Reexamining Commercial Prog of The 1980's.
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=101297
Printed Date: August 16 2025 at 01:11
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Reexamining Commercial Prog of The 1980's.
Posted By: SteveG
Subject: Reexamining Commercial Prog of The 1980's.
Date Posted: February 09 2015 at 15:51
|
As someone who has made a living in the music business, I've always kept a low profile when it came to discussions of so called 'sellouts' of 1980's Prog Rock. I've already written the term music business once, but if there are members with strictly romantic views regarding Prog Music of the eighties, then I will simply emphasize that it was indeed a business and quite a cutthroat one at that. And it was controlled by a group of corporations and companies that made up with what we today call the Record Industry. And their part in many decisions regarding the musical direction of the once chart dominant seventies Prog groups such as Yes and Genesis cannot be understated. Perhaps the most influential record company in regards to seventies prog signings, support and success was due to the efforts of Atco/Atlantic records. This company was one of the first to push for Prog rock after witnessing the success of King Crimson's ItCotCK , and were major forces behind the success of both Yes and Genesis. Atco/Atlantic was also instrumental in pushing the band Cinema to use the defunct Yes moniker to help record sells as well as fawning over the Pop-like material that was to become the album 90125. Atlantic also orchestrated the debacle that was to become the album reunion album titled, based on commercial concerns. Atlantic also approved and supported the commercial direction that Genesis was to take and the company's support of Phil Collins' never ending Pop releases cannot be understated either. Another casualty due to record company pressure was Renaissance while signed to Miles Copland's IRS records. After producing a different sounding but still progressive album that failed to chart titled Camera Camera, the group was pressured to follow it with the Pop drivel album Time Line. Even the vaunted Rush was not without record company pressure after the successful release of Moving Pictures. Rush may not have 'gone commercial', but the influences that they were incorporating into their music like Police inspired Reggae and Ultravox inspired synths certainly were. And their new radio friendly 3 minute songs didn't hurt either. Having reviewed some of the facts regarding what many Prog fans regard as a poor era for thier favorite music, is it possible to give many of these 1980's Prog groups in question a pass? Or do we continue to hold these groups to standards that they were no longer allowed to maintain? And before someone cries Neo-prog, remember that only Marillion was signed to a major recording contract among the other new mid eighties British Neo-prog groups, and ONLY they had albums that charted in the eighties starting with the album A Script for a Jester's Tears.
|
Replies:
Posted By: jacksiedanny
Date Posted: February 09 2015 at 16:03
|
Not to derail your thread, but I want to ask about "Camera Camera" (still a decent Renaissance lp) North American pressing. I have had 3 copies and all , on side two go into at least 10 minutes of nigh MONO! Anyone else experience this? It is most irksome. Could a pressing flaw do this? (I don't think so.) If not, then HOW IN ALL HELL could they of engineered this so sloppily? |
Posted By: LearsFool
Date Posted: February 09 2015 at 16:58
|
An interesting question, Steve. I do wonder... You pretty much summed up what definitely went wrong with almost all commercial/commercial leaning material of the big classic prog bands into the '80's. Discipline ran into a similar problem as Cinema, and so they put back on the clothes of the Crimson King the way Cinema did with those of Yes. In general, it was the record companies' faults. This didn't on their own lead to quality problems with Yes, and least of all Crimson, but there you go. Now Genesis... we do wonder what happened there. Record company meddling? Collins wanting to make and sell good pop? Banks doing the same??? Important thing to remember is that once Hackett left, Banks was the deciding factor in Genesis' direction... whether that was calling the shots or just rubber stamping Collin's shots is the question, as well as whether either/both only did it because of the record company.
|
Posted By: presdoug
Date Posted: February 09 2015 at 17:20
|
As one of my favorite prog groups that changed, some say for the worse, in the 1980s, jazz/jazz rock band Passport beyond the late seventies and into the 1980s have a somewhat lighter sound compared to their early to mid seventies "classic" fusion period. For me, time has been good to my appreciation of Passport in the 1980s. years ago, their 80s output was a "hard sell" for me, but now I find a lot of merit in their albums Ocean Liner, Earthborn, and Man In The Mirror from 1980 to 1983 respectively. (I have never heard 1981's Blue Tattoo) In the final analysis, it doesn't have to always sound like the seventies to please me when considering Passport. Band leader Klaus Doldinger still knew how to surround himself with great players, as evidenced on these 80s records. Even 86's Heavy Nights record has some interesting qualities. My other favourite prog bands did not record in the 80s at all, so I can't comment on them, but I give Passport a passing grade, most definitely. |
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: February 09 2015 at 17:41
True. Twelfth Night *almost* made it, but the subsidiary they were signed to was dissolved overnight, and by that time the music TN was making was 95-98% different from the music they recorded 5-6 years earlier. ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
SteveG wrote:Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 09 2015 at 17:46
|
^I thought that I might have needed to stress, that the reason for this was that no record company was interested in Neo-prog bands in the eighties, but I think members get the point.
