any two person's definitions of anything interesting could be the same can only be the result of imprecise observation.) To be more specific, for example post rock came up at some point. So suddenly there was a requirement to decide whether that's prog or not (or partly). At this point the prog definition necessarily had to change because it had to be drawn through hitherto unknown territory regardless of whether post rock was in or out. |
Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 18:28
| Not everyone considers post rock to be prog(or part of prog). |
Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 19:19
That thing was in my posting already. |
Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 19:32
Math rock and math metal are then the obvious only true constants! Deduction! ------------- https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow"> https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: February 15 2017 at 20:04
|
It has as people think the Beatles are prog.....since what they did was just like KC, Yes, Tull, VdGG and of course Can. -------------   
|
Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: February 16 2017 at 08:02
No, it wasn't. There is no thing anyway.
|
Posted By: Manuel
Date Posted: February 16 2017 at 08:49
Well said. Since we are mostly relying on personal opinions and tastes, it is hard not to find contradiction among the fans, some are quite hard core, some more accepting, traditional, liberal, etc. Like with everything, what prog is will never find a answer/definition that satisfies everyone.
|
Posted By: Kingsnake
Date Posted: February 16 2017 at 09:03
|
When I grew up, progrock didn't exist. It was called symphonic rock. And the pop-encyclopedia named bands like Queen, Saga, Alan Parsons, John Miles, Kraan, Camel, King Crimson, Gentle Giant, Genesis, Supersister, ELO, Eloy, Triumvirat, Moody Blues, Procol Harum, Supertramp etc. etc. You know, the oldies. Than suddenly the 90's appeared and the term progrock emerged and then all got lost: suddenly there was neoprog, eclectic prog, prog related, and all the subgenres. I still tend to call it symphonic rock (the oldies) and the newer bands (Porcupine Tree, Tool, Opeth) progrock or progmetal. And then there's all also spacerock and psychrock wich was a different ballgame and suddenly it's progrock aswell. And then there's fusion/jazzrock that is suddenly also progrock. I'm rambling again. sorry...
|
Posted By: Man With Hat
Date Posted: February 16 2017 at 14:32
|
I don't think so, it's just there wasn't really a widespread definition of the term to being with. And even if there was, you'd still have people saying whatever their favorite band was is prog because they like prog. :p ------------- 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. |
Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: February 16 2017 at 15:59
| Maybe it's just that these days bands fit into more than one category. For example it seems possible(and apparently has already happened) that a band can be labelled as indie, alternative, progressive, psychedelic and experimental. I noticed that for their wikipedia entry the band Muse has about four or five different categories including prog. |
Posted By: Dellinger
Date Posted: February 16 2017 at 21:25
| I guess it was even more ambiguous, and therefore, could include more music in the 70's... at least in the early 70's. I think there was something in a Deep Purple booklet in which one of them reffered to themselves as prog... or at least put themselves among prog bands, which wouldn't be considered so now (I guess most would agree Deep Purple had some prog elements... at least sometimes, but to go as far as consider them prog...) |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 03:37
I'm not surprised at calling stuff like Queen as symphonic Rock in the NL, given the country's general liking for symphonic prog.... However, was Supersister called symphonic rock?? most likely not. When I grew up in Toronto in the 70's, all these bands were called Art Rock... This until I +/- stopped buying pop-rock albums around 83 or so (I'd say Love Over Gold was the last one) and veered into jazzy lands (Bitches Brew and Mahavishnu and Coltrane) until roughly 91 and TBH, I'd never heard of Prog Rock until the early 90's when I came back to Europe (nor had I heard of neo-prog to describe Marillion or IQ before that as well , BTW). =========== But you wouldn't believe the fights we had in the fiorum and behind the scenes to get bands like Procol Harum or Traffic included as prog rock. I was even insulted by some members (notably a Polish dude) because I brought "that jazz sh*t" into what they thought was the symphonic/progressive database Sooooo, I'd say that the definition of "prog" kind of really came to be in the 90's, with those new bands' creations |
Posted By: hellogoodbye
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 03:53
Before meeting you, guys, I did not know that the majority of the music which I listened to was progressive.![Résultat de recherche dimages pour "stupid duck"](http://www.lynnchang.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/UGLY_TOWN_Stupid_thumbnail.jpg "Résultat de recherche dimages pour "stupid duck"") |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 04:07
|
At the risk of throwing gas on the fire () , prog definitions have been partly altered by PA's inclusion of the myriad sub genres. I for one, don't consider artists like Zappa to be prog. Futuristic, beyond the pale, inventive? Absolutely! But Zappa, RIO, and whatever the hell Capt. Beefheart is, is not prog in my book! If others enjoy them, then more power to them. Life is short and musical enjoyment people receive from these artists is fine with me. But when someone mentions the word prog to me, these artists never come immediately to my mind. ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: Hercules
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 05:59
The terms "progressive" and "prog" were in use before that. Procol Harum, Pink Floyd and a few other bands were being described in those terms in 1967 to my knowledge. ------------- A TVR is not a car. It's a way of life. |
Posted By: Replayer
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 09:08
I think you're overanalyzing my tongue-in-cheek remark. I meant to convey that the definition of progressive rock has always evolved by necessity, as if it didn't, then the music would have to have the same style as during the genesis of the prog movement and I chose the release date is generally accepted to be the first fully progressive rock album as the arbitrary cut-off for my comment.
