"I don't like complexity for the sake of complexity." Well la-dee-da Carnac the Magnificent. Thank you for having your finger on the pulse of artists and interpreting their true motivation for me. 

Also, any "...overrated....underrated..." narrative. 

"This sounds incoherent"

Pretty much what I was going to say.  The 'progressive' in rock has always been more about progressing the basic song with variation rather than doing something that hasn't been done before. There is room for that, of course, and we have to allow our artists to follow their own vision - whether that vision was conceived 50 years or 50 days ago.

Anyway if I have to give first progalbum title to some album, I would choose Beatles Sgt. Although most of it´s songs are pop songs, there are songs like Lucy In the Sky, Benefit of Mr. Kite, Within You Without You and specially a Day In Life that breaks out the ordinary popsong structure (I would call a Day In Life one of the first prog epics). But what most important, it´s concept album, and really work as an album, just like album become the prog music unit. And also, that album cover was the style what most progalbums would have too. If Beatles hadn´t made Sgt, I believe prog would have sounded and also looked a lot different.

Dude YES. Exactly. I post comments on GG vids all the time. It's a 50/50 split between older guys who were there at the time, and younger kids who can't figure out how they know about Opeth, Dream Theater, etc, but never heard Gentle Giant. Amazing. Prog is like brand new to those kids, lmao.

Don't tell Big Big Train, Wobbler, Kotebel, The Neal Morse Band, Deluge Grander or Cheer-Accident that.

though I do get a little tired of hearing claims about bands that should be or should not be called prog...like 'The Beach Boys'. Every few months someone gets a bug up their butt about them or The Beatles being prog or not and/or the first true prog band.

Thanks for mentioning 'Cheer Accident'.....my friend Greg who lives in Chicago is friends with several members of that band and I have been meaning to re-visit their music for some time but forgot all about them.

 

Anyway if I have to give first progalbum title to some album, I would choose Beatles Sgt. Although most of it´s songs are pop songs, there are songs like Lucy In the Sky, Benefit of Mr. Kite, Within You Without You and specially a Day In Life that breaks out the ordinary popsong structure (I would call a Day In Life one of the first prog epics). But what most important, it´s concept album, and really work as an album, just like album become the prog music unit. And also, that album cover was the style what most progalbums would have too. If Beatles hadn´t made Sgt, I believe prog would have sounded and also looked a lot different.

A specific one concerning my tastes is this:

"The music's really technical but it's ruined by the cookie monster vocals."

I totally understand not being into growling, it's a real  acquired taste that even I had to get used to back when they started creeping into metal. But c'mon man, if the Cookie Monster actually sounded like the dude from Gorguts or even Mike Akerfeldt circa 2000, little kids all over the world would be soiling their training undies in unison.

Lmaooo

When I hear that, I know the clown who says it has never actually listened to them.

I'm so thankful for my dad's stories, because he was a huge Yes fan in their prime, and he's make it a point to correct people lumping them in with those bands LOL. "The girls think Yes and Foreigner are the same thing!!!" *shakes head* 

Don't know when your college days were,but,If it was around the time of Owner of a lonely heart, it's really not that far off.

Other: Linkedin is not Facebook  

I never really noticed it much with Yes but I have noticed it a bit with Kansas. Imo, it's more understandable for people to lump Kansas in with those than Yes since most Yes radio songs didn't sound like the typical aor arena rock stuff. However, anyone who has heard the entire seventies albums by Kansas would know they don't deserved to be lumped in with Foreigner or Boston or whoever also. Heck, I've even seen people on this site(who should know better)try to lump Kansas in with those bands. In fact I should have put that down as one of the options "Kansas aren't prog." 

That was said a lot over on the progressive ears website also so I'm wondering if someone who's a member of both sites brought it over from there. 

nope, Mike and Tony wanted the pop direction, too. They are the main songwriters anyway. 

the first is an oft repeated alt-fact created by moronic red hattted Trump supporters, K.C fanboys, historical revisionists, and people who simply don't know jack sh*t about prog rock hahah

I am talking about Genesis. You are talking about Phil Collins solo. 

sorry, my bad :)

Also, LOL at blaming Banks for Collins' solo stuff, wtf?! 

you seem to like to see people screw up and laugh at them (LOL)

it was a misunderstanding, I screwed up. The line was "mostly Phil Collins ruined Phil Collins" (which is funny) which I read "mostly PC ruined Genesis" and reacted. Should pay more attention. 

No need to get defensive; I'm aware it was a slip up. The thought itself can still be humorous .

I know you dislike them, you said it before, but "lame" they are not. 

Give another chance to the music they made between 1966-1969, you might have some surprises. If you are only familiar with their rock'n'roll hits, they are so much more than that. 

technically minded? who were technically minded in the 60s? Jazz musicians? The Beatles were not jazz players (obviously).

It's that creativity you mention above the reason I like them and respect them. 

what we're supposed to do is discussing what statement we get most tired of hearing. Are you tired of hearing how great Beatles are? Is that it? I can understand that.