If You’re Older than 40!

DomValela wrote: Well! Evolver, Moshkito, Slartibartfast, akajazzman, rogerthat and ergaster, thanks for your input! You make lots of good points...the music being only "3 to 5" years old in my own mind makes very obvious sense! But most importantly; It doesn't really matter what I like, as long as I like it. There's no point in straining to be up-to-date...besides, that way lies madness. (Lady Gaga, Nickelback,Justin Bieber and wearing my pants belted at the knees!!! *cringe*) But you never know...Slartibartfast, perhaps I will discover the error of my ways!  ...and all the while, Peter Gabriel is telling me about what it's like to "cuddle the porcupine" Back in NYC in the background...hahaha...

 

Great thread 

I'm 41, and have always listened to a variety of music.  I think when I was in my 20's though, I felt 70's prog was the best music, and the best there would ever be.  I was much more critical of other music, especially if it didn't have the characteristics of Yes, Genesis, Pink Floyd, ELP, King Crimson, etc.  In the late 90's, I discovered that prog was still alive and new stuff was being made and eventually discovered this place (and was overwhelmed at how much prog was being made......and had been made that I didn't know about).

I mostly listen to new stuff these days, though I usually pick up a couple of 70's albums a year that I didn't know about before finding Progarchives.  I will find that unlike in my 20's, I can listen to and appreciate a huge variety of music, even if it's not something I would go out and buy to have in my personal collection.  I really don't listen to the "big" 70's bands anymore (listed above), though maybe a couple times a year I'll pull a couple out and enjoy them (or get something new, like the ELP Beyond The Beginning DVD, or the Genesis Peter Gabriel years remastered box).  When I do this, I find they still sound great, but some of the wonder and deep emotional connection seems to have worn off over the years......or something, which is hard to describe since it's a purely emotional and subjective feeling that I used to get when listening to them but is not not really there anymore.  Probably just heard them all too many times.

I also find I don't have as much time to listen to music these days, though I never had a time where I stopped listening or picking up new (or at least, new to me) music.  I've slowed down on my buying of new albums in the last couple years, mostly for financial reasons, but also because of limited time to listen to the 500+ albums I already have.

So I guess for me, I'm much more open minded and receptive to new music than I was in my 20's.  I would say that since that time, prog has always been my primary musical enjoyment, but I certainly listen to other genres and enjoy other stuff.  But I'm not ashamed to say I'm a hard core prog head and probably will be for life

moshkito wrote: [QUOTE=progpositivity]   It's similar to a lot of rap that we like to have fun with here ... the beat is the same ... and all that is left is what the lyrics are about ... and it is really hard to say that one set of lyrics is progressive and the other is not. That is the point of the "garage band" comment. That is not to say that someone can not use the program and create something even better than KC, or ELP, or Genesis, which of course can be done ... if someone has the inclination ... which of course we're not going to like here because we will say it is all a copy of the original!

Atkingani wrote: Great thread...  It woke up almost all dinosaurs veterans of this site!

moshkito wrote:  .... So many of your references in discussion on prog, music business, politics, sports, etc become anti-productive to an abundance of today's world.  What this tells me in the smoothest way is that you can be honest about the history and either no one will believe you or simply think of you as an ideal candidate for drug treatment in a mental ward.  I was born in Portugal, under a dictatorship, went to Brazil and finally came to America and lived Madison, WI and then in Santa Barbara, CA ... so, you tell me ... how can you compare three countries, three musics, three different concepts, and not be aware of the differences in so many things in life? I understand that but, what I am saying is that many music fans from different generations AND who groove on the life they live in 2010, don't seem to respect history. Like for example.....Many people I have met in the last 6 years, have an attitude about a reference made about a past event. A reference that makes a statement based on a fact. Instead of just everyone laying their cards on the table, it seems shameful or not cool to engage in a conversation with a person that makes reference to a past event. Something historical perhaps...and for me at age 53, it takes all the fun out of conversing. People who have this attitude half-way understand me but, lean more towards a 2010 society that wants to slam-dunk a basketball and forget  about all the other rules of the game....simply because those rules derive from the past. People who laugh at Babe Ruth and honestly think he was a worthless ball player. People who talk, talk, talk about Jimi Hendrix and Eric Clapton and assume there were no other great guitar players during the 60's. Like it's not cool to talk about past icons unless it's Hendrix and Clapton. I don't get that? All the great guitarists from the 60's and they just want to put emphasis on these 2 guys? What do people want to do today, change real history?  It's today's media that does it for their minds basically. It's what influences them to think this way. I am 53 and when I was a kid, the idea behind education was to think for yourself. You want to read about Plato for years and that's fine but, eventually....what do you actually think after all that's taken in? Observations, analogies and eventually arriving to  a conclusion of your own. Not like society does today. When I was a kid, people around me from every age group respected the past and learned quite a deal from it. They didn't try to be SO different from those heroes who laid foundations for life. They didn't act jealous and resent those who took steps before them. It was all about being open to the forces of life. Paul Green's School of Rock wants kids to study Keith Moon and Janis Joplin. It's fine if you are young and might want to emulate their styles to a degree but the point I am making is ....these artists shouldn't be studied like Mozart. Paul Green displays his teachings and his students on Woodstock documentary of VH1. It feels real ridiculous to me. When you are in your 50's and you read somewhere that Jon Anderson is performing with the kids from the Paul Green School Of Rock, a few insults and revolts enter the picture. First of all...the whole thing is a joke and he should either retire or do solo releases. New music and not the music of Yes. Money hungry people sometimes do not act their age and as Grace Slick used to say....Rock stars from the 60's who now have grey hair and are humped over at age 60, performing on tour....look ridiculous. As you grow older and you hear things like....Jon Anderson had to ask his guru if continuing working with Paul Green was a healthy thing to do, you start to bust out laughing. He had to ask his guru if that was the right decision? Shouldn't he realize that himself? I mean....to me that's like trying to talk me into appearing on the Jerry Springer Show. I don't have to pray to God for a decision on that, now do I? I'm sorry, but Paul Green makes analogies of Rock Music we grew up with and he hasn't a flippin' clue where the music came from. He does not know how the soul shines through music. He just trains his students (which are good musicians), to study Classic Rockers like Keith Moon and treats it like a music college affair with Mozart and Shubert. I'm too old for stupied insulting crap like this. It doesn't make a bit of sense.

Edited by TODDLER - November 23 2010 at 21:14

DomValela wrote:                 Hi! I'm 16,and having read some of this thread I find it to be really quite interesting. (I realize that this thread is typically not for my generation to be posting in,but I thought you might like to get a younger person's perspective.)  I've been listening to Prog music religiously for somewhere between three and five years now, and I  primarily listen to all the 70's  usual suspects (Genesis, Yes, Floyd, Magma, GG, KC, ELP, PFM etc). (I know, I know..."I'm just starting off.")                  Perhaps I'm more closed-minded than the majority of people  posting here, but I've found that the late 60's to early 70's prog is generally much more interesting, intellectual and overall...better than the new stuff! The only newer band I've really gotten into seriously is Marillion, and I'm something of a Dream Theater fan. Porcupine Tree and Tool have failed to grow on me.  (I still want to explore Pallas, IQ, etc...the rest of the Marillion-ish stuff, apparently.) I know that I'm not just a purist and hate "all that new stuff," because despite all my listening and re-listening, some classic bands like VdGG and Mahavishnu Orchestra are just not clicking.  I wonder what it is that makes all of you like the newer stuff ,and what makes me not like it! My first guess is that it's the metal leanings of the majority of the new prog that I'm not liking, and I prefer the (I guess) "softer"classic prog...but that can't be it because I'm absolutely hypnotized by the droning, pounding music of Magma! My friends do tell me that I'm old fashioned for my habits of not having an Ipod and regularly buying albums....it beats me!

It is very simple, unlike many of your metal oriented friends you are probably, like me who is also a young prog fan, open minded enough to buy into a musical aesthetic that is old and humble by comparison (some people in my age group have complained that prog is either too polite or too acid; they can't do without metal crunch) and unlike these oldies who have worn out their SEBTPs and CTTEs long ago with the passage of time, we still find these albums fresh and invigorating, the way they must have felt to people listening to them at the time of their release.  There's no reason to try too hard to like the modern stuff and as and when you find modern prog that appeals to you, you will know it.   There is some good modern prog but you or I are possibly trapped in comparing it to an exceptional benchmark which was set in a different era. Other than Kevin Gilbert, ACT and some RIO stuff, there's no modern prog I would even think of putting on the same pedestal as great 70s prog albums. Perhaps, after a few years, I would have had my fill of these classics and would no longer need an album to be that great to invest more time in listening to it.  I don't know, but until then, I can't help feeling distinctly underwhelmed when I listen to a modern prog album. 

Further, there's no overarching reason to "keep up with the times" other than that people like to do it.  A lifetime is not enough to get around to half a century of prime jazz and three centuries of classical music. If discovery of great music is the end, why not that rather than contemporary bands who are burdened by the legacy of what all came before them? It's not necessarily "this or that" but one also doesn't have all the time for all the music in the world. Lastly, while some of the alt based modern prog bands like PT have contemporary influences, I would not say what modern symph I have heard is particularly contemporary, so you are not necessarily keeping up with the times by listening to it , rather, you'd be listening to music that pays homage to yesteryear greats. 

 EDIT: I am a metalhead. From my experience, I am not sure that necessarily helps in developing a liking for prog metal. 

Edited by rogerthat - November 23 2010 at 19:19

TheGazzardian wrote: Hercules wrote: I got particularly angry this week when another member accused me of being "sad" for suggesting that some musicians in the 70s (Can and Jamie Muir, to be precise) may not have been very good live. He than grumbled that I had praised Mostly Autumn and referred to them as  examples of post 1989 rubbish, The sad thing is that some are stuck in the 70s and think that nothing good is done now. Such a closed mind. Sounds like Walter; just ignore him. He's a troll.

we must agree, he does make a point, though.

Perhaps I'm more closed-minded than the majority of people  posting here, but I've found that the late 60's to early 70's prog is generally much more interesting, intellectual and overall...better than the new stuff! ...

.... So many of your references in discussion on prog, music business, politics, sports, etc become anti-productive to an abundance of today's world.  What this tells me in the smoothest way is that you can be honest about the history and either no one will believe you or simply think of you as an ideal candidate for drug treatment in a mental ward.