|
Posted By: Kepler62
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 10:18
| All these made up sub genres of all styles of music have muddled everything. Older musc was categorized by eras whereas the more modern music became there were more deviations, amalgamations and mutations. I tend to like the era of progressive rock that had elves, sky wizards, journeys through time and space, fantasy etc. In other words, the 1969-76 era. Not much after that that really had anything to do with how it all started. It just seemed to have run it's course by the mid seventies. So there's no real definition of Prog. |
Posted By: Replayer
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 11:15
I think you may be overstating the influence of fantasy and science fiction on prog. There was a thread a year ago called http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=105644&KW=Grendel&PN=1" rel="nofollow - Dragons in Prog Rock and the general consensus was that fantasy and sci-fi themes were more prevalent in hard rock and metal. Below is a reply from the thread:
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 11:25
I always considered Zappa to be Comedic Prog.......which is not prog. I only like Capt Beefheart for their album covers. -------------
|
Posted By: Kepler62
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 11:54
|
I'm going to attempt the impossible here so bear with me : Progressive Rock Defn' 1. Classical music played with rock instrumentation & volume 2. Rock music with complex harmonies & structure. 3. Overblown , self-indulgent, pretentious, elitist boring music Progressive rock was a form of music originating in the UK that came into vogue starting in the late sixties lasting until roughly the mid-seventies. It featured ambitious instrumentation and extended compositions that often followed the pardigms of classical forms with serious lyrics inspired by science fiction & fantasy themes as well as literary sources. The Beatles, The Moody Blues and The Nice foreshadowed the movement in the late sixties but it wasn't until 1969 with the release of King Crimson's In The Court Of The Crimson King that other rock bands started to surface employing more complex musical structures that drew from classical, jazz and traditional styles. By the late 1970s Progrock had all but run out of steam both creatively and commercially being overrun by disco, punk and harder rocking arena bands.Many progrock bands were labelled as dinosaur bands in the press and were either forced to update their musical directions or fall victim to the times. Nonetheless other bands have surfaced over the years, picking up where the earlier bands left off while some of the older bands soldiered on through adversity but the genre never regained it's glories of the early seventies |
Posted By: Kingsnake
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 12:19
|
On the matter of fantasy-lyrics, a lot of proggers were fans of Tolkien. Camel (The White Rider), BJH (Galadriel) and probably even more referred to Tolkien. Also we have stuff like The Mandalaband, Jon Anderson solo, etc. But my guess is that the real swords & dragons themed lyrics canbe found in proto-metal, heavy metal and power metal (Uriah Heep, Rainbow, Iron Maiden and so on)
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 12:50
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 12:52
------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 14:44
| Actually no, the term "prog" was not used in the late sixties. It was not used until the late eighties. I remember I had a mixed tape labelled "Mike's mixed prog tape." That was in the mid 90's. "Prog rock" may have been used in the seventies but "prog" by itself like I said came later. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=prog |
Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 14:47
I don't think these old definitions which applied to seventies bands still apply anymore. That definition still counts for some stuff especially maybe the symphonic prog stuff but I think there's a lot of bands who are more song oriented these days who don't follow all the old rules. That was the point of this thread. I guess not everyone sees it that way and as Jethro Tull might say some people are still living in the past. I think these days they are more like guidelines and not hard and fast rules. The other possibility is that a lot of the newer bands are mislabeled as prog when they really aren't. Maybe they have a few prog elements but really aren't prog. Or maybe just one or two songs that would qualify and the rest not so much.
|
Posted By: zravkapt
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 15:06
|
What is prog? ------------- Magma America Great Make Again |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 15:25
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 15:36
So will I. ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 17:57
| What does having a lava lamp have to do with the way prog sounds? |
Posted By: Thatfabulousalien
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 18:17
Why are there so many threads at the same time that are the same topic as this? ------------- Classical music isn't dead, it's more alive than it's ever been. It's just not on MTV. https://www.soundcloud.com/user-322914325 |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 17 2017 at 19:53
|
^ Because that's what we love to obsess and talk about. Actually 'What is prog?', 'Who was the first prog artist?', 'Which band was most influential?', etc. etc., are all slightly different discussions. ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: February 18 2017 at 01:24
Even if finding the incandescent bulbs needed to power them is proving to be a lot harder than it once was. I suspect that in a few years time they'll be obsolete. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Kepler62
Date Posted: February 18 2017 at 03:35
|
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: February 18 2017 at 04:28
|
Heh... No two people on here will ever agree on what exactly it is that constitutes prog...so asking if this fatamorgana has changed with time is rather like contemplating whether or not the colour blue was slightly different during the 30s. ------------- “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 |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 18 2017 at 05:49
ask 10 people what prog is.. get 10 answers... where it gets interesting is the old prog v. progressive debate. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: February 18 2017 at 08:50
That is never interesting. ------------- What? |
Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: February 18 2017 at 10:50
| In some prog circles it's referred to as the little p prog vs big P prog debate. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 18 2017 at 12:16
some? Find me one it hasn't been debated into the ground, trust me it has here on this site, for good reason. Forget that curmudgen Dean. Bring the popcorn everytime it comes up. Always fun considering most of the bands listed on this site are no more Prog than my left toe, and most of the bands on this site are no more progressive than my right toe. Two very different camps yet many insist on lumping them together including this site which has led to a site that more than a Prog site.. yet less than progressive rock site. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: February 18 2017 at 15:52
|
Mickey's Left Toe. Mickey's Right Toe. I have heard of neither of these bands. ------------- A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now) |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 18 2017 at 18:33
I was thinking similarly. The music itself has developed to much further and beyond the capes and the definitions, to the point where ... even us here, can not agree on a whole lot and which bands to kiss up to! ------------- 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 |
Posted By: Dellinger
Date Posted: February 18 2017 at 20:22
| I think that trying to make a difference between prog and progressive as a genre is just wanting to make a discussion out of nowhere. Prog is just the diminutive of progressive... perhaps there could be a point about progressive rock as a genre, and progressive music as an adjective... |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 18 2017 at 20:24
|
^ I think you just made it ~ ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: Nogbad_The_Bad
Date Posted: February 18 2017 at 20:52
|
Everything from ambient through technical metal to nu jazz, all welcome ------------- Ian Host of the Post-Avant Jazzcore Happy Hour on Progrock.com https://podcasts.progrock.com/post-avant-jazzcore-happy-hour/ |
Posted By: socrates17
Date Posted: February 19 2017 at 07:16
|
I believe it was science fiction writer/editor Damon Knight ("To Serve Man") who said: "Science Fiction is whatever I'm pointing at when I say 'Science Fiction'." SF writer Samuel R. Delany often makes the argument that science fiction is a way of reading, rather than any specific elements of the text. No, I haven't gone way off topic. I think the same thing applies to music. You can listen to a wide variety of music with "progressive" ears. It's an approach to listening that's less superficial, more in depth. Because we're listening less superficially, material that has greater complexity/sophistication can be more satisfying. At least it is to me. I liken it to playing tennis. The more you practice, the better you get. The better you get, the more you enjoy it. (Trust me on this. I suck at tennis, and I really don't enjoy it.) I enjoy lots of different music with my "prog ears". Jazz, albeit primarily post-bop. Classical, albeit mostly 20th Century. San Francisco psychedelic. "After Bathing at Baxters" by Jefferson Airplane is clearly a progressive album, although the band's earlier hit singles aren't. Grateful Dead did some very progressive pieces, like The Eleven and Terrapin Station. In fact, I specifically credit the Dead (who were a lot closer to prog when I used to see them in the '60s than they were later) with getting me started on the road that led to Henry Cow. That's the reason I like the fact that this site discusses so many different types of prog.
