Innovative vs. Regressive prog artists

cacho wrote: BTW: Have you heard The Tangent?

A Place in the Queue and new album - both I perceive as music with more integrity and creativity. I think it's the difference in approach of songwriting of Tillson and Stolt. For example in music of The Flower Kings I hardly found something memorable, feel lack of the melodies and half-baked ideas, quite opposite to Tangent, though sound is similar. My case isn't definitely about retro or not. But as I see TFK has many defenders, and respect their points of view.
Concerning Kaipa (new albums), I feel the same problem like in TFK, and for example another swedish band Ritual (where the singer is the same as in Kaipa) I consider as one of best nowadays prog music, though it sounds very retro.:)

stewe wrote: cacho wrote: BTW: Have you heard The Tangent? A Place in the Queue and new album - both I perceive as music with more integrity and creativity. I think it's the difference in approach of songwriting of Tillson and Stolt. For example in music of The Flower Kings I hardly found something memorable, feel lack of the melodies and half-baked ideas, quite opposite to Tangent, though sound is similar. My case isn't definitely about retro or not. But as I see TFK has many defenders, and respect their points of view. Concerning Kaipa (new albums), I feel the same problem like in TFK, and for example another swedish band Ritual (where the singer is the same as in Kaipa) I consider as one of best nowadays prog music, though it sounds very retro.:)

which albums from TFK you heard? if you mentioned before, sorry for my ignorance.

Arena were definitely doing great stuff until their latest album. I don't know how people can dismiss them as "neo-prog" when it's clear they achieved their own stride and sound with albums like Immortal? and Contagion. As I said, I consider Pepper's Ghost to be of much lesser quality (it's good, but it's crap compared to what they've shown themselves capable of).  


As for the main discussion here, it's what I've always thought. Progressiveness in terms of what such a word essentially means and not just as a category that refers to a certain "sound" or a series of characteristics. In the end I think it's pretty obvious which bands progress and which bands don't.

Progressive spirit v/s "Progressive" characteristics?


Neither negates the other of course and both can be equally valid depending on what you may want to hear.

For me of course, it's the spirit that's more important. But in the end I say that if it reaches you, than it's valid.  And based upon that I leave each to decide for his or herself.


Edited by Dorsalia - July 06 2008 at 21:52

As for some bands I believe true to that spirit in modern music: Devin Townsend, Dredg, Pain of Salvation, Meshuggah, The Mars Volta, Tomahawk, 65daysofstatic or Ulver are just some of the first few that come to mind.

HughesJB4 wrote: Henry Plainview wrote: 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. Probably because this topic has come up SOOOO many times, just with slightly different titles or sometimes probably the same title for the thread. The reason why this thread hasn't got much responses from the older members is because this topic has been done to death many times over

I think Pink Floyd summed it up pretty well in one of their better known songs.

Speesh wrote: While I don't mind the artists borrowing older ideas, following their own formulas, etc, there's definitely modern stuff I like a lot more. Specifically the modern Avant-Prog scene. Bands like Discus, Estradasphere, Cardiacs, Sleepytime Gorilla Museum, SC3, and so many others are constantly blowing my mind the same way classic prog did back when I first discovered Yes and KC. I recommend anyone who isn't into these bands to certainly check either Discus' 1st or Estradasphere's Buck Fever out. There's a huge wealth of this music already and the innovation's not dying anytime soon.

I'm in the same boat as you, I think. While I love the symphonic bands of the 70s, I find the modern symphonic scene pretty boring. What I'm finding I like a lot from this decade, like you, is the avant prog scene which I just started checking out as of a month ago or so. I love Sleepytime! I'm also fond of a couple other bands that don't seem to get much mention here: Ahvak, Bubblemath, and Far Corner. I'll definitely have to check out those albums you mentioned though.

Sean Trane wrote: 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.     Indeed I get some of the same feelings you get: While not a fan at all of neo-prog (who seems to have copied everything from Marillion's Script and to a lesser extrent IQ's The Wake), I also get bored bya few  retro prog prog bands (groups doing prog" ala sumthin'") and  while at first retro prog appealed much to me (I still love Anglagard, Landberk and early Anekdoten and the first Paatos), most of the canon of the retro prog genre are growing increasingly boring to me (Wobbler, Synkadus, Gargamel, Discipline etc....   The two main example you are citing Spock's Beard and TFK are sitting somewhere retro prog and neo prog to my ears.  As does The Tengeant, which unfortunately seems so flat to me, that by half the album, it's been popped out after skipping a good third of the first part.     From seeing them live both around their first few albums, I'd say that I always had better feelings for Spock's Beard (excellent live show >> a real tight group) although their progressiveness was diminishing with their third, fourth and fifth albums, while TFK (a catastrophic live experience for me) was getting more into "prog cannon standard" with concept albums, double albums, extremely long tracks.....  but were certainly not getting better... TFK always did stuff "ala sumthin" and no matter of hard they try,  it's a lost cause to get me to change opinions. I think it's great both group are able to grow their own public and fill medium sized halls, but neither shall get the precurssor or even worthy followers status in my history book.      Soooooo why Anglagard and not The Tangeant???????????  Beats me. It's more than colours & tastes, for sure.... Not that i'm looking actively at finding out why, either

I definitely agree with you on Spock's Beard. While they are trying to recreate some of the 70s sound (Genesis, Gentle Giant, etc.), they seem to have taken influence from what I perceive neo-prog to be (influences from pop music and a bit more simplistic in musicianship and song structure). Not that there is anything inherently wrong with this, just not my cup of tea.

While I understand Anglagard to be technically retro (they use instruments only from the 70s?), I think their music is anything but retro. I find them to be a truly progressive symphonic prog band from this era because they are still pushing the boundaries of what a rock song is. Completely different from the usual list of retro prog bands, in my opinion.

What I don't get here is the words progressive an regressive as in positive and negative.  Are you meaning to imply that you can't take an older style of music, any music, and create a new song or piece around that format? That somehow that is less creative or progressive than trying to come up with something newer? Not all new progressive music is good for that matter either. 

Kestrel wrote: While I understand Anglagard to be technically retro (they use instruments only from the 70s?), I think their music is anything but retro. I find them to be a truly progressive symphonic prog band from this era because they are still pushing the boundaries of what a rock song is. Completely different from the usual list of retro prog bands, in my opinion.

I haven't heard a ton of Anglagard, but from what I have heard, it sounds like what you'd expect to come out of a blender after sticking in some Genesis, King Crimson, Yes and Cathedral's "Stained Glass Stories".  I think it's this last influence (plus some more obscure bands) that makes Anglagard sound more "progressive" than other symphonic bands of the 90's.  It at least gives them a different sound.  But does that make them any more innovative?

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

And your point?

Show me a prog band that doesn't take ideas from other bands and I'll pat you on the back and give you high five.

If the music sounds edgy or purposefully atonal, then they took ideas from a similar past band and maybe varied it with a different reference.

If the music sounds not purposefully edgy or atonal, then the artist probably followed music theory standards, with maybe a variation here and there.

Very very very very little music is original.


Edited by stonebeard - July 07 2008 at 20:58

heyitsthatguy wrote: I sort of understand The Flower Kings anti-sentiment, I felt like pieces here and there were already done by other bands when I listened to them...one of my main problems with prog metal (specifically the subgenre 'prog metal' on the archives) is that a good majority starts to sound the same. I'm not going to tell anyone to not listen to those bands though

Just as a lot of Symphonic prog, Jazz Fusion, Neo Prog, Post Metal et al can start to sound the same to some ears. I happen to think metal is pretty diverse and no less diverse than anything else..