contrived subgenre's, rewriting history

christ almighty Tux. We divided Art Rock years and years ago... where were you... or were you around and haven't gotten over it from all those years ago.   You are digging up and whipping a corpse long buried and given last rites.


We eliminated Art Rock for the same logical reasons any genre called 'progressive rock' would be eliminated with extreme prejudice.  It serves no purpose and is confusing.

We dived art rock and . yes... manufactured 3 new genres.. but you know what.. those along with RPI have become established genres  not just on this site but in the larger world of prog.   We don't take credit for being smart.. anyone with half a brain saw that having Rush and Supertramp in the same genre was silly.. what we take credit for .. was recognized the REAL value of this is attempting to place groups in like minded, like sounding categories...  to help new people easily find types prog that interests them. Art Rock was a GODAWFUL mess filled with bands that sounded nothing like each other.  Are they historical. Hell no... but did it make sense and help new listeners find what interests them...goddamn right it did.

Did they make enough sense that those outside of this site saw the logic of them....


goddamn right they did.  It is all about helping people find the areas of prog that interest  them. 


Edited by micky - November 05 2014 at 17:43

I'm in favor of whatever keeps people quiet about who belongs where under what umbrella and focuses peoples' attentions instead on just listening to, enjoying, and hopefully reviewing the music.

Polymorphia wrote: PR/MR under Prog Metal?

The "contrived" subgenres should have retained the Art Rock name, i.e. Heavy Art Rock, Eclectic Art Rock and Crossover Art Rock. Other than that.... no change needed, no change necessary.

tuxon wrote:   You're right Micky,   I was there and vehemently opposed at the time, but accepted it when you lot decided to actually do it. So there's no real problem for me, just want to evaluate this past decision, has it still got the support, is it actually helpfull for the pre-innitiated, and how do people currently look upon these 'new' genres.   And of course, it's just a vehikel to get discussion on what subgenre rules (and of course that's symphonic rock, love Gentle Giant, VDGG, King Crimson and most of all the father/mother/grandparents of symphonic rock The Moody Blues)   And naturally don't forget to add Phil Collins to prog related.

I remember that, and you quite well hahha. You were quite against it.

Does it have support? I suppose so Tux. There haven't been people going fruity or nutty about it. Nor did I expect people TO do so.  The reasons for it were made very clear, both the collabs like you and the forum gen pop. I thought it was extremely well done, f I may say so, my lot as you call them the 5 other members of old Art Rock team I worked with was the damn finest collection of collabs this site has seen IMO.  Any one can judge bands, however the shear amount of work they put into, and thought given to where best place 100's and 100's of bands, famous and not famous,  that once inhabited the dumping ground that was Art-Rock was staggering. Even before that was the behind the scenes work to put together or create the new genres which had to then be firmly defined. 

Personally I thought it was the defining moment for this site. While personally I am most proud of the creation of the RPI subgenre, as much for the shear amount of bullsh*t and entrenched resistance I had to overcome to finally see it done. (took many years) It was IMO the splitting of Art Rock and establishment and acceptance (again like RPI not just here but especially OUTSIDE the side) of the 3 new genres the site should be proud of.  It showed the promise and potential  of the website to not merely catalog but to guide potential prog explorers and be a defining voice IN the modern prog scene. It went from merely being a amorphous mess. A semi organized mess of bands to starting to fulfill its full potential as a website able  to serve people as well as becoming a trendsetter and real voice. As well as to show what a group of highly motivated friends who happened to be team members could do. I'd like to think our success and the acceptance of it led in some small part to what the Prog Metal team which was needed almost as much as Art Rock was for the shear number of bands lumped together who had very little in common beyond the most base elements.

cheers Tux and nice to see you around again.
 

tuxon wrote: Polymorphia wrote: PR/MR under Prog Metal?  Yeah that's probably not entirelly correct, not very familliar with metal as a whole, and I just lump it in there because the few bands in there I know sound somewhat metalic to my taste, I did say to keep it as a distinct genre though, so I'm not entirelly off I think.

There are a few that have a metal influence, definitely, but much of it is very unmetallic. Most of the metal-influenced ones like Mogwai still couldn't be considered metal.

tuxon wrote: Cheers Micky, good to be back, when lurking around these forums I do miss the olden days when al was fun and games, and the great Velvet wars of course. And much more ELP controversies. yes  the good old days. We've noticed the very different atmosphere on the site as to the wild wild west that the forum used to be.  Perhaps I am finally getting old and mellow.. but I have to admit... I like it. I have enough drama in real life.  I just come here to see friends and shoot the sh*t. I don't remember RPI being created, thought it always had been here wasn't it? Than that is a good and rightfull creation (although, actually mostly symphonic rock, some RIO, possibly some folk, and of course Art rock)   There was an incomplete forerunner of it. ISP - Ital Symp Prog. I took that genre over, assembled a really great team, and we all discovered it was only the tip of the iceberg of a very unique genre.  It has been awhile but I think RPI came into existance around '09. After a good number of years of internal politicking, arm twisting, as well as research to prove the case we were trying to make.  While the fight, and it was one was one I made alone ( I love a good fight but not everyone does of course)  the work was very much much a collaborative effort. Look at that RPI definition.  A thing of beauty and best of any of the sub-genres. It had to be, it was in effect a court document explaining why we wanted this and felt the site should do it. Back in my days when I was a young tuxxie in The Netherlands we had no progressive rock, just Symphonic rock and Art Rock and that was all we needed to define progressive rock. It was a simpler time, it was the best of times. Getting older sucks, but you get great memories in return. Yeah old tuxxie but times change, and lot of acne scared punks are getting into the music. Prog is dead IMO, its fans and the bands dying off, but what we have a very VERY vibrant progressive rock scene in many cases sounding little or owing litle to the old warhorses. Kids and young bands making THEIR music.   I always felt as a collab and tried to impress on those on the teams I had, that it the site we serve as well as the people who use it.  That is the reward I see we got for all the hard work. I think we did a  great job.  I am quite proud of what the two teams did.

Edited by micky - November 05 2014 at 20:49

Thanks!  It was a labor of love and the fruits of loins of a good number of people.  Raff and Andrea P especially.  One who was there and was intimately familiar with it first hand, the other the single most knowledgeable person I've met on the subject.

Now for prog itself.    I have always believed prog rock was just a subset of a larger body called progressive rock which is turn is encapsolated by a much broader heading progressive music. That is why some genres here which have miniscule relation to prog rock, not prog.. definitely not rock but all fit nicely and snuggly together on this site.  I forgot Tux. I did have a 4 year vacation from the site, but I had popped back in just a bit when prog rock died as we know it. Check out  this thread for an interesting discussion on the current state of prog rock. Check this out and see what you think. It is a subject I'm highly interested in so I'd be curious if you have anything to add or thoughts on it.

Note the post by 'Jacob',  a working musician in a current group in the scene today.  That I think, having spoke to a good number of musicians in the scene, is highly indicative of the thoughts and feelings of many current progressive rock groups.

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=77031&PN=2


Edited by micky - November 06 2014 at 06:20