Innovative vs. Regressive prog artists

There is a third group of bands. Classic bands, that profiled in the 80's/90's and now copy the formula they became known with. That group includes many of the classic prog metal bands (Dream Theater, Symphony X etc.). They use the same formula over 10 years now, only with slight variation or very slow evolution. (This is no attack on prog metal, which I'm quite a fan of, but undeniable)

I thought I was the only, for I saw bands of both examples being called innovative. However, if the music is good I will buy it. As originality is not that much of a measure for me, I do not really care, yet I do not need a 100% copy..

Congratulations you discovered something! ...did you? Sorry, but it's been repeated plenty of times, and many do consider these "Retro" Prog bands pointless, etc.

I love TFK, one of the few Modern Prog bands that I dig. Just if you don't like them cause they have a more 70's oriented sound just don't listen to them.

Pendragon's 90's outputs IMO are excellent while having certain degree of influences, Pink Floyd and Genesis mainly.

I found in very few songs of these both bands to be complete rip offs. While albums like Space Revolver and Masquerade Overture are very inventive and excellent on their own right.

While I certainly don't like Modern "inovative" Prog bands, like Porcupine Tree, Mars Volta, Pain of Salvation just for the fact that they esemble to much metal or heaviness and not much prog. But of course this is my opinion just as yours.

I love many 70s inspired music and retro prog, but it has to have inspiration.. that's the main point for me. TFK seem to me that they're not write music in true sense - just come to jam-session, throw some random ideas, well-tested formulas, put it together, and that's all their music is all about. I can't hear the own personality in such music. I don't think even any of 70s bands - Yes, Genesis, ELP etc. sat and said - let's do some prog. They created music without thinking of purpose, they had own ideas and visions. But from the music of TFK I feel that purpose too much. That is difference, the approach to the music.
But of course it is only my opinion (and it is reffered mostly on recent albums - seems to me they write music - as routine, and they have nothing to bring). I used to like quite lot Rainmaker or even Unfold the Future, but get bored after the constant repeating themselves and the same influences, creating 30 minute same tiresome songs.
Wanted to know if someone here feel it similar or in different ways.


Edited by stewe - July 05 2008 at 15:07

Just listening to Transatlantic and that seems to me excellent still after years, though both Stolt and Morse I named as examples are here and in the main roles.. it is retro, but it has some different enthusiasm, chemistry, approach, whatever it is...

But is a band like Porcupine Tree really all that innovative?  I mean, sure they have changed their sound over the years whereas a band like TFK is more consistent in their style.  But does that make them innovative?  If memory serves me correctly, FoaBP sounds more or less like Deadwing, just with fewer pysch/space elements and slightly more mainstream.  That's not to say it isn't a good album (because it is), but how is that innovative other than that it sounds different than what they recorded 15 years ago?

I don't think it's fair to denigrate TFK by claiming they have a cookie-cutter writing style and that they "borrowed" (ie stole) their ideas from the 70's "prog giants" (and remember, Stolt was a member of Kaipa in the 70's).  TFK has a very distinctive sound, so much so that when you hear one of their songs, you know without a doubt that it's TFK.  If they weren't able to do anything on their own merit, then wouldn't all of their music sound exactly the same as Yes, Genesis, KC, etc.?  It certainly sounds different to my ears, even if the influences are clear.

But in the end does it really matter?  Isn't the quality of the music what's really important?  I've never heard any of PoS's music and I can only comment based on what I have read in these forums, but I have heard that their last studio album was "innovative".  However, a lot of those people have also stated that the album isn't very good.  Is it better to produce an "innovative" yet inferior album than it is to produce a quality "regressive" album?  I'd rather hear the latter, but maybe that's just me...

No, I don't have these feelings on the modern prog scene. I think that The Flower Kings and Neal Morse are great symphonic rock artists with their own sounds. I don't get why so many people think we should have let that genre die in the 70's. The entire point of progression in rock music is to open up new sounds so that bands can play in them. Well hey, cool; The Flower Kings, Marillion and many other bands even as far back as Camel owe Yes and Genesis thanks for their innovations, now they can play in their preferred style.

Btw, what exactly makes Porcupine Tree and Pain of Salvation "innovative"? I've not seen one person define that yet.

Edited by King Crimson776 - July 05 2008 at 17:14

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ I don't think that PoS - Scarsick was innovative ... their other albums are far more adventurous. If anything, it's a surprising change compared to the previous releases, and it caught many fans off guard.

Like I said, I've never heard the album, but I had heard that it was "different."  I took that to mean "innovative", but I could very well be mistaken.  Of course, it also depends on how one defines "innovation."  Semantics can be a very dangerous thing...

I personally like the Flower Kings, and while their music may sound similar to the classic proggers, I don't really think it's fair to say they just go into the studio and start jamming.  Wheather you'd call it "innovative" or not, their music is still quite complex and requires much thought, knowledge and training to compose.

Well, maybe not ALL we should care about, but drawing heavily on groups of the past doesn't void the talent of modern acts, or nullify the worth of their art.

stewe wrote: The Flower Kings - still the same formula repeated and recycled thousands times, ideas are taken from 70s giants.