New Prog?
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=48190
Printed Date: July 19 2025 at 08:25
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: New Prog?
Posted By: jetson
Subject: New Prog?
Date Posted: April 28 2008 at 12:39
|
I guess many of you have seen this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_prog ... Whow I don't understand, new prog should be a new sub genre here in PA? Some bands listed in the article are already in our prog related section, so, is new prog another way of saying prog related? Also, there is the term post prog, should it be listed in the post rock section? What dou you guys think? (I don't know if this topic belongs to this category, escuse me if it isn't so  . )------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: April 28 2008 at 14:15
| I think the term 'Prog Related' is good enough to describe bands like Muse and Coheed & Cambria. I see no need for yet another category. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: April 28 2008 at 14:18
|
Muse is not prog. At all. I can maybe possibly conceive of them being Prog Related, but only barely.
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: The Hemulen
Date Posted: April 28 2008 at 15:24
|
Utter balls. Let's hope the mainstream music journalists don't ever latch onto the term as it could have disasterous repurcussions. It really does seem as though any rock band with the presence of mind to compose a song or two in something other than 4/4 immediately have the term 'prog' thrust upon them, usually with ridiculous qualifiers to absolve and apologise for using the word at all.
I'm usually in favour of wikipedia and I don't like to see articles getting pulled on a whim (an article on the artistic group Post-NeoAbsurdism, in which I am heavily involved got removed in less than twenty-four hours due to apparently being 'made up'!) but this is just an utterly pointless, factually inept attempt to classify a bunch of barely progressive rock groups as prog, for reasons I shall never truly fathom. |
Posted By: jetson
Date Posted: April 28 2008 at 15:27
Maybe the genre was made upby those mainstream bands fans that wanted to take their music more seriously. -------------
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: April 28 2008 at 15:33
|
Glancing over the article, which hardly includes enough info to really be more than a little stub of an idea, I think I understand where they are getting at, but honestly I think a better descriptor for this "genre" would be Diluted Alterna-prog. PRR are about as prog as DSOTM era Floyd, which is to say not much, but one can see why it's included with Prog. I imagine dredg is in this "genre" as well, but I don't think, by PA's standards, they're beyond Prog Related--meaning essentially interesting alternative rock, with maybe a concept and some time shifts.
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |