Print Page | Close Window

Defining Prog- The Eternal Question

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Blogs
Forum Description: Blogs, Editorials, Original articles posted by members
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=74044
Printed Date: December 15 2018 at 15:00
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Defining Prog- The Eternal Question
Posted By: sararocksprog
Subject: Defining Prog- The Eternal Question
Date Posted: December 12 2010 at 23:52

DEFINING PROG- THE ETERNAL QUESTION

The inspiration for this article arose out of the unexpected controversy I encountered while marketing my band’s first album, Total B.S.’ “2 the Core,” to the progressive rock community.  I was surprised to discover there was a question as to whether we qualified as ‘Prog’ due to some unconventional influences that are prevalent in our music.

When I joined up with Blair to form Total B.S., I was sure I was getting into a serious “Progressive Rock” outfit… if not even fusion.  At the time I was going through a bit of an identity crisis with my singing but was absolutely thrilled with my new association.  From my perspective, being in a ‘Progressive Rock’ band… making progressive rock music was the best thing that could’ve happened to me short of actually being Robert Plant fronting Led Zeppelin.

I soon came to learn that Blair was a self proclaimed “Progger.”  I had never considered myself a progger specifically.  Yeah, I loved Progressive Rock… “YES” had a major impact on me… and the few songs I had heard from ELP, Dixie Dregs and King Crimson prompted me to pick up their “best of” releases... but ultimately, I considered myself more of a rocker than anything.  Bottom line… this whole progressive rock movement… the community and of course... all the subsequent bands and sub subgenres that spawned from those greats that had left everlasting impressions on me and ultimately started the movement were all foreign and new information on me.

In our efforts to promote the band, the progressive rock community seemed an obvious starting point.  Now… call me naïve, but I had no idea this was such an exclusive club.  I’ve been around a lot of musicians in my time… and there is certainly an inherent attitude among those in the clubmetal heads can be very difficult… but I have to admit… it’s been a little tenuous navigating my way.  I’ve concertedly utilized every shred of diplomacy, finesse and political correctedness, in my power, to gain favor.  Smile

Regarding the progressive rock phenomena and all the related subgenres... it has come to my attention that Progressive Rock didn’t exist as a musical category until years after it’s forefathers had forged the music that would define the genre.  At the time when the late 60’s were bridging into the new decade… any song that was played on AM radio was considered pop music… where FM radio played the underground artists.   Singles from Yes, ELP, and Led Zeppelin were common fare on the AM radio station alongside Elvis and Beatles hits.  I’ll take the liberty of coining a new term I’ll call “Pop Prog” as it relates to music that’s played on the popular radio station.  The way I see it… progressive music  has bridged the gap between pop music and underground music… fostering the path to more sophisticated music that may or may not be embraced by massive sectors of the population.

These days, to define Prog seems to be akin to finding the holy grail… that which is elusive if not unattainable…but always worth the chase.  I see forum topics addressed over and over again bearing titles like “Is Pink Floyd prog?”

So… I think to myself, what IS Prog?”… and… what makes Me more qualified to define Prog that the next analytical mind?  Nothing… but I’m going to take a swipe at it.

Let’s analyze the term first… “Progressive Rock”   What does it mean literally?  Webster defines ‘progressive’ as characterized by reform… so… in essence… constant change.  I always thought of progressive rock as unconventional and constantly changing, happily absent of the “verse, chorus, verse, chorus” monotony ever prevalent in most pop music arrangements. 

Classic Prog might be characterized by classic synthesizer sounds; the Moog with its haunting tones, the Prophet 5… shrill and precise, the crass howl of the leslies spinning on the Hammond B3, the pristine and poignant tones of the Fender  Rhodes… they all smack of the progressive rock of old that once defined the genre.  What about the Concept album?...  the side length epic track?... the long intro, solo, and outro sections?... all signature progressive movements.

When I think of progressive rock music I think of the dynamic shifts and bursts of strategically engineered sound… the surprise changes, the sudden starts and stops.  I analyze for form and sense circular arrangements with beginnings, middles and endings… sections characterized by multi segment passes, parts bridged by dramatic transitions and turnovers. Cerebral, thought provoking song themes, concepts and lyrics float across sophisticated and highly orchestrated harmonic cacophony.  It’s not so much about style, but about adventure and surprise.

So… dare I say… I am a Progger… because I love adventure and embrace change. Whether my band will be embraced by the progressive rock community as a whole remains to be seen… but that’s truly a side note to an even larger question… Is Pink Floyd PROG???  Confused



-------------



Replies:
Posted By: TheOppenheimer
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 00:20
if you consider yourself prog, maybe you're prog.

if you consider X band prog, maybe it's prog.

anyway, you should not fight for falling into the 'prog' label, but for making music that you love, and for loving the music that you make.

take it easy on yourself, no one can define a music genre, but anyone can create it


-------------
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
A veces es cuestión de esperar, y tomarte en silencio.


Posted By: Steven Brodziak
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 00:45
I've never thought of Led Zep as prog until recently. They were like heavy rock to me. But with songs like "No Quarter" yes, in my opinion it is prog. Chord changes, mood changes, instrumentation changes as well as vocal changes in a song can be prog. Not every song from the giants of prog ie. Genesis, Yes are prog. Even from selling England by the Pound you have "More Fool Me" a wonderful song but no prog imo. Today, Dream Theater does some prog. Transatlantic? Nearly 100% prog. Flower Kings the same. You are correct on pop description.
 
You know Prog when you hear it.


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 00:47
Originally posted by TheOppenheimer TheOppenheimer wrote:

if you consider yourself prog, maybe you're prog.

if you consider X band prog, maybe it's prog.

anyway, you should not fight for falling into the 'prog' label, but for making music that you love, and for loving the music that you make.

take it easy on yourself, no one can define a music genre, but anyone can create it
I appreciate your response. I don't mind if we're not categorically Prog by whomevers standards... definitely loving creating music that is certainly progressive and rockin' to ME!  Exclamation

-------------


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 01:07
Originally posted by Steven Brodziak Steven Brodziak wrote:

I've never thought of Led Zep as prog until recently. They were like heavy rock to me. But with songs like "No Quarter" yes, in my opinion it is prog. Chord changes, mood changes, instrumentation changes as well as vocal changes in a song can be prog. Not every song from the giants of prog ie. Genesis, Yes are prog. Even from selling England by the Pound you have "More Fool Me" a wonderful song but no prog imo. Today, Dream Theater does some prog. Transatlantic? Nearly 100% prog. Flower Kings the same. You are correct on pop description.
 
You know Prog when you hear it.
I hadn't thought of Zep as Prog either...to me they're in a class by themselves... although there are certainly elements of Prog in a number of their songs... and the fact that they struck me as somewhat thematic which is very theatrical and therefore Prog.
 
You are correct that plenty of categorically Prog  bands have produced decidedly un prog material.
 
I thought I knew what Prog was... but now I'm not sure I qualify as an authority on the subject


-------------


Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 03:12

With Prog apparently being back in vogue, I think there is a tendency among marketing people to want to define their band as such, regardless of the music. Many more bands are being described as prog these days, the irony being that a few years ago they would probably have sued if they were given such a label!

Prog draws in a lot of influences, but simply because a band plays fusion, jazz, metal, Led Zeppelin covers or whatever does not make them prog.
 
This site must take some of the responsibility for the confusion surrounding what is genuinely prog. We have widened the boundaries significantly in terms of what gets on the site (too far in my personal opinion) and have many jazz, metal and "Crossover" artists (in particular) listed as prog who really should not be.
 
Nevertheless, the inclusion of some of the big names in theese fields brings people into the site, and allows us to direct them towards the genuine stuff. It is interesting that our top artists and albums solidly remain focused on the core prog bands.
 
I have not listened to your band Sara, so I offer no opinion on their prog credentials. As has been said though, do not allow a label of convenience ("Prog") to distract your band from recording the music you like making. Leave it to others to then worry about how it should be classified.


Posted By: akaBona
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 05:55
Lots of good writings here, thank you. All I need to say is that:

Prog is in your heart, it's a kind of way of living.

Have Mercy!


Posted By: yeshu2k
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 15:46
Well, I think you should all check out Sara's music and see if it is prog or not...
 
http://www.reverbnation.com/totalbsrocks" rel="nofollow - http://www.reverbnation.com/totalbsrocks


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 16:03
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

 
I have not listened to your band Sara, so I offer no opinion on their prog credentials. As has been said though, do not allow a label of convenience ("Prog") to distract your band from recording the music you like making. Leave it to others to then worry about how it should be classified.
 
I feel like I may have come across as some "Prog Wanna-Be"... which obviously is NOT pretty... or you're just being nice ? Shocked... 
 
Regardless... I never set out to be "prog."  I feel like I kinda found out inadvertently that I have a progressive sensibility when it comes to producing music.  I'm just genuinely surprised at the difference of perspectives... but such is life. 
 
Obviously... as a band... we are seeking to be exposed to an appreciative audience which I now realize will be found among a variety of musical communities... and will be embraced more likely by music lovers who are not extremists in their love of one style or another.  Our style definitely posesses a broad range of influences... some of which may be considered decidedly "un-prog" to the prog purist...  Take a listen if you care and tell me what you think.  The first song has some rap in it so you may want to listen to a few tracks as they vary quite a bit stylistically from one another.  http://www.reverbnation.com/totalbsrocks" rel="nofollow - http://www.reverbnation.com/totalbsrocks
 
Thanks for your input and support.  I'm definitly going to keep doing MY thing... prog or not... Tongue


-------------


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 16:07
Originally posted by akaBona akaBona wrote:

Lots of good writings here, thank you. All I need to say is that:

Prog is in your heart, it's a kind of way of living.

Have Mercy!
hehe  LOL  Thank YOU for the comments... I concur... "Prog for Life!!"  I live my life very progressively... and YES... Have Mercy!!


-------------


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 16:51
Some of us have a more narrow definition of what's prog and some are more broad minded.   Being 45 and a prog fan for most of my years, I just don't get hung up on it.  When I first got into prog it wasn't really a well defined genre anyway.  There was just the really good stuff and stuff that wasn't worth bothering with.  By the way, I would check out your stuff but lately I've been trying to avoid exploring new stuff.  Still, wish you the best of success in your musical endeavors.

-------------


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 17:05
Quote By the way, I would check out your stuff but lately I've been trying to avoid exploring new stuff.  Still, wish you the best of success in your musical endeavors.
 
No offense taken.  Thanks for your well wishes... Smile


-------------


Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 19:43
Classic prog is NOT characterized by Moog, Hammond or Fender. If it may have appeared that way to you, it is only because bands from the same era naturally sought out similar equipment.  Even Stevie Wonder used Moog and Fender in the 70s,  I am sure.   Unlike other genres, prog cannot be characterized by stylistic elements. No, this is not because we progheads are snobbish and live in ivory towers LOL, it's because it is not really a genre but more a reference to an approach to songwriting and imposing artificial boundaries on what is and what is not prog is not feasible. That said, while I have a clear idea of what is prog, I have no idea at all what this site considers prog except for the 70s where it seems that largely, only those bands who were considered prog rock in the 70s have been included anyway.


Posted By: yeshu2k
Date Posted: December 13 2010 at 20:54
Yeah, I think she said everything you just said only in different words.... and much more descriptive.  The reference to Fender Rhodes and Hammond and Moog, she said, was something characterized by "some".  She defined prog as the musical movements and elements in conceptual albums and long songs... bla bla bla... take a listen to their stuff... what would you call it, if you could classify it.
 
http://www.reverbnation.com/totabsrocks" rel="nofollow - http://www.reverbnation.com/totabsrocks
 
I like it!


Posted By: Tengent
Date Posted: December 15 2010 at 11:49
Prog is to music as Howard Roark is to architecture.


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: December 15 2010 at 16:40
Originally posted by Tengent Tengent wrote:

Prog is to music as Howard Roark is to architecture.

And what Ayn Rand is to anuses and Rand Paul.


-------------


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: December 15 2010 at 16:43
Quote take a listen to their stuff... what would you call it, if you could classify it.
 
http://www.reverbnation.com/totabsrocks" rel="nofollow - http://www.reverbnation.com/totabsrocks
 
I like it!
Thanks for the plug... but your link is mussed up... hee hee  LOL
 
Here it is  again http://www.reverbnation.com/totalbsrocks" rel="nofollow - http://www.reverbnation.com/totalbsrocks
 
It's worth mentioning that the perspectives we are sharing here are those of the music analyst... and surely not that of the layman or the uninformed.  As far as instruments and "sounds" characterizing styles of music... certainly in the passive listeners mind- which constitutes most of the population... they DO...but... ultimately... FORM is what defines style moreso than sounds.  Both deserve consideration as certain sounds, tones and instruments are indicative of certain styles and therefore do sometimes play a part in defining said style.


-------------


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: December 15 2010 at 16:46
Originally posted by Tengent Tengent wrote:

Prog is to music as Howard Roark is to architecture.
 
I like that!!  Wink


-------------


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: December 15 2010 at 16:58
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Originally posted by Tengent Tengent wrote:

Prog is to music as Howard Roark is to architecture.

And what Ayn Rand is to anuses and Rand Paul.
 
You guys got me Googling stuff like crazy... I didn't get this one though... Confused

-------------


Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: December 15 2010 at 19:48
Originally posted by sararocksprog sararocksprog wrote:

 
It's worth mentioning that the perspectives we are sharing here are those of the music analyst... and surely not that of the layman or the uninformed. 


Laymen who would call Kenny G jazz, for instance?  I doubt that the layman's perspective was taken into account in discerning genres like hard bop and cool jazz.  I understand that the uninformed would, hypothetically, like to call something with a lot of Hammond prog (even though it could just as well be Deep Purple) but that is, well, an uninformed judgment and only adds to the confusion. 

The simplest definition of prog (that could be used to explain it to the uninitiated) is of a music style based predominantly in rock in which the compositions tend to be long and have extended sections and interludes.  More or less in line with the website's description of prog, that is. LOL It is still inaccurate and gives too much weight to stereotypes (Gentle Giant were definitely not defined by epics) but it is difficult to frame an accurate definition that can still be easily understood by anyone with little or no knowledge about prog.


Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: December 16 2010 at 07:18
Listening to your music, I feel it fits into the prog genre, though I dont know which prog subgenre yet. Hope to hear an album for review some day.

-------------


Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: December 16 2010 at 11:02
Upon hearing two tracks, I felt this would probably get into crossover. I don't know if this band was suggested earlier and rejected (and if that may be the motivation for her quasi-rant?).  

You - the OP - have asked a question whether Pink Floyd is prog. I don't know whether you are possibly unaware of them being on the archives or if you have asked how they can be called prog. Either way, with tracks like Interstellar Overdrive, Set Controls to the Heart of the Sun, Saucerful of Secrets and Echoes, they are one of the most important prog rock bands and that they have also released Brick in the Wall does not change this fact in the least. 


Posted By: MusicSnob
Date Posted: December 17 2010 at 09:47
I belive that Marillion summed it up in one line; "Constantly changing, becoming constant" Big smile


Posted By: Baggra
Date Posted: December 21 2010 at 08:10
The problem with music fanatics is that they are out to vilify the other guys and stand  up for their personal love, elevating its worth (in the eyes of those they assume the ignorant rabble).
So, in their defining of it they make it what they themselves ideally wish it to be, not as it truely is.
They distort/shape it to mirror their own frenzy/fancy/conceit.
Build it up to be something grander and purer than it really is/was.
 
(As in my other post, make it into something which "always progresses" - even though it may not always progress, but merely become exploited.)


Posted By: Manuel
Date Posted: December 21 2010 at 08:47
If you read many interviews with some of the "Original proggers" like Ian Anderson, Steve Hackett, etc, they don't really think themselves as "Proggers", since when they wrote their music, and I mean back in the day, the term "Progressive Rock" did not existed. As Steve Hackett once mentioned "We were not trying to make progressive music, we were simply trying to write the best music we possibly could". so, if you are doing your best, that's all you need. 

I will definitely check your music out, you have arisen my curiosity.  


Posted By: sigod
Date Posted: December 22 2010 at 10:48
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

... do not allow a label of convenience ("Prog") to distract your band from recording the music you like making. Leave it to others to then worry about how it should be classified.
Wise words there mate.

-------------
I must remind the right honourable gentleman that a monologue is not a decision.
- Clement Atlee, on Winston Churchill


Posted By: Cartmen
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 18:38
Wow, I just checked this band out and its not prog at all.  I live in America now, but I grew up in Europe and have followed all the great progressive and metal bands.  The songs here aren't nearly good enough to be classified as progressive or metal.
 
Just my two cents.


Posted By: Whitegold
Date Posted: January 07 2011 at 10:07
A lot of the music I enjoy is defined as prog so from that I accept that I like prog, I let other people define the music and decide if bands should be classed as prog or not as I follow the Genesis line "I know what I like and I like what I know",  


Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: January 08 2011 at 06:11
Originally posted by Baggra Baggra wrote:

The problem with music fanatics is that they are out to vilify the other guys and stand  up for their personal love, elevating its worth (in the eyes of those they assume the ignorant rabble).
So, in their defining of it they make it what they themselves ideally wish it to be, not as it truely is.
They distort/shape it to mirror their own frenzy/fancy/conceit.
Build it up to be something grander and purer than it really is/was.
 
(As in my other post, make it into something which "always progresses" - even though it may not always progress, but merely become exploited.)


There is a lot of truth in this but we are in the main not fanatics and would not pretend to know what any artistic phenomenon truly is.

Reductio ad absurdum: music is just vibrating air molecules that hit the timpanic membranes i.e. objectivity in aesthetics is one of the worst delusions we can harbour.


-------------


Posted By: Starless
Date Posted: January 09 2011 at 06:17
Ah, the age old question!
Now into my second half century on Earth I like to think of myself as musically broad minded, and although I like this site, I try to ignore the preponderance of labels. Who cares whether something is defined as Psychedelic/Space Rock or Fusion or Neo Prog? Musical appreciation is always subjective, and you either think something is "good" or "average" or "bad".
My personal definition of prog has in more recent times been swamped on this site by the sheer number of Metal sub-genres, something I've always found hard to appreciate, particularly those "singers" who have a fondness for gargling with barbed wire. When that guy from Opeth actually sings rather than attempts to turn his throat inside out, I quite like the band, but as soon as a "Gnnnrrrrawghh" is heard I switch off. Like I said, it's all subjective. If it were up to me, all those Metal subgenres should exist on a Metal site, not a Prog one!
 
I like the article writer's last question - are Pink Floyd prog? No they're not, again in my opinion. They were, and practically invented space rock and morphed into stadium rock. The only song of theirs that has a time signature even slightly out of the ordinary I can think of is Money! Still love the band though, but they don't fit my definintion of Prog, which should entail some adventure. Gilmour is a great guitarist, but you could never describe him as adventurous could you?


-------------
Beware of the flowers, cos they're gonna get you yet!


Posted By: Progdaybay
Date Posted: January 11 2011 at 12:35
To someone asking me... that question ?
I say : "Listen to Whirlwind, of Transatlantic", and you will have an idea of what prog is.
Of course, I agree on the feelings that we have, which vary from day to day, even to include groups or not in "the" category.
Subjective, and it is ok that it is...


Posted By: Makntak
Date Posted: January 14 2011 at 04:24
Sara

Thanks for your contribution and your thoughts and questions.  Fundamentally, I don't think you'll ever get a fully satisfactory answer.  I like this from Debbie Sears @ Prog Rock Diner Radio.  Her quote comes form the Romantic Warriors DVD released last year:

Progressive music is different things to different people, but to what it is, is music that defies the boundaries of commercial music. People who try different things. Experimenting with music.”

I like this, it's simple and embracing and inclusive.  I don't for an instant suggest this dedinition is all-encompassing, it just works for me, and when people ask (which they do) "What is Prog?",  I tell them this and they can get their heads around it.  To the converted, our church is vast and has wide doors for easy access.  There are statues around about of the many saints who founded our faith, but, I like to believe ours is a living church, otherwise, when the middle-aged pseuds, amongst whom I fiercely and proudly consider myself a card-carrying member, that comprise our congregation die, who will carry the torch?

I echo all of the comments above that mention the fact that musicians should just play what they like to play and hear and I appreciate that marketing the results is never an easy task in a world where any bedroom artist can claim their status as musician, without ever really having earned their stripes in front of a live and apathetic public, but that's another debate.

I listened to your band's music and I respectfully want to say this.  Using Debbie's quotation, I can totally see how Total B.S. could fit under the wings of Prog, there's an inventive compositional aesthetic at work, no doubt.  I think you're right, I imagine you'd most comfortably come under a Prog Fusion banner, just for ease of understanding (Pigeon Holes are useful! - I'd rather pigeon-hole something and absorb it fully at my leisure, than have to go through all of my letters, strewn randomly about the floor every time I wanted to find something).  Having said that, I do think you are appealing to only a very small, very niche market within the Prog community and it would be for you to judge how much effort is worth such potentially small returns.

As for the music itself, Blair is an amazing bassist.  You're a bit bonkers in a Tori Amos or Bjork kind of way.  Is the drumming a machine or a human?  I find the songs a bit chaotic and out of control, but I admire your diversity.  It's certainly adventurous!  Prog on, lady and best of luck with Total B.S.




-------------


Whoever Controls Your Eyeballs Rules The World


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: January 15 2011 at 22:56
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

You - the OP - have asked a question whether Pink Floyd is prog. I don't know whether you are possibly unaware of them being on the archives or if you have asked how they can be called prog.
 
My reference to whether Pink Floyd is prog or not was in reference to all of the articles I've come across since I've been browsing these Prog forums.  I guess you may not be aware there is some question as to whether Pink Floyd is prog or not.   Before I was ever exposed to the whoe 'prog phenomena'... I never thought of Pink Floyd as "Prog"... just one of the greatest bands of all time... My statement was 'tongue in cheek'... since it really makes no difference to me...and them being listed on Prog Archives doesn't add any validity to whether they qualify as Prog or not.  There are plenty of non-Prog bands on this sight so... 
 
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Upon hearing two tracks, I felt this would probably get into crossover. I don't know if this band was suggested earlier and rejected (and if that may be the motivation for her quasi-rant?).
 