|
Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: February 19 2017 at 08:55
Was this ever different? I don't think there was ever a point at which at least everyone who really cared would've agreed. Music doesn't naturally fit into categories. OK, there are probably some examples to be found in the history of music that certain definitions were canonised enough and supported and protected by certain authorities that disagreement about them was hard to find, but a core aspect of creativity was always not to respect borders and to extend them. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 19 2017 at 17:30
he must have remembered all my years of posts hammering just that point home. Hell... lets do it again!!! 'What I think, is that the prog umbrella for too long has tried to shelter two very different things under its shade: On the one hand, the nostalgia scene, which features both the old acts that are still around, like Yes and whatever Italian band you care to mention, and "old-new" bands like Flower Kings and Transatlantic - bands that, though newish, cater mostly to very conservative audiences. On the other hand, the new progressive scene, which could include anything from The Mars Volta to Gösta Berlings Saga, and which really isn't a scene at all, especially considering that many of the bands themselves have no awareness of being part of a "prog scene". These two strands really are extremely different. There's plenty of people with a love for both (including, to a certain extent, myself). But to throw the typical fans of both scenes (the former, ageing, follicle-challenged geezers - bless'em all!, the latter young, dynamic listeners brought up to endless eclecticism and irreverence to genres - bless them too!), might just be too much of a stretch. Maybe it's time for a divorce. Let the geezers have their nostalgia-fests, and let the "new prog" bands get out on the regular rock circuit and compete with any other rock genres out there rather than put them in the geriatric ward of "prog" where the smell of old age will make them unpalatable to both the rock media and the major labels. No disrespect to either!!! :-) And as an a propos: Prog labels that sign new, fresh and exciting bands should be careful how they market and present the bands. Selling them in the traditional way ("washes of mellotrons, recall Eloy in their heyday, rave reception at Bolivia Art Rock Fest (BARF)") will, quite simply, sell them short. It's a new world out there. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: February 20 2017 at 01:54
But how about Kansas??
|
Posted By: Kingsnake
Date Posted: February 20 2017 at 01:56
|
Good arguments here. Interesting read. My cup of tea: I think a lot of people here listen to socalled sophisticated music. Disco, grunge, punk, hiphop, new age and hitparade pop are the big enemies. I must say that I listen to punk, grunge, pop, disco, hiphop etc., but only if it's sophisticated. That's why I listen to only 10% of the bands listed on this website. And sometimes I wish some of my favorite bands are listed here, because they are so good, but they just don't fall in any of the progrock categories (Tears for Fears, Rupert Hine, Incubus, Propaganda, 4Hero, The Roots, Guru's Jazzamatazz, etc. etc.) When I think of progrock (as listed on the website) I think of sophisticated (complicated) classic rock, and bands that copy that sound.
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: February 20 2017 at 03:30
|
no. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Nogbad_The_Bad
Date Posted: February 20 2017 at 07:24
I'm ok with Kansas, its Hitler who doesn't think they belong. ------------- Ian Host of the Post-Avant Jazzcore Happy Hour on Progrock.com https://podcasts.progrock.com/post-avant-jazzcore-happy-hour/ |
Posted By: WeepingElf
Date Posted: February 22 2017 at 14:48
|
The meaning has changed. Back in the late '60s, many kinds of rock music were called progressive which we now would no longer consider prog, such as Jimi Hendrix or the Grateful Dead. In West Germany, progressive Musik was a frequently used term for what we now know as Krautrock. What we now call prog was then mostly called art rock (but of course considered a part of progressive music). The term progressive rock was narrowed down to its present meaning in the late 70s, I think. I don't know when the shorthand prog was invented; I first met it in the rec.music.progressive newsgroup in the early 90s but it may be older. One must never forget that progressive rock (or prog) is not the same as rock music that is progressive, but we all know that. Prog is progressive, but some other kinds of rock music are also progressive. Meanwhile, the alternative rock press (at least in Germany) uses prog rock for kinds of alternative rock that show some affinity to prog, often just the addition of synthesizers, while mostly ignoring actual prog. No, I don't blame them anymore (I used to). It is just not part of their subject matter. After all, jazz magazines don't review much prog, either. ------------- ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf "What does Elvish rock music sound like?" - "Yes." |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 23 2017 at 04:06
|
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: February 23 2017 at 07:57
|
Granted I'm younger than many here, but as far as I know (US) West Coast music (Zappa, Beefhart) was called Art Rock or Avant Garde Rock, never progressive rock. I only ever saw Progressive Rock attributed to British synth Prog (including Crimson) and sometimes Rush. Sometime in the 80s I actually saw Toto referred to as progressive (meh!). ------------- A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now) |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: February 23 2017 at 09:01
|
The definition hasn't changed. It's just the genre which has gotten worse over the years.  |
Posted By: CapnBearbossa
Date Posted: February 27 2017 at 11:13
|
The more about "prog" as a thing I read and hear, the less meaningful the term becomes. It's used by some in a complimentary way, by others derisively. It means forward-looking, backward-looking, or reveling in the present with about the same frequency. Prog is a genre when the word is used de jure in categorization schemes or in sales parlance, although the performers and the music themselves de facto transcend genre. I don't mean to be dismissive of the movement, concept, or phenomenon. It's just that names, like all words, live out their useful lifetimes and then should probably be retired. (Otherwise they end up being fodder for arguments and needless animosity Lol). ------------- Will higher mighty force redeem the one who dropped the moral compass, failed to fulfill the dream? -Ian Anderson |