------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: February 09 2015 at 19:09
|
I gave them a break for a little then generally lost interest in them. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 01:53
|
IQ were also signed to a major label although Nomzamo is still the weakest album in their entire catalogue mainly because Peter Nicholls got nervous about the whole thing and left the band before it was recorded (although obviously returned later).However it was only Marillion that made a significant breakthrough. Fish reckoned that there was only room for one and they were it. The 80's is largely a weird decade. There was a surprising amount of good music being made considering the influence of MTV and radio was very unhelpful. The old bands came back and one or two made some acceptable stuff. ELPowell was a decent stab at old school prog, the record company actually not allowing Powell to use electronic drums ( a good idea as e-drums are a crime against rock music). I can't think of many bands that attempted this though with the likes of Yes and Genesis and even Camel doing sub AOR radio friendly stuff. The only old school bands though that managed to roll with the times and still make decent music were Rush and King Crimson (although KC in that decade does little for me but that's beside the point). So apart from Rush and KC where was the good music I was talking about? It was on the fringes of prog. I can list great albums by Propaganda, Simple Minds, Al Stewart , OMD , Talk Talk, China Crisis. The Police, Kate Bush and many others. There was a lot of creative people at work and really in this decade you have to look beyond traditional prog if you want good music to listen to. Some of these artists are even now considered prog as the definition gets ever widened . I would also add that great British institution Iron Maiden who were a major influence on the prog metal scene. The Number Of The Beast , Powerslave , Seventh Son Of A Seventh Son and Somewhere In Time are great albums. Prog? Yes why not! |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 02:16
|
I wouldn't mind reexamining it, it's re-listening to it that I'd object to. But seriously, as for Rush, if they were pressured after Moving Pictures' success, you'd think they'd have done more of that kind of thing-- but instead we got less teeth and more pablum. If Mercury were pushing them toward a more acceptable contemporary sound, it didn't set-in until the disastrous Grace Under Pressure four years later. But man did it ever, something terrible happened somewhere around 1983 that caused the band to just start cutting everything; complexity, depth, even their hair for crying out loud. ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 06:43
 Yep, need to guard against a revisionism that is kinda like cramming for an examination we all failed a long time ago. Much is made of the prevalent technology that dominated the 80's recording world e.g. digital synths and drum machines, gated reverb, looped samples, programmed beats etc as if such were the underlying cause of poor music. I know it reeks of cliche but it's stubbornly true: garbage in = garbage out. Strong musical ideas, albeit couched in short radio friendly formats rendered on even the most sterile of digital presets will still prove resilient to any withering disavowal of Prog during the 80's. Cut to the chase: Yesterday by the Beatles would sound utterly wretched on Bolivian Nose flute, but you would still walk away in disgust whistling the tune. For a few short years during the 70's the things we liked were popular. That's tantamount to miraculous in a 1st world democratic marketplace, so treasure and celebrate it by all means but all said and done, we get the culture we deserve.------------- 
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 07:12
It Bites were signed to Virgin and scored two top 10 albums, and a small string of top 10 singles in the UK... But overall I get your point about neo prog, with the exception of Marillion and It Bites it was fairly underground and unfashionable. It's not all down to music industry pressure though. Bands only sell out if they actually want to. Genesis wanted to, and they sold out very badly actually transforming into a pop group. Yes, didn't go that far imo, even on 90125. It was a stylish modern commercial rock album and as with mosty Trevor Horn productions at the time was quite arty and original sounding. As for Rush I know Alex was not happy about the dominance of synths in their music, but they did get back to letting the guitar take the lead and I don't read too much into their use of Reggae references in some of their early 80's music. The Police were one of Pearts favourite bands at the time. It's healthy for musicians to listen to different types of music, and what's happening at the time. It broadens their musical influences and allows them to 'progress' more. Had they just been listening to old men with beards and flared trousers playing organs and twin neck guitars their music would have stagnated and become completely uninteresting. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 07:30
|
Jethro Tull did some incomprehensible crap with synths in the early 80s, even if Eddie Jobson joined the band (and then later Peter Vettese). The albums A, Broadsword and the Beast and particularly Under Wraps simply was not up to snuff in comparison to the ten-year classical period (1969's Stand Up to 1979's Stormwatch). There was a discernible decline in creativity and an annoying uptick in brazen 80s synths. It wasn't until Crest of a Knave that Ian Anderson came to his senses. The album still has that annoying 80s sound in places, but Martin Barre's screaming guitar carries the workload, thank god. ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 08:27
This is really funny! I wish I could meet more people in life who feel this way. I agree a hundred percent , but often have to deal with people's rolling eyes whenever I express this kind of honesty as you have. I really like your post! It expresses real truth.
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 08:35
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 08:38
------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 08:49
|
Hmm. The 1980s saw the burgeoning of the Independent Labels as a major force within music and many non-Prog bands saw considerable success in that era on those Indie labels (Beggars Banquet, 4AD, Factory, Mute, ZZT, Rough Trade, etc.,). With notable exceptions not many bands in the 1970s achieved much fame on major labels, and in this I do not count Transatlantic, Island, Virgin or Charisma as major labels, though they were not wholly independant either, however, I would I count subsidiaries and imprints such as Deram, Dawn, Vertigo and Harvest as a being part of a major. The late 70s and early 80s saw the transition of these artists from major and minor established labels towards more specialist independent labels. None more graphically illustrate this than The Enid who went from the independent Buk Records, to signing with to EMI, then Pye and then back to indie (Mantella) and finally self-release. Fame and fortune eluded them at every step along the way, in spite of the mass of loyal fans they picked up during their live tours in the late 70s. So, I do not think that the "blame" can be levelled at the disinterest of the major labels. Nor was it due to the failure of the Indie labels to gain any recognition for their albums. If anything in the 1980s being signed to an indie rather than a major would have been a boon not a hindrance. So what was it? Public disinterest? Had the Prog scene become too commercial for the die-hard Prog fan and not commercial enough for Joe Average? Were Marillion more commercial than their Neo-Prog compatriots? The undoubtable poppiness of Kayleigh and Lavender aside, their unbroken list of non-Pop UK top-40 singles would suggest otherwise:
With Renaissance, it is worth remembering that they achieved "Pop" success in 1978 with Northern Lights, something that I believe that all concerned (band, major label and IRS) were keen to repeat. How they failed in that endeavour is open for debate, but it is not the fault of the buying public, who lapped up All About Eve's half-dozen Renaissance-influenced goth-lite top-40 hit singles in the 80s without complaint. I believe two factors contribute to our view of this era in Prog's history - the Rock Press (whose influence cannot be ignored or excused) and thus the public that is undoubtably swayed by what they read in the press, and by those non-Prog bands whose success toppled Prog from its natural home in the hearts of the record-buying youth. Both these factors shaped the music that was being created and I would argue that this has a greater effect than any pressure by a record label or producer to be "more commercial". ------------- What? |
Posted By: altaeria
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 08:51
|
I never understand why prog guys get all upset if a song has a discernible verse and chorus anyway. God forbid there might be a strong temptation to sing along with a catchy melody sometimes. Following this logic-- With all their instantly anthemic hooks, The Beatles must've been the cheesiest band to ever exist. |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 08:56
I am not sure how much "real truth" comes with my opinion, but there are and were numerous Tull fans (there are two main Tull sites/forums I still stop by) who were utterly dismayed with Under Wraps and other albums of its ilk. I quite understand an artist's need to branch out and explore new ideas, but to me it seemed like Ian Anderson, egoist as he is, was more interested in band control and keeping up with the Jones's (in this case, maybe Howard Jones  ) than making some profound artistic statement with f**king synths. Of course, John Glasscock died in 1979 and Ian decided to can Barrie Barlow, John Evan and David Palmer, which basically cut the heart out of Tull. They were really never the same thereafter, and I did not go along for the ride. The same can be said of Yes and Genesis. Make your pop brainfarts, by all means, but don't expect me to gush about your newfound crass commercialism. But one's interest in bands are cyclical, in my opinion, rather like personal relationships. They don't always last, some last longer than others, and some may be enduring. But the enduring ones are the rarest, if they happen at all. Except, of course, for my wife of 15 years (who is glaring at me currently).  ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 08:59
My own take on Marillion's chart success can only be seen as an anomaly or the result of bad business decisions on the part of EMI et al, which only adds fuel to the fire by pointing out that the overwhelming majority of major labels in the eighties avoided Prog like the plague.
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 09:08
|
Hi, I have not studied this as much as I would like to but I am not sure that the "record companies" were exactly the problem, as was the distribution system that brought things to your local store. The material was out there, but all of a sudden most of the "imports" took a dive, and things did not exactly disappear as other record companies came up in the mid 70's that helped, like Jem, Wayside and many others. The best person to discuss this would be Archie Patterson (if he would, not sure of this), as he was a distributor for over 30 years of Imports and a part of this stuff in California and oregon. The thing that hurt the most was the combination of the big three for DISTRIBUTION purposes, which was called "WEA" (Warner, Elektra and Atlantic) and we could see the results in Santa Barbara, as a lot of the individual albums by many artists all of a sudden disappeared and replaced with extra copies of Rolling Stones, Elton John and other bigger name groups, to the point where some folks in a local store even said ... no one buys it ... and of course they never had any to prove it! But one other store in there started doing imports and did rather well, for quite sometime as far as I know, although I left Santa Barbara within a year or so of it starting. Here in Portland/Vancouver area, my only outlet for any "imports" was Tower Records that finally went under when they converted to top ten ... which I had specified to the manager was stupid because they were known as a specialty store ... and all the Kmarts and Fred Meyers and everyone else had copies of the same thing they would also have! Sheer stupidity! All in all, I think the distribution channels were the bigger issue. But, by that time (mid 70's on) we were already well established with Tower on the Strip, Warehouse in Westwood and Moby Disk, and we did not need the local crap house! Despite all this, however, Space Pirate Radio did just fine when it came to new material and it never really ran out of stuff to play, because the station did not know the difference between a hit and just another hit and new music! And by the 80's I was already completely weened out of Genesis and Yes, because the Europeans were far superior in qualilty and quantity! You just had to get off the "radio syndromme", or the "top ten" idiocy and mind corruption to learn and find the other stuff. Plain and simple. And this was the main reason why by 1990 when I got my first computer, I was saying that all these bands needed to get their own website and tell these "record companies" to take a hike! And many bands did, albeit a bit too slow. Gong was about 5 years late. Marillion was about the same. Porcupine Tree was independent from the start I think. And it all coincided with the rise of the new "prog" and "metal prog" that we hear so much today ... in other words, there was new music out there we had not heard yet. ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 09:28
|
I'm not too knowledgeable about the precise role played by the music industry in what happened to Prog bands in that period, surely they had a big say, but I guess that the bands themselves were a bit confused too regarding which way to go in order to keep making some money and being able to attract audiences on tour, and many adapted to those new times more or less voluntarily. At any rate, for whatever reason, memories and nostalgia being probably the main ones, I still enjoy many of those 1980's albums, even with their flaws, and often better than many current Prog albums (but I will not restart the Old Prog vs New Prog debate
). |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 09:31
I'm already thinking that the reason is obvious ... it ain't "prog". It's just another song! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 09:43
That's a good point, they had to adapt and some did, some didn't. There are bands whose 80s work I enjoy. Yes, Pink Floyd, Rush, even Kansas did a good job in the 80s IMO. Even Moody Blues did some good music in the 80s, even though it was quite poppy. As far as Genesis goes, all three of them wanted to go pop, it's not Phil's fault as some think. In fact, Mike was the first one who wanted to make Genesis more accessible. Although I find 80 Genesis albums rather uneven (some hidden gems here and there), they were still making better music than your regular mainstream pop. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 09:52
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 21:12
Hear, hear. ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 23:01
See, this is what I always thought. The record companies actively ignoring music that a significant faction of listeners wanted to hear in the eighties. As you can see, Dean has already objected to laying it at the feet of the record companies, and we had a back and forth over that quite awhile ago. What I saw as a teenager in the early eighties was an enormous interest in Prog in my white suburban stomping grounds. Mainly it was the geeks or the refer smokers that made the Prog fan ranks, but there were a lot of them. Someone spray painted Rael on a school storage building for cripe's sake. Perhaps the place I was in was an oddity, but I found it incredulous that there was supposedly no market for it. Since then, I've thought about it and come to realize that all the Prog we supported was from out of town. There were no local Prog bands, or at least not enough to have made an impression on anyone. Even Rush, which almost seemed like a local band actually came from Toronto. The point I'm working toward is there has to be an active underground that cultivates new talent (e.g. the Canterbury scene). That's what Prog was missing in the eighties and probably earlier. It's not to say individual talent can't emerge in the oddest places, but the Record Companies perhaps might have responded differently if they had found both a fan base and a cohesive base of talent to go with it. This is all very speculative, I know, but if I were interested in promoting a band I would want to follow the sports model, cultivate lots of upcoming talent, and value any rivalries. |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 23:06
| Oh, and I believe there was a second question in the OP. Could you forgive any of the sell-outs? The answer from me is yeah, sure, if they return to playing Prog. Yes, I could even forgive Tony and Phil. |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 23:09
I can't agree more, but unlike some of the others, they were still a very worthwhile band to see live, even then. |
Posted By: Metalmarsh89
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 23:16
|
I'm a believer that synths did wonders for Mike Oldfield's music. Tubular Bells --> Ommadawn are stellar. Incantations is good as well. But Five Miles Out, Crises, and even QE2 are right up there close to his best work. And then there's Amarok. That guy continued to kill it (when the record company allowed for it) all the way through the 80's, right up to Tubular Bells II in the 90's. ------------- Want to play mafia? Visit http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com" rel="nofollow - here . |
Posted By: KingCrInuYasha
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 23:31
Well, at least with the Broadsword era, Tull was able to successfully integrate their sound with the new technology at the time, especially if you look at the outtakes like "Jack-A-Lynn" and "Down At The End Of Your Road". Under Wraps I can definitely agree on. It sounds like Anderson was desperate to try to be current with the times and it shows. Most of the sounds on there were done earlier and better by the Police and The Buggles (both as their own group and with Drama era Yes). Even worse, at least two-thirds of the album was completely forgettable to my ears. As of this writing, I rented the album twice from my library and I can only remember parts of the title track, "Lap Of Luxury", "European Legacy" and "Moscow Radio". ------------- He looks at this world and wants it all... so he strikes, like Thunderball! |
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 23:40
|
I recall that in 80s I was very disgusted by that vulgar commercialized 80s prog. And for that vulgarization of 80s prog, I don't blame the music industry only. Some prog artists have gladly stopped being artists, and turned into a money printing press. At that time, I was listening to just released ECM LPs, adding some 80s prog albums that were worth listening to, such as 80s Zappa's albums, Peter Gabriel 4, King Crimson's Discipline, Beat and Three of A Perfect Pair (that KC's trilogy was saved the honor of British prog in 80s imo), then some great LPs that were released in 80s by Yugoslav prog rock bands such Vrt svetlosti ("A Garden of Light") by Igra staklenih perli ("The Glass Bead Game"), Zašto ne volim sneg ("Why do not I like snow") and '86 by Smak ("The End Of The Wolrld"), Beskonačno ("Infinity") by Leb i Sol ("Bread and Salt"), U vreći za spavanje ("In A Sleeping Bag") by Tako ("So") .... for example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3veq88KZdQ" rel="nofollow - this is a magnificent instrumental Smak's track from '86; a timeless track that had nothing to do with 80s sound. |
Posted By: cstack3
Date Posted: February 10 2015 at 23:42
We cannot examine the music of an era in a vacuum. As the times changed, so did the drugs of choice of those who tended to listen to rock music. Marijuana, which helped fuel the prog boom of the 1970s (Jon Anderson has written about this) was looked upon as an "old hippie drug," and newer drugs including stimulants and other synthetics became more fashionable. These did not lend themselves to sitting around in a dark room, listening to side after side of progressive music. |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 00:26
I remember lots of marijuana. The Grateful Dead were still going strong then with lots of fans when I was in high school who were also Floyd fans who were also Yes fans and so on. A lot of this was regional too. |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 01:13
Personally I didn't like Islands or TBII although TBIII (especially the live version) is a very strong album. Songs of Distant Earth is also a classic Oldfield album and I am quite fond of The Millenium Bell, Light + Dark and Tres Lunas. Even Voyager and Guitars are worth checking out. Remarkable artist of course not really conforming to any rules. Genius can do that
 |
Posted By: Big Ears
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 04:47
|
Progressive rock musicians could not operate outside of their time, any more than science fiction writers could anticipate developments beyond the knowledge and experience of their era. Robert Heinlein, a technical and imaginative writer, had settlers using radio on Mars. Portable and lower cost synthesizers, as well as drum machines, appeared to open a realm of fresh opportunity for musicians, but it is curious how it did not work this way and lead to at least ten years of banality. Keith Emerson, who made futuristic music with synthesizers, that was also exciting and dynamic, on albums like Trilogy and Brain Salad Surgery, slipped into mediocrity with some horrible Japanese keyboard instruments on Love Beach. I am one of the few who thinks LB has its redeeming features, but it should have been a lot better. Emerson probably believed at the time that he was taking his instruments a step further (as he had done previously). The irony is that by the early nineties and further advances in technology, like samplers, the progressive rock bands could capitalise artistically with these developments, but not commercially. I am thinking of ELP's live use of samplers, which gave Pictures at an Exhibition a whole new dimension, while Black Moon and In the Hot Seat were not very adventurous. |
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 05:52
|
One thing I find interesting, that has only been briefly remarked on so far is that Captain Beefheart and Frank Zappa did quite well in the late 1970s/early 1980s where both artists put out some of their best work. Doc at the Radar Station and Ice Cream for Crow are both remembered rightly as the Captain's bowing out on a high note after a couple failed attempts at mainstream crossover in the 1970s. Zappa's 1980s output was more hit-and-miss or at least there is less of a critical consensus about them, but he did put out stuff like Sheik Yerbouti and Joe's Garage which are some of his most respected back in 1979 when all the rest of the prog-rock movement was floundering and going out of style. I guess this might have something to do with both of those guys not really being part of the progressive rock "cultural movement", e. g. them coming at it from more of an avant-jazz background than a classical/folk angle? Even their classical influence was usually from more modern sources than the European groups'. Their music does strike me as being quintessentially American whereas there's something distinctly British or European about the UK prog movement. ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 06:02
You are listening to the wrong current Prog albums.... ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 06:06
While I didn't have any direct route of connection to the European scene, I became a huge ECM fan in the '80's, which I credit for my eventual loss of interest in the commercial efforts of the older guys of prog. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 07:23
Stuff like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0RFjnWh5W0" rel="nofollow - this , all produced by German genius Manfred Eicher, actually was my refuge in the eighties
 |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 12:12
|
At the time when ELP's Love Beach was released, there was immense pressure by the industry to be commercial from every angle possible and more emphasis was placed on how to design it,..."the product" beyond how it was ever designed before. Beatlemania was exploited by record companies like Vee-Jay, Tollie Records and Swan Records in the U.S. Capitol was re-investing and no limitation whatsoever was placed upon the abundance of distribution to Beatle records. Completely unreal! This event was totally a natural progression in marketing and wasn't necessarily pre-planned or even needed to be contrived at first. The 80's...I am certain, was contrived because of certain music that the industry pushed further away. It was certainly sad to think in 1981.."I wonder what happened to Johnny Winter?" and discover he was playing up the street from you. The industry had zero interest in serious Rock/Blues guitarists in the 80's and especially Rory Gallagher! Instead they chose to have Rock guitarists stand on this icon stage...far, far, away in another dimension from the audience and only to be worshipped. For God's sake...Hendrix entered the stage at Woodstock at the crack of dawn when many people had left and many were still asleep. Musicians didn't concern themselves with this sort of moronic Rock Star image as much in the 60's and early 70's. Paul Kossoff didn't stand on stage and flaunt his image as a Rock Star...although he obviously was a Rock Star, he focused more on being a serious musician. This attitude seemed to vanish quickly in the 80's and the flash guitarists focused more on stage presence, hair style, and attitude. Pete Townshend sort of naturally developed this ...so when he displayed it, it was in fact quite different and not completely contrived and insulting. The industry placed the same amount of pressurized tactics upon the Progressive Rock bands and obviously many of the bands towed the line. In the early 70's...Jon Anderson was clearly a singer/songwriter that understood song craft. 'I've Seen All Good People" is based off formula/method of songwriting often heard in the music of Cat Stevens. There is a twist of Beach Boys/Mamma's and the Papa's/ 3 or 4 part vocal harmony style. Ian Anderson was also indeed a singer/songwriter. Aside from his acoustic ballads on Stand Up, Benefit, and Aqualung, on "Skating Away" you can observe that the structure of the song doesn't differ all that much from the structure of a Joni Mitchell song in 1970.
The "In The Dead Of Night" by U.K. was a introduction to a more commercial appealing vocal phrase in Progressive Rock. Those particular words in the title had more of a smooth operator vibe to them. As John Wetton once said: "Gong? They don't have any hits" "You gotta have hits" Greg Lake was a singer/songwriter and gifted ELP with a personality. If the industry wanted to promote this aspect to talent, it was personally fine by me, but when they placed restrictions on Rock music then it was time to restrict Progressive Rock ...and that was the great fall of the composition/instrumentation which was once perfectly impeccable and natural and beginning to turn into a limited process musically to render a simplistic sound that was somewhat contrived instead. Most Progressive Rock musicians remained on the underground Prog scene during the 80's. Steve Hackett, Gong, Univers Zero, Art Zoyd, Edhels, Pulsar...there were a trillion of them...bands like Ange and Harmonium lived to keep the scene alive. Argent were dropped by Epic and signed to the United Artists label. Counterpoints was a very progressive release for them. Bands were still struggling to survive in order to play progressive in the late 70's. There was no doubt by that point in time that a musician had to either find another source of income just to play Progressive Rock or sell out completely. |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 14:25
Japanese instruments were not the problem in themselves. The Yamaha GX1 was used effectively on Works and more so on Emerson, Lake Powell while the Korgs came into their own on the soundtrack album Harmageddon. Emerson had to wait for MIDI and that created the opportunity he needed. The industry had to catch him up not the other way round. Love Beach was about a band nearly at the end of its tether and fast running out of creativity. Emerson couldn't carry it any further. However his solo releases that followed ,especially Inferno and Nighthawks, were excellent imo.
|
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 14:33
|
I wouldn't say any of the sounds that Emerson used were categorically "bad" (as far as good taste goes) until the 3 album arrived. Some of his sounds lent an unfavorably low-rent veneer to the music. ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 21:06
|
Posted By: freyacat
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 21:51
|
< id="" id=":AA2F4D1D-BC58-4ac1-931C-94B431C26869">I don't look to the 80's to enjoy what I call "Progressive Rock." However, I think the music of the 80's is fantastic. How the energy of punk and the finesse of prog and the danceability of disco all poured into a vital new pop music called New Wave. How all of our prog stars get the chance to reinvent themselves. How video did not in fact kill the radio star, but instead made him dream of a future open to new artistic possibility. Don't get me wrong. I wish that Yes could have done 10 more albums with the same kind of sound and conviction of "Close to the Edge" and "Tales from Topographic Oceans." But all you have to do is listen to the abandoned songs recorded after "Tormato" to understand that they had reached the end of the line, creatively. They all needed to do something different. Yes, it's all pop music. But it is really remarkable pop music with visionary lyrics and clever arrangement and virtuoso playing. Now, if you want a decade which was truly dismal for music (and all forms of culture), try the 90's...
iframe,embed,object,img,div{behavior: url(#htmlfilter)}
window.onerror=abperr;
function abperr(a,b,c){return true;}
|
Posted By: Star_Song_Age_Less
Date Posted: February 11 2015 at 22:42
|
^I'm basically in this camp. The '80s saw bands that had previously front-lined the prog movement becoming more straight pop and rock. But I strongly feel these bands did so really well compared to most groups that started out straight pop or rock. When I take Big Generator or Power Windows (etc.) and compare them to what... for example.... hair bands were doing at the time, I'll take BG and PW all the way. The musicianship was still there. The song structure was different, and so were many of the sounds being employed. But the core of what made these bands great in the first place allowed them to produce good music even if it wasn't the same type as before. As to whether it was the record companies' fault... I really don't know. ------------- https://www.facebook.com/JamieKernMusic |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 12 2015 at 01:36
The word is 'tacky' and Emerson admitted that this was his trademark sound so he was well aware of it. BUT the Yakama GX1 was a massive hunk of keyboard that Emerson used as well as anyone else.
|
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: February 12 2015 at 10:52
Another reason is I think that Beefheart and Zappa were both too unique in their artistic sensibility to be part of any particular "cultural movement" like the classic progressive rock style was. They're definitely harder to pigeonhole into a "scene", and I guess as songwriters it was easier for them to adapt when the cultural circumstances that produced the original prog rock no longer really existed. Basically, either's signature sound is more of a "soul radar" for the musician's genius than part of a subgenre. Maybe there's also the issue of both being an influence on music scenes that got bigger at the same time progressive rock's decline started, with Beefheart inspiring the more cerebral abstract end of punk (The Fall, Père Ubu) and Zappa being an influence on the guitar heroics of the heavy metal movement of the time? ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: February 12 2015 at 11:03
I tend to give analog(ue) sounds a "sweeping" pass. Pun intended. In the case of 3, the sounds were cheap, cheesy, plastic-sounding. Even his ELPowell sounds were formidable compared to what happened on that (crap) album. ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 12 2015 at 11:07
My post is simply to call attention to one of the vital player, or most vital player, that's often overlooked for reasons that no-one can explain. The record companies always had the most to gain or lose in record sales if music trends shifted, so it would be in their interest to control that to an extant. A warehouse full of punk records was not an optimal situation when Madonna broke out and went super popular. No business likes to play catch up. And if most don't recall, there was only about a dozen and a half record companies who signed most of the key artists. The best thing to do is find out more about the 'silent' industry that actually controlled Pop Music.
|
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 13 2015 at 02:35
I do like Desda La Vida but the rest is just lack lustre AOR ish material so I've never paid that much attention to it if I'm honest.
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 13 2015 at 09:50
|
Highly debatable point. History of the arts has always shown someone that was in a "vacuum" and not doing something that everyone else was. Picasso became an example, and so did Stravinsky, and this is 2 of the 7 deadly arts! There are just as many artists that started in a vacuum as there are artists that started within a social context. Ex: In America is was easy to discern the discontent in the late 60's that led to a lot of things, and these coincided with the Black Americans plight, on the spirit of Martin Luther King, who was taken away from us, along with so many other folks that we thought taught us something new about ourselves ... that part would be a social context. As would a KC in England. In Germany, however, with the music schools intent on not using "western music concepts" (that is the stuff that we KNOW!!!!!), would be a bit more on the vacuum side of things. And you can see this in other areas, for example, check out the stuff on Manuel Gottsching on the Tube, and there is an interview that he talks about his music ... and he says that he is a "live performer", not anything else. And THIS, was the main factor behind a lot of those Berlin schools that we are not checking out ... ALL of them were live performers first, and recorded what they did second, and they retained their freshness for the most part. Tangerine Dream, Klaus Schulze, AshRa Tempel and Ashra, Can ... all of them made their marks off improvisations and free form-ness, and we STILL do not accept it! And is the main reason why I find their work so good! It's explorations are magnificent compared to the simple minded rock music countdown and reinventing of the same 4 measures!
I take offense at this ... slightly. I was not doing anything at the time, and drugs were NOT the main influence in my music tastes and here I am with you guys! Not everyone was ripped or stoned, and I walked out of many a concert because of the stupidity that it was about being stoned, and the music on stage was not only bad, it was out of tune, and it was sick ... and we're talking Rolling Stones, here! And now, you could change the story that by the time that disco and then the fashionistas came around that it was about cocaine that dictated the music! This was not the case in Europe, but in America, you could say that it was ... everyone lost sight of the Chicago Seven and thought that what they fought for was just the right to pee in their own toilets! We forgot everything, including the flowers in our hair (thank gawd for that!), and then blamed it on Reagan and Bush and Ford and ... anything except our own strength, and we had none ... we got one guy voted in by accident, and it was like a priest in the midst of a bunch of sinners ... no one even wrote about that in music! By 1974, my music tastes had started to get refined. I had already "met" Gismonti, Garbarek, Rypdal, Jarrett, ECM and other stuff that became far more "TUNED" to the feelings inside that I understood, instead of the external anger, which Jon Anderson had written about, and we ignored! And I quit the top ten ideals for good .... because they were condusive to manipulating your mind into believing something ... that was not there! You might discount this, since I lived in a Fascist country and they manipulated everything you could think of, and there is a publish work translated, of my dad's own film, and critical reviews that were government censored in the 50's if you want to see what I am talking about ... and when the "public" doesn't know any better ... and the media in America is owned by two conglomerates and they do their best to manipulate everything they do, to support their goals, not yours. And that means they have an interest in the top ten, that you DON'T as an artist! Also means that in America, you are NOT going to get any recognition until you have shown you can make money for them! I know very well the day I stopped doing any dope at all, with my friend ... when we heard a president say ... "let them smoke dope! I'll win all the elections!" ... and he DID! And I knew that we were now being totally stupid and out of touch with the reality of it all and I also knew that it was no longer needed or required and I had seen enough literature and music in the LP's (over 3K of classical stuff) at dad's house to know that fact! In the end, we were the ones that had no personality or ability to stand up for ourselves, and the best we could do was kiss-up to a top ten or other. Some of them were worth it, as I would never say anything bad about Michael Jackson (the only black performer I ever saw where the audience was 50-50 instead of 90-10!!!!! think about it!!!!! how things changed in America!), but in the end, most of them were just fabricated news and fame, to make sure you did not appreciate anything else. You have to make a choice!!!! And sometimes, we just don't know how! And this is the part that is difficult here when it seems that too many folks only live by their favorites ... they are walking right into the manipulation trap! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: February 13 2015 at 10:26
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 13 2015 at 11:20
And the idea that drug intake while listening to Prog was only done by a select few is, frankly, laughable.
|
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 13 2015 at 11:32
| So Ronald Reagan helped kill prog by cutting off the weed supply which lead to an influx of cocaine |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 13 2015 at 11:34
|
^Not at all. Weed was still around in the 80's but Coke became the drug choice of the Me Generation. Reagan was only the dealer. ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 13 2015 at 11:37
| Yeah, I remember weed was around in the 80's. Kind of a foggy recollection though. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 13 2015 at 11:39
|
^Yes. And I remember Iran Contra, but I wish that that was only a foggy recollection. ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: February 13 2015 at 12:24
Only tangentially related, but here's Emerson in 1983 talking about using the Fairlight for composing his movie soundtracks. |
Posted By: Smurph
Date Posted: February 13 2015 at 13:15
|
I think you mean "Reexamining former prog bands that started making commercial music that wasn't prog in the 80's" ------------- http://pseudosentai.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - http://pseudosentai.bandcamp.com/ wtf |
Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: February 13 2015 at 13:38
For good or bad, it's true that the Japanese revolutionised the synths market and consequently the soundscape of our lives. Jean Michele Jarre talking about the American ARP 2600: "ARPs are like the Stradivarius or the Steinways of electronic music. They were invented by craftsmen who, today, we’d place on the same level as the luthiers that built violins, clavichords, pianos – all of the acoustic instruments. Interesting fact: all of the electronic instruments from this era more or less disappeared at the start of the 80s with the arrival of the DX7. Or in other words, at the time when the Japanese infiltrated the market of synthesizers with a much more commercial and aggressive vision than that which had dominated during the earlier days of electronic instruments. Today, same as a piano or a saxophone, an ARP remains a classic instrument, and one that we’ll still be using in two centuries time. The current trend for using old synths is like putting a Les Paul 58 or a Fender 52 into the hands of a guitarist who, up until that point, had only ever played an Ibanez or a poor Japanese replica model. From the early 90s, the whole techno scene expanded with plug-ins and emulations of instrumental sounds which were fairly unconvincing digital replicas of analogue sounds. It’s not that I prefer analogue to digital, quite the opposite in fact. I think the two can co-exist perfectly well together and my music is proof of that. But there comes a time when we have to admit that it’s not the same thing. We can’t compare an ARP, which in its day cost 30,000 Francs [4500 euros] with a plug-in that costs 50 euros. It’s a question of sense! After having weighed up the advantages of the virtual, today we’re realising that we’re made of flesh and blood and we have an absolute need for an emotional and tactile relationship with our instruments." http://www.redbullmusicacademy.com/magazine/jarre-synth" rel="nofollow - http://www.redbullmusicacademy.com/magazine/jarre-synth
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: February 14 2015 at 09:50
...
Of the 3 big names in Synthesizers, Korg, Yamaha and Roland, 2 of them were invented by Japanese (might even be all three!), and two of those inventors were (previously) clockmakers!
...
(removed. I have the article that had this and will look for it and post it. I would not have done so otherwise.)
------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: February 14 2015 at 10:58
Oh lumey. If a merest fraction of what you have said here was true then your following presumption would still be wrong. 1. All three are Japanese. 3. Yamaha started out as a maker of acoustic instruments. 4. Korg and Roland made electronic instruments from the get-go. 5. None of them were ever clockmakers. Perhaps you are confusing them with Casio, who did indeed make timepieces but not before spending several decades making electric and electronic calculating machines. Who can forget the earth-shattering impact of their entry into the world of musical instruments... 
Erm... well... erm... no.
Really?
Erm...
------------- What? |
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: February 14 2015 at 11:50
|
The "problem(s)" with synthesizers in the mid-late '80s were, amazingly, the introduction of more sampled waveforms and more memory. Synths like Roland's D-50 and especially Korg's M1 were a delight for keyboard players who played in jazz and new age groups (Yellowjackets, Spyro Gyra, Shadowfax, Mannheim Steamroller, etc.) because their soundbanks stored so many immediately accessible sounds that were one or two button clicks away. Therefore, programming unique sounds got tossed by the wayside because the presets were often deemed "good enough" especially after being effected with delays and reverbs. Need drums? Alesis' HR-16 was the hottest selling drumbox of its time and it was ridiculously affordable when compared with its predecessors. Unfortunately, it took a while for most of these players to acknowledge the sounds on the new Korgs and Rolands weren't of the same quality and a shorter duration between composition and realization doesn't necessarily add up to good music. ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: February 14 2015 at 13:15
Yeah I had one of them
 (perhaps the question is who didn't) |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 15 2015 at 14:24
------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: February 15 2015 at 16:54
|
Posted By: pfontaine2
Date Posted: February 17 2015 at 11:41
|
Regarding ELP and the GX1, Emerson clearly loved the sound but it didn't have the "ooomph" of the Moog gear he was using in the early 1970's. Much of their music after Works (including their live album and Love Beach) was all mid and upper range sound, very little bass. Perhaps it was a change in recording technology that changed their sound. The earlier albums felt "warmer" while the albums after Works sounded cooler and thinner. Listen to any Works Live recording and even the Hammond has a thin sound and the GX1 sounded terrible on older material like Tarkus (IMHO). Personally I like a lot of the music created by Progressive bands throughout the 1980's. I very much like ELPowell and the "3" album. I don't mind the pop influence throughout Genesis' output because they still managed to devote ten minutes to a longer song on each album. If those long songs had disappeared, I would have been very disappointed. I really like Yes' output during this time as well. Jethro Tull had a harder time of it but as was already mentioned, they seemed to understand that their appeal was in guitar-driven progressive rock and not in drum machines and synthesizers. |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 17 2015 at 14:09
I don't think the Moog had anything to do with the more warmer sound of the music but everything to do with the way music was recorded. You can hear a clear parting of the ways on Brain Salad Surgery where that high end 'trebley' sound started to dominate although intriguingly the live album that followed did have that warmer feel. Perhaps they managed to 'fix' it? Also should be noted that Greg Lake started using a different bass guitar from 1977 onwards . It has almost the feel and sound of a rhythm guitar as evidenced by the track Fanfare For The Common Man where you hear a lot of clicking. Kind of weird but also very distinct. btw Live At Nassau Coliseum 1978 is way better than that horrible Works Live thing which you rightly take a dig at. To be fair much of that recording was from the Montreal Olympic Gig where they had some massive technical issues that they were clearly not able to overcome. The end result is very thin sounding and a bit nasty as you suggest.
|
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: February 17 2015 at 14:34
Alembic basses, right? I've never looked to Lake for a good bass tone, not since '71-'73. ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 17 2015 at 14:51
|
^You should have said that you never look for Lake with a good bass tone, ever! ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: February 17 2015 at 15:55
|
Poor Greg. Hey, I won't mince words at all when it comes to comparing him, tonewise or otherwise, to other bassists. ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: February 17 2015 at 15:59
|
One of the great bass players that really needed a guitar tech! ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |