Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Innovative vs. Regressive prog artists
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedInnovative vs. Regressive prog artists

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 12>
Author
Message
stewe View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Czechoslovakia
Status: Offline
Points: 596
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Innovative vs. Regressive prog artists
    Posted: July 05 2008 at 12:02
It may sounds kind of weird... but today I have listened to recent albums The Flower Kings and I can help feeling how I found again their music mostly pointless, uninspired and stagnant (although their proficiency as musicians). Similar problem I have with recent music of Neal Morse or Pendragon (with exception of the last album). Still the same formula repeated and recycled thousands times, ideas are taken from 70s giants. That music sounds like routine to me in most cases.

On the other hand I feel constant evolution and new inspiration in music of prog-bands like Pain of Salvation, Opeth, Porcupine Tree even Arena. Integrity of those bands remains, influences of variety of music are still present, but all it serves as the healthy inspiration without recycling the ideas - music has much more own "face". Focus is on compositions, creating moods, not primarily on jamming and showing-off the skills, and sounds fresh with each new effort.

Anyone has such feelings of dividing of current prog music?


<a href="http://steveer.ic.cz" rel="nofollow"
Back to Top
Luke. J View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 07 2008
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 380
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 12:51

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..
Back to Top
CaincelaOreinim View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 21 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 395
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 13:21
It's definitely dividing I feel the older of the progressive music fans...the more familiarity/knowledge one has with any genre, the more one would be looking for it to expand/bring out new elements...unless one is content to stay in one place...I however am not.

I for one like The Flower Kings (let's not make this the focal point) but they aren't exactly doing anything sonically new...do they write good music?  I think so...and like Luke says it's not necessarily important that they're doing anything new...only that one likes it, and that's enough really.  
Back to Top
The Quiet One View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 13:27
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.
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21817
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 13:31
This is a cool coincidence ... what you're saying directly relates to the two criteria I defined in a different thread I created recently. Bands can either be truly progressive, sound like classic prog bands - or any combination/variation of the two.
Release Polls

Listened to:
Back to Top
stewe View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Czechoslovakia
Status: Offline
Points: 596
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 14:54
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


<a href="http://steveer.ic.cz" rel="nofollow"
Back to Top
fusionfreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: August 23 2007
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 1317
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 15:13
The Flower Kings:controversial as ever,actually I don't care about derivative or not.By the way I ordered
2 of their albums this week and I'm eager to listen to them.Dan Britton undoubtedly delivers 70's prog inspired works but he does it with talent,moreover they give me new "food" for dreaming. 
I was born in the land of Mahavishnu,not so far from Kobaia.I'm looking for the world

of searchers with the help from

crimson king
Back to Top
stewe View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Czechoslovakia
Status: Offline
Points: 596
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 15:28
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...


<a href="http://steveer.ic.cz" rel="nofollow"
Back to Top
The Quiet One View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 16:37
Originally posted by stewe stewe wrote:



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.


It's fine to me that we have both different ideas, peace.

I do understand that they have some repeated sections on their later albums from early ones. That's why I just stay with few albums by them, the ones that show more UNIQUEness and Better, of course. Space Revolver, Adam & Eve(yeah I really like it), The Flower King(Roine Stolt) and I'm now looking which Double album is their best. I think I'll go with Paradox Hotel, while Stardust has a LOT of 70's soundish which is, I think your problem with Retro, and I understand.
I may also try Retropolis or Back in the World of Adventures or even Rainmaker.

BTW: Have you heard The Tangent?

Edited by cacho - July 05 2008 at 16:38
Back to Top
Rubidium View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: March 23 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1158
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 16:50
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...
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21817
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 17:00
^ 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.
Release Polls

Listened to:
Back to Top
King Crimson776 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 12 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2779
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 17:06
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
Back to Top
russellk View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 28 2005
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 17:09
Dividing the prog world into regressive and innovative music is, of course, a gross simplification. In reality there's a continuum from bands like STARCASTLE at one end (undoubted YES clones) to the CARDIACS at the other (there are no other bands that sound like them). In between we have bands that are mostly derivative, bands that are mostly innovative, or any combination of the two. I refer you to Mike's thread (http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49851) and my thread (http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49864), both of which discuss this issue.

It's a simplification, yes, but although it's not ACCURATE it is USEFUL because it mirrors people's taste. There seems to be two groups on this site that do not understand each other: the 'innovators', who look for originality in their music, and the 'derivatives', who look for sounds that remind them of the classic era. Yes, I know that many people will say they don't care how music is classified, as long as they like it. Fine - but people will usually gravitate towards one end of the continuum or the other.

Understanding this division in ProgArchives will help us cope with reviews like this famous one: (http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=173419), or, on the other hand, http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=23231. These are both great reviews, but people at the other end of the continuum found them hard to credit.
Back to Top
Rubidium View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: March 23 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1158
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 17:12
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia 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...LOL
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21817
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 17:13
^^ or this one: http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=61487, although in this case I think it might be a simple case of genre incompatibility.

Edited by MikeEnRegalia - July 05 2008 at 17:13
Release Polls

Listened to:
Back to Top
MonkeyphoneAlex View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: September 27 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 234
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 17:13
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.
"Information is not knowledge. Knowledge is not wisdom. Wisdom is not truth. Truth is not beauty. Beauty is not love. Love is not music. Music is THE BEST."
-FZ
Back to Top
King Crimson776 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 12 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2779
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 17:19
Originally posted by MonkeyphoneAlex MonkeyphoneAlex wrote:

Wheather you'd call it "innovative" or not, their music is still quite complex and requires much thought, knowledge and training to compose.

Which is all we should care about anyway, even if someone doesn't like The Flower Kings, their reason shouldn't be, "it's regressive prog". The point of progression is music, not the other way around.
Back to Top
MonkeyphoneAlex View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: September 27 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 234
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 17:30

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.

"Information is not knowledge. Knowledge is not wisdom. Wisdom is not truth. Truth is not beauty. Beauty is not love. Love is not music. Music is THE BEST."
-FZ
Back to Top
Henry Plainview View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 17:55
I'm getting serious deja vu here... :/
 
Also, I never thought I would see Porcupine Tree classified as one of the "innovative" modern prog groups.
if you own a sodastream i hate you
Back to Top
anglagardist View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: May 06 2007
Location: Czech Republic
Status: Offline
Points: 40
Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2008 at 18:18
Originally posted by stewe stewe wrote:

The Flower Kings - still the same formula repeated and recycled thousands times, ideas are taken from 70s giants.
 
I hear many similarities between the sound of TFK and sound of some 70's giants (mostly Yes, Genesis, KC), but these similarities lie mostly in arrangements. Could You name any TFK song, where the ideas (melodies) are really taken from any song by any 70's giant?
 
The originality and innovative approach is, for some listeners, the most important thing in evaluation of musical quality.
 
But not for me, my look to "progressivity" is different. I really wouldn't complain to listen to Close to the Edge part II or Pawn Hearts part II etc etc. The quality of musical ideas, that's my main key to enjoy music.  If the music is complex, adventurous, sophisticated and "deep" enough, I call it "progressive", despite the sound is to certain level similiar to any other band.
 
If somewhat talented musician want to recreate the sound of most other groups, it's not so difficult. But without good musical ideas it's nothing. I'm not blind lover of TFK, I really like about 30% of their output, but in some cases they do write very good songs. I even prefer any album by Italian group The Watch, which recreate the sound of Nursery Cryme and Foxtrot, to any Collins - era album. The reason is the same : they do write very good songs.
 
Some people can't stand unoriginality, I can't stand prog, which is too "poppy" (some songs by TFK, but most by Transatlantic, most by Arena, probably everything by Pendragon). Different ears, different opinions,
 
Mostly it's impossible to win the fight against stupidity. But always it's necessary to attempt it.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.282 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.