Print Page | Close Window

ask bands how they would be classified

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Help us improve the site
Forum Description: Help us improve the forums, and the site as a whole
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=17658
Printed Date: July 19 2025 at 06:51
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: ask bands how they would be classified
Posted By: Guests
Subject: ask bands how they would be classified
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 11:17

overall, there are some very fine lines - in some cases - as to what to include and what NOT to include under the title "Progressive Rock", hense the debatable concepts "proto-prog" & "prog-related".


perhaps this has already been dealt with...but,
suggestion:
what about somehow contacting members of these bands (if that is possible), and simply asking THEM something like this for example;
       
"How would you as a former musician with Deep Purple classify your music...is it Progressive Rock or Hard Rock, or...?"

yea...  I know this would be an enormous, time consuming task. but wouldn't it be interesting just to see THEIR opinions on these debatable issues ?

wouldn't it be a surprise if some of these band personnel were contacted and they replied, "No, we were NOT progressive rock...we felt that we were ______________ Rock at the time"







Replies:
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 11:21

I think most musicians are leery of the "progressive" label (labels in general), and would find it a tad pretentious.Ermm

Artists generally hate to be categorized, in my experience. They like to consider themselves as  unique.Stern Smile

 

Hmmmm... is there a lesson there? Ermm



-------------
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.


Posted By: Rosescar
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 11:23
Yeah, most groups/artists say "You can't put a label on us, we don't play blues/jazz/prog rock, we play our own music/<group name>".

-------------
http://www.soundclick.com/rosescar/ - My music!

"THE AUDIENCE WERE generally drugged. (In Holland, always)." - Robert Fripp


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 11:24
Originally posted by Peter Peter wrote:

I think most musicians are leery of the "progressive" label (labels in general), and would find it a tad pretentious.Ermm

Artists generally hate to be categorized, in my experience. They like to consider themselves as  unique.Stern Smile



new catagorie for PA: Unique Rock       








Posted By: Tholomyes
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 11:47
Ask Steven Wilson that question again


Posted By: bluetailfly
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 12:03
Originally posted by utah_man utah_man wrote:


overall, there are some very fine lines - in some cases - as to what to include and what NOT to include under the title "Progressive Rock", hense the debatable concepts "proto-prog" & "prog-related".


perhaps this has already been dealt with...but,
suggestion:
what about somehow contacting members of these bands (if that is possible), and simply asking THEM something like this for example;
       
"How would you as a former musician with Deep Purple classify your music...is it Progressive Rock or Hard Rock, or...?"


yea...  I know this would be an enormous, time consuming task. but wouldn't it be interesting just to see THEIR opinions on these debatable issues ?

wouldn't it be a surprise if some of these band personnel were contacted and they replied, "No, we were NOT progressive rock...we felt that we were ______________ Rock at the time"




Why would we prioritize what the band thinks over what the forum thinks? Why should their opinion be given more weight and priority simply because they created the music? I would rather choose someone who has listened to a lot of prog rock, thought about it, read about it, experieced a lot of it, talked a lot about it, over someone who only creates music they are inspired to create.

Don't fall for the fallacy that the artist actually is the best critic of his/her work. Oftentimes they are the least able to really comprehend what they are doing (which is often why they are great artists).



-------------
"The red polygon's only desire / is to get to the blue triangle."


Posted By: Moogtron III
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 13:03

Originally posted by Tholomyes Tholomyes wrote:

Ask Steven Wilson that question again

Hmmm, I remember going to a Porcupine Tree concert, and I remembered that Steven Wilson said in a little speech to the audience that he didn't like his music to be in the prog rock (or any other) category.

I remember an interview that Ayreon's Arjen Lucassen took from David Gilmour, and that Arjen was talking about prog music (his own music) and that Dave grimaced. And I remember that some other interviewer asked David Gilmour: "How would you describe your music?" Dave said: "I wouldn't"



Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 13:18
The only band (or band member actually) I've heard
acknowledge themselves as "Prog" is Nick Barrett in the liner
notes on The Masquerade Overture. But I'm sure other bands
do so as well.

I believe Marillion didn't consider themselves prog, even during
Fish's reign. Can anyone verify?

Also, I hear IQ HATE this term!

Many bands will say "Oh, well we play complex, long,
keyboard-driving rock songs with many moods..." without flat-
out saying, "Yeah,we're a prog band." Personally, I'd think it
would be a badge of honor. And It should be PROG, not
PROGRESSIVE, because prog describes a sound while
progressive describes an attitude. Almost any band would love
to consider themselves progressive.

-------------
http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!


Posted By: horza
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 13:44
"How would you as a former musician with Deep Purple classify your music...is it Progressive Rock or Hard Rock, or...?"


Weren't there 165 former members of Deep Purple

-------------
Originally posted by darkshade:

Calling Mike Portnoy a bad drummer is like calling Stephen Hawking an idiot.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 13:55
Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:


"Prog"...Personally, I'd think it would be a badge of honor.


yes, absolutely.
and "rap" of course would be a badge of shame






Posted By: Garion81
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 15:19

Originally posted by utah_man utah_man wrote:

Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:


"Prog"...Personally, I'd think it would be a badge of honor.


yes, absolutely.
and "rap" of course would be a badge of shame




 

To you maybe not to an artist.  The last thing an artist wants to do is be labeld and pigeon holed.  Not too many of them would say I am Symphonic Prog or Prog Metal or Art Rock.  I agree with Peter's post.  For another most wouldn't even respond. So what do you do then?

 

 



-------------


"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?"


Posted By: Froth
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 15:27
It seems that the term 'Progressive rock' has become more broad over the years. In a receant interview, Tony Reeves said how he never knew that any of the bands he played in (Colluseum, Greenslade, Curved Air) were concidered 'Progressive rock' and at the time were concidered 'Underground'.  


Posted By: alan_pfeifer
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 15:33
I know that If I was an artist, I'd sayI play in a rock band.  Pretty much leaves things open to tinterpretation.


Posted By: el böthy
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 15:34

I think that when ever a musician says we do "<insert name of the band> music" they are pretty full of sh*t. Just bands like The Mars Volta or Sigur ros can have that term...bands that realy, not only sound like any other but are something out of this world. The worst thing is when really crappy bands try to make theyr music sound interesting by changing the name of their genre. The best example are The backstreet boys (crap if there ever was) who said their latest album sounded much like "if you take the early rap of the ´80, mix it with some Peter Gabriel music (...) added some power ballads like bands like Mortley Crue and Poison, take the beatifull melodys from REM and sing it with some R&B atittud"...wow, thats a lot of words for "marketting pop"!!!

 

And I also dont understant why people get offended with the term prog...specilly because how vast prog really is!



-------------
"You want me to play what, Robert?"


Posted By: GoldenSpiral
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 15:43
Has anyone ever just gone browsing on Purevolume.com, that site for underground bands?  you can filter searches by genre, so try checking the box marked 'progressive' and see what you get.  a whole lot of crap.  it seems a whole lot of people like to tack on the label of progressive to their music.  It then occurred to me that they probably have no idea at all what prog rock really is, they just saw the word 'progressive' and thought it meant 'better'.  For instance, i sh*t you not, there are multiple bands who listed their genre as pop/pop punk/progressive.  emo/punk/progressive.  hardcore/progressive.  I figure they must want progressive on there to make it look like "oh, were not really pop punk, we just sound like it, we're actually better than that."  Then I got angry and left.





and then I found ten dollars.


-------------
http://www.myspace.com/altaic" rel="nofollow - http://www.myspace.com/altaic
ALTAIC

"Oceans Down You'll Lie"
coming soon


Posted By: Syzygy
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 15:44
I was able to ask Guapo this very question. I didn't ask about sub genres, but I did ask how they felt about being referred to as prog rock and they were actually very positive about it. They also said that prog had lost a lot of negative connotations in the last couple of years - for further details, read the interview!

-------------
'Like so many of you
I've got my doubts about how much to contribute
to the already rich among us...'

Robert Wyatt, Gloria Gloom




Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 15:47
Originally posted by Garion81 Garion81 wrote:

Originally posted by utah_man utah_man wrote:

Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:


"Prog"...Personally, I'd think it would be a badge of honor.


yes, absolutely.
and "rap" of course would be a badge of shame


To you maybe not to an artist.  The last thing an artist wants to do is be labeld and pigeon holed.  Not too many of them would say I am Symphonic Prog or Prog Metal or Art Rock.  I agree with Peter's post.  For another most wouldn't even respond. So what do you do then?

Well, I'm a developing artist, and I certainly wouldn't mind being labeled prog if most people would agree that is the music I make. If being labeled prog would get my music out to more prog-minded fans, then I'd go with it. Artists can take themselves so seriously.



-------------
http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 16:29
Originally posted by Froth Froth wrote:

'Underground'.  


when i heard pink floyd for the first time (around '69 or '70), i asked a friend, "what is this ?" - he replied, "they're an underground group from england".

i recall pre-DSOTM floyd being consistently labeled as such.

interesting how labels work isn't it ?





Posted By: Moogtron III
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 16:41

Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:

I believe Marillion didn't consider themselves prog, even during
Fish's reign. Can anyone verify?

I'm not an expert on this, but I know that Fish would rather stcik with the label "folk music" (because of the kind of protest songs he was writing) than prog. After the Fish - Marillion split, though, Mark Kelly was annoyed, and he said: we make symphonic music and we're proud of it.



Posted By: Manunkind
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 17:04
So basically 99% of prog bands of all shapes and sizes are listed and discussed here against their wish.


Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: January 19 2006 at 17:24
Originally posted by Peter Peter wrote:

I think most musicians are leery of the "progressive" label (labels in general), and would find it a tad pretentious.Ermm

Artists generally hate to be categorized, in my experience. They like to consider themselves as  unique.Stern Smile

 

Hmmmm... is there a lesson there? Ermm

There may well be - for obsessive categorisers and purists alike, methinks...




Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk