Print Page | Close Window

Is "The Wall" Progressive Rock

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Recommendations/Featured albums
Forum Description: Make or seek recommendations and discuss specific prog albums
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=75612
Printed Date: June 09 2025 at 05:11
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Is "The Wall" Progressive Rock
Posted By: let prog reign
Subject: Is "The Wall" Progressive Rock
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 13:46
Many of Pink Floyd's albums are clearly prog like DSOTM or Animals. The Wall never really appealed to me like Pink Floyd's other great albums and I think it's because it is not very progressive. 

-------------
Once upon a time there was some writing on the wall we all ignored, until the time that there was war and feasts of famine at our door



Replies:
Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 13:49
mayebe more crossover prog and rock operattic idunno

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


Posted By: zravkapt
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 13:52
Short answer: no
 
I think the proggiest thing on that album is Wright's synth solo in "Run Like Hell"


Posted By: Prog Geo
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 13:54
Ι think yes.



-------------
Sonorous Meal show every Sunday at 20:00 (greek time) on http://www.justincaseradio.com


Posted By: topographicbroadways
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 14:14
Eclectic and at times Symphonic. I would say yes it is very progressive despite a lot of the music not being overly complicated

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


Posted By: Luna
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 14:48
Considering that almost all of it was written by RW, if you consider his solo work prog, then yes. (I think so)

-------------
https://aprilmaymarch.bandcamp.com/track/the-badger" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 14:58
I think it has to be considered as a complete piece, not a collection of individual tracks.


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 15:05
How is Dark Side of the Moon "clearly prog?"  Confused

-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: The Neck Romancer
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 16:02
It is literally progressive, but it ain't "prog"


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 16:10
Yes, but none of the songs on it is.


Posted By: Badabec
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 16:16
I think it is not progressive at all.

-------------
Mesmo a tristeza da gente era mais bela
E além disso se via da janela
Um cantinho de céu e o Redentor

- Antônio Carlos Jobim, Toquinho & Vinícius de Moraes - Carta ao Tom 74


Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 16:26
Yep.

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


Posted By: Deleuze
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 16:29
It is.Not only musicaly but look at the lyrics...


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


Posted By: The Truth
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 17:19
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

I think it has to be considered as a complete piece, not a collection of individual tracks.


-------------
http://blindpoetrecords.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 17:37
I don't think it is too progressive....but because of that I do think it is very progressive.

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


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 18:04
Not as progressive as some of their other stuff, but progressive nevertheless.  

-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: Luna
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 18:12
Originally posted by The Truth The Truth wrote:

Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

I think it has to be considered as a complete piece, not a collection of individual tracks.


-------------
https://aprilmaymarch.bandcamp.com/track/the-badger" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 20:41
Originally posted by let prog reign let prog reign wrote:

Many of Pink Floyd's albums are clearly prog like DSOTM or Animals. The Wall never really appealed to me like Pink Floyd's other great albums and I think it's because it is not very progressive. 
 
I'll be honest with you ... when definitions tell the world that you are screwed up and you don't know anything, and no one can do anything ... I'm not sure I would not say ... too bad for you ... I wrote the piece, got famous off it and have the millions to show for it, and I don't care if you call it prog, bullsh*t or anything else you want ...
 
It's the craziest thing ...
 
Don't start telling me that you only like "progressive" music, because I am not sure you can define it and show it with examples. The Wall might not be "progressive" if you consider just a bunch of songs, but everything else about it, is more progressive than the majority of things that have ever been done ... and that is the reason why it is remembered, and appreciated, and if you decide you don't like it because it ain't progressive enough for your knickers ... too bad!
 
Can you see the fault with that question now? ... how the fudge would you feel if you had composed that massive piece of music, and then some kid comes up and tells you some words that ... have nothing to do with music, and certainly not anything to do with your own work?
 
Yeah ... you would flip the kid, too! And I would say on top of it ... I don't need your nickels!
 
It's not "we don't need no education ... we don't need no thought control ... " ... it's "we don't need your opinions ... we don't need no oppresive ideas ... " ... that are all about ... I can't do something! I can't think of anything more ... unjust ... and a bigger crime ... than say ... I don't like that man's music because he ain't black ... or green ... or blue ... or progressive!Cry    Unhappy


-------------
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: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 21:17
I always like to say - we don't need no education, well how about some grammar lessons?  When you say we don't need no education you are really employing a double negative and oh never mind.


-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: The T
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 22:49
I should link this thread to the "prog pet peeves" thread... 

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


Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: February 02 2011 at 22:52
From all this latest polls I have found that a lot of people believe that Bjork or Steely Dan are Prog but Pink Floiyd not

Awesome

Iván 


-------------
            


Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 00:07
^ Just shows what the populace think eh?
 
Of course The Wall is progressive


-------------
<font color=Brown>Music - The Sound Librarian

...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR]


Posted By: irrelevant
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 02:28
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

From all this latest polls I have found that a lot of people believe that Bjork or Steely Dan are Prog but Pink Floiyd not

Awesome

Iván 

Steely Dan are just as prog as Pink Floyd. Oh sh*t, look what I just got myself into. LOL


-------------
https://gabebuller.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - New album!
http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385


Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 05:21
The whole piece is a progressive masterpiece, simple as...

-------------
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org

Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!


Posted By: Hawkwise
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 06:05
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

From all this latest polls I have found that a lot of people believe that Bjork or Steely Dan are Prog but Pink Floiyd not

Awesome

Iván 
Clap

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


Posted By: O666
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 06:25
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

How is Dark Side of the Moon "clearly prog?"  Confused
This is my question too.


Posted By: O666
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 06:29
Originally posted by Hawkwise Hawkwise wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

From all this latest polls I have found that a lot of people believe that Bjork or Steely Dan are Prog but Pink Floiyd not

Awesome

Iván 
Clap
ClapClap


Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 06:34
I don't like The Wall, but for me this album is progrock. No question about it. I think that album is nothing special, but I think the same about DSOTM, and WYWH. Just my opinion. I love Animals, though.


Posted By: sleeper
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 06:36
Prog, without a doubt. Doesnt mean its a good album though, average at best I'd say.

-------------
Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005



Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 06:58
Originally posted by irrelevant irrelevant wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

From all this latest polls I have found that a lot of people believe that Bjork or Steely Dan are Prog but Pink Floiyd not

Awesome

Iván 

Steely Dan are just as prog as Pink Floyd.
Agreed. For me, Steely Dan is better progrock than Pink Floyd, but SD never recorded so commercial progrock as DSTOM and WYWH albums are, and of course The Wall.


Posted By: irrelevant
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 07:59
Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Originally posted by irrelevant irrelevant wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

From all this latest polls I have found that a lot of people believe that Bjork or Steely Dan are Prog but Pink Floiyd not

Awesome

Iván 

Steely Dan are just as prog as Pink Floyd.
Agreed. For me, Steely Dan is better progrock than Pink Floyd, but SD never recorded so commercial progrock as DSTOM and WYWH albums are, and of course The Wall.

They're two entirely different bands though (and both were commercially successful). Pink Floyd often crated long and drawn out spacey-rock and Steely Dan crafted (quite intricate) song based jazz pop/rock. 


-------------
https://gabebuller.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - New album!
http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385


Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 08:09
Maybe 'Progressive Rock' is the Wall (we can't seem to negotiate over or through)Wink

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


Posted By: irrelevant
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 08:12
Originally posted by ExittheLemming ExittheLemming wrote:

Maybe 'Progressive Rock' is the Wall (we can't seem to negotiate over or through)Wink




-------------
https://gabebuller.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - New album!
http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385


Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 09:05
Originally posted by irrelevant irrelevant wrote:

Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Originally posted by irrelevant irrelevant wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

From all this latest polls I have found that a lot of people believe that Bjork or Steely Dan are Prog but Pink Floiyd not

Awesome

Iván 

Steely Dan are just as prog as Pink Floyd.
Agreed. For me, Steely Dan is better progrock than Pink Floyd, but SD never recorded so commercial progrock as DSTOM and WYWH albums are, and of course The Wall.

They're two entirely different bands though (and both were commercially successful). Pink Floyd often crated long and drawn out spacey-rock and Steely Dan crafted (quite intricate) song based jazz pop/rock. 
Of course that they are different bands. So different that I like Steely Dan much more than Pink Floyd, and I think that Steely Dan' music is better, regarding entire catalogue by both.
I disagree that Steely Dan recorded so commercial albums as DSTOM, WYWH and The Wall. Those Pink Floyd albums were sold in so much copies than ANY other progrock band, be that "spacey - rock" or "jazz pop/rock", were sold entire catalogue. 


Posted By: irrelevant
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 09:15
Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Originally posted by irrelevant irrelevant wrote:

Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Originally posted by irrelevant irrelevant wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

From all this latest polls I have found that a lot of people believe that Bjork or Steely Dan are Prog but Pink Floiyd not

Awesome

Iván 

Steely Dan are just as prog as Pink Floyd.
Agreed. For me, Steely Dan is better progrock than Pink Floyd, but SD never recorded so commercial progrock as DSTOM and WYWH albums are, and of course The Wall.

They're two entirely different bands though (and both were commercially successful). Pink Floyd often crated long and drawn out spacey-rock and Steely Dan crafted (quite intricate) song based jazz pop/rock. 
Of course that they are different bands. So different that I like Steely Dan much more than Pink Floyd, and I think that Steely Dan' music is better, regarding entire catalogue by both.
I disagree that Steely Dan recorded so commercial albums as DSTOM, WYWH and The Wall. Those Pink Floyd albums were sold in so much copies than ANY other progrock band, be that "spacey - rock" or "jazz pop/rock", were sold entire catalogue. 

Does that mean that because of it, Pink Floyd are "less prog"?


-------------
https://gabebuller.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - New album!
http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385


Posted By: let prog reign
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 09:47
Haha, I've created quite a mess!

-------------
Once upon a time there was some writing on the wall we all ignored, until the time that there was war and feasts of famine at our door


Posted By: let prog reign
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 09:50
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

From all this latest polls I have found that a lot of people believe that Bjork or Steely Dan are Prog but Pink Floiyd not

Awesome

Iván 
What's wrong with these people! Wink


-------------
Once upon a time there was some writing on the wall we all ignored, until the time that there was war and feasts of famine at our door


Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 12:17
Originally posted by irrelevant irrelevant wrote:

Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Originally posted by irrelevant irrelevant wrote:

Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Originally posted by irrelevant irrelevant wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

From all this latest polls I have found that a lot of people believe that Bjork or Steely Dan are Prog but Pink Floiyd not

Awesome

Iván 

Steely Dan are just as prog as Pink Floyd.
Agreed. For me, Steely Dan is better progrock than Pink Floyd, but SD never recorded so commercial progrock as DSTOM and WYWH albums are, and of course The Wall.

They're two entirely different bands though (and both were commercially successful). Pink Floyd often crated long and drawn out spacey-rock and Steely Dan crafted (quite intricate) song based jazz pop/rock. 
Of course that they are different bands. So different that I like Steely Dan much more than Pink Floyd, and I think that Steely Dan' music is better, regarding entire catalogue by both.
I disagree that Steely Dan recorded so commercial albums as DSTOM, WYWH and The Wall. Those Pink Floyd albums were sold in so much copies than ANY other progrock band, be that "spacey - rock" or "jazz pop/rock", were sold entire catalogue. 

Does that mean that because of it, Pink Floyd are "less prog"?
Of course that not means that Pink Floyd is "less prog". Pink Floyd is an iconic progrock act for so many people worldwide, even for a crowd who never heard any other progrock band.


Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 13:47
PF's Wall is made of progressive rocks


Posted By: POTA
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 14:44
Originally posted by Gerinski Gerinski wrote:

PF's Wall is made of progressive rocks
Lawl.


Posted By: iluvmarillion
Date Posted: February 04 2011 at 06:26
Originally posted by SolarLuna96 SolarLuna96 wrote:

Considering that almost all of it was written by RW, if you consider his solo work prog, then yes. (I think so)

But the best track on the album is 'comfortably numb' which Gilmour wrote (music that is).

Also "Animals" is almost all written by Waters, but no-one questions whether "Animals" is progressive or not.




Posted By: let prog reign
Date Posted: February 04 2011 at 14:05
Originally posted by iluvmarillion iluvmarillion wrote:

Originally posted by SolarLuna96 SolarLuna96 wrote:

Considering that almost all of it was written by RW, if you consider his solo work prog, then yes. (I think so)

But the best track on the album is 'comfortably numb' which Gilmour wrote (music that is).

Also "Animals" is almost all written by Waters, but no-one questions whether "Animals" is progressive or not.


Thats because animals is completely different

-------------
Once upon a time there was some writing on the wall we all ignored, until the time that there was war and feasts of famine at our door


Posted By: jean-marie
Date Posted: February 04 2011 at 18:17
for sure the wall has prog times but it's not my favourite floyd album though i was at earlcourt at the time and though i'll be at roger's show in paris on june 


Posted By: lucas
Date Posted: February 04 2011 at 18:35
Originally posted by let prog reign let prog reign wrote:

I think it's because it is not very progressive. 
You rate an album on the level of "progressiveness" ?
 
And who cares if an album is less "prog" than others ? it certainly doesn't mean it is inferior.


-------------
"Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood)


Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: February 04 2011 at 22:02
Originally posted by lucas lucas wrote:

Originally posted by let prog reign let prog reign wrote:

I think it's because it is not very progressive. 
You rate an album on the level of "progressiveness" ?
 
And who cares if an album is less "prog" than others ? it certainly doesn't mean it is inferior.
 
I am wondering what specifically the poster feels makes The Wall "not very progressive".
 
Is it the artwork by avant-garde cartoonist Gerald Scarfe? Is it the fact that it is a concept album about a rock musician's descent into isolation and madness, based in part on Floyd guitarist Syd Barrett? Is it the trial scene where a judge that looks like a massive buttocks sentences the defendant to be exposed before his peers? Is it three separate sections of "Another Brick in the Wall" sung from different viewpoints? Is it the enormous amount of studio time spent on sound and vocal effects? Is it because the movie based on the album was one of the most surreal and arresting rock film experiences ever created? Is it because the song "Comfortably Numb" fades in an out of reality, with Waters handling the conscious sequences and Gilmour singing the hallucinatory parts, and then finishing with a towering extended lead that is one of the greatest ever recorded?
 
Oh...wait...those would all indicate a highly progressive album. Never mind.


-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...


Posted By: irrelevant
Date Posted: February 04 2011 at 22:10
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

Originally posted by lucas lucas wrote:

Originally posted by let prog reign let prog reign wrote:

I think it's because it is not very progressive. 
You rate an album on the level of "progressiveness" ?
 
And who cares if an album is less "prog" than others ? it certainly doesn't mean it is inferior.
 
I am wondering what specifically the poster feels makes The Wall "not very progressive".
 
Is it the artwork by avant-garde cartoonist Gerald Scarfe? Is it the fact that it is a concept album about a rock musician's descent into isolation and madness, based in part on Floyd guitarist Syd Barrett? Is it the trial scene where a judge that looks like a massive buttocks sentences the defendant to be exposed before his peers? Is it three separate sections of "Another Brick in the Wall" sung from different viewpoints? Is it the enormous amount of studio time spent on sound and vocal effects? Is it because the movie based on the album was one of the most surreal and arresting rock film experiences ever created? Is it because the song "Comfortably Numb" fades in an out of reality, with Waters handling the conscious sequences and Gilmour singing the hallucinatory parts, and then finishing with a towering extended lead that is one of the greatest ever recorded?
 
Oh...wait...those would all indicate a highly progressive album. Never mind.

No, that indicates they put a lot of thought and hard work into it. 


-------------
https://gabebuller.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - New album!
http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385


Posted By: Baby Snakes
Date Posted: February 04 2011 at 23:20
Could someone explain what exactly isn't prog about The Wall?


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: February 04 2011 at 23:24
Originally posted by Baby Snakes Baby Snakes wrote:

Could someone explain what exactly isn't prog about The Wall?

I think it has something to do with the thread question not having a proper question mark. 


-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: The T
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 00:46
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:


Originally posted by Baby Snakes Baby Snakes wrote:

Could someone explain what exactly isn't prog about The Wall?
I think it has something to do with the thread question not having a proper question mark. 


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


Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 01:28
Maybe the better question is, does it matter?

If it's not prog rock, does that make it any worse?
Do you not like it because of the music itself or because you feel it's not prog rock?

Ponder deeply



Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 03:23
The more one appreciates music the more labels, truly become insignificant.....The Wall.......is there anybody out there yet...?

-------------
<font color=Brown>Music - The Sound Librarian

...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR]


Posted By: trackstoni
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 03:29
Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Yep.

  That's the Word ! Wink


-------------
Tracking Tracks of Rock


Posted By: boo boo
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 06:01
Originally posted by Baby Snakes Baby Snakes wrote:

Could someone explain what exactly isn't prog about The Wall?
 
No 3 minute synth solos or epics. As we all know, it is NOT progressive (I don't mean just not prog, but not in any way progressive) if it's not very long songs full of radical time signature changes, polymetrics and long synth solos.
 
Maybe none of the songs on their own sound like typical prog. But since like other PF albums it really should be judged as a whole rather than the sum of it's parts, the album itself is pretty goddamn progressive.
 
And I'm tired of people writing off obviously progressive music because it's not "prog", some idiots think that's equal to not being progressive at all.
 
Yeah. Post punk was not progressive but Symphony X sure is. Ermm
 
Some people need to look up what progress actually means. I really wish people would remember how to use the word progressive correctly and realise it isn't quite the same as "sounding like Genesis", because when people say with a straight face that David Bowie wasn't progressive despite the incredible diversity and creativity of his career but any band that strictly imitates an already established prog act is progressive just because they sound alike (though almost always inferior) I get more than a little pissy.
 
