Innovative vs. Regressive prog artists

The reason I favour a term like 'retro-prog' is because it accurately summarises many modern prog bands. Please note, let me spell it out: calling a class of prog music 'retro' IS NOT A REPLACEMENT FOR SUB-GENRES.

It is an accurate term because their music EVOKES the classic prog era, in influence, arrangement, structure or sound. One or more of these, I think. It's an accurate term, and is NOT a negative term. I have retro furniture, and its fabulous. Moreover, 'retro-rock' is an accepted genre of rock: bands like the Datsuns, the Hives, the Darkness, Wolfmother and so on incorporate elements of classic rock into their sound.

Using the term helps distinguish this music from modern progressive music, which attempts to subvert musical conventions to make something experimental. None of the bands mentioned above could possibly be classified primarily as experimental, even though most of them have done a few interesting and even experimental things.

Finally, the term is useful because it is a defence when someone claims an album or artist is not 'prog' because it doesn't 'progress'. If it is retro-prog, why should it?

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: stonebeard wrote: Uh, wat? Given that I only know ATOTT, W&W, Duke, and We Can't Dance, I have to say I find very little in common with Genesis. The Masquerade Overture is the epitome of Neo as I know it.   I mentioned 4 men Genesis era, that limits the influence to 2 albums, and it's obvious (at least for me) that The Masquerade Overture has a strong influence from ATOTT, specially in the Banksian style of Nolan.   In songs like The  Shadow, ythe influence of Entangled is more than evident for anybody with ears, this effect is clearly more evident in the closing section of the bonus track The King of the Csstle which is practically a rip off.   Despite the preeminent guitar in Guardian of my Soul and As Good as Gold is very simnilar to what Hackett and Banks did.   Only in Pursuit of Excelence I find a clear Pink Floyd reminiscent sound, but aren't the above mentioned songs enough to talk about a clear Genesis influence?   Even Cygnus X-1,  the head of the Neo Prog Team of which you were a member speaks of a clear Banks influence in Nolan, so I can't understand your rekluctance to accept what's evident for most people.   Or maybe you should visit Pendragon's site, and read what Clive Nolan  has to say:   Most influential album: "Seconds Out" by Genesis was the album that made me want to be in a rock band.   http://www.pendragon.mu/uk/files/clive_nolan.htm   BTW: When you mention the epitome of Neo Prog, you're mentionoing Genesis, because it's obvious for everybody that Genesis was the main influence of Neo Prog. And as far as Pendragon being in symphonic territory now, I throw my hands up in the air and decry genres. It makes no sense.   Maybe not for you, but it makes for me and other people, Believe is a radical change IMO, they blend moire influences that go from Flamenco to clear and pristine Symphonic like in "The Wishing Eell".   And not the only one   Atkingani, also member of the Symphonic and Neo Prog Teams and who for that reason I guess knows something says:   The best feature here is the sound; in reality, PENDRAGON, although included as a basilar neo-prog band have left the style a long time ago. “Believe” is a blend of symphonic prog with the traditional art-rock fluid   http://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=8451   Cesar Polo, a reviewer of the site also says:   With this CD, Pendragon changed notably their sound, deriving towards a rawer and dispersed mixture, not so sweetened like before (though always within the domains of symphonic rock),   But not only here, you can check Jerry Lucky's site:   Believe is a wonderful addition to the Pendragon catalog. If you’re already a fan it’s a “slam dunk” that you’ll like this. If you’ve hesitated getting to the music of Pendragon because of what some might have written about them, this is the perfect time to set aside any preconceived notions and sink your teeth into some great music. Pendragon’s Believe sets the standard for modern symphonic progressive rock. I highly recommend it.   http://www.jerrylucky.com/reviews%20p-t_003.htm   Probably if you're expecting a Symphonic sound as in the 70's Pendragon would sound different, but the sub-genres evolve, already Progressor talks about Neo-Symphonic (A term that we coined some time ago in this site  http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=34538&KW=Symphonic+Structure  ):   All the other twelve numbers are kindred works, each brightly reflecting the trademark Pendragon style which is classic Neo Symphonic Progressive with a slight predomination of guitar-laden textures.   http://www.progressor.net/review/pendragon_2006.html   So, I'm not alone in my opinion.   Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: First 2 arena albums are very very close to Pendragon.   Until there we agree, then we are talking about a band inspired by a heavily influenced band After that, they become much more....like concise rock/metal with heavy Neo Prog sensibility. The songs are very pop-structured usually, and the bombasticness of earlier albums is toned down a lot, but still comes up in epics.   Structure of prog metal versus structure of Neo prog? Do any of us really know enugh about both genres to really debate that. I could try, but it would be generalized and stupid. On the surface, they seem very close.   Yes, debating when the tone of the replies borders the offensive, is futile I don't see much Genesis in Arena, except in mellotron occasionally. Genesis doesn't have a monopoly on mellotron though.   You don't, I see it, then we must agree to disagree, but any band with a clearly Banks influenced keyboardist like Clive Nolan, has Genesis influence.   Iván

Regarding genres: I don't care. I have no qualms about saying I think going and making hair-splitting genres about perceived minute trends in music is pointless. None of the people you mentioned have any more legitimate opinions on Believe than my own, and I'm sure I could find reviewers that don't bother making the assertion that Pendragon are becoming Symphonic at all.

I'm getting the clear vibe that diversity and Neo Prog cannot coexist according to you and others. As a Neo band matures and gets a bit adventurous, they become symphonic? Pendragon has NOT radically changed their sound. Neo prog as a stepping stone! You may not have that opinion, but I know others do, and why else would bands not want to be labelled Neo? It's a bullsh*t genre. 

HughesJB4 wrote: Kestrel wrote: Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: HughesJB4 wrote: Have I heard Morningrise? Yes. Reminds me of Pink Floyd, yes, but like many artist of course they have their influences. But isn't Opeth also influenced by a lot of more modern bands, such as 80s/early 90s extreme metal genres? I would think so. THAT'S  MY POINT....There's nothing wrong in being influenced by 70's, 80's or 90's bands, there's not such thing as retro Prog,  all the bands have an influence that's not only natural, but also healthy. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think what the term retro prog is saying is that it's taking influence from 70s bands and not contemporaries. *shrug* Not just that, but I tend to think retro also evokes  a feeling, that makes the music sound retro, as opposed to just taking influence from retro bands.

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 09 2008 at 01:24

stonebeard wrote: Uh, wat? Given that I only know ATOTT, W&W, Duke, and We Can't Dance, I have to say I find very little in common with Genesis. The Masquerade Overture is the epitome of Neo as I know it.   I mentioned 4 men Genesis era, that limits the influence to 2 albums, and it's obvious (at least for me) that The Masquerade Overture has a strong influence from ATOTT, specially in the Banksian style of Nolan.   In songs like The  Shadow, the influence of Entangled is more than evident for anybody with ears, this effect is clearly more evident in the closing section of the bonus track The King of the Csstle which is practically a rip off.   Despite the preeminent guitar in Guardian of my Soul and As Good as Gold is very similar to what Hackett and Banks did.   Only in Pursuit of Excelence I find a clear Pink Floyd reminiscent sound, but aren't the above mentioned songs enough to talk about a clear Genesis influence?   Even Cygnus X-1,  the head of the Neo Prog Team of which you were a member speaks of a clear Banks influence in Nolan, so I can't understand your reluctance to accept what's evident for most people.   Or maybe you should visit Pendragon's site, and read what Clive Nolan  has to say:   Most influential album: "Seconds Out" by Genesis was the album that made me want to be in a rock band.   http://www.pendragon.mu/uk/files/clive_nolan.htm   BTW: When you mention the epitome of Neo Prog, you're mentioning Genesis, because it's obvious for everybody that Genesis was the main influence of Neo Prog. And as far as Pendragon being in symphonic territory now, I throw my hands up in the air and decry genres. It makes no sense.   Maybe not for you, but it makes for me and other people, Believe is a radical change IMO, they blend moire influences that go from Flamenco to clear and pristine Symphonic like in "The Wishing Eell".   And not the only one   Atkingani, also member of the Symphonic and Neo Prog Teams and who for that reason I guess knows something says:   The best feature here is the sound; in reality, PENDRAGON, although included as a basilar neo-prog band have left the style a long time ago. “Believe” is a blend of symphonic prog with the traditional art-rock fluid   http://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=8451   Cesar Polo, a reviewer of the site also says:   With this CD, Pendragon changed notably their sound, deriving towards a rawer and dispersed mixture, not so sweetened like before (though always within the domains of symphonic rock),   But not only here, you can check Jerry Lucky's site:   Believe is a wonderful addition to the Pendragon catalog. If you’re already a fan it’s a “slam dunk” that you’ll like this. If you’ve hesitated getting to the music of Pendragon because of what some might have written about them, this is the perfect time to set aside any preconceived notions and sink your teeth into some great music. Pendragon’s Believe sets the standard for modern symphonic progressive rock. I highly recommend it.   http://www.jerrylucky.com/reviews%20p-t_003.htm   Probably if you're expecting a Symphonic sound as in the 70's Pendragon would sound different, but the sub-genres evolve, already Progressor talks about Neo-Symphonic (A term that we coined some time ago in this site  http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=34538&KW=Symphonic+Structure  ):   All the other twelve numbers are kindred works, each brightly reflecting the trademark Pendragon style which is classic Neo Symphonic Progressive with a slight predomination of guitar-laden textures.   http://www.progressor.net/review/pendragon_2006.html   So, I'm not alone in my opinion. First 2 arena albums are very very close to Pendragon.   Until there we agree, then we are talking about a band inspired by a heavily influenced band After that, they become much more....like concise rock/metal with heavy Neo Prog sensibility. The songs are very pop-structured usually, and the bombasticness of earlier albums is toned down a lot, but still comes up in epics.   Structure of prog metal versus structure of Neo prog? Do any of us really know enugh about both genres to really debate that. I could try, but it would be generalized and stupid. On the surface, they seem very close.   Yes, debating when the tone of the replies borders the offensive, is futile I don't see much Genesis in Arena, except in mellotron occasionally. Genesis doesn't have a monopoly on mellotron though.   You don't, I see it, then we must agree to disagree, but any band with a clearly (and self admited) Banks influenced keyboardist like Clive Nolan, has Genesis influence.   Iván

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:   If Pendragon ever sounded close to the 70's it was in The Masquerade Overture in which the massive use of soft melodies and Mellotron sounded like 4 men Genesis, but today their sound has changed dramatically, there's a clear evoution in them, they have left Neo Prog to enter in Symphonic territory.

Uh, wat? Given that I only know ATOTT, W&W, Duke, and We Can't Dance, I have to say I find very little in common with Genesis. The Masquerade Overture is the epitome of Neo as I know it.

Keyboards = dominant, but very very synthy
Sound = feels like a comparison of digital (Pendragon) versus analog (Genesis) to me
Guitar: basically the most prominent guitar of any Neo prog band that I know, heavy Pink Floyd influence
Songs: feel much more structured and predictable as far as structure goes than symphonic

And as far as Pendragon being in symphonic territory now, I throw my hands up in the air and decry genres. It makes no sense.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Oh my God!!!! Arena is probably the most derivative band in history, not only derivative from Genesis, but derivative from Marillion who as good as they can be, are already derivative and from early Pendragon, it's amazing you call them fresh and innovative.   They can border Prog Metal in Pepper's Ghost, but the main structure and the main influence can be easily traced to the 70's and 80's.   I see more Genesis ideas in Arena than from any band in TFK.

First 2 arena albums are very very close to Pendragon.

After that, they become much more....like concise rock/metal with heavy Neo Prog sensibility. The songs are very pop-structured usually, and the bombasticness of earlier albums is toned down a lot, but still comes up in epics.

Structure of prog metal versus structure of Neo prog? Do any of us really know enugh about both genres to really debate that. I could try, but it would be generalized and stupid. On the surface, they seem very close.

I don't see much Genesis in Arena, except in mellotron occasionally. Genesis doesn't have a monopoly on mellotron though.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: stewe wrote: 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).   Because of your later posts I read you like Spock's Beard but you don't like TFK, I can understand that but not for the reasons you give, they are playing the same kind of Symphonic inspired in the 70's,  I believe the real answer is that you don't like TFK and you like Spock's Beard despite their similar roots.............That's all.   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.   I'm not a fan of Neal Morse, but please explainme what you mean by "Ideas taken from the 70's Giants" please.   If Pendragon ever sounded close to the 70's it was in The Masquerade Overture in which the massive use of soft melodies and Mellotron sounded like 4 men Genesis, but today their sound has changed dramatically, there's a clear evoution in them, they have left Neo Prog to enter in Symphonic territory. On the other hand I feel constant evolution and new inspiration in music of prog-bands like Pain of Salvation,   Pain of Salvation evolved? They take as much ideas from the 70's as TFK, only that they blend them with Metal, nothing more and nothing less,   Opeth,   Opeth has evolved from pure Metal to Prog Metal that's truth, but aren't they a band based in jamming and soloing that later in youtr post you criticize?   BTW: Have you heard Morningrise? Doesn't it reminds you of a barely known band called Pink Floyd? Isn't Pink Floyd a 70's band?   Porcupine Tree   Please man, what are you talking? Porcupine Tree didn't had a significative evolution  in 18 years, they are doing something that you should consider worst, and it's getting stuck in a cliche, they are copying themselves, you don't see really any change, lets say from their second album to the date. Don't misunderstand me, I like PT a lot, but for the same reasons you dismiss TFK, you should criticize PT.   even Arena.   Oh my God!!!! Arena is probably the most derivative band in history, not only derivative from Genesis, but derivative from Marillion who as good as they can be, are already derivative and from early Pendragon, it's amazing you call them fresh and innovative.   They can border Prog Metal in Pepper's Ghost, but the main structure and the main influence can be easily traced to the 70's and 80's.    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".   Are you talking of influences? There are wo ways of being retro (As much as I dislike this term), one is being healthy influenced and the other is cloning...Please tell me where TFK steal ideas from other bands?   I see more Genesis ideas in Arena than from any band in TFK.    Focus is on compositions, creating moods, not primarily on jamming and showing-off the skills, and sounds fresh with each new effort.   Do you believe that playing in the 70's style is easy? Do you think you don't require compositional skills to write a song in the style Tony Banks or Jon Anderson did?   In first place is good to check some Prog history, The Flower Kings are part of the movement that was born with the imnpulse of the Swedish Art Rock Society founded in 1991 with the specific task to rescue the values of the 70's Symphonic Prog  after a weak decade as the 80's in which Symph was dying,   We baptized this movement as Symphonic Renaissance and it's being used in different sites, because that's what they were, a Renaissance of Symphonic that was in an almost catatonic state during the 80's.   It's nothing but logical they should sound inspired in the 70's as other band from the same movement like Par Lindh Project or Anglagard.   Tha was their motivation, to resurrect Symphonic, and if it wasn't for the Swedish bands of the 90's, today Prog would most surely be dead today. Anyone has such feelings of dividing of current prog music?   Not in m case, I like new fresh and radical Prog as much as 70's inluenced Prog, there are good and bad  bands in both sides of the spectrum.   Dorsalia wrote: Arena were definitely doing great stuff until their latest album. I don't know how people can dismiss them as "neo-prog"   Dismiss????????????????   Since when is Neo Prog a second rate sub-genre to consider placing a band there to be dismissed?   You may like Neo Prog or not, but it's a valid sub-genre as any other oine, with people who lñove them and people who don't.   I don't specially like Prog Metal or Avant, but I would hardly say you dismniss a band including them in Prog Metal or Avant, you include them because they are Prog Metal or Avant.   In the same way, a super group as Arena, formed by members of Neo Prog bands mainly and with clear Marillion influences, can't be in any other place than in  Neo Prog.   Iván

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: stewe wrote: 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).   Because of your later posts I read you like Spock's Beard but you don't like TFK, I can understand that but not for the reasons you give, they are playing the same kind of Symphonic inspired in the 70's,  I believe the real answer is that you don't like TFK and you like Spock's Beard...That's all..   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.   I'm not a fan of Neal Morse, but please explainme what you mean by "Ideas taken from the 70's Giants" please.   If Pendragon ever sounded close to the 70's it was in The Masquerade Overture in which the massive use of soft melodies and Mellotron sounded like 4 men Genesis, but today their sound has changed dramatically, there's a clear evoution in them, they have left Neo Prog to enter in Symphonic territory. On the other hand I feel constant evolution and new inspiration in music of prog-bands like Pain of Salvation,   Pain of Salvation evolved? They take as much ideas from the 70's as TFK, only that they blend them with Metal, nothing more and nothing less,   Opeth,   Opeth has evolved from pure Metal to Prog Metal that's truth, but aren't they a band based in jamming and soloing that later in youtr post you criticize?   BTW: Have you heard Morningrise? Doesn't it reminds you of a barely known band called Pink Floyd? Isn't Pink Floyd a 70's band?   Porcupine Tree   Please man, what are you talking? Porcupine Tree didn't had a significative evolution  in 18 years, they are doing something that you should consider worst, and it's getting stuck in a cliche, they are copying themselves, you don't see really any change, lets say from their second album to the date. Don't misunderstand me, I like PT a lot, but for the same reasons you dismiss TFK, you should criticize PT.   even Arena.   Oh my God!!!! Arena is probably the most derivative band in history, not only derivative from Genesis, but derivative from Marillion who as good as they can be, are already derivative and from early Pendragon, it's amazing you call them fresh and innovative.   They can border Prog Metal in Pepper's Ghost, but the main structure and the main influence can be easily traced to the 70's and 80's.    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".   Are you talking of influences? There are wo ways of being retro (As much as I dislike this term), one is being healthy influenced and the other is cloning...Please tell me where TFK steal ideas from other bands?   I see more Genesis ideas in Arena than from any band in TFK.    Focus is on compositions, creating moods, not primarily on jamming and showing-off the skills, and sounds fresh with each new effort.   Do you believe that playing in the 70's style is easy? Do you think you don't require compositional skills to write a song in the style Tony Banks or Jon Anderson did?   In first place is good to check some Prog history, The Flower Kings are part of the movement that was born with the imnpulse of the Swedish Art Rock Society founded in 1991 with the specific task to rescue the values of the 70's Symphonic Prog  after a weak decade as the 80's in which Symph was dying,   We baptized this movement as Symphonic Renaissance and it's being used in different sites, because that's what they were, a Renaissance of Symphonic that was in an almost catatonic state during the 80's.   It's nothing but logical they should sound inspired in the 70's as other band from the same movement like Par Lindh Project or Anglagard.   Tha was their motivation, to resurrect Symphonic, and if it wasn't for the Swedish bands of the 90's, today Prog would most surely be dead today. Anyone has such feelings of dividing of current prog music?   Not in m case, I like new fresh and radical Prog as much as 70's inluenced Prog, there are good and bad  bands in both sides of the spectrum.   Dorsalia wrote: Arena were definitely doing great stuff until their latest album. I don't know how people can dismiss them as "neo-prog"   Dismiss????????????????   Since when is Neo Prog a second rate sub-genre to consider placing a band there to be dismissed?   You may like Neo Prog or not, but it's a valid sub-genre as any other oine, with people who lñove them and people who don't.   I don't specially like Prog Metal or Avant, but I would hardly say you dismniss a band including them in Prog Metal or Avant, you include them because they are Prog Metal or Avant.   In the same way, a super group as Arena, formed by members of Neo Prog bands mainly and with clear Marillion influences, can't be in any other place than in  Neo Prog.   Iván

Pain of Salvation evolved? They take as much ideas from the 70's as TFK, only that they blend them with Metal, nothing more and nothing less

Yep, they evolved. Listen to them to see how.

laplace wrote: Random squeals and effects is avant-garde genius

Lol.

I'd rather have excellent retro music that I can enjoy that incredibly original music that makes me want to sleep... or even cause stomach reactions.... (some Iceland band almost manages that)...

Henry Plainview wrote: stonebeard wrote: Henry Plainview wrote: For the record, I have never met or seen anyone who values originality over his enjoyment of the music, and it baffles me that so many people appear to think that is what avant-garde fans are about. It's rather about the condescending attitude I see that if something isn't innovative, how can it be enjoyable? I also haven't seen that except in what I perceived to be joking, but that's more believable than someone honestly believing "Random squeals and effects is avant-garde genius!"

:shrugs:

In my 3 years here, it's soaked in, the attitude toward neo.

Garion81 wrote: Hernry Plainview   All I asked is why the author used the terms "Innovative" and "Regressive". I took them to mean Innovative is positive and creative and regressive is negative and is not creative.     If you took something more from my post I am sorry. and I should point out you weren't the one I was asking.