Emulating Classic Prog Is Not Prog - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Listening to new albums by the likes of Phideaux and The Watch, I begin to wonder if this is even prog at all.

"Aah, but they sound just like classic prog acts such as Yes, Genesis, Pink Floyd and Jethro Tull."

Exactly. They're imitating established successful formula. This is the opposite of prog.

To me prog is not a musical style, it is an attitude where new things are tried. Some of this "dad-rock prog" is about as progressive as Coldplay. Prog should threaten and challenge expectations. Some of the recent records receiving high praise here are as threatening and challenging as a cup of warm milk with some chocolate teddy bear biscuits on the side. They are comfy old pairs of slippers.

Note that I am not attacking Yes/Genesis etc. In their day, what they were doing was new/different and so they really are the genuine article. It's the people/bands who think that 40 years later it's acceptable, even praiseworthy, to be doing more or less the exact same thing, that I have a problem with. As I said in my Phideaux review, I understand wanting to make an album like the ones that inspired you but it's a lose/lose situation. If you fail, well you failed. And if you succeed, it's redundant because those albums already exist.

"Gosh I hate all this pop music, all predictably following established patterns in the pursuit of the success of others. Anyway, check out this new prog band, they're great, they capture the spirit of classic Yes to a tee." Ooh look it's got a 20 minute song with old fashioned key boards and mystical lyrics and silly time changes and it doesn't take me out of my little comfort zone, five stars. This is flagrantly sad/embarrassing nostalgia and it's super-unprogressive.

I'm not the biggest Kayo Dot fan but they are an example of a band who is prog precisely because I *don't* hear echoes of Genesis and Yes et al. They are doing their own thing. Or someone like Opeth, chiefly responsible for bringing what had a been a largely ostracised genre (death metal) in from the cold. Doing something new.

How does a site dedicated to musical adventurousness and experimentation lavish such praise on those who coast on the glories of others? And at the same time, if you suggest something genuinely new, like a prog album which contains drum and bass or rap or country-western themes, many will react with revulsion and disgust.

I think a lot of people here like the idea of being prog, rather than actually being prog.

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
colorofmoney91 Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Prog Reviewer Joined: March 16 2008 Location: Biosphere Status: Offline Points: 22774	Posted: April 20 2011 at 22:56
	I actually feel the same way. After all, the making new, previously undone, "progressive" music that kept developing over album releases was the definition and purpose of early King Crimson, I believe.
	Hanashukketsu

Textbook Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Forum Senior Member Joined: October 08 2009 Status: Offline Points: 3281	Posted: April 20 2011 at 22:53
	Listening to new albums by the likes of Phideaux and The Watch, I begin to wonder if this is even prog at all. "Aah, but they sound just like classic prog acts such as Yes, Genesis, Pink Floyd and Jethro Tull." Exactly. They're imitating established successful formula. This is the opposite of prog. To me prog is not a musical style, it is an attitude where new things are tried. Some of this "dad-rock prog" is about as progressive as Coldplay. Prog should threaten and challenge expectations. Some of the recent records receiving high praise here are as threatening and challenging as a cup of warm milk with some chocolate teddy bear biscuits on the side. They are comfy old pairs of slippers. Note that I am not attacking Yes/Genesis etc. In their day, what they were doing was new/different and so they really are the genuine article. It's the people/bands who think that 40 years later it's acceptable, even praiseworthy, to be doing more or less the exact same thing, that I have a problem with. As I said in my Phideaux review, I understand wanting to make an album like the ones that inspired you but it's a lose/lose situation. If you fail, well you failed. And if you succeed, it's redundant because those albums already exist. "Gosh I hate all this pop music, all predictably following established patterns in the pursuit of the success of others. Anyway, check out this new prog band, they're great, they capture the spirit of classic Yes to a tee." Ooh look it's got a 20 minute song with old fashioned key boards and mystical lyrics and silly time changes and it doesn't take me out of my little comfort zone, five stars. This is flagrantly sad/embarrassing nostalgia and it's super-unprogressive. I'm not the biggest Kayo Dot fan but they are an example of a band who is prog precisely because I don't hear echoes of Genesis and Yes et al. They are doing their own thing. Or someone like Opeth, chiefly responsible for bringing what had a been a largely ostracised genre (death metal) in from the cold. Doing something new. How does a site dedicated to musical adventurousness and experimentation lavish such praise on those who coast on the glories of others? And at the same time, if you suggest something genuinely new, like a prog album which contains drum and bass or rap or country-western themes, many will react with revulsion and disgust. I think a lot of people here like the idea of being prog, rather than actually being prog.