The most Prog song on the album is "Following Forward"... if you want to give it a listen   http://www.reverbnation.com/totalbsrocks" rel="nofollow - http://www.reverbnation.com/totalbsrocks
BTW... Have we been rejected?  Waaah!! Cry   Actually, I was 'informed' that we may or may not get listed... which surprised me... I hadn't realized it was such an exclusive listing... and from what I read on getting listed, stated by a site administrator who wrote the guidelines for getting listed... he said that there would be controversy with regard to some of the bands listed due to the fact that he was instructed by THE ADMINISTRATION to be 'inclusive' rather than exclusive in an effort to drive more traffic to the site, which... for a genre community that seems to pride itself on it's discriminating taste... I thought that was a bit peculiar  Ermm
Anyway... I appreciate your comments.


-------------


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: January 15 2011 at 23:10
Originally posted by Manuel Manuel wrote:

As Steve Hackett once mentioned "We were not trying to make progressive music, we were simply trying to write the best music we possibly could". so, if you are doing your best, that's all you need.
 
Thanks!  I definitely feel the same... just trying to make supersonic music!  I get a lot of joy out of it so... this is good! Big smile 

Originally posted by Manuel Manuel wrote:

I will definitely check your music out, you have arisen my curiosity.  
Did you ever get to check it out?  http://www.reverbnation.com/totalbsrocks" rel="nofollow - http://www.reverbnation.com/totalbsrocks
 
Here are a few of our standout tracks
  • Following Forward
  • What It Feels Like
  • For Another Day
  • Total B.S.

I'd love to hear what you think.

 
Sara


-------------


Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: January 15 2011 at 23:27
Originally posted by sararocksprog sararocksprog wrote:

I guess you may not be aware there is some question as to whether Pink Floyd is prog or not.   Before I was ever exposed to the whoe 'prog phenomena'... I never thought of Pink Floyd as "Prog"... just one of the greatest bands of all time... 

Actually, no, the question is asked frequently here.  The answer is simple, Pink Floyd had tremendous crossover appeal, so they are remembered much more and by many more as a great CLASSIC ROCK band but they also made enough prog to get considered prog rock on a prog rock website.  That of course doesn't mean all their work was prog.  Incidentally, I didn't think of Pink Floyd as prog either when I started to listen to rock. But while reading their wikipedia page, I came across the word progressive rock which in turn led to Prog Archives and...  Smile


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: January 15 2011 at 23:32
Originally posted by Cartmen Cartmen wrote:

Wow, I just checked this band out and its not prog at all.  I live in America now, but I grew up in Europe and have followed all the great progressive and metal bands.  The songs here aren't nearly good enough to be classified as progressive or metal.
 
Just my two cents.
"Following Forward" is certainly Prog... if you want to give it a listen   http://www.reverbnation.com/totalbsrocks" rel="nofollow - http://www.reverbnation.com/totalbsrocks

-------------


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: January 15 2011 at 23:56
Originally posted by Makntak Makntak wrote:

Having said that, I do think you are appealing to only a very small, very niche market within the Prog community and it would be for you to judge how much effort is worth such potentially small returns.
 
Thanks so much for your comments!  Yeah... we'll keep on trucking... we've found some Total B.S. Heads for sure within the prog community... but we're also finding our audience everywhere... so it's all good.
 
Originally posted by Makntak Makntak wrote:

Is the drumming a machine or a human?
The drums were created on a CAT system which are drum pads that trigger digital sounds... It's a powerful program that you can edit in a myriad of ways to get a real drumset sound. 


-------------


Posted By: Xanatos
Date Posted: January 27 2011 at 08:15
its simple

Prog = not bjork


Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: February 10 2011 at 04:44
^^^LOL

-------------


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: February 10 2011 at 05:50
Originally posted by Xanatos Xanatos wrote:

its simple

Prog = not bjork


Then everything not = bjork = prog - pi?


-------------


Posted By: Makntak
Date Posted: February 10 2011 at 11:34
 -bjork=prog-pi squared, Slartibartfast!  How many times do we have to go through this lad?

-------------


Whoever Controls Your Eyeballs Rules The World


Posted By: frippism
Date Posted: February 16 2011 at 11:41
I think the definition of prog is much broader and the same time much narrower. I do not count neo-prog as prog (with exceptions of course) because its major lack of progressivness and not a major sonic evolution in nearly 30 years. I count something as prog if it's different and if it's creative. Technical abilities? Definitely, but not a major necessity. Progressive is about being Progressive in my eyes, not a genre.


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: February 18 2011 at 00:36
Originally posted by frippism frippism wrote:

Progressive is about being Progressive in my eyes, not a genre.
I like that!  Clap

-------------


Posted By: Battlepriest
Date Posted: February 18 2011 at 14:00
I have a certain criteria for determining what is and isn't progressive rock. I don't expect anyone else to follow them -- the good thing about opinions is you get to form your own. Genre has very little to do with musical approach (although the baseline is derived from that); it has much more to do with concensual perception.

Certain bands are genre defining, regardless of how far away they get from the baseline of prog rock. King Crimson, Yes, Genesis, ELP, Pink Floyd, Jethro Tull, Gentle Giant and even Rush, Kansas and Dream Theater fit this (as do a few other less publicly obvious bands such as Renaissance and VDGG). No matter what someone may think of 90125, Invisible Touch or Under Wraps, the bands that produced them are not stripped of their prog rock status, heritage or stigma.

If a band is a "clone" of one of these bands, they are automatically progressive rock -- even if they sound more like the band during a "pop" phase. By way of example, both Starcastle and World Trade are thought of as clones of Yes. The former sounds more like Fragile-era Yes, and the latter sounds completely like 90125-era Yes. Both are automatically progressive rock, even if they have progressed no further than the b-side of their favorite Yes singles.

If a band doesn't fall into either of those two categories, at least one of the following two criteria must be met --

1) The band must be perceived as a progressive rock (or sub-genre) band more or less in equal measure to other genres with which the band is associated. A band that is overwhelmingly associated with another genre, regardless of prog elements in their music belongs to the other genre (Iron Maiden is overwhelmingly a Heavy Metal band, despite being more "progressive" than many prog metal bands). Bands like Coheed & Cambria and Tool are both thought of as alternative rock bands, but also as progressive bands in both mainstream and underground reviews; they're both prog.

2) The band strongly promotes itself through the progressive "scene" (i.e. they're on a "prog" label, they accept gigs at prog festivals, interview with prog magazines and websites), whether or not their music meets the traditional expectations of progressive rock. King's X and Ambrosia are examples.


Also of note -- Prog doesn't equal "good", and being reviled by prog fans does not exclude a band from being a prog. Styx (criteria 1) and Asia (criteria 2) are fine examples. As much as some on ProgArchives would like to shake Styx from their collective shoes, it ain't ever gonna happen.

On the flipside, If a band/artist with progressive tendencies steadfastly professes a hatred/rejection for progressive rock, and doesn't use progressive music scenes to self promote, they are not Prog. "Hypocrites" like The Enid don't get out of being prog, because they are on the prog "dole". Radiohead, on the other hand, is not legitimately part of the genre, and I'll respect their rejection of it.

Anyway, I don't expect everyone to agree with my take on it, but it works for my sanity. :)



For what its worth, after listening to Total B.S., I would conclude it is prog rock (as well as progressive by musical approach).


Posted By: Bonnek
Date Posted: February 18 2011 at 15:08
Originally posted by Battlepriest Battlepriest wrote:



1) The band must be perceived as a progressive rock (or sub-genre) band more or less in equal measure to other genres with which the band is associated. A band that is overwhelmingly associated with another genre, regardless of prog elements in their music belongs to the other genre (Iron Maiden is overwhelmingly a Heavy Metal band, despite being more "progressive" than many prog metal bands). Bands like Coheed & Cambria and Tool are both thought of as alternative rock bands, but also as progressive bands in both mainstream and underground reviews; they're both prog.

2) The band strongly promotes itself through the progressive "scene" (i.e. they're on a "prog" label, they accept gigs at prog festivals, interview with prog magazines and websites), whether or not their music meets the traditional expectations of progressive rock. King's X and Ambrosia are examples.



You joined on the same day as me so obviously your thoughts are very wise Smile

I would normally not care too much whether something is Prog or not, but having to listen to multiple Metal bands each weak in order to "judge" them fit for PA or not, I reason very much along the same lines.
With progressive metal bands it's especially difficult as the metal part is so crushingly dominant mostly.



Posted By: Battlepriest
Date Posted: February 18 2011 at 15:40
Originally posted by Bonnek Bonnek wrote:


I would normally not care too much whether something is Prog or not, but having to listen to multiple Metal bands each weak in order to "judge" them fit for PA or not, I reason very much along the same lines.
With progressive metal bands it's especially difficult as the metal part is so crushingly dominant mostly.



I don't envy you that task, my friend, as the ProgPower Festival is one of the things that can put a wrench in my criteria. ;)


Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 18 2011 at 15:53
Hi,
 
My biggest criteria for it all is the easiest one ... if you have to find a definition then, it is not progressive ... because the one thing that the originals did to you was defy the equation of music and do something different ... so, in the spirit of the founding musicians, for us to sit here and try to define a feeling is really sad and boring ... and I seriously doubt that we can find words where each and everyone of us can meet and agree ... because if there is one thing that we do not agree on is to disagree! Sorry Voltaire!
 
But it's hard ... because what we are doing is labelling music that is formulaic it and nailing it down even more ... and in the process, we are not helping define and explain, what it is that helped many of these people create the whole thing in the first place ... and not one musician that I have ever met, has written a piece of music because he wanted to create a "progressive" or "prog" piece. And the one that said that to me I said that I thought he was an idiot that didn't know what music was inside him ... and a year later he gave me a hug ... and he is doing very well now ... and living off the music.
 
It's not about the definition ... it's about the music first ... and I am not a great fan of these because too many of these treatises do not respect the music and think the music has to be secondary to the exercise in mental rumination and there are not too many musicians that live on that!


-------------
... none of the hits, none of the time ... now you know what the art is all about!
www.pedrosena.com


Posted By: The_Jester
Date Posted: February 18 2011 at 19:30
I can't define prog. It's defining itself when you hear some.

-------------
La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte


Posted By: jaybird77
Date Posted: February 21 2011 at 23:27
Originally posted by Steven Brodziak Steven Brodziak wrote:

I've never thought of Led Zep as prog until recently. They were like heavy rock to me. But with songs like "No Quarter" yes, in my opinion it is prog. Chord changes, mood changes, instrumentation changes as well as vocal changes in a song can be prog. Not every song from the giants of prog ie. Genesis, Yes are prog. Even from selling England by the Pound you have "More Fool Me" a wonderful song but no prog imo. Today, Dream Theater does some prog. Transatlantic? Nearly 100% prog. Flower Kings the same. You are correct on pop description.
 
You know Prog when you hear it.
IMO, "Achilles Last Stand" by Zeppelin was the best example of prog they ever came close to.


Posted By: artnico
Date Posted: March 02 2011 at 05:39
Someone should explain that if there is a genre that you can not label, well, that’s just prog :)))


Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 02 2011 at 22:52
Originally posted by The_Jester The_Jester wrote:

I can't define prog. It's defining itself when you hear some.

The bizarre thing is this ... no one here, or otherwise, sits and listens to Beethoven because it is "romantic music" (as the arts period was called), or Bach because he was "baroque", or Stravinsky, because it was ... something or other. So, for me, to need a "description" or "definition" for anything I, or any of the members here listen to, is bizarre to say the least, and only means that we have created some standby definitions in order for them to be more viable to find and sell in a commercial world.

It maybe that 50 years from now that the period of music for 10 to 20 years that started 45 years ago, it will be named "Progressive" ... but we're not there in that future yet, so, until then ... we either listen to the music and appreciate the composer/composers, or all we are doing is listening to your oldies favorite, and in this case "progressive" and not even on Sirius, even if they use the word ... badly!

We just need a better historical perception, that's all ... not to say that we can not matriculate to "progressive", but the music has to come first, not the definition ... later, the definition takes shape for books, historians and ... academics! We're neither of those, sometimes!


-------------
... none of the hits, none of the time ... now you know what the art is all about!
www.pedrosena.com


Posted By: Makntak
Date Posted: March 03 2011 at 06:31
That's an interesting perspective, Moshkito.  In the same way as the 'romantic ' period covers many decades and many composers with no regard for individual differences and compositional distinctions, this time will probably run from the 1950's to Now and beyond and earn the name of the 'Prolific' period.  In the future of course, music will be illegal and it will be the 'Prolifics' that were to blame...

After many years attempting to define the millions of releases into genres, the factions defending each definition split into fiercely opposed tribal groups.  Eventually arms were taken up and people all over the world began slaughtering their neighbours for failing to agree with their particular version of the truth.  At the end of 'The Prolific Wars', as they became known, so many millions had perished that a new form of world government needed to be created.  Their first act was to criminalize MUSIC.  Birdsong is the only sound that the people of the future have, although, those that gather in parks to listen to the dawn chorus and buy t-shirts are becoming the targets of  undisguised public disapproval and intense state surveillance.

The story goes that the few Swedish survivors of The Prolific Wars left the country so depopulated that it was considered a human desert.  Nevertheless, there are strong, though entirely unsubstantiated, rumours that a small band of survivors have gone underground near the Arctic Circle.  Sometimes, at night, when the Aurora Borealis is particularly strong, sailors navigating the Boreats Sea attest to having heard the sky filled with mellotrons...

-------------


Whoever Controls Your Eyeballs Rules The World


Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: March 04 2011 at 04:40
Interesting that people are suggesting here that Total BS are not in the prog category. The eclectic music is there and there are prog influences throughout the album.  
 
Anyway I wanted to post these clips of the bands music that I made into slide shows for youtube so here they are. I hope you enjoy the music and please comment on the slide shows and maybe help me to improve my work.
 
Cheers
 
 
 
"TOTAL BS"
 
 
"Following Forward" from Total BS CD.
 
This is really progressive and crossover into other styles - love this track so I made a clip to go with it.
 
Enjoy the trippy psychedelic art slides too on this.
 


-------------


Posted By: Cartmen
Date Posted: March 09 2011 at 17:26
The slide shows are cool, too bad the music is poor...


Posted By: caretaker
Date Posted: March 10 2011 at 10:42
Fine work on the videos. As for the music, I've heard some of their stuff on the college station here and have been wanting to hear more. Sounds like prog to me.


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: March 17 2011 at 05:44
Total BS's music is so challenging I don't even know if most progheads would know what to make of it (ironically), either way it's incredible stuff, just don't expect a ton of interest in music this unusual .. and the slideshows are fun and colorful too

oh and,

that which is elusive if not unattainable…but always worth the chase
.






Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 17 2011 at 20:05
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

Total BS's music is so challenging I don't even know if most progheads would know what to make of it (ironically), either way it's incredible stuff, just don't expect a ton of interest in music this unusual .. and the slideshows are fun and colorful too

oh and,

that which is elusive if not unattainable…but always worth the chase
.




 
Now I'm gonna change this ... some!
 
Amon Duul 2's music is so challenging  I don't even know if most progheads would know what to make of it (ironically), either way it's incredible stuff, just don't expect a ton of interest in music this unusual .. and the slideshows are fun and colorful too

oh and,

that which is elusive if not unattainable…but always worth the chase
.

Now I'm gonna change this again!
 
Can's music is so challenging  I don't even know if most progheads would know what to make of it (ironically), either way it's incredible stuff, just don't expect a ton of interest in music this unusual .. and the slideshows are fun and colorful too

oh and,

that which is elusive if not unattainable…but always worth the chase
.

...............................................
 
To be perfectly honest with you, if I played in that band I would ask you to stop talking about our music! Here are the assumptions:
 
1. Progheads don't know music
2. Progheads have no idea how to interpret music
3. Incredible stuff for you -- but you're trying to make me feel guilty for not listening to it
4. Not sure that your statement of interest is going to gather more interest. It certainly didn't me at all and I'm not even bothering checking out the links.
5. Slide shows and such were always fun. But I was too stoned at the time, and then I saw Nektar's and the slide show was just as stoned! And no one did them as good as the Fillmore! EVER!
6. That which is elusive is atainable ... if it matters enough to you
7. Why would I be interested in music that has a spokes person that has no idea how and what he is saying in his very own words and on top of it, why would I, as a band, want someone else to speak for me?
8. The chase part ... some crap is not worth chasing, specially when the spokes person has no idea what he is saying and is making the music less important than the band's very own work.
9. Most prog folks, btw, do not live in a "chase" mode. We're not after the chicks anymore (or the fantasies!), I don't think, and we have settled down way too much for that kid bullsh*t! ... so, tuck yours in, and then let's talk about the music!
10. Now, try talking sense, instead of crap!
 


-------------
... none of the hits, none of the time ... now you know what the art is all about!
www.pedrosena.com


Posted By: caretaker
Date Posted: March 18 2011 at 13:56
Wow.


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: March 21 2011 at 01:03
I'm stoked about the controversy!
 
If I may... Defining Prog... is that which is elusive if not unattainable…but always worth the chase... NOT 'Total B.S.' music... just in case there was a misunderstanding...
 
This was quoted from the original article the comment is based upon... as follows...
 

"These days, to define Prog seems to be akin to finding the holy grail… that which is elusive if not unattainable…but always worth the chase.  I see forum topics addressed over and over again bearing titles like “Is Pink Floyd prog?” 

I appreciate the passion here though!


-------------


Posted By: yeshu2k
Date Posted: March 21 2011 at 01:45

Well, I think you need to listen to the music he is referring to before making statements that generalize them.  It is you that I wouldn't want promoting me.   While I do somewhat agree with your statement when looking at the last statement where he says they won't have much of an audience up here.  After listening to their stuff I find it somewhat true since a lot of the proggers up here think that if you don't sound like Yes or ELP or one of those that you are'nt a real prog band.

The whole thing about moogs and synth tones that define prog is totally wrong, but even in this case this band does have that as well as the introduction of hip hop, and in one song "One Word" a bought of country right along side some skathing metal parts.  
 
The vocals have a very soulful feel time as well as the bassist being somewhat funky in his shredness goes where most progressive rock fans don't tread, but usually find their feet tapping involuntarily should they keep listening, which they usually do. 
 
Go listenen to them, Moshkito, first then make your assumptions about Atavachron's assessment of Total B.S.


Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 21 2011 at 21:33
Originally posted by yeshu2k yeshu2k wrote:

... 
Go listenen to them, Moshkito, first then make your assumptions about Atavachron's assessment of Total B.S.
 
I plan on it ... but was very disappointed that someone would talk about a band like that ... I mean ... let's get started on the merits of Lady Gaga from her being slightly undressed on, shall we?
 
See the point?
 
It's hard ... and a total turn off. I was not really trying to send that person off, but hopefully they can understand that the attitude was ... not a good one for a forum like this one. Maybe the alt.music.progressive along with all the other spam in there? ... see the difference, now?


-------------
... none of the hits, none of the time ... now you know what the art is all about!
www.pedrosena.com


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 26 2011 at 18:42
WinkThere is no confusion about the definition of prog at all! Nothing could be easier to understand! It's very simple,why people try to make something confusing about it is beyond me?Prog rock is music that is about the music only.That's it.It's not about what's cool or in or out or what the people wear or what they look like or about the stage show or the lyrics or politics or ratings or sales or ANYTHING,except the music.The music is composed and played with one thing in mind-the music itself ,nothing else.The idea is to make music that is musically good and that is the ONLY consideration.The reason why it seems confusing is because music for music's sake is rare in the world of rock music.For most of rock music the more important things are what you look like,how old you are,what kind of clothes you wear,what your politics are,do masses of idiots like you for some reason,how many records do you sell,what are your politics,what do your lyrics say,who are they talking to,or what about,how do you act on stage or off,what do you say,how do you move on stage or off,are you something new,are you more of the same thing are you the "latest thing" and a 100 other things that aren't prog rock.Once again,prog rock is music for music's sake only,that's it.If there's any arguement then you're talking about something else.


Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 07:23
^^^Clap

-------------


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:14
Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

WinkThere is no confusion about the definition of prog at all! Nothing could be easier to understand! It's very simple,why people try to make something confusing about it is beyond me?Prog rock is music that is about the music only.That's it.It's not about what's cool or in or out or what the people wear or what they look like or about the stage show or the lyrics or politics or ratings or sales or ANYTHING,except the music.The music is composed and played with one thing in mind-the music itself ,nothing else.The idea is to make music that is musically good and that is the ONLY consideration.The reason why it seems confusing is because music for music's sake is rare in the world of rock music.For most of rock music the more important things are what you look like,how old you are,what kind of clothes you wear,what your politics are,do masses of idiots like you for some reason,how many records do you sell,what are your politics,what do your lyrics say,who are they talking to,or what about,how do you act on stage or off,what do you say,how do you move on stage or off,are you something new,are you more of the same thing are you the "latest thing" and a 100 other things that aren't prog rock.Once again,prog rock is music for music's sake only,that's it.If there's any arguement then you're talking about something else.
That applies to any form of "serious" music, not just Prog and not just Rock. It is a characteristic of some prog, but it isn't a defining characteristic by any means.


-------------
"You know what uranium is, right?
It’s 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."


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:23
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

WinkThere is no confusion about the definition of prog at all! Nothing could be easier to understand! It's very simple,why people try to make something confusing about it is beyond me?Prog rock is music that is about the music only.That's it.It's not about what's cool or in or out or what the people wear or what they look like or about the stage show or the lyrics or politics or ratings or sales or ANYTHING,except the music.The music is composed and played with one thing in mind-the music itself ,nothing else.The idea is to make music that is musically good and that is the ONLY consideration.The reason why it seems confusing is because music for music's sake is rare in the world of rock music.For most of rock music the more important things are what you look like,how old you are,what kind of clothes you wear,what your politics are,do masses of idiots like you for some reason,how many records do you sell,what are your politics,what do your lyrics say,who are they talking to,or what about,how do you act on stage or off,what do you say,how do you move on stage or off,are you something new,are you more of the same thing are you the "latest thing" and a 100 other things that aren't prog rock.Once again,prog rock is music for music's sake only,that's it.If there's any arguement then you're talking about something else.
That applies to any form of "serious" music, not just Prog and not just Rock. It is a characteristic of some prog, but it isn't a defining characteristic by any means.


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:24
you still have to type something when you quote... Wink

-------------
"You know what uranium is, right?
It’s 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."


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:31
WinkIt's SUPPOSED to be the definition,but in reality of course it's not.The prog rockers realize that it is their stage show or something else that's actually drawing people into their concerts.But in the long run,TIME will sort out the better music from the mediocre.Time is the only true test we have if music is really good or not because in the present,it's all just a matter of opinion.The better the music ,the longer it will be listened to.Some might be forgotten for a while for some reason like being overplayed,but if it's really good eventually it will always come back and  to future generations even.


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:33
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

you still have to type something when you quote... Wink


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:34
Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

WinkIt's SUPPOSED to be the definition,but in reality of course it's not.The prog rockers realize that it is their stage show or something else that's actually drawing people into their concerts.But in the long run,TIME will sort out the better music from the mediocre.Time is the only true test we have if music is really good or not because in the present,it's all just a matter of opinion.The better the music ,the longer it will be listened to.Some might be forgotten for a while for some reason like being overplayed,but if it's really good eventually it will always come back and  to future generations even.
Again, that covers many forms of music, not just Prog. That is not what "defines" Prog and seperates it from everyother kind of music.

-------------
"You know what uranium is, right?
It’s 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."


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:36
SleepyProg rock will be around for many decades yet.It will eventually travel all around the world just like English and American prog rock from the 70's is very popular in different countries in the world today.


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:41
ConfusedWhat am I doing wrong?
Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

you still have to type something when you quote... Wink


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:44
ConfusedAm I getting it any closer yet?


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:46
Confused
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

you still have to type something when you quote... Wink


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:46
UnhappyI give up!


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:49
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

WinkIt's SUPPOSED to be the definition,but in reality of course it's not.The prog rockers realize that it is their stage show or something else that's actually drawing people into their concerts.But in the long run,TIME will sort out the better music from the mediocre.Time is the only true test we have if music is really good or not because in the present,it's all just a matter of opinion.The better the music ,the longer it will be listened to.Some might be forgotten for a while for some reason like being overplayed,but if it's really good eventually it will always come back and  to future generations even.
Again, that covers many forms of music, not just Prog. That is not what "defines" Prog and seperates it from everyother kind of music.


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 10:51
ConfusedWhat is your definition of the music I've been playing for the last 36 years?


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 11:59
Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

ConfusedWhat is your definition of the music I've been playing for the last 36 years?
I have no idea. What have you been playing for the last 36 years? Tongue
 
I have listened to a broad spectrum of music my entire life (53.9863 years and counting) and played a narrower but still relatively wide range of styles for slightly less than that. Most of that I would call good music, music that was created for the sake of music or art or just to be lisened to and appreciated for what it is and not what it represesents or how it was presented - some of it would be called Prog, but even then not all Prog would fit into such a description.
 
If we are to talk about Prog Rock and universally understand what we mean by that then some assume that a concrete immutable definition is required, just as it is with any other form of music. We can define Blues by its scales, structure, style and chord progressions that will suffice for most Blues with minor variances and modifications. However, when you are discussing a form of music that deliberately sets out to break convention then any attempt at definition becomes an excercise in futility and what you are left with is a discussion about the simularities between various forms of Prog rather than what sets it apart. Your posts are of the latter form, characterising Prog by effect rather than cause.


-------------
"You know what uranium is, right?
It’s 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."


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 12:34
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

ConfusedWhat is your definition of the music I've been playing for the last 36 years?
I have no idea. What have you been playing for the last 36 years? Tongue
 
I have listened to a broad spectrum of music my entire life (53.9863 years and counting) and played a narrower but still relatively wide range of styles for slightly less than that. Most of that I would call good music, music that was created for the sake of music or art or just to be lisened to and appreciated for what it is and not what it represesents or how it was presented - some of it would be called Prog, but even then not all Prog would fit into such a description.
 
If we are to talk about Prog Rock and universally understand what we mean by that then some assume that a concrete immutable definition is required, just as it is with any other form of music. We can define Blues by its scales, structure, style and chord progressions that will suffice for most Blues with minor variances and modifications. However, when you are discussing a form of music that deliberately sets out to break convention then any attempt at definition becomes an excercise in futility and what you are left with is a discussion about the simularities between various forms of Prog rather than what sets it apart. Your posts are of the latter form, characterising Prog by effect rather than cause.


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 12:36
Sleepy


Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 12:39
Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

Sleepy

Ermm


-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 13:13
Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

Sleepy

Ermm
Yeah, I never was very good at keeping people awake...Ouch


-------------
"You know what uranium is, right?
It’s 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."


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 13:15
SleepyI can't figure out how to reply properly because I'M COMPUTER ILLITERATE AND ASLEEP WITH MY EYES OPEN.Maybe we can't define what prog rock is,but we can begin by saying what it is not to a degree.It's not about the clothes,fashion ,or lifestyle.It has always been about the music foremost.And the definition is so obscure that what used to be called a prog rock band in the 70's like The Mahavishnu Orchestra is now classified as simply jazz today.The key word to try to interpret is progressive.What music from the rock genre exhibit the qualities of being progressive-advocating progress concernig creative and experimentally new,improved and advanced modern sounds which usually means adding jazz and classical musical elements to the basic rock music format.So I agree,there really is no clear cut definition,as long as the music shows elements of progressing to a more intricate or complecated form than it's prior musical state,it can be deemed progressive.The word progressive invokes an evolving,improving,changing style of music so pinning it down to an exact starting point is not a perfectly precise thing to be able to do.24 hours from now I'll probably have a completely different answer or outlook and I hope someone could please walk me through the steps on how to respond properly when I'm more mentally prepared to try and grasp it.Thank You.


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: March 27 2011 at 16:37
Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

I hope someone could please walk me through the steps on how to respond properly when I'm more mentally prepared to try and grasp it.Thank You.
You're doing fine!

-------------


Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 28 2011 at 20:28
Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

WinkThere is no confusion about the definition of prog at all! Nothing could be easier to understand! It's very simple,why people try to make something confusing about it is beyond me?Prog rock is music that is about the music only.That's it....
 
Remember you said that!
 
Quote
...
The music is composed and played with one thing in mind-the music itself ,nothing else.The idea is to make music that is musically good and that is the ONLY consideration.
...
 
That would be incorrect. Not all music is "composed" and a lot of the really early stuff was actually originally designed as an improvisation that later was concluded to be "composed" because it could be played on stage again!
 
It's easy, if you have a tape, and now you know what you did ... wow ... how creative!
 
There is a nasty stigma that something that is "improvised" is not considered music ... and one of the things that were being fought in those days, were exactly that ... and a lot of things in the really early days were about complete and outright experimentations and jams, and even the Grateful Dead used to do 6 hour concerts as late as possible and create many moods and things that most bands went on to do and try themselves ... but ... this "law" concept that things have to be composed is inacurate, because once you grab a handle on what you do, ANYONE can scribble it down on paper ... but no one was sitting there and writing the notes for "In a Gadda Da Vida" on paper because we were all too stoned enjoying the trip ... but that's not to say that the musicians did not know what they were playing because the German krautrock scene quickly disproves that and so did other scenes, even in France ... not to mention the exprimental nature of the arts in France ... you obviously have never heard of Godard, and he is a total parallel to the Berlin'os and their anti-western music ideas!
 
Progressive music, never was music for music's sake, or art for art's sake (thank you 10CC) ... it was no different than anything else out there, for the time and place ... with the blatant exception that we continue to discuss this and totally ignore the rest of the arts, the time and the place it was happening. If you do this parallel with the arts, the continuation and study of this illuminates a lot more than it hides ... but it takes the open mindedness and studiousness of many of us here ... and I sincerely doubt that most here are willing ...


-------------
... none of the hits, none of the time ... now you know what the art is all about!
www.pedrosena.com


Posted By: Andy Webb
Date Posted: March 28 2011 at 20:58
Prog = Prog

Make of it what you will.


-------------
http://ow.ly/8ymqg" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 29 2011 at 03:16
Wink
Originally posted by moshkito moshkito wrote:

Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

WinkThere is no confusion about the definition of prog at all! Nothing could be easier to understand! It's very simple,why people try to make something confusing about it is beyond me?Prog rock is music that is about the music only.That's it....
 
Remember you said that!
 
Quote
...
The music is composed and played with one thing in mind-the music itself ,nothing else.The idea is to make music that is musically good and that is the ONLY consideration.
...
 
That would be incorrect. Not all music is "composed" and a lot of the really early stuff was actually originally designed as an improvisation that later was concluded to be "composed" because it could be played on stage again!
 
It's easy, if you have a tape, and now you know what you did ... wow ... how creative!
 
There is a nasty stigma that something that is "improvised" is not considered music ... and one of the things that were being fought in those days, were exactly that ... and a lot of things in the really early days were about complete and outright experimentations and jams, and even the Grateful Dead used to do 6 hour concerts as late as possible and create many moods and things that most bands went on to do and try themselves ... but ... this "law" concept that things have to be composed is inacurate, because once you grab a handle on what you do, ANYONE can scribble it down on paper ... but no one was sitting there and writing the notes for "In a Gadda Da Vida" on paper because we were all too stoned enjoying the trip ... but that's not to say that the musicians did not know what they were playing because the German krautrock scene quickly disproves that and so did other scenes, even in France ... not to mention the exprimental nature of the arts in France ... you obviously have never heard of Godard, and he is a total parallel to the Berlin'os and their anti-western music ideas!
 
Progressive music, never was music for music's sake, or art for art's sake (thank you 10CC) ... it was no different than anything else out there, for the time and place ... with the blatant exception that we continue to discuss this and totally ignore the rest of the arts, the time and the place it was happening. If you do this parallel with the arts, the continuation and study of this illuminates a lot more than it hides ... but it takes the open mindedness and studiousness of many of us here ... and I sincerely doubt that most here are willing ...


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 29 2011 at 03:37
WinkMoshkito,if you looK above half a page ,you'll see I already radically altered my view on the definition when a senior member pointed out the obvious realities and inconsistencies of my former close as possible text book definition.I didn't actually change my view ,no more than anything you've said changes it.Let me re-phrase it for you:prog rock is SUPPOSED to be rock music that is essentially about the music itself and not the extra commercilaized gimmicks that help originally sell it that are used to primarily sell other types of rock music,such as looks,clothes,attitude,age,etc.And in the end though,that is exactly why we still listen to an album like Close to the Edge almost 40 years later.We listen to it for the music and the music ONLY.And I know good and well that even Yes didn't write their music down(compose it),some of the members couldn't even read music!We don't listen to other albums that were even more popular back then because it wasn't the actual music that sold so many of them.We don't listen to music of any kind that was writtren 40 years ago for anything but the actual excellent quality of the music and THAT'S IT.


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 29 2011 at 04:27
AvatarPedro, this is Paul Avatar
 
AvatarPaul, this is Pedro  Avatar
 
You two are going to get along real swell. Approve


-------------
"You know what uranium is, right?
It’s 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."


Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: March 29 2011 at 04:37
LOL

-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 29 2011 at 05:16
Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

when a senior member.
Hey, you're going to be a senior member in 41 posts - it's not a badge of office - it's an automatic title change after 100 posts.

-------------
"You know what uranium is, right?
It’s 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."


Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: March 29 2011 at 05:21
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

when a senior member.
Hey, you're going to be a senior member in 41 posts - it's not a badge of office - it's an automatic title change after 100 posts.

He's already a member.Clown


-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: March 29 2011 at 14:00
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

AvatarPedro, this is Paul Avatar
 
AvatarPaul, this is Pedro  Avatar
 
You two are going to get along real swell. Approve

I do so enjoy coming onto PA in the evening. Posts like this make my day!LOL


-------------


In Lazland, life is transient. Prog is permanent.


Posted By: sararocksprog
Date Posted: March 29 2011 at 22:46
That's good to know about the # of posts elevating your status. I like it!     Big smile

-------------


Posted By: Any Colour You Like
Date Posted: March 29 2011 at 22:58
Originally posted by sararocksprog sararocksprog wrote:

That's good to know about the # of posts elevating your status. I like it!     Big smile
 
And when you get to 10,000, you can claim mental illness!


Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: March 29 2011 at 23:01



Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: March 30 2011 at 10:24
http://www.jmorganmarketing.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/fail.jpg


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 30 2011 at 15:33
AngryThem that do,do;them that can't do,teach;and them that can't teach ctiticize.And that's all you can do since you undoubtably can't play a note of real music.YOU are the failure.I just spent 2 hours looking through internet files on typos for Karn Eval 9 to try and solve the mystery.I found nothing to explain my paradox.I even contacted Greg Lake himself and may hopefully hear back from him someday.When I google Karn Eval 9,there are many websites with that spelling reffering to ELP.You can't tell me I got the one typo album and nobody else did.Since all you're capable of is to critisize others,you should have the solution.You are the failure and all you can do is print fail to someone else to make yourself feel like you're important.What a pathetic sick joke!


Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: March 30 2011 at 15:42
Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

AngryThem that do,do;them that can't do,teach;and them that can't teach ctiticize.And that's all you can do since you undoubtably can't play a note of real music.YOU are the failure.I just spent 2 hours looking through internet files on typos for Karn Eval 9 to try and solve the mystery.I found nothing to explain my paradox.I even contacted Greg Lake himself and may hopefully hear back from him someday.When I google Karn Eval 9,there are many websites with that spelling reffering to ELP.You can't tell me I got the one typo album and nobody else did.Since all you're capable of is to critisize others,you should have the solution.You are the failure and all you can do is print fail to someone else to make yourself feel like you're important.What a pathetic sick joke!

Wrong thread.


-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 30 2011 at 16:09
Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

AngryThem that do,do;them that can't do,teach;and them that can't teach ctiticize.And that's all you can do since you undoubtably can't play a note of real music.YOU are the failure.I just spent 2 hours looking through internet files on typos for Karn Eval 9 to try and solve the mystery.I found nothing to explain my paradox.I even contacted Greg Lake himself and may hopefully hear back from him someday.When I google Karn Eval 9,there are many websites with that spelling reffering to ELP.You can't tell me I got the one typo album and nobody else did.Since all you're capable of is to critisize others,you should have the solution.You are the failure and all you can do is print fail to someone else to make yourself feel like you're important.What a pathetic sick joke!

Wrong thread.
Wrong planet.

-------------
"You know what uranium is, right?
It’s 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."


Posted By: rematpac
Date Posted: March 30 2011 at 16:45
Angry
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Originally posted by rematpac rematpac wrote:

AngryThem that do,do;them that can't do,teach;and them that can't teach ctiticize.And that's all you can do since you undoubtably can't play a note of real music.YOU are the failure.I just spent 2 hours looking through internet files on typos for Karn Eval 9 to try and solve the mystery.I found nothing to explain my paradox.I even contacted Greg Lake himself and may hopefully hear back from him someday.When I google Karn Eval 9,there are many websites with that spelling reffering to ELP.You can't tell me I got the one typo album and nobody else did.Since all you're capable of is to critisize others,you should have the solution.You are the failure and all you can do is print fail to someone else to make yourself feel like you're important.What a pathetic sick joke!

Wrong thread.
Wrong planet.
Why don't you check up on just one thing I ever said to see if it's true or not?it's so little work and aren't you even curious that you might have been completely wrong about me?No ,you won't.Because then you'd have to face the truth about yourself.



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk