A good amount of Yes and Asia are similar. Progressive Rock/Metal to me is when the song constantly evolves without being bound to a generic structure, like shown above. Early Floyd strays from this more.
Joined: February 19 2010
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 15
Posted: February 19 2010 at 16:05
How are they not prog?
They were as innovative and creative as it gets for their time. They helped create new genres of PROG such as the aforementioned space and psychedelic rock.
And their albums and individual tracks range from heavily synth based, soft, melancholic, riffs ect.
Joined: February 14 2006
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 436
Posted: March 06 2010 at 16:06
Nick Masons drumming as a bit of a problem to me. Not that he is bad, but he lacks a bit of the jazzy drumming I would like in a prog band. The Jam section on 'Money' is a good example, it kinda falls flat and sounds heavy handed. That track needs Robert Wyatt, :)
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: March 06 2010 at 22:37
I would say some or even a lot of their music is not prog rock, but they are PROGRESSIVE rock..in keeping with the current fashion on PA. Yes, they may have a lot of straight up rock songs and lot more of those than any other prog rock band (why is that a problem by the way) but to add to what Dean pointed out in the previous page, they arrived before Genesis, Yes, ELP, Gentle Giant and still had The Wall left in the tank in '79. I don't listen to prog rock because it's prog rock but because there is much inventive music in this genre and if you want an inventive band, you can't do much better than Pink Floyd. I don't know whether this answers the question, so I should say that I don't particularly care if they are prog rock or not but they have enough songs that can safely be called prog - Astronomy Domine (cmon, it was '67), Saucerful of Secrets, Set controls to the heart of the sun, Atom Heart Mother Suite, Echoes, Dogs, Sheep... and more - to settle the issue anyway.
Joined: January 20 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1601
Posted: March 06 2010 at 23:04
I always thought of them as more of a psychedelic rock band. Obviously Barrett era is heavily psychedelic, after that it was a psych band continuously going towards more standard rock (with some exceptions). And obviously there were some progressive tendencies since psych and prog rock have many crossover traits.
Joined: August 17 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6673
Posted: March 07 2010 at 00:17
The term progressive rock stems from the post-Woodstock explosion of new bands that now included musicians who wanted to stretch beyond the simple pop psychedelia that permeated the nascent rock scene. The conservatory trained instrumentalists wanted to enter the rock medium and cash in on the huge following that they may incur (money, fame, groupies etc...) . The Wakemans , Emersons and company vaulted the 3 minute songs into epic compositions , full of inventive explorations fueled by the immense technological advances (namely synthesizers) of the time. In that sense , Floyd was progressive in relation to pre 1970 rock bands and kept the formula going into the future. Obviously the term progressive is not really valid anymore , as every possible style has been recorded already.
I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth.
Joined: May 23 2007
Location: South Africa
Status: Offline
Points: 492
Posted: March 10 2010 at 05:28
Maybe one of the answers is a simple one - back in the early 70's a number of bands broke away from the pop music mould and created music that we had never heard before. Black Sabbath, Uriah Heep, ELP, Pink Floyd, Grand Funk Railroad, LZepp, Yes, Genesis etc etc. That was a magic time to be a music lover. The fact that then the music was ground breaking makes it prog as per then standards. Listening to DSOTM or WYWH was a very different experience then than it could possibly be now.
There is no reason why a "prog standard setting" band then should not be considered as prog today - those bands were the cornerstone of much that we hold as brilliant today. Without those cornerstones I don't know what we would be listening to today as prog music lovers.
Joined: March 12 2008
Location: Madrid (spain)
Status: Offline
Points: 169
Posted: March 11 2010 at 11:45
"Nothing is formulaic" , oh man it seems you been absolutely cheated.
Evrything since Atom Heart Mother is purely formulaic, i think they even have the mathematical equation for building these tiny gloomy musical houses ad nauseam.
Wish you were here is bad and The Dark Side of the Moon is a cliche craft all over the disc.
Is no surprising is hit radio friendly.
About philosophical deepness dont make me laugh. Does any of the members make a new school system or they just take them to expensive english private schools as every other wealthy englishman does?
