Why so few American bands in 70's prog?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=103009
Printed Date: June 18 2025 at 04:41
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Why so few American bands in 70's prog?
Posted By: Big Kid Josie
Subject: Why so few American bands in 70's prog?
Date Posted: June 25 2015 at 15:59
|
I'm curious why the classic period of prog was an almost European-only phenomenon. One could argue that the Beach Boys' Pet Sounds influenced the Beatles on Pepper, which opened up the door for all other forms of musical experimentation, including prog. But the Beach Boys weren't prog, to me. Frank Zappa was. I think the first couple of albums by Kansas and Styx were prog, although they fell off into area rock/pop pretty quickly. You could argue that Chicago started out very progressive. Starcastle was very derivative of Yes, to me. But, after that, I can't think of too many American bands. Is it the fact that a lot of symphonic prog was based on European classical composers rather than rhythm-and-blues and so it just passed the US bands by, initially? Looking at music history, I see the rhythm-and-blues/folk musicians in the US influencing the Beatles, Stones, Yardbirds, etc., which led to the 60's musical explosion. Then, another musical explosion (this one being prog rock/art-rock/whatever you want to call it), based on the European composers and traditions, often uniting orchestras with the bands, by groups like the Moodies, Deep Purple, Pink Floyd, the Nice, Yes, KC, the usual suspects. There were some other great bands from Italy, Sweden, etc., of course. Why do you think so few US bands jumped on the prog bandwagon? |
Replies:
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: June 25 2015 at 16:23
| Due to an unique atmosphere in that part of England where Symphonic rock was born, methinks (I'v been there as a tourist). It was not possible to Symphonic rock occurs elsewhere, it could be only exported from England. And as an imported genre in America, Symphonic rock didn't find a suitable soil for growth. |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: June 25 2015 at 16:34
| Don't overlook Captain Beefhart too. I think one might expect more because of Zappa's influence, given all the musicians he's had going through his band. A lot of them, though, such as George Duke or Jean Luc Ponty (a little later) were doing stuff that was more standard jazz in their solo work than the Prog/Fusion they took part in with Zappa. A lot of British and German psychedelic music was not easily distinguishable from Prog. In the US, the Grateful Dead were mainly extended blues and didn't get proggy until Terrapin Station. None of these are real answers, just ways of deepening the mystery. |
Posted By: Rando
Date Posted: June 25 2015 at 20:14
Maybe its simply American music traditions vs European tradition. Yet what I find interesting is at the same time here in the US we had the more "eclectic-avant-garde-experimentalists" like Zappa, Miles Davis, Beefheart, Velvet Underground, or even The Residents. Maybe its because Classical music here in the US (generally speaking) has always had a bad rap as this elitist, "symphony hall night with seasoned tickets" image. US bands are too deep-rooted in Blues, R & B, Jazz, and even Gospel. It's in our musical blood. Prog involved using European classical influences, with a more compositional approach with set arrangements, utilizing long extended cadenza-like solos. We all know that. But I still find that no different from say, an extended blues jam, or an improvised Jazz section, or variations on a theme. Like somebody already said; maybe the the soil here wasn't tilled or fertile enough at the time... ------------- - Music is Life, that's why our hearts have beats - |
Big Kid Josie wrote:Posted By: PrognosticMind
Date Posted: June 25 2015 at 21:03
Was coming in here loaded with Beefheart and Zappa love. I wouldn't consider The Grateful Dead prog at all. ------------- "A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous. Got me?" |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: June 25 2015 at 21:15
|
The US didn't have many bands, but had arguably the most influential artist of the progressive movement as a whole: Frank Zappa. He was an influence to the inception of progressive rock during the earliest stages of the Mothers and he always pushed boundaries forward during the 4 decades he released material during his life. it can be argues that his impact was mostly felt on the underground circles, but that's not right either. Even though he wasn't "successful" regarding record sales, his music was, at that time, of great importance for the musicians and composers of progressive bands; his impact was absolutely universal, although not quite as apparent as, say, Pink Floyd or Yes. -------------   
|
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: June 25 2015 at 22:29
|
That is an interesting question; .....there were others besides Kansas, Styx, Starcastle, ...... Ethos Cathedral Happy The Man Yezda Urfa Babylon Easter Island ..but none ever became very popular except for Kansas and Styx. There were probably more Canadian prog bands . ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: The.Crimson.King
Date Posted: June 25 2015 at 22:59
Along with... Netherworld Lift Pentwater Ambrosia (1st album) Shadowfax (1st album) It's not that there weren't US prog bands, just not many that got any radio attention or became known outside their local area  ------------- https://wytchcrypt.wixsite.com/mutiny-in-jonestown" rel="nofollow - Mutiny in Jonestown : Progressive Rock Since 1987 |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: June 25 2015 at 23:27
Also, in England the Canterbury groups were heavily jazz oriented. Jethro Tull was heavily blues oriented. Steve Hackett was classically oriented but also blues oriented. Peter Gabriel brought elements of soul music to Genesis, and so on. So I'm still unclear about what the differences were.