Not prog =/= not progressive, hell prog has become so NOT progressive now that I really wish the concept of prog and it's whole community would just die off. All of the better prog bands these days tend to be polarizing because people seem so enraged that people dare call a band like The Mars Volta progressive even though they dont sound exactly like some other band they can think of.
 
Prog has ironically become a very constrictive limited term. Think about that, the word "progressive" has rules and limits now. Does anybody realise how STUPID that is?
 
It's not the only genre guilty of this, there's a lot of idiots who don't consider anything punk unless it sounds exactly like The Sex Pistols.


-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs/?chartstyle=LastfmSuicjdeGirls" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: irrelevant
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 06:14
People getting mixed up on their terms again. 

-------------
https://gabebuller.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - New album!
http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385


Posted By: boo boo
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 06:32
Yeah I'm sure when somebody here says "this is not progressive" they really just mean "it's not prog", if that's what they mean then that's what they should say.
 
Because the next time I see somebody with a Kamelot avatar saying Brian Eno isn't progressive I WILL try to ruin that person's life. Angry
 
I know I'm really nitpicking over a simple thing, but it really does bug me. I don't think the tern"progressive rock" has been shortened to "prog rock" over time just out of sheer convenience. Because as the genre has evolved it's been made VERY clear that prog doesn't strictly mean progressive anymore.
 
It did at first, when the term was first being used for bands that actually were progressive, but then people started using the term for bands like IQ and Toto and so shortening it to prog became a neccesity because calling those bands progessive would (and should) result in you being completely laughed at outside of the prog community.


-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs/?chartstyle=LastfmSuicjdeGirls" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: irrelevant
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 07:20
Originally posted by boo boo boo boo wrote:

Because as the genre has evolved it's been made VERY clear that prog doesn't strictly mean progressive anymore.
It did at first, when the term was first being used for bands that actually were progressive

That's right. 


-------------
https://gabebuller.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - New album!
http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385


Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 07:24
Originally posted by boo boo boo boo wrote:

Yeah I'm sure when somebody here says "this is not progressive" they really just mean "it's not prog", if that's what they mean then that's what they should say.
 
Because the next time I see somebody with a Kamelot avatar saying Brian Eno isn't progressive I WILL try to ruin that person's life. Angry
 
I know I'm really nitpicking over a simple thing, but it really does bug me. I don't think the tern"progressive rock" has been shortened to "prog rock" over time just out of sheer convenience. Because as the genre has evolved it's been made VERY clear that prog doesn't strictly mean progressive anymore.
 
It did at first, when the term was first being used for bands that actually were progressive, but then people started using the term for bands like IQ and Toto and so shortening it to prog became a neccesity because calling those bands progessive would (and should) result in you being completely laughed at outside of the prog community.

Why is IQ not "Progressive Rock"? And why do you put them alongside Toto? Two bands so unlike.


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


Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 09:42
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

How is Dark Side of the Moon "clearly prog?"  Confused
 
The Wall feels to me more like a progressive rock album than DSOTM.More expressive and takes you on more of a journey.


Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 09:53
It's art rock. I prefer to lump art rock with prog rock because the distinction between the two gets really blurred often.   DSOTM is more progressive than prog, if that makes sense, but in 1979, rock concept album was not the most progressive idea around (although yet to be flogged to death), so The Wall is neither.  I'd call Meddle both prog and progressive.


Posted By: Progmind
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 10:24
I really dont care if "The wall" its progressive or not

I really enjoy this album and contains very good songs


Posted By: boo boo
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 10:40
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

It's art rock. I prefer to lump art rock with prog rock because the distinction between the two gets really blurred often.   DSOTM is more progressive than prog, if that makes sense, but in 1979, rock concept album was not the most progressive idea around (although yet to be flogged to death), so The Wall is neither.  I'd call Meddle both prog and progressive.
 
Just because The Wall isn't the first concept album doesn't mean it's not progressive, it's stupid to say all newer concept albums can't be progressive since there are many different kinds of themes they can explore.
 
The Wall may not be the first concept album to feature the kind of themes it did (alienation, bitterness, fascism) but it was the first to execute them as well as it did.


-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs/?chartstyle=LastfmSuicjdeGirls" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 17:44
Originally posted by irrelevant irrelevant wrote:

Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

Originally posted by lucas lucas wrote:

Originally posted by let prog reign let prog reign wrote:

I think it's because it is not very progressive. 
You rate an album on the level of "progressiveness" ?
 
And who cares if an album is less "prog" than others ? it certainly doesn't mean it is inferior.
 
I am wondering what specifically the poster feels makes The Wall "not very progressive".
 
Is it the artwork by avant-garde cartoonist Gerald Scarfe? Is it the fact that it is a concept album about a rock musician's descent into isolation and madness, based in part on Floyd guitarist Syd Barrett? Is it the trial scene where a judge that looks like a massive buttocks sentences the defendant to be exposed before his peers? Is it three separate sections of "Another Brick in the Wall" sung from different viewpoints? Is it the enormous amount of studio time spent on sound and vocal effects? Is it because the movie based on the album was one of the most surreal and arresting rock film experiences ever created? Is it because the song "Comfortably Numb" fades in an out of reality, with Waters handling the conscious sequences and Gilmour singing the hallucinatory parts, and then finishing with a towering extended lead that is one of the greatest ever recorded?
 
Oh...wait...those would all indicate a highly progressive album. Never mind.

No, that indicates they put a lot of thought and hard work into it. 
 
That they put a lot of thought and work into it is neither here nor there.
 
Someone put forth the proposition that DSotM was more "progressive" than The Wall, and additionally stated The Wall was "not very progressive." I have yet to see valid clarification of such statements. To be honest, I believe such statements to be subjective in the extreme and not very factual.
 
 
 


-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...


Posted By: The Neck Romancer
Date Posted: February 05 2011 at 19:03
Originally posted by Progmind Progmind wrote:

I really dont care if "The wall" its progressive or not

I really enjoy this album and contains very good songs


The OP cares, that's why he made this thread.


