In particular, in 1968, Procol Harum's "Shine On Brightly" (especially "In Held 'Twas In I"), and Pink Floyd's "A Saucerful of Secrets" stand as among the first to include true prog material, as an evolution from their psychedelic roots.

 

Can anyone else name albums that pre-date "Crimson King" that could claim the title of first prog album, or at least contain some of the first prog music?

 

The years you ask about were the height of the underground music period, which included allsorts: psychedelia, experimental rock, folk and blues, and fusions of many musical genres and theories. But stand by to be swamped with psychedelia  and avant rock/blues, which was not heard as prog until the young liberals here (who were neither born nor increasingly appear to have read the subject in any depth) started to rewrite history. Sticking to mainstream prog:

 

The original Renaissance (a chunk of the Yardbirds) released their album within a few months of ITCOCK and on the same label Island in the UK - and probably had the earlier above ground critical acclaim. To me the essential Touch, recorded 1968 in the US, part paid by Jimi Hendrix, and probably the first mainstream US prog album  (and you can hear connection to Vanilla Fudge - as you can with Nice). Inevitably  the Moody Blues, post Denny Laine albums, e.g. Days of Future Passed (which was part intended to encourage middle aged audiophiles to more sophisticated pop music). Then check out the better and more experimental psychedelic bands: Floyd, Soft Machine (first album).

 

In passing there are 6 or 8 excellent and cheap 3 CD box sets out there covering the period 1966 to1975, which can be recommended as samplers of this period of music, e.g. Legend of A Mind, Strange Pleasures (released last week)

 

Thanks for your help! I love this website!

 

Vanilla Fudge can be neglected too often but give strong clues to roots - try tthe album with the Supreme's cover You Keep Me Hanging On. Clearly an influence on early British prog (e.g. Nice) and US prog (e.g. Touch), but Jeff Beck has made it clear an influence on the heavy rock bands of the late 60, such as his and Led Zep - or more strictly the rhythm section of Bogert & Appice, who went from VF to Cactus and to the Beck Bogert Appice band - Carmen Appice then ended up for many years in Rod Stewart's (what I call) "Las Vegas band".

 

I am curious about the use of a political term in reference to progressive rock. I am not  a youngin (late 40s) and I am pretty well read on the subject, but since I am a liberal I am curious about that term. Are you implying that liberals rewrite history and conservatives don't (he said chuckling). Have you listened to George Bush for more than 10 minutes? Rush Limbaugh? Anyway, I just found that odd.

 

/cosigned

 

'liberal' wrt to interpretation - over here wrt politics this might  be with a capital L, LIberal..... conservative (small c)  meaning an  old prog fan like me  would not broadly encompassing  as many forms of music as the young folks   - who  might less aware  of the narrow definition of progressive rock in the early/mid 70's. (Just to confuse: 'progressive  music' is more ambiguous but only covers music appearing 1968 to 1970 - to some the term could be the alternative description for some or all  'underground music' - but to me heavy rock, psychedelia might be underground but not progressive music (which also included quite a bit of blues rock...) . Confusing ain't it. and I have to lie down before being able to continue further - if required

 

See, for something to be proggy, it has to contain some of the rocky, and therefore, "Schizo" certainly counts. The Moodies were pretty much art-pop at that point. Which, of course, good and all. But it's still pop. If you count dem Moodies as the first proggers, then you'd have to contradict yourself, and say that Pet Sounds was the first prog album, predating Inna Court AND Sgt. Peppah (and, hell, you'd probably be right).

 

Taking that into account, I would say that Procol Harum were definately at the forefront. They were the first band that REALLY fused art and rock into a single, gooey, awesome mass. Despite the keyboards, they really could make something rock and be intelligent (see: "Christmas Camel," "Repent Walpurgis," "Conquistador," etc).

 

To dig deeper back, I recently came to realize how innovative "A Quick One" must have been. If that thing had recieved the budget that Townsend had wanted, it would be considered an all time classic instead of a cult curio.

 

And props to my man Dick Heath there (heya Dick! I don't know you, do I?) for mentioning the Yardbirds; certainly something like "Still I'm Sad" must have seemed to have come from nowhere, and scared the living f**k out of everyone who heard it. Gregorian chants and lame poetry in a singles band? Awesome.

 

Final notes: although when we consider their classic "epic" tracks, the Doors doubtless come off as psychadelic ("The End"), jazzy ("Riders on the Storm"), or a proto-prog hybrid at best ("When the Music's Over" and "L.A. Woman"); however, something with the spread, intent, and PRETENTION of the "Celebration of the Lizard" suite comes to mind as a step towards the progressive. However, for a truly shattering track, the interested should listen to "The Soft Parade," a nine-minute, multi-part suite, VERY mature sounding for a band in 1969, the SAME FRIGGIN' YEAR as Inna Court.

 

In closing, to answer the initial question, what was the first prog rock album? Well DUH...This Was.

 

Okay, wait a minute, what about "I Talk to the Wind?" That's ONLY JUST psycho folk. It's certainly not long; therefore, it CANNOT BE progressive. Sorry. That's just the way things work.

 

Ergo, Inna Court shouldn't be regarded as the first full blown prog rock album. That dubious honor must fall, therefore, on Emerson Lake and Palmer or something.

 

Also Crazy World Of Arthur Brown did a concept album around that time as well.They had a young drummer called Carl Palmer who with organist Vince Crane formed Atomic Rooster in 1969.

 

 

There are many "prototypes", as indicated by Dick, and all the other posts - I'd include Graham Bond's Organisation as probably the earliest, along with The Who's "A Quick One..." as mentioned above.

 

The first time I know of the term appearing on an album was 1968 - I've temporarily forgotten what that album was - but that could lay claim to being the first, if only because it used the term.

 

I would personally lay the blame squarely at Pink Floyd's feet - the whole "Piper..." album is a lot less naive than most would (dis)credit it for, and IO is not "vanilla" psychedelia.

 

Even among the psychedelic scene, there were many albums that are more progressive than pure "psych" (Fifty Foot Hose has already been mentioned, I'm delighted to see) - and, of course, there was a thriving progressive blues scene in the UK. Yardbirds have been mentioned, but, surprisingly, not Johnny Winters' "Progressive Blues Experiment" (not as progressive as the title would have you believe, but a clear indication of the "movement").

 

There was also an underground electronics scene that often gets overlooked - the leading name in the UK being the wonderful Delia Derbyshire. Her involvement in the 1,000,000 volts sound and light rave (I forget the real name) is crucial - and it's often forgotten that Paul McCartney composed an electronic piece which remains unheard by the rest of us for that festival. Other important electronics wizards of the time were Varese (who famously influenced Zappa) and Pierre Henry (who later worked with Spooky Tooth on the disastrous/fascinating album "Ceremony").

 

The others mentioned, Moodies, Procol Harum, etc. (more pop groups with progressive leanings, like Kaleidoscope and Tomorrow)., were in second place, progressively speaking, to contemporary bands like The Nice - and bands like Art (later Spooky Tooth) and Clouds (previously 1-2-3), who were instrumental (sic) in developing progressive music.

 

Having recently acquired both "Scrapbook" and "Watercolour Days", I realise what the latter were doing, albeit in a rather hamfisted manner. "Watercolour Days" is at least as progressive as ITCOTCK, if more poppy in style and lacking both finesse and long songs - but every piece is a marvel of truly progressive songwriting (with very sucky drum fills).

 

There are also the concept albums of the Pretty Things and the Small Faces (et al), not to mention Andrew Lloyd Webber's Rock Opera which all predate Prog Rock.

 

There's probably other stuff I forgot, but Prog Rock (as opposed to "mere" progressive rock) arose out of this scene, but there is simply nothing that fuses as many varying elements is ITCOTCK that predates it, only stuff which comes close.

ZAPPA > "FREAK OUT" (btw, very first double LP prog album with 24 musicians who were played on the album), 1966

QUICKSILVER MESSENGER SERVICE > s/t, 1968

STEVE MILLER BAND > "CHILDREN OF FUTURE", 1968

IRON BUTTERFLY> "IN - A - GADDA - DA - VIDA", 1968

IT´S A BEAUTIFUL DAY > s/t ( btw, so great WHITE BIRD the song!), 1969

MOTT (THE HOOPLE) > s/t, 1969

THE MOVE > s/t , 1967

PROCOL HARUM > "SHINE ON BRIGHTLY", 1967

JETHRO TULL > "THIS WAS", 1968

 

 

 

 

 

 

Very good album - and very progressive.

 

http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=170871 - http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=170871

 

 

It only says it's Progressive Rock on the packaging - who am I to argue?

 

 

The McCartney piece I was thinking of is called "Carnival of Light" - and it's legendary.

 

http://www.delia-derbyshire.org/unitdeltaplus.php - http://www.delia-derbyshire.org/unitdeltaplus.php

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rave - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rave

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnival_of_Light - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnival_of_Light

 

Here's the main issue with anything pre-ITCOTCK - it's not so much that people are re-writing history, as people either didn't write it in the first place, or wrote it from a very skewed point of view;

 

Most books or articles I've read on Prog (indeed, rock in general) concentrate on the well-knowns and a cross-section of bands known to and loved by the author. The author generally goes on to connect his favourite bands as being essential to overall development - a very common trap in music journalism.

 

Sometimes it's the lesser-knowns - the unsung heroes - who did play a significant part, but generally, all musical trends are led from the top. The issue here is getting the balance, as the guys at the top picked up ideas from the little guys, and the little guys were spurred on (whether through imitation or direct rejection of what the established bands stood for) by the big guys. Phew...

 

 

Most of these books also take an authoritative stance from the viewpoint of "I was there". Well, "there was but one place, and as you read the many articles on the subject, you realise that every author who was "there" has their own ideas - obviously and naturally, depending on where "there" was. With the huge number of bands in varying scenes around the world, no-one can categorically state that they were everywhere and knew everything that every band released.

 

I'd say that It's actually easier for someone born after the time to make objective judgements - providing the right perspective is kept. People who were "there" are extremely valuable for providing facts connected with their particular spheres.

 

 

The main problem with the history and definition of Prog Rock is that as yet, it has not been satisfactorily documented (ie free from the author's bias and a useful and workable definition that is commonly agreed on) - hence the frequency of questions on the subject.

 

The internet is really useful in digging out further data - but like any mine of data, you need to spend some time sifting out the real gold from the crud.

 

But history does need to be re-written to match the facts