|
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 04:50
|
I think it's more or less what Rando said above.... because Europe have classical while the US have jazz as the respective culture's home-grown art music tradition, resulting in different cultural frames of reference being at work in used as starting points for trying to expand rock music's horizons. Notice that the American high-minded rock musicians of that generation, not just Frank Zappa and Captain Beefheart but also Mahavishnu Orchestra and Steely Dan etc, usually lean less on classical and more on jazz. Zappa and Beefheart's classical influences also come from newer generations of classical (Stravinsky, Varese etc) than the British prog rock movement's while we're at it. ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 05:27
| As already mentioned, very influential avant bands/artists are from America. America also had a strong jazz rock scene in the 70s. It is symph prog that was weak in America. Perhaps the particular blend of classical influences with a more pastoral, folky kind of rock/pop could not have happened in America and what bands did pick up the thread from the European scene were condemned to be me-toos at best. Prog metal embraced the epic format and the most influential prog metal band is American. |
Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 08:06
Pretty sure what happened was that America created the blues, jazz, R&B, bluegrass, country and psych, and while we were resting on the seventh day the Brits came up with prog. ------------- "Peace is the only battle worth waging." Albert Camus |
Posted By: twosteves
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 08:11
Agree--Europe in general has more respect and diverse taste for all kinds of music than America. In the Proggish world--America did give us some great jazz fusion---which I always appreciated more than any american prog.
|
Posted By: dr prog
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 08:29
|
American music is too rock n roll and hard rock influenced. Per population they were and are one of the weakest in regards to quality bands ------------- All I like is prog related bands beginning late 60's/early 70's. Their music from 1968 - 83 has the composition and sound which will never be beaten. Perfect blend of jazz, classical, folk and rock. |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 09:29
|
I'm sure I read a Kansas interview once where they said that record companies in the US were completely opposed to prog rock, with a few notable exceptions, because they didn't think US bands would be able to compete with the European prog bands - British bands in particular - and that they should just stick to hard rock. Rush also had opposition from the record company when they started to move away from rock 'n' roll on COS. Whereas British labels were embracing a lot of prog, it seems that US labels didn't want to promote anything that was not radio friendly. Just a theory. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 09:34
Well, he was an influence to the Beatles. The MoI album Freak Out! was a allegedly a major influence to the Beatles' Sargent Pepper's and one of the biggest reason for their musical u-turn towards psychedelia since 66, as were some of the subsequent MoI albums.
AFAIK, none of these bands were of any importance to the progressive scene, except Kansas.
That's absolutely possible. The same thing happened here in Brazil: the album O A e o Z by Os Mutantes was shelved for over 20 years because they didn't believe it was any marketable; but the album had influences by various important bands so maybe their label was just uninformed/ill informed about the genre? I really don't know. Something similar happened to Bacamarte: Depois do Fim was shelved for 5 years because the labels thought it couldn't be marketed. Ironically, these are two of the best prog albums by Brazilian bands and are arguably among some of the best in the world. -------------
|
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 09:35
I consider fusion a progressive form of music, and we had the best of the best over here. Also, I can't believe nobody's brought up Todd Rundgren's Utopia. The first album, and Another Live, scream "Prog!" ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 09:37
I think they're a tad overrated, but Happy The Man's fans beg to differ. ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 09:40
------------- 
|
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 09:43
Well, OK, I'm open to whatever you have, because I frankly don't think they are exceptional. What's their importance? What's the consequence of their work to the American scene? I'm genuinely curious. -------------
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 11:16
|
Hi, The Europeans invented the world when it was flat ... and they killed for it. The US didn't stand a chance, because they are ... it was no different in South America or Central America, or North America!!!  ------------- 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: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 11:49
|
A couple months in rehab and still unintelligible. As far as American bands and the lack of prog, it's a matter of references. The U.S. did not have a cultural aptitude for classicism stretching back 500 or 600 years to Gregorian chants in the Middle Ages. The primary frame of reference for U.S. rock musicians in the 60s and early 70s was blues, jazz, American folk and country/bluegrass influences; hence Dylan, CSN and the Byrds, The Band and Creedence Clearwater Revival, Frank Zappa and Captain Beefheart, or The Doors and Hendrix. No need for further exposition and hand-wringing. ------------- ...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: HackettFan
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 12:29
|
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 14:11
|
Slightly off-topic, has anyone else experienced that people who have their music listening background in classical and jazz (rather than rock) often like Captain Beefheart and Frank Zappa but not British progressive rock except its most avantgarde practitioners? (Henry Cow etc) ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: t d wombat
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 18:50
|
I agree regarding Jazz but not so much re Classical. My earliest exposure was to Classical and for me that leads to an appreciation of the likes of e.g Genesis/Yes/Floyd. Took me a bit longer to get into Jazzier styles (Gentle Giant e.g.) and even now my tastes in Jazz run more towards the likes of Keith Jarrett rather than say the likes of Weather Report. Of course one cannot underestimate the virtuosity of someone like Zappa but that's not the question. ------------- Andrew B “Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” ― Julius Henry Marx |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 19:31
Actually, come to think of it, even Tim Buckley was doing a kind of expansive folk-rock in the late 60s. Another amazing voice. But none of these artists seems to have put together a band with top notch musicians contributing substantially on the composition side (as supposed to merely executing what the songwriter desires). Something like Genesis or Yes. P.S: Never knew of Shawn Philips before this. Thanks much.