Posted By: iluvmarillion
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 01:45
Originally posted by boo boo boo boo wrote:

Yeah I'm sure when somebody here says "this is not progressive" they really just mean "it's not prog", if that's what they mean then that's what they should say.
 
Because the next time I see somebody with a Kamelot avatar saying Brian Eno isn't progressive I WILL try to ruin that person's life. Angry
 
I know I'm really nitpicking over a simple thing, but it really does bug me. I don't think the tern"progressive rock" has been shortened to "prog rock" over time just out of sheer convenience. Because as the genre has evolved it's been made VERY clear that prog doesn't strictly mean progressive anymore.
 
It did at first, when the term was first being used for bands that actually were progressive, but then people started using the term for bands like IQ and Toto and so shortening it to prog became a neccesity because calling those bands progessive would (and should) result in you being completely laughed at outside of the prog community.

Agree. When I listen to Arena, IQ and Pendragon I feel I'm listening to very dated music. Doesn't mean it's not Prog rock. When I listen to David Bowie I feel I'm listening to an artist always ahead of the game, experimenting with new music forms and willing to collaborate with other artists to achieve his ends. I think more of David Bowie as a progressive Pop artist and influencer of Prog rock artists such as Marillion. Coming back to the original question I still don't see why an album such as Animals is more progressive than The Wall, apart from the obvious that Animals has longer songs! 


Posted By: Rockjf1
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 01:51
Of course it's progresive maybe not songs alone but the whole concept with emotional lyrics gives this album a very progressive side so yes it's prog


Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 03:35
Originally posted by Progmind Progmind wrote:

I really dont care if "The wall" its progressive or not

I really enjoy this album and contains very good songs
this is the best attitude to haveThumbs Up


Posted By: boo boo
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 04:08
Originally posted by iluvmarillion iluvmarillion wrote:

Originally posted by boo boo boo boo wrote:

Yeah I'm sure when somebody here says "this is not progressive" they really just mean "it's not prog", if that's what they mean then that's what they should say.
 
Because the next time I see somebody with a Kamelot avatar saying Brian Eno isn't progressive I WILL try to ruin that person's life. Angry
 
I know I'm really nitpicking over a simple thing, but it really does bug me. I don't think the tern"progressive rock" has been shortened to "prog rock" over time just out of sheer convenience. Because as the genre has evolved it's been made VERY clear that prog doesn't strictly mean progressive anymore.
 
It did at first, when the term was first being used for bands that actually were progressive, but then people started using the term for bands like IQ and Toto and so shortening it to prog became a neccesity because calling those bands progessive would (and should) result in you being completely laughed at outside of the prog community.

Agree. When I listen to Arena, IQ and Pendragon I feel I'm listening to very dated music. Doesn't mean it's not Prog rock. When I listen to David Bowie I feel I'm listening to an artist always ahead of the game, experimenting with new music forms and willing to collaborate with other artists to achieve his ends. I think more of David Bowie as a progressive Pop artist and influencer of Prog rock artists such as Marillion. Coming back to the original question I still don't see why an album such as Animals is more progressive than The Wall, apart from the obvious that Animals has longer songs! 
 
Yeah, I don't think a band has to be progressive to be prog, and even if I don't find a band progressive I don't consider that a bad thing, if they have a sound they are good at, nothing wrong with sticking to it.
 
But yeah, there are many progressive musicians from many genres that are not prog rock.
 
There are electronica artists who can be considered progressive (Aphex Twin), hip hop artists who can be considered progressive (Madlib), even punk artists can be progressive, in fact that's essentially what post punk was, progressive punk.


-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs/?chartstyle=LastfmSuicjdeGirls" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 07:11

Floyd were always leaders of the movement, not driven by it, so by the time they had recorded Dark Side of the Moon they had already covered most of the ground that we consider to be Prog Rock, from its Psychedelic beginnings, through the avant garde, space rock, symphonic/baroque rock, prog folk, electronic prog, heavy prog, jazzy prog and pop prog and were moving into Art Rock with albums as an art form rather than just a random collection of nice tunes or a contrived assortment of themed tracks held together by an external concept.

That last point is an important one, concept albums and Rock Opera, (or Rock Musicals as they should more accurately be called), didn't tell the whole story within the music, they required some-other means to convey the back story - an external narrative to unlock the meaning and to relate the concept - if someone needs to explain the concept then it doesn't really work as a concept. The Wall is one of the few concept albums that does not need CliffNotes to aid the listener in understanding the message or the idea being expressed - it's contained there in full within the lyrics. Of course Floyd were not the first or the only band to do this, The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway doesn't need the narrative on the album sleeve, but it has it never-the-less, then that was Gabriel's method, on stage he would use short surreal stories to prelude each song (mainly to fill-in time while Rutherford, Hackett and Banks tuned and re-tuned between each song) so the narrative on the album sleeve is an extension of this. Waters didn't use such contrivances, his stage "presence" could not support that (the whole idea of Floyd was a band that hid behind "spectacle" on stage and that is reflected in the concept of the wall and the surrogate band), apart from a few iconic moments like Waters hitting the flaming gong or Gilmour's back-lit solo during Comfortably Numb, they did not engage in the stage theatrics; that happened around them and in front of them, or perhaps in spite of them - another point emphasised in the production of The Wall as an album; in the construction of the Wall itself on stage; and in Parker's cinematic version where Floyd do not appear at all, each are just another brick in the wall in the same way that Cousin Kevin, Uncle Ernie and the Gypsy are just bricks in the wall for Tommy.
 
Of course the whole of that last paragraph just concerns the story as portrayed by the lyric, so begs the question "can lyric be progressive?" - something that I feel is not exactly overlooked in Prog, but at least sidelined to secondary importance, an idea not helped by some of the more toe-curling lyrics that Prog is destined to throw up from time to time. My answer to this is "yes, of course" - Hammill is the past-master of the Progressive lyric and has few equals, Bowie for all his adoption of trends in music and pseudo-intellectual tangents is Progressive lyricist who can form seemingly simple songs from esoteric and erudite concepts and ideas that could at times leave Sinfield's oh so clever lyrics wallowing in a land of make believe. Anderson (Jon) is oft derided for his incomprehensible and baffling lyrics, but that in essence is what Prog is musically so those same ideas given voice should be accepted as being on par with the music - music and lyric being equal components of the whole, of equal weight and equal relevance. These lyricist show that the gulf between Prog lyric to Pop/Rock lyric is as wide as the gulf between Prog music and Pop/Rock music, something that we recognise in the definitions of Progressive Rock in the http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive-rock.asp" rel="nofollow - PA Guide to Prog Rock  and something to be considered before nay-saying some of the additions to the archive.
 
Dark Side of the Moon was Waters first successful foray into this realm of progressive lyricism, and one of the few Floyd albums where the balance between Progressive Music and Progressive Lyric achieved equilibrium, (I could add that this numbers as one of the few Prog albums ever to achieve this). Wish You Were Here and Animals tips the balance back towards the music and the lyric, while important to Waters maybe, is less important to the listener. However, on The Wall and The Final Cut we see the emphasis shift away from the music, so the lyric (and Waters' influence) is more important than the music that carries it. Here the music is composed to fit within the time constrains imposed by the lyrics, without that restraint and the withholding of musical excess and extended soloing, the album's length would increase with furthering the concept one iota - and to that end a double album is long enough, a triple or quadruple album would become an endurance. That is not to say that the music is unimportant, or not progressive in itself - instrumental versions of those albums, should such a thing exist, would still be progressive - musically both albums are not a million miles away from Atom Heart Mother in the way themes and motifs replicate and repeat through each track and in the overall tone and feel of the music - the fact that we can recognise the similarities between these albums is more than just the observation that they were composed by the same person or played by the same musicians (substituting Kamen & Ezrin for Geesin & Smith where appropriate).
 
As Bob said early on in this thread, we need to regard The Wall as a whole and not as a compendium of individual songs, and with that we need to take into account the lyric content as vital component of the whole when assessing it as a work of Progressive Rock; that the elevation to the "high art"  that some appear to hold Prog Rock requires that acceptance of lyric as narrative prose taken as something "higher" than melodic rhyming couplets to sing along to in the shower or woo a prospective mate on dancefloor.


-------------
What?


Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 07:21
Interesting post Dean, you put a lot of thought into that.Clap


Posted By: let prog reign
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 08:02
Originally posted by lucas lucas wrote:

Originally posted by let prog reign let prog reign wrote:

I think it's because it is not very progressive. 
You rate an album on the level of "progressiveness" ?
 
And who cares if an album is less "prog" than others ? it certainly doesn't mean it is inferior.
Of course I don't rate an album by how progressive it is. I just think that may be the reason I don't like the album as much. My musical tastes lie with progressive rock

-------------
Once upon a time there was some writing on the wall we all ignored, until the time that there was war and feasts of famine at our door


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 08:11
Originally posted by let prog reign let prog reign wrote:

Originally posted by lucas lucas wrote:

Originally posted by let prog reign let prog reign wrote:

I think it's because it is not very progressive. 
You rate an album on the level of "progressiveness" ?
 
And who cares if an album is less "prog" than others ? it certainly doesn't mean it is inferior.
Of course I don't rate an album by how progressive it is. I just think that may be the reason I don't like the album as much. My musical tastes lie with progressive rock
Big smile I would suggest perhaps that your tastes lie within a subset of progressive rock Wink


-------------
What?


Posted By: boo boo
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 09:06
Yeah, I agree with Dean for the most part, rock operas really need to be judged as a whole. Like previous Floyd albums, many of the songs do segue together as if they were a part of something bigger.

-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs/?chartstyle=LastfmSuicjdeGirls" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: let prog reign
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 09:07
Because this thread has caused so much arguing and fighting I've decided I will make poll on what you think. Is The wall progressive rock or not

-------------
Once upon a time there was some writing on the wall we all ignored, until the time that there was war and feasts of famine at our door


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 09:41
Confused really? Why? The only person with a negative opinion is you and you're not exactly putting forward arguments as such.

-------------
What?


Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 10:24
The Floyd albums up to and including DSotM are far more progressive than anything Genesis, Yes or Tull put out.
Watch the DSotM Classic Album programme and you will understand.


Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 10:33
Originally posted by boo boo boo boo wrote:

 
Just because The Wall isn't the first concept album doesn't mean it's not progressive,



I didn't say that was the only reason.  As usual, the point flies right over your overreactive head.   Did you even read the full post?

Originally posted by boo boo boo boo wrote:

it's stupid to say all newer concept albums can't be progressive since there are many different kinds of themes they can explore.


Agreed and I didn't say THAT in any case. Read properly.

 
Originally posted by boo boo boo boo wrote:

The Wall may not be the first concept album to feature the kind of themes it did (alienation, bitterness, fascism) but it was the first to execute them as well as it did.


Flash news, all your favourite albums and bands are not and cannot be progressive just because they are YOUR favourites. Prog is not about good or bad. 


Posted By: Dellinger
Date Posted: February 06 2011 at 19:54
Originally posted by boo boo boo boo wrote:

Originally posted by iluvmarillion iluvmarillion wrote:

Originally posted by boo boo boo boo wrote:

Yeah I'm sure when somebody here says "this is not progressive" they really just mean "it's not prog", if that's what they mean then that's what they should say.
 

Because the next time I see somebody with a Kamelot avatar saying Brian Eno isn't progressive I WILL try to ruin that person's life. Angry

 

I know I'm really nitpicking over a simple thing, but it really does bug me. I don't think the tern"progressive rock" has been shortened to "prog rock" over time just out of sheer convenience. Because as the genre has evolved it's been made VERY clear that prog doesn't strictly mean progressive anymore.

 

It did at first, when the term was first being used for bands that actually were progressive, but then people started using the term for bands like IQ and Toto and so shortening it to prog became a neccesity because calling those bands progessive would (and should) result in you being completely laughed at outside of the prog community.


Agree. When I listen to Arena, IQ and Pendragon I feel I'm listening to very dated music. Doesn't mean it's not Prog rock. When I listen to David Bowie I feel I'm listening to an artist always ahead of the game, experimenting with new music forms and willing to collaborate with other artists to achieve his ends. I think more of David Bowie as a progressive Pop artist and influencer of Prog rock artists such as Marillion. Coming back to the original question I still don't see why an album such as Animals is more progressive than The Wall, apart from the obvious that Animals has longer songs! 


 

Yeah, I don't think a band has to be progressive to be prog, and even if I don't find a band progressive I don't consider that a bad thing, if they have a sound they are good at, nothing wrong with sticking to it.

 

But yeah, there are many progressive musicians from many genres that are not prog rock.

 

There are electronica artists who can be considered progressive (Aphex Twin), hip hop artists who can be considered progressive (Madlib), even punk artists can be progressive, in fact that's essentially what post punk was, progressive punk.


I think it was really bad that the name of the genre ended up being "Progressive Rock" or "Prog" or whatever, it rather makes people want to think of the genre about the music "progressing", whether it is within the same song, the same album, or within the boundaries of the genre (the new album has to offer something new to music, to "progress" music). However, I don't think that's the whole description of the genre, though it is an important part of it. I liked better the early description of the genre "art rock", for I believe it describes better the whole point of prog (at least at the beginning), which was to do something better with rock music.


Posted By: Tavastia
Date Posted: February 07 2011 at 16:28
I agree with Dellinger. Sometimes the arguments on "Progressive Rock" are as illusive and individualstic as on "Black Metal". 


Posted By: topographicbroadways
Date Posted: February 07 2011 at 16:36
[/QUOTE]

I think it was really bad that the name of the genre ended up being "Progressive Rock" or "Prog" or whatever, it rather makes people want to think of the genre about the music "progressing", whether it is within the same song, the same album, or within the boundaries of the genre (the new album has to offer something new to music, to "progress" music). However, I don't think that's the whole description of the genre, though it is an important part of it. I liked better the early description of the genre "art rock", for I believe it describes better the whole point of prog (at least at the beginning), which was to do something better with rock music.[/QUOTE]

\Thread. With prog it is very easy to over-analyse when how you feel as you listen is the most important thing, the genre of prog is about emotions in the music and not solely about complexity. Floyd were never a band that played in 9/8 and showed off a great deal of virtuosity but were always a prog band.


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


Posted By: javier0889
Date Posted: February 07 2011 at 16:50
People are assuming that prog has to be the "common sound" of the genre, like Yes, Genesis, etc.
Pink Floyd was more like "carefully crafted rock music", more avant garde on their early years, more "pop" or accesible if you like on their later years. But the level of experimentation that Pink Floyd represents to the common "rock" or "pop" music, both in lyrics and musical composition, is enough to reckon them as "progressive rock". To be honest I don't care if they're prog or not, but I think about them as a progressive rock band.
So yes, The Wall is a prog album for me.


-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/javier0889


Posted By: let prog reign
Date Posted: February 07 2011 at 18:21
Originally posted by Tony R Tony R wrote:

The Floyd albums up to and including DSotM are far more progressive than anything Genesis, Yes or Tull put out.
Watch the DSotM Classic Album programme and you will understand.
Thumbs Up Let the man with 100 000 posts tell us all


-------------
Once upon a time there was some writing on the wall we all ignored, until the time that there was war and feasts of famine at our door


Posted By: Fox On The Rocks
Date Posted: February 12 2011 at 21:27
Originally posted by Starhammer Starhammer wrote:

It is literally progressive, but it ain't "prog"
  Exactly.

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


Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 21 2011 at 14:05
Originally posted by let prog reign let prog reign wrote:

Many of Pink Floyd's albums are clearly prog like DSOTM or Animals. The Wall never really appealed to me like Pink Floyd's other great albums and I think it's because it is not very progressive. 
 
The more I think about this, the more I prefer to not think that this is progressive ... but it does not take away from it, anything ... it's still excellent music and work all around.
 
I still think that this will become one of the best known "operas" of the 20th century ... and I just can't wait for someone else to try and do this and see their interpretation ... and clean up the staging so the fluency and themes of the work are more integrated and displayed better ... it might be better if we either concentrate on the kid that is all alone, or concentrate on the effects of war on the folks involved, and I am not sure that the whole thing is clear enough to join both themes and in the early version a lot of "The Final Cut" was a part of it, and in the final version it is not ... and I think that it confuses things ... I think that a kid growing up in an oppressive place, might feel that way, but I am not sure that he/she would be so vehemently opposed to everything and consider their ex-instructors a vicious military ... somehow it's a bit of an extreme here for me ... I can see the anger and the isolation, but hardly see the rest of the political situation, even though it could happen.
 
As to "progressive"? ... I have never felt that Pink Floyd was all about "progressive" anything ... just inventive and excellent work all around ... the kind of work that defies description and designation, and in the end, that is the best art there is.


-------------
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: boo boo
Date Posted: February 21 2011 at 14:20
Originally posted by topographicbroadways topographicbroadways wrote:

I think it was really bad that the name of the genre ended up being "Progressive Rock" or "Prog" or whatever, it rather makes people want to think of the genre about the music "progressing", whether it is within the same song, the same album, or within the boundaries of the genre (the new album has to offer something new to music, to "progress" music). However, I don't think that's the whole description of the genre, though it is an important part of it. I liked better the early description of the genre "art rock", for I believe it describes better the whole point of prog (at least at the beginning), which was to do something better with rock music.

\Thread. With prog it is very easy to over-analyse when how you feel as you listen is the most important thing, the genre of prog is about emotions in the music and not solely about complexity. Floyd were never a band that played in 9/8 and showed off a great deal of virtuosity but were always a prog band.
 
I agree with this.
 
I do like the term "prog rock" just because it sounds cool. It never annoys me when people say "this isn't prog", but when people say "this isn't progressive" even when it's something that CLEARLY is...............................


-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs/?chartstyle=LastfmSuicjdeGirls" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: jaybird77
Date Posted: February 22 2011 at 02:03
Pink Floyd's trademark are writing conceptual albums musically and lyrically. Some people confuse "concept albums" being synonymous with Prog Rock. Yet, not all concept albums fit into the genre of Progressive Rock, i.e., "Tommy", "Antichrist Superstar". In the case of Pink Floyd some of their music could also be questioned whether it fits into the Prog Rock mold or not, but that's another arguement. Honestly, this forum could be 50/50. "The Wall" has alot of Prog elements; reccuring themes and motifs, great instrumentals, dynamic songwriting, and the beginning of side 2 really sets more of the  musical ambience then on side 2. On the other hand, Waters was never much of a virtuoso, neither was Nick Mason. IMO a band that considers themselves Prog Rock must possess some type of prowess over their musical instruments, I never thought these two guys were good musicians. Thank God for Dave Gilmour and Rick Wright. After weighing the pros and cons, I would consider this album to be Progressive Rock material.


Posted By: Evolver
Date Posted: February 22 2011 at 06:21
Originally posted by Tony R Tony R wrote:

The Floyd albums up to and including DSotM are far more progressive than anything Genesis, Yes or Tull put out. 
That's trying to quantify something that's not quantifiable.

-------------
Trust me. I know what I'm doing.


Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: February 22 2011 at 06:31
Originally posted by jaybird77 jaybird77 wrote:

 IMO a band that considers themselves Prog Rock must possess some type of prowess over their musical instruments, I never thought these two guys were good musicians. .

Pink Floyd don't consider themselves Prog Rock..never have. Anyhow prowess over instruments has nothing to do with Prog anyway.


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


Posted By: King Winter
Date Posted: February 22 2011 at 09:04

The Wall is progressive because it has many classical influences, especially on the second disc.

Animals is not progressive! Dogs and Pigs are both long tracks but not progreesive, and they are preety groovy. Sheep is kind of progressive, I guess...


Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 22 2011 at 20:59
Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Originally posted by jaybird77 jaybird77 wrote:

 IMO a band that considers themselves Prog Rock must possess some type of prowess over their musical instruments, I never thought these two guys were good musicians. .

Pink Floyd don't consider themselves Prog Rock..never have. Anyhow prowess over instruments has nothing to do with Prog anyway.
 
+1
 
+2
 
+3
 
+4
 
Echoes my sentiments exactly.
 
It's great music, and I couldn't give a damn if it is progressive or not ... that band's music and work will survive hundreds of years and no one will remember ProgArchives! ... even our comments would be even less important in either direction!
 
But if "progressive", or "prog" means "innovative", "creative", "original" ... then the discussion is over. But the band, themselves, never used the term, and Roger laughs about it all day long! And Jim Ladd will say something witty about people that think they know music and then call it radio-active waste!


-------------
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: jaybird77
Date Posted: February 22 2011 at 21:16

I'm sorry but I do believe prowess does have something to do with Prog. How many progressive rock bands out there have mediocre chops? I became a musician because of Prog and Fusion. It's always compelled me to play beyond the limited restraints of basic 4/4 rock and chugging out the same 4 or 5 chords. Like I said before, that's my opinion.



Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: February 23 2011 at 10:49
Originally posted by jaybird77 jaybird77 wrote:

How many progressive rock bands out there have mediocre chops?



I don't think Renaissance had amazing MUSICIANS except maybe the bassist.  I am not sure how amazing Mick Pointer was, at least not on the Script...album and while Steve Rothery has got a great tone, lovely vibrato and writes emotional solos, given the context you are referring to viz prog/fusion, he's not all that hot and nor is Mark Kelly.   While it could be argued that prog musicians are technically above average vis-a-vis plain vanilla rock, they are not always outstanding.  Maybe that the top prog rock bands like JT, ELP, Yes had such talented musicians creates such an impression.  


Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 23 2011 at 15:13
Originally posted by jaybird77 jaybird77 wrote:

I'm sorry but I do believe prowess does have something to do with Prog. How many progressive rock bands out there have mediocre chops? I became a musician because of Prog and Fusion. It's always compelled me to play beyond the limited restraints of basic 4/4 rock and chugging out the same 4 or 5 chords. Like I said before, that's my opinion.

 
Not disagreeing with this at all.
 
But the issue, in my understanding of it, is that we confuse someone playing this and that with what it is ... or might not be.
 
In the end, it doesn't matter if you play whatever you play ... if they are 4/4 or the same 4 or 5 chords, if your emphasys is on a different accent and on a different "non-format", away from the ones that most rock music tends to follow.
 
My contention is, that the description, is trying to do something that music has done for hundreds of years ... and that is to "simplify" what is done, or heard, and see if you can copy it or play it ... or at least write it down ... which is one of the things in some of the definitions that state that improvisation can not be done and there are not to many solos that were not originally improvised anyway!
 
But let's not state that all fusion is progressive or prog, because it can be ... but it might also not be!
 
In the end, we fail to see the most obvious things, that you can see in the early albums and bootlegs ... the massive amount of improvisation and experimentation and playing around with sound effects, that became a massive part of their work ... think about that ... you are talking about the "musicality" of it all, and they were thinking how to add music to this sound, or effect or type of moment ... it's a bit different, and in that sense, yes, very progressive!


-------------
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: jaybird77
Date Posted: February 23 2011 at 15:30

Getting back to the original subject, "The Wall" had a huge influence on me, more then DSOTM, WYWH, or Meddle. The first time I ever heard it was at a laser show in Seattle. To sit down and listen to the entire album in one sitting is quite mind blowing. There is a darker and more intense atmosphere to this album then anything else they've done, even "Animals". I think this album is when the Floyd rocked the most.



Posted By: Jarvig
Date Posted: February 25 2011 at 03:35
Off cause The Wall is prog. Very much so.



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