Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - How do you define Old and New Prog?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedHow do you define Old and New Prog?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Message
 Rating: Topic Rating: 1 Votes, Average 5.00  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Tapfret View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 12 2007
Location: Bryant, Wa
Status: Offline
Points: 8576 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 01:48
Old prog = pre-1980
New prog = post-1990

I suspect for most the breakdown is highly subjective. My defined era's are mostly predicated on my perception of the 80's as a virtual artistic vacuum, particularly where prog is concerned. My knowledge of worthwhile 80's prog is fairly recent and tend to exist solely in the RIO/Avant-garde SG with progmetal entering late. I can also not discount the concept that my particular age plays a major role given my birth coinciding with prog's emergence.

But really, I rarely give the differentiation much attention.

Bandcamp
Back to Top
Cristi View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover / Prog Metal Teams

Joined: July 27 2006
Location: wonderland
Status: Offline
Points: 41382 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 01:51
^ aahhhhhh, I don't need to use my glasses LOL
Back to Top
Tapfret View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 12 2007
Location: Bryant, Wa
Status: Offline
Points: 8576 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 01:54
yeah, posting from my phone is unpredictable. 

Bandcamp
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 02:07
If you define it chronologically without regard to the style of music being produced then you cannot capitalise the "new" and the "old" since this is taking the adjective use of those words and converting them into nouns.

Moreover, you can only use them to adjectively describe music that is delineated chronologically regardless of its style, for example, modern albums by old Prog bands would be new Prog music.
What?
Back to Top
Cristi View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover / Prog Metal Teams

Joined: July 27 2006
Location: wonderland
Status: Offline
Points: 41382 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 02:16
this thread is getting better and better (and i mean it in a good way Wink); I'm looking forward to some POV of those who a while ago, on a similar thread to this, were stating that prog died in 1974 and everything after that it's just... meh LOL
Back to Top
Gerinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5093 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 02:28
I don't think anybody expects a textbook definition, that would be silly, but it is no less true that debates do exist in these forums discussing various aspects of modern Prog and contrasting it with classic Prog. So I guess it depends on the context of the discussion.

For example sometimes those who criticize some modern Prog do so referring to technological aspects, the era of digital recording, one-man DAW-made albums, or over-edited, ultra-perfect 'sterile' sounding music. So in such a context the cut would be around the 2000's, when such technologies started to become widely available. 1980's Neo in this context would still be 'classic' Prog.

While perhaps if the discussion focuses on the fact that early Prog was made under a certain cultural and social environment, the post-psychedelic / hippie era, which possibly gave it a certain distinctive flavour, then Neo would not qualify as 'classic' Prog in this context.
Back to Top
Raff View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24392 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 04:35
Just a suggestion... What about using "classic" and "modern", instead of the frankly unimpressive (and rather incorrect) "old" and "new"?
Back to Top
Cristi View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover / Prog Metal Teams

Joined: July 27 2006
Location: wonderland
Status: Offline
Points: 41382 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 04:44
Originally posted by Raff Raff wrote:

Just a suggestion... What about using "classic" and "modern", instead of the frankly unimpressive (and rather incorrect) "old" and "new"?


so when does the classic prog stop and the modern one begins then? it's just as confusing as "old" vs "new".
or it just confuses me. LOL
Back to Top
Manuel View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 09 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 12410 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 09:55
The only distinction I make is:  "Music I like" and "Music I don't like" , as simple as that.
Back to Top
dr wu23 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20485 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 12:37
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

Everything went to hell musically after 1979. So there's that.
 
That works for me............1979 it is.
 
LOL
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin
Back to Top
TODDLER View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: August 28 2009
Location: Vineland, N.J.
Status: Offline
Points: 3126 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 13:28

There seems to be an on going issue between people who hear the same riffs, signature lines, time signatures, and chord progressions and the people who do not. I believe there is a great debate between people because of this and narrowing it down to the crowd , (who are intelligent), but totally misunderstand any indication of signature lines in "Modern Prog" being repeatedly drawn from "Classic Prog" , you could probably just take music theory I in your local community college and figure it out. Seriously though...enough research into the history of music on the internet would be the answer for all the people who disagree that Modern Prog repeats too many signature lines from Classic Prog. This can be very insulting to an individual who personally admires Modern Prog, but it is a fact that should be noteworthy for it's meaning/value and remember that those in life who use the fact as a harsh defense to prove a point make it twice as hard for you accept the truth.

Manuel said "Music I like" and "Music I don't like". This is the best feeling to have. If you concern yourself to a point where God and Satan are having a battle over music, your listening experience will crumble into little pieces and your stomach will be in knots. I enjoy the Modern Prog for what it is ..even though it is obvious to me that music is being repeated more than being creative in the department of originality. I love Solaris and personally enjoy their emulation of Jethro Tull. I love this band because of their ability to shine on their own. I often wonder why Jethro Tull, ELP, Genesis, King Crimson, Yes, Gentle Giant, and Frank Zappa were all extremely separate from each other in musical characteristics and why it feels like a non-existent film today

Many of the ideas in 70's Progressive Rock obviously derived from music written in different centuries, however the ideas were experimented with to form some kind of originality and not a clear obvious emulation. Not to be dismissive of 70's Progressive Rock bands who in fact DID emulate ...but to only present a specific  composer's music fused with Rock. Mainly known as an experiment of fusing Classical with Rock in a creative fashion to push Rock music further into a level of theater and complex composition.   

   



Edited by TODDLER - February 02 2015 at 14:30
Back to Top
TeleStrat View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 27 2014
Location: Norwalk, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 9319 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 13:39
Originally posted by Manuel Manuel wrote:

The only distinction I make is:  "Music I like" and "Music I don't like" , as simple as that.
I totally agree with this. Always have and always will.
Back to Top
Walton Street View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 24 2014
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 872 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 14:16
Originally posted by Manuel Manuel wrote:

The only distinction I make is:  "Music I like" and "Music I don't like" , as simple as that.
 
I was going to say the exact same thing ..
 
and it isn't year specific.
"I know one thing: that I know nothing"

- SpongeBob Socrates
Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26199 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 14:19
I'm actually beginning to warm to the Emerson, Lake and Powell album (mid eighties) having tried to dismiss it for so many years. As an ELP fan it never felt right that Palmer was not the drummer and Powell seemed a bit too 'basic' by comparison. Anyhow I just think that this only confuses the idea that you can just put things into classic or modern or old and new. Somewhere along the line bands started to get more muscular and less jazz orientated. ELP had that jazz influence thing going for a while in the seventies , certainly pre 1974. Prog just became a bit more straight forward from 1974 onwards and the trend continued through the 80's. Look how old drummers used to set their kits up and the more fluid style of playing compared to the double bass kit that many drummers used in the 80's (like Powell). Even when the retro prog bands came along in the 90's it just didn't have the same 'feel' to it. That perhaps is one of the major stylistic differences for me anyway.
 
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20506 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 14:21
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

There is no such thing as New Prog, it's a made-upism originally coined by lazy journalists around 10 years ago for bands like Muse and Coheed and Cambria (even Doves have been tagged New Prog by some bone-idle lazy-arsed muso-journalist ... oh wait, that's what they call themselves). This latest "fad" of using it when referring to modern progressive rock is a recent trend here that achieves nothing since it is inaccurate and misleading. I see now that it has even wheedled its way into Wikipedia - this is of course because Wikipedia is edited by know it all spotty numpties who only think they know it all.

We do not classify Progressive Rock music by chronology, it is as helpful as classifying it by the population density of the band's hometown or lead guitarists shoe size.... oh, I much rather listen to 8½ Prog, it's so much better than 7½ Prog (or 43 Prog and 41 Prog if they are European).

We classify music by musical style and genre similarity, and New Prog is not a genre nor is it a style of music. There has not been a new subgenre or new musical style in Progressive Rock for over twenty years. 

As we know, punk did not kill Prog because Prog did not die and Prog bands of the 70s continued into the 80s and beyond. So since it did not die and never went away then there can be no demarcation between so-called New and so-called Old Prog. It may have had peaks and dips along the way, but it's an unbroken continuation just the same.

And btfw: Neo Prog is not new Prog - Neo Prog started in the late 1970s when Progressive Rock was less than ten years old - how the blithering heck can a subgenre of Progressive Rock that is in itself 37 years old be called "New" any-effing-thing when the whole genre is only 46 years old. Just because the noun phrase Neo Prog that was coined at some unspecified time in the mid 1980s (long after the subgenre had emerged) contains the prefix Neo- (meaning new, recent or modern) it does not mean that the subgenre is in any way new, recent or flipping modern.

What next? Do we call the Progressive Rock made between 1973 and 1978 Inbetweenie Prog?

I'm pretty much in agreement with you, Dean Shocked, but you lost me at Inbetweenie Prog as no one has been using that description.
 
Until now! I can hear the Prog Gods moaning from Mt. Olympus! LOL
Back to Top
rdtprog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Heavy, RPI, Symph, JR/F Canterbury Teams

Joined: April 04 2009
Location: Mtl, QC
Status: Offline
Points: 5145 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 14:26
If we answer this question it could only have a relation to the technological part of the music, not the quality or style of this music. I don't really focus on the historical aspect of the music when I listen to Progressive Rock music, I just respond to a quest for the best possible experience no matter how old is the music I listen too.
Music is the refuge of souls ulcerated by happiness.

Emile M. Cioran
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20506 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 14:40
There have been many interesting posts but the ones that stick out for me are the members saying that they rarely use the Old vs New Prog distinctions, but still offer a definitive timeline. It's a bit like being just a little bit pregnant. LOL
 
My personal view is that there is just too much grey area to support a lot of the New and Old timeline distinctions. Take Rush for an example. They have transcended these timelines. Allowing for the four (?) year break, on account of Neil's personal situation, how do we reconcile Rush within the timelines of Old and New Prog?
 
I think that another grey area would be to categorize all new sub genres as the New Prog. Take Dream Theater for example. DT is in most member's New Prog time frames, but frankly, their music has become stale to me recently. So all New Prog sub genres cannot, in reality, always produce new progressive rock music.
 
Perhaps we should just refer to New Prog as simply the output of newer or more recent Prog groups and move past this Old Prog/New Prog terminology. I know some will say that this contains time frames also, but at least we will be focusing on groups or individual artists instead of perceived styles and ages of Prog music.
 
Btw, I have no problem calling 70's era Yes or Genesis '"Classic Prog" as that refers to a zenith in the genre's history. (At least I hope it does!)


Edited by SteveG - February 03 2015 at 10:43
Back to Top
dr prog View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 25 2010
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 2449 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 15:33
Old prog is the only prog. Fun complex melodies that only came from composers who were brought up with jazz, classical, folk and 60s Rock. Melodies that progress. Don't worry about the modern version in most cases. They try to invent styles instead and don't have the 5 big influences in those volumes. Prog music was a natural invention, modern prog is a forced invention. Definitions can't change. A table will always be a table

Edited by dr prog - February 02 2015 at 15:41
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.
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20506 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 15:36
^I guess you weren't taken with calling 60's/70's prog "Classic Prog"! LOL
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
LearsFool View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: November 09 2014
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Points: 8633 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2015 at 15:48
Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

Old prog is the only prog. Fun complex melodies that only came from composers who were brought up with jazz, classical, folk and 60s Rock. Melodies that progress. Don't worry about the modern version in most cases. They try to invent styles instead and don't have the 5 big influences in those volumes. Prog music was a natural invention, modern prog is a forced invention. Definitions can't change. A table will always be a table

It sure must be hard to progress when you only allow people to progress in melody and not in any other way.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.105 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.