|
Posted By: Rick Robson
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 19:46
Interesting your thoughts indeed. My earliest exposure was to Classical too, my interest for the Jazzier music began to grow only after being a member here, but I still keep having difficulty to grab their feelings, perhaps due to their complexity, the fact is that it pushes me off a bit after a while. I liked Jarret's The Koln Concert though, btw he has gone also into some Classical incursions through his incredibly long career, still today he keeps making big concerts. It's the first time I read in PA's that Gentle Giant have a jazzier style, never dug into their music, so their better album to begin with is 'Acquiring The Taste'  -------------  "Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy." LvB |
Posted By: t d wombat
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 20:26
Ah .... maybe its just me but I hear jazz free form elements in what GG I have listened to. I am not a huge fan so maybe I do need to listen to "Acquiring the Taste"  We have two choices here ... either I am not very good with labels or I am talking through my arse. I think I might hide behind the vagueness of jazzIER, bit more freeform, less melodic, in the way jazz experimentalists have. I guess what I was driving at was that GG's stuff (that I know) doesn't have a particularly smooth even flow. That's not necessarily a negative of course, indeed with what GG I do know it adds great interest and depth though not necessarily my speed. Speaking of Jarrett I was thinking of his concert work such as Koln. Magnificent album. It is one of the problems with discussing artists when you have been listening to them for nigh on 50 years. After all how can I say I love Genesis and leave it at that ? The folk who love Invisible Touch are in a whole different world to an old fart like me who found them with Selling England and dropped away after Duke. Listening to Turning Around live at the moment and I'm beginning to come around to the "talking through my arse" possibility. ------------- Andrew B “Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” ― Julius Henry Marx |
Posted By: t d wombat
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 20:34
Wonderful artist. Did a trio of albums in the early 70s with Paul Buckmaster and Peter Robinson ; Contribution, 2nd Contribution and Collaboration. Followed those up with Faces. Maybe a bit dated, maybe at times a bit hippy dippy but at his best, stunning. I don't know much of his later work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Peter_Robinson" rel="nofollow - ------------- Andrew B “Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” ― Julius Henry Marx |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 22:00
| GG use freeform in only a very calculated way when they do. Everything about GG is very calculated and deliberate even if it may sound very weird and throw off listeners the first time (first few times?) around. Not jazz at all in that sense. Having said that, they do lean more towards jazz rock/funk on parts of Free Hand, but again only borrowing some stylistic elements and avoiding improvisation. |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 22:03
|
Posted By: Kati
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 22:08
lol true, but hahahahaha awwww
  lol so cute awww for the cutest fufufucute avatar pic big hug to you, ClemofNazareth |
Posted By: t d wombat
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 22:10
|
No argument there RogerT. Lets face it, some of the most anarchic freeform sounding music in any genre is very much deliberate not by note. Steve Howes intro to Close to the Edge is a good example. First time I heard it my reaction was WTF ?? Just kept on getting better from there on in. ------------- Andrew B “Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” ― Julius Henry Marx |
Posted By: Kati
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 22:15
Zappa is American tho' :) he was/ is awesome  
Progressive music did originate from the UK tho' :) xxx
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 22:15
Hmm, from that point of view...I would consider that CTTE intro pretty conventional compared to GG. Perhaps you are somewhere equating dissonance to free form?
|
Posted By: t d wombat
Date Posted: June 26 2015 at 22:27
|
Indeed he was Kati, indeed he was. Over the past few days I've been listening/watching a few interviews with various prog luminaries plus the BB King tribute doco. It is quite amazing how many of these people's earliest musical love was The Blues. Also pretty remarkable the debt American Blues players owe to the Brits circa early Stones, John Mayall, Yardbirds etc. ------------- Andrew B “Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” ― Julius Henry Marx |
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 02:03
With the bands like the Mothers of Invention and Oregon, America don't really needed some more of U.S. version of English Symphonic rock music than American proggers actually had it with such a great band as KANSAS aswell. Dig it, collab! |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 02:07
| Congrats on missing the point yet again. Now what year did you say this album was? 1971. That's right. By which time, Yes had released Yes Album, Genesis Nursery Cryme and ELP Tarkus. Do you get the drift? The three bigwigs of symph prog were already well established at this point. If you have to name ANY American band from the 70s making symph prog, there are plenty. But there were no first movers in that genre from America. I am really sorry you have such a tremendous chip on your shoulder at your age but there's no way I can help you. |
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 02:38
Oh sorry, I made the lapse in my previous post: Oregon were founded in 1971 and the debut album Music of Another Present Era was relesead in 1972, if we don't count Our First Record recorded in 1970 and released in 1980. And imagine what? It's nothing less complex, it's nothing less top of notch PROGRESSIVE album than any album by your favourite bands of English Symphonic rock! However, Music of Another Present Era is without any pop adorment what all that Symphonic rock (whatever it was / is English, Italian or American) have to have that to be popular as it really is. |
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 02:39
|
What about Touch? Their album came out in 1968. ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 03:28
Though, it's a big shame that the Touch is not in one of PA prog categories. Their "guiltiness" is that they weren't released their album after ItCotCK. I'd like to present now one quite illustrative comparison. Ex-Yugoslav band https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYN6I9Sv4zw" rel="nofollow - Opus , also one-album wonders but from the middle of seventies, they weren't playing 'pastoral' music at all, and with that pretty rock singer (RIP Dušan Prelević), they have nothing to do with that English Symphonic rock, but they are in PA' Symphonic Prog section; TOUCH are in proto-prog (i.e. non-prog) section. Why? I will try to explain. Due to anglocentrism, the evidence(s) of any progressive rock out of UK and before ItCotCK "must" be eliminated as much as possible. Those anglocentric individuals (which may not necessarily be Englishmen) can't put, for example, the Mothers of Invention in "proto-prog" (i.e. non-prog) category, but it's just an exception of the rule, because those individuals blindly following to their (wrong) "ideology" that say that whole prog came from England, which is absolutely nonsense. Progressive rock, with all of its sub-genres and styles, was indigenous emerging in different places, in different ways, but in the same time frame; that was second half of 60s and early 70s. And finally, what is the most important thing for that anglocentric "ideology"? That is to proclaim that everything released before ItCotCK, but not in UK, has to be called "proto", i.e. non-prog; it's actually THE evidence of anglocentric hysteria here at PA. p.s. Of course, English Symphonic rock (and related) albums could be labeled prog at an official level at PA even if those albums are released before ItCotCK, and that is the weakest point of that grotesque "ideology".
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 04:32
Why the shame? If they are here then they are here so if people want to review their album they can. The shame would be to not have them here at all.
Your understanding of Proto Prog has been proven to be false, erroneous and grossly mistaken on several occasions, so nothing new here. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 07:48
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 10:40
|
This question requires a sociologist more than a musicologist to answer it, but I'll try my best. As EM Forster once remarked about the relation with Great Britain and India, "East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet." A simple way of saying chalk and cheese, but it relates to America and the UK in the seventies in many ways. American rock music in the seventies was reflective, in some degree even if it was on a subliminal level, of the social upheaval and mass disappointment with the American government's involvement in Viet Nam and the loss of innocence in the institution of the US presidency over the Watergate Scandal, to use two well known examples. Other social issues included civil rights and the ensuing racially motivated riots and assassinations. Hardly conducive to fueling art rock, is it? Other factors include the divide between late sixties psychedelic rock that was produced in the US and UK, which gave raise, quickly, to sophisticated British progressive rock, and slowly to American proto punk music, and ultimately punk in the late seventies. To recap the differences between American psychedelic rock and that of the UK, one need only to contrast American "garage rock" bands like the 13th Floor Elevators with the "studio experimental" British bands like Revolver era Beatles. Again, East was East and West was West. So America simply went Punk while the UK went Prog. The rest is, as they say, history. |
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 11:57
|
Also, that the UK punk scene takes more from glam rock and the US one more from garage rock. (exception: New York Dolls) Not to mention how I've noticed British punk groups usually have much better defined and clearly articulated ideological standpoints, I think ExitTheLemming mentioned something similar in a previous discussion of punk. It's almost as if... (gasp) that different countries have different cultures! ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 13:48
| ^Yes, it was difficult for me answer this question without sounding condescending, and Lemming (Iain) is definitely the "go to" man in regard to the British punk scene. |
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 13:54
|
Bringing things back on topic: I also wonder if the classical connection has something to do with progressive rock appearing to me more popular and influential in Continental Europe than the Anglosphere. To start with, it's well documented that Van der Graaf Generator only really became that influential a group in Italy... but I also remember reading that Genesis were at first more popular in France than the UK, and that Henry Cow of all bands actually managed to achieve some mainstream crossover success in Sweden! ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 14:00
^Oh absolutely, it's in the European DNA as far as I'm concerned and I'm sure other members expressed this already in previous posts. (I didn't read all of the posts.  ) But again, it relates to the different cultures.
|
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 14:05
|
Not to mention that the division between high and low culture in general isn't as big in most Continental Western European cultures as in the UK, probably since the education systems of these countries aren't quite as stratified by social class as the British one. ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 14:45
|
^Yes, social class distinctions are also a part of culture but I'm not sure as to how this played into Prog. In the early seventies, the UK was rife with worker strikes from electrical workers, coal miners to underground (tube) operator strikes, so it puzzles me that this did not become the musical catalyst of British topical music, be it folk rock, punk or whatever.
|
Posted By: cstack3
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 14:55
|
Well, I don't think it was for a lack of interest nor talent....I knew some amazing prog guitarists in the early 1970s at university! One fellow introduced me to King Crimson ITWOP when it came out, and another was a blazing, John McLaughlin type player. Perhaps it was London? Peter Banks speaks out nicely about the London prog scene in this interview, which is very revealing! http://www.themarqueeclub.net/interview-peter-banks-yes" rel="nofollow - http://www.themarqueeclub.net/interview-peter-banks-yes I don't think the US had any equivalent to London's developing prog scene....we are too spread out. There were regional "incubators" for music (and still are) across the USA, but we never seemed to reach a critical mass of prog talent in one spot to generate a true progressive musical movement. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 15:02
|
^I don't think that different musical interests is the same as lack of interest, and I agree with you in that no country has a monopoly on talent.
But sixties London must have been a gas! I wish I could have experienced it.  |
Posted By: t d wombat
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 15:25
Fair point. You may well be correct. Exact terminology may not be my strongpoint. (if indeed I have one).  ------------- Andrew B “Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” ― Julius Henry Marx |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 16:38
There was a group called Love that came out with what I would call a Proto-Prog album called Forever Changes in 1967. I don't know their over stuff before and after that. What do people think of the West Coast Pop Art Experimental Band. I heard an album from them once. They seemed like they were very derivative of Freak Out! era Zappa. |
Posted By: cstack3
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 16:41
You and I, both!! I was listening to the Monkees when I could have been listening to the first Yes LP! My point was one of geography....America is a vast land, and our cities are not very well connected. London was THE scene in the UK, whereas musicians in the USA were in "islands" such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York City and various other cities. My own Chicago was always something of a backwater for music, despite an ill-deserved reputation as "birthplace of the blues" and large population. On my first trip to London in the early 1990s, I took the tube to Piccadilly Circus just because I had read so much about it in my youth....mod fashion especially. The place was a RIOT!! I love London, fantastic town! Anyway....I have no idea why the prog bands Yes, Genesis, ELP, KC etc. exploded out of the UK like they did. Was there better social support, so that the musicians didn't have to hustle for a living as much as we Yanks did? |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: June 27 2015 at 16:50
|
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: June 28 2015 at 07:31
|
Interestingly, I always thought that America not only in the 60s, but in the 70s also gave the world a large cargo of amazing artists and albums that can be labeled *art-rock*, *experimental*, *jazz-rock*, *fusion* *progressive*... From top of my head: Oregon, Miles Davis (his 70s progressive fusion phase), Joni Mitchell ( the albums like Hejira, Don Juan's Reckless Daughter, Mingus ), Stevie Wonder (Talking Book, Innervisions and Journey Trough "The Secret Life of Plants" soundtrack), Marvin Gaye (What's Going On), Tim Buckley (Starsailor, my fav album by him), Frank Zappa, Captain Beefheart, The Grateful Dead (Wake of the Flood, From The Mars Hotel, Blues For Allah, Terrapin Station), Carlos Santana, Steely Dan, Yellowjackets, Spyro Gyra, Larry Coryell, Billy Cobham (his Spectrum as one of the best 70s progressive fusion albums), Bill Connors, Weather Report, Return To Forever, Chick Corea solo output (the albums like The Mad Hatter and My Spanish Heart ), John Scofield, Pat Metheny, Steve Tibbets, Jaco Pastorius, The Flock (Dinosaur Swamps, Inside Out), Relatively Clean Rivers, The Electronic Hole, Todd Rundgren (and his band Utopia), Ambrosia (s/t, Somewhere I Never Traveled), Pavlov's Dog, ID, Yezda Urfa, Happy the Man, Netherworld, Angel (s/t, Helluva Band), Journey (the first album is just great), Good Rats, The Tubes (the first album is just great), Dixie Dregs, Guns & Butter, Kansas, Cathedral, ID, Jasper Wrath, The Muffins, Synergy, Glass Harp (s/t, Synergy, It Makes Me Glad ), The Residents, Rush, Styx, Blue Oyster Cult...
|
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: June 28 2015 at 09:02
The theory is part of the equation, along with the cultural differences. Detroit was just such an incubator, but after the riots of '67, the music gained a bit of mayhem, if not downright violence, hence bands like The MC5, Iggy & the Stooges, Ted Nugent & the Amboy Dukes, Frijid Pink, SRC and Alice Cooper. High energy and hard edged acid rock, proto-punk and hard rock. No prog here, please, unless we beat it out of you. ------------- ...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: SteveG
Date Posted: June 28 2015 at 14:08
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 29 2015 at 01:15
Then why was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friars_Aylesbury" rel="nofollow - Friars Club so popular? While not being in Hull, Alyesbury isn't recognised as a thriving hub of music, or anything else come to that. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Kati
Date Posted: June 29 2015 at 01:21
|
To be honest I do not think America was ready for prog at the time (one has to remember many even trashed/burned The Beatles albums a few years earlier lololol hihihi ) Even Jimi Hendrix only became famous when he went to England hugs to all
|
Posted By: prog4evr
Date Posted: June 29 2015 at 07:29
|
Kid Josie: You are spot on regarding Beach Boys, Kansas, Styx, and - yes - even Chicago. But, I think you forgot one: Journey. When Gregg Rolie was at the helm in their early albums (before their break-out "Infinity" album), he was leading the band into at least some of the proto-prog styles he had cultivated when playing with Santana (he played with Santana at Woodstock). It was only after the departure of Rolie - and a very under-rated drummer, Aynsley Dunbar - that Journey went full let's-make-at-least-one-pop-single at the end of the 70s all through the early- to mid-80s. Rolie was definitely into keyboard styles that were prog-esque, as well as wanting to change time-signatures and prog-like mood changes; he's one helluva conga player (with Santana) too... |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: June 29 2015 at 10:48
part of the short lived explosive zeitgeist of "Swinging London" in the sixties. I don't believe that the Fryiars Club was located in an area that was ever referred to as "Swinging Alyesbury". Except by a few old ossified ale house residents, I suppose.
|
Posted By: Skalla-Grim
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 16:56
|
The brilliant HANDS have not yet been mentioned in this thread, I think. Their "eclectic" prog with a lot of different instruments reminds me of Gentle Giant. Unfortunately, I haven't managed to buy one of their CDs which were released in the 90s, containing their music from the 70s (HANDS and PALM MYSTERY). But their 2002 album TWENTY-FIVE WINTERS is very good, though not as playful as the old stuff. I must admit I haven't heard STRANGELET (2008) so far. |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 17:15
I am the proud owner of a copy of Strangelet (a gift from a friend who is also a friend of the band), which is a truly outstanding album - a must for fans of the Warr guitar, played by Mark Cook (now a member of Herd of Instinct). |
Posted By: TeleStrat
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 17:48
|
^ I recently purchased Strangelet and Twenty Five Winters. I've heard each of them one time only but they were very good. I expect to like them more after another listen. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: July 16 2015 at 08:12
May I suggest that the term indeed originated from the UK ... but the music was already around in many places around the world, not just London! ------------- 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: Friday13th
Date Posted: July 16 2015 at 08:39
|
Frank Zappa and Mahavishnu Orchestra were popular and highly influential. I wouldn't call most jazz fusion prog, but Mahavishnu definitely is. I read an interviews with Yes and Genesis saying they were inspired by Inner Mounting Flame and Birds of Fire to add jazzy parts to their music. Yezda Urfa is really good if obscure and similar enough to Yes and Gentle Giant. |
Posted By: RockHound
Date Posted: July 16 2015 at 08:57
|
Progressive music developed along very different paths in the US and the UK. Although there are some wonderful US-Canadian progressive rock bands of the classic era (Zappa, Rundgren, Rush, Dixie Dregs, etc.), the North American school of progressive music was much more closely tied to fusion and the contributions of Miles Davis and his progeny (Zawinul, Corea, Clarke, McLaughlin, Shorter, Coryell, Hancock, Martino, etc.). Alternatively, one could pose the question, "why are there so few british fusion bands?" And then we point toward Brand X in somewhat the same vein as we point toward Zappa. Indeed, both schools of music figure prominently in Progarchives, and I think that is with good reason. The relative independence of the development of progressive music on either side of the drink is, IMHO, an underappreciated facet of the prog/fusion story. Another interesting facet is the cross-pollination between the schools (e.g,. RTF composing Romantic Warrior and Chester Thompson touring for so long with Genesis).
|
Posted By: WeepingElf
Date Posted: July 16 2015 at 09:25
Yes. The US and the UK had different musical cultures. The US had modern jazz, and that was where most American rock musicians looked when they wanted to transcend the rock song formula. The UK was the last country of the western world where classical composition had not yet fallen to serialism, and that was where most British rock musicians looked when they wanted to transcend the rock song formula. There were other differences as well, like that between American cowboy romanticism and English "Green" romanticism, or between American New Left and European New Left, and all these differences led to American counterculture and English counterculture developing into different directions. But one moment - wasn't fusion music chiefly a matter of jazz musicians? At least, all the major (American, at least, but also many European) fusion musicians I can think of came from jazz. It seems that while many English rock musicians looked to the future and created progressive rock, most American rock musicians looked to the past and created roots rock. ------------- ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf "What does Elvish rock music sound like?" - "Yes." |
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: July 16 2015 at 13:12
|
Didn't most of Beefheart and Zappa's band lineups come from the jazz subculture, though? ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: July 16 2015 at 15:57
Hard to argue what with the hugs and all, but I'm not sure this was a case of Americans not being 'ready' for British-style prog. Most of the seminal works of the progressive heyday (69-72) sold at higher volumes in the U.S. than they did in Britain: Yes The Yes Album Fragile CTTE Jethro Tull Stand Up Benefit Aqualung TAAB ELP ELP Tarkus Trilogy King Crimson ITCHYCOCK Gentle Giant Three Friends Octopus Pink Floyd Ummagumma Atom Heart Mother Meddle Obscured by Clouds There were definitely some European-centric bands that never really broke over here back then, most notably VdGG and Genesis, but there was certainly a lot of support for progressive music at least in terms of the listening public. And by 71-72 we had enough of our own prog bands to capture attention that the distinction between European and American prog sort of started to not matter. RockHound has it right when he says there were a lot more things going on musically than just prog, especially in terms of fusion, blues, psychedelic and electric folk to compete with the interests of musicians and their listeners. Frank Zappa, Miles Davis, Vanilla Fudge, Spirit, Jefferson Airplane and Captain Beefheart were all cranking out some pretty wild and progressive stuff before most of those British bands listed above ever entered a recording studio. Early incarnations of Kansas were recording the likes of "Incomudro" and "Belexes" at the same time CTTE, Fragile, Tarkus and Meddle were being conceived. And there were plenty of Americans wandering around over in Europe making their mark on British progressive music in the late 60s and early 70s as well, including Joe Boyd who was busy promoting and producing the likes of Pink Floyd, Fairport Convention, Nick Drake, and the Incredible String Band; Hendrix who was rocking London on behalf of all Americans; and people like Abu Talib (Bluesbreakers), Tony Visconti (Bowie, Strawbs, Gentle Giant) and Jim Gordon (Traffic) who played and recorded with British prog acts. I don't think there is any denying British artists played a major role in developing and promoting progressive music in those early days, but the genre was definitely well-known, respected and promoted in the U.S. at the same time. There was just a whole lot more going on here then and prog rock had to share the stage with tons of other great styles of music being made at the time. And as far as burning the Beatles, that did happen. I was unfortunately present for some of those bonfires. Our Bible-fueled parents also burned the Mamas and the Papas and CSNY, so this wasn't a phenomenon specific to prog rock. On the bright side, most of their kids (predictably) rebelled and promoted lots of even more seditious music later in the same decade, so everything worked out for the best. ------------- "Peace is the only battle worth waging." Albert Camus |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: July 16 2015 at 16:26
|
FEW? There were a lot Let me see how many I remember 1.- Kansas: Never really fell in Pop, they made two or three AOR albums when Steve and Robby lest the band in the 80's 2.- STYX 3.- Pavlov's Dog 4.- Albatross 5.- Atlantis Philharmonic 6.- Axcraft 7.- Babylon 8.- Bondar & Wise 9.- Brimstone 10.- Cathedral 11.- Earthrise 12.- Fireballet 13.- Harlequin Mass 14.- Happy the Man 15.- Infinity 16.- Lift 17.- The Load 18.- Netherworld 19.- Pre 20.- Starcastle Only checked Symphonic partially ------------- 
|
Posted By: RockHound
Date Posted: July 16 2015 at 17:37
That is very true, in large part because the U.S. already had a robust progressive music scene that blossomed with Bop - and so the Miles Davis connection looms very large. An interesting aspect of the Brits spearheading the fusion of classical music with rock is the British composer gap. There wasn't a whole lot between Purcell and Britten that worked its way into the general repertoire (unless you count Handel). I forgot Elgar, but then again, I'd really like to forget Elgar (apologies to all you Elgar fans out there). I guess it was worth the wait, considering what Brittania gave the world with the "Big Five or Six" of prog. |
Posted By: Intruder
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 00:10
|
One American band that was at the forefront of psychedelic, ambient, prog-folk, electronic, jazz-fusion, not to mention avant-garde and space music was THE GRATEFUL DEAD. Those who don't think they belong on PA have probably never explored the Dead's studio and live catalog. Their work from 1965-70 was a huge influence on so many genres of prog....where would Krautrock be without the Velvets and the Dead? To call the Airplane, Phish, or - ugh! - Kansas, Journey and Styx prog but exclude the Dead is....wrong. Instate the great Grateful Dead for gawd's sake! ------------- I like to feel the suspense when you're certain you know I am there..... |
Posted By: The Sloth
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 00:47
| I bet the Dead only have about a dozen songs that could be seen as Prog, and only a few of them in any substantial way. They're mostly a psychedelic folk-rock band with jazzy tendencies. |
Posted By: WeepingElf
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 10:22
And in England, people like Britten and Tippett still composed tonally and in a classical spirit while on the Continent and in the US, the serialist avant-garde had taken over after 1945. IMHO, serialism was a cul-de-sac; it resulted in music that more than 99% of the people considered unlistenable. It was ice-cold and academic, and rock musicians saw no way connecting to it and letting it influence popular music. England still had a living tradition of tonal, non-serialist music that rock musicians could connect to, and they did. Also, the divide between "serious" and "popular" music was less rigid in the UK than in most other countries. There was not much of this "if the masses like it, it cannot be good" nonsense that had infected avant-garde music circles (and not only them; some jazz aficionados thought in similar ways) elsewhere. English composers not only continued to compose tonally, they continued to compose for the common people. Even the ach-so-egalitarian Americans were more elitist than that. Compare that to Schoenberg's "Society for Private Music Performances" which was as snobbish as one could get. These factors predestined England to become the place where the rock and classical traditions could merge fruitfully. ------------- ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf "What does Elvish rock music sound like?" - "Yes." |
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 10:49
If this is not progressive Space Rock then I really don't know what that term means...
|
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 11:00
|
Posted By: Skalla-Grim
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 11:14
 Elgar, Vaughan Williams, and Bax belong to my favourite composers, and I see them as "prog-related" (I think they may have contributed to the pastoral elements in the music of Genesis and Genesis-influenced bands like England). |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 11:40
What a dreadful bunch of half-arsed bands. Your list proves the point rather than refutes it. In a jury trial, this list would lead to the execution of the defendant. As I've stated elsewhere, American bands simply weren't interested in what we on this site term "prog", or what is best viewed as a British phenomena in the late 60s/early-to-mid 70s. Everyone of any importance that didn't play straight rock, The Doors, Hendrix, The Allman Brothers, The Grateful Dead, Chicago, Santana, Zappa and Beefheart, synthesized their rock with jazz or blues or a mix of both during their most creative periods. ------------- ...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: RockHound
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 14:37
I have a soft spot for Williams and Delius. Genesis definitely draws from the late romantics, and i have always been impressed by the originality and tastefulness of Banks' sense of harmony.
|
Posted By: Son.of.Tiresias
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 17:39
|
Proto-Kaw´s 1st recordings from 1971, pre-KANSAS feat. Kerry Livgren could very well be the first true prog rock album. US (symphonic) prog at finest is KANSAS but Proto-Kaw luckily is a different story with emphasis on wind instrument sound rather than violin sound as KANSAS. Both are corner stones of the genre. Proto-Kaw recorded 2 new albums in the 2000´s but these are weaker than the eponymous debut album. For me BLUE ÖYSTER CULT is the best rock progressive band from the USA and rivals some UK bands too but at the same time is something that England couldn´t produce, the multi-art image of BÖC. The 4 first BÖC albums have it all: strange mixture of psych, heavy metal, prog, far out mysticism & black and white image with Sci-Fi themes, and a symbol which instantly associates with BÖC and exactly tells what the band is all about: Kronos is the symbol for the heaviest of metals and the inverted question mark as well referring to ancient and modern mysteries. A perfect symbol for a rock band. Luckily like certain UK bands BÖC lacks the rhythm´n´blues element that often turns the music too tedious. And a perfect rock ballad performed by electric guitar with no acoustic guitars and boring string arrangements, these simply are not needed to create a masterpiece, an evergreen. Extraordinary fine art on album covers and real poets writing the lyrics that are deep, and intelligent... and weird. 2 of the toughest frontmen in Rock´s history: Eric Bloom the sinister rocker in black leather & Buck Dharma the gentleman in white suit. Buck Dharma is second to none as a lead guitarist and the coolest image as a guitar hero with bliztering fretting technique on Gibson SG and Les Paul. With 4 lead singers they were a terrific live band. The first laser shows that blew the crowds far out. BLUE ÖYSTER CULT were something else, in the glory days of rock´n´roll, the 70´s of course. On Your Feet Or On Your Knees from the Secret Treaties tour is a terrific live album, one of the very finest from the Golden Era of Classic Rock. Astronomy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V7KPZtcOVQ
|
Posted By: twosteves
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 18:23
Lol---I don't think any are prog---and agree ugh! about Kansass, and the horrible Journey and Styx--- I like some of the Dead long pieces ---and there would be no Phish without Dead---I hear prog influences but not convinced it;s prog.
|
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 20:10
|
Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 20:36
Interesting that over half those original Kansas ('Proto-Kaw') tracks were written as early as 1970 and recorded in 1971, predating nearly the entire top albums chart on this site except ITCOTCK and Americans Miles Davis and Zappa. ------------- "Peace is the only battle worth waging." Albert Camus |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 22:20
So......You're the owner of the ultimate taste? IMO a) Kansas: In the level of the best British bands b) Styx recorded at least 5 excellent albums. c) Pavlov's Dog is a unique band. d) Albatross is a clone band as many British ones e) Babylon is a classic, stupendous band, brilliant music. f) Bondar & Wise: Not the most original, but excellent fuson of ELP and King Crimson g) Brimstone: Not my cup of tea, but bad weren't h) Cathedral: A classic, for me Stained Glass Stories is a masterpiece i) Earthrise: Excellent band with an average of 4 stars in PA j) Fireballet: Their debut is quite good, one of the best versions of A Night in the Band Mountain despite being derivative from other bands k) Harlequin Mass: Simple but effective l) Happy the Man: Another classic, brilliant sound m) Infinity: Brilliant, complex and elaborate music with touches of Gentle Giant n) Lift: Not prolific, but their only album was outstanding o) Atlantis Philharmonic: Great blend of Hard Rock and Symphonic p) The Load: Excellent musicians with a lot of acoustic guitar in Fandango and very good tracks q) Netherworld: Underrated band r) Pre: Even when they cloned many Yes sections, they were quite good s) Starcastle: We all know they were Yes clones, which is a shame, because they made great material and had talent I don't know if you heard all of this bands, but most of them are really good, the fact that they are not well known doesn't make them bad Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 22:22
|
But America had Led Zeppelin. End of discussion. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 22:52
|
^ America may have had them, but they were English. ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 18 2015 at 01:29
Yes, the most ironic thing about rock history is that British bands took essentially American source material and then blended it with their own influences which made them sound more unique than their American counterparts. Yes, Canterbury is so jazzy and yet it sounds so English. Logically speaking, it would have been difficult for American bands to do something similar because jazz/blues WAS their music already. Which is probably why, like Zappa or Residents, the more innovative American bands drifted towards avant.
|
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: July 18 2015 at 02:39
That's why they're all here (except for Kansas) as Prog-Related or Proto-prog Journey is here because of their outstanding first two albums, which are definitely prog
mmmhhh!!!... Ivàn, even an old dog such as I haven't heard 3/4 of these bands in the list and in that last 1/4 (in either bold or italic , and the bold can be considered as major rock acts, the rest being confined to secrecy/confidentiality), I can wish I hadn't heard around half of them It's all a matter of taste. The fact is that the US weren't that big in producing prog acts, but theu certainly adopted them. (BTW, are missing in that list Pentwater , Mithrandir and a few more). |
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: July 18 2015 at 04:15
|
1968 1968 1969 ( cover of Blind Willie Johnson' song from 1927) 1976 1976 1977 1977 (...) Miller-Scaggs-Peterman-Turner-Davis was a line-up who recorded two albums that are even today considered as the milestones, Children of the Future and Sailor; debut is considered as perhaps the best example of progressive rock in 1968, while the second album, Sailor, was one of the first albums on which they used theatrical sound effects to complement the music. (...) "The Illustrated New Musical Express Encyclopedia of Rock" by Nick Logan and Bob Woffinden (London, 1976) |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: July 18 2015 at 04:56
|
^^^^ though from Frisco and existing in the summer of love, SMB is somehow rarely linked to the rest of the bay-area band (maybe because they didn't mingle that much with them), but I always thought they deserved more than that oblivion (as CCR is also from Frisco and of the 67 times). And SMB is as proggy as the Airplane or Quicksilver, and I always thoughht they deserved a space in the BD, at least as proto-prog (more than prog-related as his misd-70's hits would tend to hint)... TBH, I think it must've been proposed at one point as Proto-prog, but probably that if it was accepted, it was postponed because of all the heat these additions were creating. And I'd tend to think that fom his album like The Joker, it could still create a mild eruption. |
Posted By: RockHound
Date Posted: July 18 2015 at 10:28
Agreed! America was the quintessential prog band. They totally pwned Led Zep! |
Posted By: WeepingElf
Date Posted: July 18 2015 at 10:44
|
Long pieces and/or weird time signatures alone aren't automatically prog. You need structure - something of the kind found in classical music. That's something else than noodling on a few repeating chords for twenty minutes - which is something anybody can do who can play any kind of rock ;) Hence, I don't think that the Grateful Dead, Barrett-era Pink Floyd, most Krautrock bands, or, closer to now, bands such as Tool or Oceansize are prog. ------------- ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf "What does Elvish rock music sound like?" - "Yes." |
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: July 18 2015 at 13:25
|
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: July 18 2015 at 15:46
|
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: July 18 2015 at 16:11
|
Posted By: terramystic
Date Posted: July 18 2015 at 16:50
A lot of proposed SMB songs sound like psych. rock - "normal" rock plus avant-garde intros and background effects ... However some sections really sound as proto-prog. |
Posted By: terramystic
Date Posted: July 18 2015 at 16:56
But are extra long improvisatons on repeated few chords characteristic for prog? Is a "jam band" like Grateful Dead automatically prog? |