Did Classical Music influence Prog?

 

Exactly!

Ones' training doesn't determine which musical direction one takes. Plenty of Pop musicians were classically trained, as were Jazz players, as were Prog players, etc.

 

Players that have no training whatsoever, are still free to develope an understanding and/or love/hate for all forms of music, and they do, all the time.

 

The issue is the influence in Prog rock, which may have nothing to do with ones training.

 

Keith

 

I was attracted to prog as a wee lass because of its classical leanings, and sometimes, borrowings.  When I mention "classical" I mean traditional western, orchestral music, including Renaissance, Baroque, Rococo, Classical, Romantic, 20th Century.  Also I think prog has a lot in common with jazz and with folk musics (of the world)

 

You can look at the "fugue", "fantasia", "sonata-allegro" or other classical forms and see how many prog artists use these forms to develop their musical ideas. 

 

An obvious example is ELP with all of the classical motifs boorrowed and otherwised used (lessee, Bartok in "The Barbarian"; Mussorgsky, "Pictures at an Exhibition"; adaptation, "Knife Edge";  fugue, "Endless Enigma" and "Trilogy"; bolero "Abbadon's Bolero";  Chopin etude "Memoirs of an Officer..."; Mozart via Brubeck, "Rondo; and so on)  ELP used jazz and blues too, listen to "Blues Variations" from "Take a Pebble" - even modal jazz  in "Take a Pebble" or boogie woogie in Keith Emerson's hit record " Honky Tonk Train Blues".  Folk leanings in ELP abound-- "The Sage" is a great example.  So, they, especially, were frankly influenced in other musical forms.

 

But too, listen to other especially "symphonic" prog bands, and you can really see formal, classical structure (like the musical ABCBA arch) is used all the time.  I would say, at least with foundational prog artists, they were mostly classically trained, if even for a short period of time (Rick Wakeman or Chris Squire come to mind for significant classical training) .  I remember growing up in the 1960s and 70s, and most kids getting music lessons anywhere were getting a strong classical training, even in guitar, as their preliminary training.  Guitar I mention because there are so many self trained musicians, who use books  or get with friends to learn...

 

I would say that a lot of prog depends on classical, jazz, folk, for a variety of things:  motif, structure, rhythms, etc.

 

Other prog, like prog metal, might not be so classically based.  So it really depends on what you are listening to.  But I think there is a great deal of agreement that this music was considered "progressive" because it endeavored to merge various musical influences into a rock context, sometimes wildly successful  to less successful merging (well, there is a long list of lame music by great rock bands, I don't think I should start).

 

"Roundabout" is tops in the "wildly successful" songs.  For those who either weren't around or don't remember, Roundabout was all over the am and fm radio for years.  I heard Roundabout so often for so long., I had it memorized, and never owned Fragile.  It really, as a song, opened the door for other prog bands to get prog hits.  I mean, Kansas in the late 1970s, wouldn't have gotten Point of Know Return popular without the open door from Roundabout in the early 1970s.  And  there were other hits, like Karn Evil 9, or ""Wish You Were Here" that  also broke amazing ground.  A lot of prog did not get on the am pop charts, but stayed in fm land for the hardcore listener, because it wasn't so catchy.  And a lot of prog bands got on the am pop charts in the 1970s only with less "proggy" -if that is a word!-songs, like "From the Beginning" or "Time" by the Floyd.  I mean, "Tarkus", "Lizard" "Siberian Khatru" or a number of other prog hits did not go far on the am pop song charts.  I don't remember hearing Tarkus at all on the am stations, but oh, boy the fm was loaded, so guess where I was)

I think a great question is whether prog artists (especially those who aren't adamantly striving to blend classical music into their rock) know, I mean really know, why they are doing what they are doing, in the sense of where their musical ideas come from, how they develop, and what they are using for their groundwork, and bottom line, what sounds good and right.  I think, if we all examine our music that we make, we will probably find that a lot is from our personal musical experiences (what a concept) and much of our musical experiences, like childhood songs, here in the west at least, come from classical.

 

There are some books on prog that have come about since the late 1990s that really help explain the foundations of prog.  I recommend that if you seriously want an answer to this endless question, get some of these materials and find out what the pros say about themselves, or about what musicologists say. 

 

 

 

I go back to my original point - music is for enjoyment not for putting in boxes and excluding or dismissing simply beacause it has been put in a random category by persons unknown.  Who in this forum knows that Pete Sinfield (of King Crimson fame) wrote lyrics for Bucks Fizz (notably Land of Make Believe).

 

There is some pop that I thoroughly enjoy and there is some prog rock that I find unlistenable.  If I like a peice of music, I like it I really don't care who its by or which genre it gets put in hence my very eclectic collection. 

 

 

 

I state this because bands like Bowfire are often labled this, and get played on Arts Channels.

 

Unfortunately they do not play progressive rock bands whose material is often more complex and more interested in the music itself (and not the show), which the classical masters would approve of.

 

I used to believe this, but it's not completely accurate either.

 

Keith Emerson had Classical training with private teachers, he didn't studied in a conservatory, but he was trained in Classical Music by a certified teacher since the age of 8. I believe I read he had to take a test in UK to get an official certificate and he got it.

 

Lets remember that Jean-Luc Ponty only had to study 2 years in a Conservarory before he graduated and was awarded with the Premiere Prix, because he had studied violin with his father from the age of 5 to 15.

 

So, not studying in a conservatory doesn't mean you don't have classical formation, lets mention that some of the great masters only studied with other great masters and never in an official academy or Conservatory.

 

Iván

Not strictly acurate either.

The École Royale de Chant was created  by Louis XIV on 28 June 1696.and changed into the Conservatoire National Supérieur de Musique in 1795, if I'm not wrong in Germany there's an Academy of Arts founded in 1696, plus when we mention Classical, we incluude the Romantic era, when most of he countries had a Music School or Conservatory.

 

Also agree with you Keith

 

As Peter Gabriel said while placing the sole of his shoe on his ear "Inspiration comes from the soul".

 

Musical training is only a way for developing skills, the influence comes from what you listened, like and admire and ultimately from inside ourselves.

 

Just was pointing that there were Conservatories a long time ago, even before the ones I mentioned....Trivia facts

 

Iván

 

Don't you just hate it when we wont let it lie!