Another brick in the wall? Yeah especialy if you are in the builders team.
And what about sacking barret and then talking about madness from the comfortably numb view in their quiet sofas?
Yes so deep, they are really an institution od deepness.The cunning deepnes of the hipocrites.
Floyds inventors of psychedelia and space rock? No way man.
When did the Floys do space rock? Why they are in same section of Ozrics? Hawkwind?!
Space rock is not about wild spacy psychedelic rock. Im missing somthing?
Just ears really. I'm not a massive Floyd fan but any artist who is capable of inventing what are now deemed clichés that have been copied and mutated forever hence is a true litmus test of originality. The signature sounds of psychedelic music were freshly minted by Floyd (and others) on Piper at the Gates of Dawn and Saucerful of Secrets. Ozric Tentacles appear to have formed circa 1985 so must have been active as a ground breaking psyche band with no recorded output since 1967 ?
Pink Floyd minus talent = Hawkwind.
Space Rock = Interstellar Overdrive (BTW the worst track on Piper IMO)
Some of the best lyrics of any genre of music are contained on Dark Side of the Moon, but yes, by that stage the music was pretty much plain vanilla rock. (but why is good rock music deemed less worthy than very bad Progressive Rock ?)
It appears the lunatic is not just confined to the grass...
Joined: February 25 2010
Location: Russia
Status: Offline
Points: 236
Posted: March 11 2010 at 13:56
rushfan4 wrote:
I believe that Pink Floyd are here in Progressive rock, because with their earlier albums they were pioneers in psychedelic and space rock, which are branches of progressive rock. The later on concept albums probably also contributed, since in the area of rock, concept albums tend to land under the progressive label, although this doesn't mean that it is an all inclusive progressive rock characteristic. Tracks like Atom Heart Mother clocking in at 24 minutes, A Saucerful of Secrets at 12 minutes, Echoes at 23 minutes, etc...
Joined: May 16 2009
Location: Blighty
Status: Offline
Points: 6797
Posted: March 11 2010 at 14:02
ExittheLemming wrote:
shockedjazz wrote:
Floyds inventors of psychedelia and space rock? No way man.
When did the Floys do space rock? Why they are in same section of Ozrics? Hawkwind?!
Space rock is not about wild spacy psychedelic rock. Im missing somthing?
Just ears really. I'm not a massive Floyd fan but any artist who is capable of inventing what are now deemed clichés that have been copied and mutated forever hence is a true litmus test of originality. The signature sounds of psychedelic music were freshly minted by Floyd (and others) on Piper at the Gates of Dawn and Saucerful of Secrets. Ozric Tentacles appear to have formed circa 1985 so must have been active as a ground breaking psyche band with no recorded output since 1967 ?
Pink Floyd minus talent = Hawkwind.
Space Rock = Interstellar Overdrive (BTW the worst track on Piper IMO)
Some of the best lyrics of any genre of music are contained on Dark Side of the Moon, but yes, by that stage the music was pretty much plain vanilla rock. (but why is good rock music deemed less worthy than very bad Progressive Rock ?)
It appears the lunatic is not just confined to the grass...
Hawkwind, no talent, yeah right! You too seem to lack ears of any functional variety!
Floyds inventors of psychedelia and space rock? No way man.
When did the Floys do space rock? Why they are in same section of Ozrics? Hawkwind?!
Space rock is not about wild spacy psychedelic rock. Im missing somthing?
Just ears really. I'm not a massive Floyd fan but any artist who is capable of inventing what are now deemed clichés that have been copied and mutated forever hence is a true litmus test of originality. The signature sounds of psychedelic music were freshly minted by Floyd (and others) on Piper at the Gates of Dawn and Saucerful of Secrets. Ozric Tentacles appear to have formed circa 1985 so must have been active as a ground breaking psyche band with no recorded output since 1967 ?
Pink Floyd minus talent = Hawkwind.
Space Rock = Interstellar Overdrive (BTW the worst track on Piper IMO)
Some of the best lyrics of any genre of music are contained on Dark Side of the Moon, but yes, by that stage the music was pretty much plain vanilla rock. (but why is good rock music deemed less worthy than very bad Progressive Rock ?)
It appears the lunatic is not just confined to the grass...
Hawkwind, no talent, yeah right! You too seem to lack ears of any functional variety!
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65792
Posted: March 11 2010 at 17:44
shockedjazz wrote:
Wish you were here is bad and The Dark Side of the Moon is a cliche craft all over the disc.
Is no surprising is hit radio friendly.
- Wish You Were Here and Dark Side are only bad if you do like 'cliche craft', otherwise they're great examples of music making that is apart from other popular bands, a truly original work not unlike most of their albums: you may not like those records - which is a perfectly fine opinion to have - but they are anything but "clichéd"
About philosophical deepness dont make me laugh. Does any of the members make a new school system or they just take them to expensive english private schools as every other wealthy englishman does?
- Well they're musicians not statesmen, did the Beatles or The Who 'make a new school system' or any other socio-political actions related to their lyrics?
And what about sacking barret and then talking about madness from the comfortably numb view in their quiet sofas?
- Have you ever known someone, a close friend or associate, that has serious mental illness? At a certain point - depending on the illness or whether the person is taking medication - it's very hard to be the good and accommodating person you should be.. you can try and try to be the person's friend but there's only so much craziness people can take before something has to give-- seems the boys were as sympathetic to Barrett's situation as they could be at that time.
The Monkees are more deep than the Floyds.
-That's where you blew your argument, just sounds like sour grapes at this point.
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
Posted: March 12 2010 at 05:35
shockedjazz wrote:
"Nothing is formulaic" , oh man it seems you been absolutely cheated.
Evrything since Atom Heart Mother is purely formulaic, i think they even have the mathematical equation for building these tiny gloomy musical houses ad nauseam.
Wish you were here is bad and The Dark Side of the Moon is a cliche craft all over the disc.
Is no surprising is hit radio friendly.
About philosophical deepness dont make me laugh. Does any of the members make a new school system or they just take them to expensive english private schools as every other wealthy englishman does?
Another brick in the wall? Yeah especialy if you are in the builders team.
And what about sacking barret and then talking about madness from the comfortably numb view in their quiet sofas?
Yes so deep, they are really an institution od deepness.The cunning deepnes of the hipocrites.
The Monkees are more deep than the Floyds.
OK, this misses the point so wildly it must be deliberate - congratulations on a great troll!
I particularly like the point about the Monkees - their work with Frank Zappa on "Head" is astonishing.
shockedjazz wrote:
Floyds inventors of psychedelia and space rock? No way man.
When did the Floys do space rock? Why they are in same section of Ozrics? Hawkwind?!
Space rock is not about wild spacy psychedelic rock. Im missing somthing?
It's true - Floyd didn't invent psychedelia.
Not sure about Space Rock - that kinda evolved from psych, with a little help from Sun-Ra, Zappa and a few others - but I'm hard pressed to think of a Spacey Rock album released before "Piper..." (not that there aren't any, but 1966 was quite short on them).
Floyd (obviously) wrote and played a form of Space Rock - and equally obviously, they did not sound like the Ozrics. Their influence on Hawkwind (not to mention much Krautrock, later British, European and American psych is also patently obvious - but, of course, there were other bands at the time.
er... Space Rock IS largely about wild spacy psychedelic rock isn't it? If not, what IS it all about?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Pink Floyd Progressive Rock?
Topic Options
Yes, they may have a lot of straight up rock songs and lot more of those than any other prog rock band (why is that a problem by the way) but to add to what Dean pointed out in the previous page, they arrived before Genesis, Yes, ELP, Gentle Giant and still had The Wall left in the tank in '79. I don't listen to prog rock because it's prog rock but because there is much inventive music in this genre and if you want an inventive band, you can't do much better than Pink Floyd. 
I don't know whether this answers the question, so I should say that I don't particularly care if they are prog rock or not but they have enough songs that can safely be called prog - Astronomy Domine (cmon, it was '67), Saucerful of Secrets, Set controls to the heart of the sun, Atom Heart Mother Suite, Echoes, Dogs, Sheep... and more - to settle the issue anyway. 
Snow Dog wrote:
