Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Polls
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Exclusionsist or Inclusivist?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedExclusionsist or Inclusivist?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>
Poll Question: Does Contemporary Progressive in 2014 still constitute Prog?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
46 [83.64%]
9 [16.36%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 20:53
Halford used to struggle with Painkiller live.  Not saying he never nailed it live but have noticed him struggle with it on several occasions.  Even the great Dio often bailed out of the unbelievable "Bloody angels fast descending" (Neon Knights) part live and changed the melody slightly to sing it lower.  It does not make the musician in question incapable for that reason alone.  

Edited by rogerthat - April 13 2014 at 21:21
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65671 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 20:39

It might illuminate this interesting debate to know that John Bonham often recorded things in the studio that were difficult if not near-impossible to recreate live.   It is something those who've not taken their music in front of an audience may not understand, but what one may accomplish on your instrument one day ~ the magic, the brilliant unplanned moments and spontaneous breakthroughs ~ may escape you the next.   Music is a physicality as much it is a spirituality; musicians are athletes and it requires huge amounts endurance as much as it does skill and a good ear.

Case in point:  'How Many More Times', one of the great drum songs and one the band often performed, is notable for the difficulty Bonham had reproducing that killer drum part on demand.   But it is exactly that demand musicians face every day, and all sorts of things may impact that--  mood, wellness, temperature, personal chemistry, or other subtle influences we can't see.   Keep in mind, an awesome moment on an album is either recorded many times till right, or they get lucky and the first or second takes are the best.   But live or under pressure to record, it's do or die, put up or shut up, and mistakes are made.   In this way, musicians and singers are uniquely vulnerable to their conditions and surroundings more than actors or comedians may be.   Imagine having to sing a two-hour set of complex, challenging songs; I'd rather tell some jokes or act a part than play music live, it's a recipe for disaster and a wonder so many gigs go off so well.   What good musicians do in front of an audience is nothing short of miraculous.
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy
Back to Top
ghost_of_morphy View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: March 08 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2755 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 20:36
It is not that prog "died" at a certain time.  Bands are still making interesting and exciting prog today.  But there is an unfortunate tendency among prog fans to assume that, because they like it, it must be prog.  This has led to abominations such a Jefferson Airplane, Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin et. al. being included on this site under a false flag, when they have little or nothing to do with prog.  Prog is here and now, but to find it on this site you need to use some discrimination and some common sense.
Back to Top
The Dark Elf View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13232 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 19:05
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

...or...

Yes, that does sound like a brilliant piece of Keith Moon drumming on "Love Reign O'er Me", and in 6/8 time.

But besides the whole 6/8 time question that is utterly consuming this thread (after all, I've been accused of taking discussions off-topic), the more cogent bit that I was trying to get at is that Tbe Who, along with Zeppelin, Tull, Genesis, ELP, Yes, Gentle Giant, VdGG, Pink Floyd and nearly every other notable progressive band from the "Golden Age of Rock and Roll" (if I may quote Mott the Hoople) were considerably greater and, might I add, considerably more proggy (or proggier, if you prefer) prior to 1979 than after. I don't believe one can defend an opposing point of view.

I graduated high school in 1978, and entering college I can say that campuses (we partied at many) were decidedly punkier and new wavish, from both the music in dorms and apartments on turntables (where we used to play round vinyl discs known as "records") to the college radio stations. There was a decided difference in what one heard at the close of the 70s -- a palpable change in the air, as it were -- and thousands of college kids were turning elsewhere than prog for their listening enjoyment.
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 17:10
...or...
What?
Back to Top
Svetonio View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 15:00

Jon Astley, the producer of WAY:

Quote Meanwhile, given one more chance, and with his back now firmly up against the wall, Keith Moon finally got his act together, laying down all of his drum parts within about 10 days. "He was great," asserts Astley. "The band couldn't believe it. When they did '905', which was bass drum, snare, off-beat, on-beat, everybody went 'That can't be Keith playing!' It was so unlike him. The timing was great and it was difficult to do, but he pulled it off. The only thing on which he couldn't play, which Pete warned me about, was 'Music Must Change'. Pete said 'It's in 6/8 and he doesn't feel 6/8. He never has, he never will. Don't even go there.' He was right. We ended up putting footsteps on the track. On Pete's demo he was walking around in a circle, and had it been quadraphonic it would have been wonderful to listen to — you could hear his squeaky shoes, and the sound of him walking around in a circle was the pace of the record... I mean, never mind 6/8, Keith never really felt 2/4 either. He felt orchestra — timpani here and big cymbals there. It was acting, it was theatre, and he really was great. I loved him.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 13:43
LOL
What?
Back to Top
Svetonio View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 13:22
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

That's a great video, Svetonio. The song was written for The Who Are You album, and was played in concert after Moon's death. What is it you are attempting but failing to say? The Who are still trudging on with occasional tours, even though John Entwistle and Keith Moon are dead. Bands vomiting up memorial tours does not mean much to me. It's nostalgia, remembering what they were. It's an enjoyable rerun without all the original performers. It is not the incredible excitement of watching a band in their prime playing something like Quadrophenia or Who's Next for the first time live.

The song which was impossible for Keith Moon to play, because he (although a great rock drummer & innovator), was not know to play 6/8;
the studio version they recorded with the "steps", and some cymbals were taken from Townshend's demo. There is not Keith Moon in the song. As you can see, there was one band called The Who, and they were the greatest concert attraction in 1979 - without Keith Moon (RIP).

Check your source material. It is not that Keith Moon "did not know how to play" in 6/8 time, which is a ludicrous assumption; it is, rather, because his health had deteriorated so much that he "could not play" the song in total:

"(Keith) was so sad about it. He was so upset. He used to cry. Nobody knew more than Keith (that his drumming had deteriorated). It used to break his heart."
--Roger Daltrey

You are wrong. Try again.
Aside of his alcoholism, Keith Moon was not know to play jazzy groove. Due to Keith Moon's alcoholism, what Roger Daltrey explained as well,  the band had a serious problem with his drumming at entire WAY, but 6/8 he never played because he simply didn't know to play it.  He was a rock'n'roll drummer. His favourite band was The Beach Boys and  his favourite genre was surf rock. He never practice, he never did reherseals. He couldn't be a studio and (or ) fusion drummer. But, Keith Moon is the legend.


Edited by Svetonio - April 13 2014 at 15:21
Back to Top
The Dark Elf View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13232 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 12:56
Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

That's a great video, Svetonio. The song was written for The Who Are You album, and was played in concert after Moon's death. What is it you are attempting but failing to say? The Who are still trudging on with occasional tours, even though John Entwistle and Keith Moon are dead. Bands vomiting up memorial tours does not mean much to me. It's nostalgia, remembering what they were. It's an enjoyable rerun without all the original performers. It is not the incredible excitement of watching a band in their prime playing something like Quadrophenia or Who's Next for the first time live.

The song which was impossible for Keith Moon to play, because he (although a great rock drummer & innovator), was not know to play 6/8;
the studio version they recorded with the "steps", and some cymbals were taken from Townshend's demo. There is not Keith Moon in the song. As you can see, there was one band called The Who, and they were the greatest concert attraction in 1979 - without Keith Moon (RIP).

Check your source material. It is not that Keith Moon "did not know how to play" in 6/8 time, which is a ludicrous assumption; it is, rather, because his health had deteriorated so much that he "could not play" the song in total:

"(Keith) was so sad about it. He was so upset. He used to cry. Nobody knew more than Keith (that his drumming had deteriorated). It used to break his heart."
--Roger Daltrey

You are wrong. Try again.
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
Back to Top
Svetonio View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 12:41
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

That's a great video, Svetonio. The song was written for The Who Are You album, and was played in concert after Moon's death. What is it you are attempting but failing to say? The Who are still trudging on with occasional tours, even though John Entwistle and Keith Moon are dead. Bands vomiting up memorial tours does not mean much to me. It's nostalgia, remembering what they were. It's an enjoyable rerun without all the original performers. It is not the incredible excitement of watching a band in their prime playing something like Quadrophenia or Who's Next for the first time live.

The song which was impossible for Keith Moon to play, because he (although a great rock drummer & innovator), was not know to play 6/8;
the studio version they recorded with the "steps", and some cymbals were taken from Townshend's demo. There is not Keith Moon in the song. As you can see, there was one band called The Who, and they were the greatest concert attraction in 1979 - without Keith Moon (RIP).
Back to Top
The Dark Elf View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13232 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 12:14
That's a great video, Svetonio. The song was written for The Who Are You album, and was played in concert after Moon's death. What is it you are attempting but failing to say? The Who are still trudging on with occasional tours, even though John Entwistle and Keith Moon are dead. Bands vomiting up memorial tours does not mean much to me. It's nostalgia, remembering what they were. It's an enjoyable rerun without all the original performers. It is not the incredible excitement of watching a band in their prime playing something like Quadrophenia or Who's Next for the first time live.
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 12:05
As for the original question: yes I think it still counts as prog. Prog doesn't mean progressive rock anymore, but rather a certain type of music that encorporates some of the stuff people go apefeaces for on this site. 

As for the actual discussion, I think the real meat lies in the new suggestions forum. It's there we're faced with the "natural" borders of the genre and are forced to look at various bands with supposedly prawk credentials. To me personally, asking any member whether they're inclusive or exclusive relies entirely on the subject matter. What band are we talking about? Which genre - is it electronic, pop prog, punk prog, funk prog or rhumba prog. People often come here to argue their case for personal faves and very often these turn into longwinded fruitless back n forth talks that always end up with the same result: My view of prog is different from yours ie my dad's stronger than yours...

I'd be inclusively minded if we're talking outsider artists - a lot of em we already have in Kraut, RIO, Avant and folk - acts that don't really fit the prog sticker as it is yet still deserve to be here. If we were to have a (sic) place to file these things, it'd be allright with me.
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
Svetonio View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 11:54
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

Originally posted by Chris S Chris S wrote:

Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

I have read very detailed recollections of forum member TODDLER capturing how prog got relegated to a sideshow in the 80s, of how it became difficult to play Zappa songs in clubs...in America, mind, not just Britain.  The album sales figures speak for themselves and I don't need to reiterate it.  Only Marillion achieved telling success on that front and they still could not approach the success of Floyd or Tull.  Moving Pictures would appear to be the last blockbuster prog rock album for a very long time, to be beaten only by OK Computer nearly two decades later.  I am not convinced the collapse was restricted only to Britain.  The scene began to dwindle in Italy as well.  What prog was left in Europe was mainly the avant/RIO groups. A parallel development was the relegation of jazz in America.  So it wasn't just prog, long winded improvisational music generally began to face a tough time.  To believe that prog was as healthy and robust a music scene in the 80s as in the 70s is to deny this seismic cultural shift in music happened at all.  None of this is to support an overly British centric view of prog, especially the one that holds symph prog as the basis of all prog.  I am making neutral observations based on various articles and reflections such as TODDLER's that I have read about the time.
You can not measure the popularity of someone like Frank Zappa with regard to the fact that obscure clubs in the early eighties playing post-punk (or whatever, I did not read TODDLER's post). Actually, Zappa was filled up the arenas from LA to Paris at that time. Pink Floyd released The Wall In 1979; Jethro Tull released Stormwatch; Bill Bruford released  One of a Kind; a ticket for a concert of "proto-prog" act The Who was a hot ticket in 1979, and so on. There was no collapse of the classic bands in 1979. It's a concoction that was later created to celebrate the British punk & new wave movement at the first place, but it can be useful for other things too, as you can see.
Nobody was collapsed but there was a huge commercialization of British (symphonic) progressive rock i.e. Genesis.
Svetonio, I'll have to disagree, up to a point. Although one can't use the year 1979 as the end-all, be-all milestone for the death of prog, one can certainly see that rigor mortis set in around that year. Pink Floyd released The Wall in 1979, but went straight to hell after that. Tull released Stormwatch in 1979, but that was the last album of their classic releases, and the last of their classic lineup. ELP was already done by 1978 (can you say Love Beach?), Yes released Tormato in 1978 (and the equally dreadful Drama in 1980), Genesis was well on their way to being commercial shells of their former selves (Hackett left in `77). King Crimson would not return until 1981 with their Talking Heads tribute album Discipline, and Gentle Giant, VdGG and Camel were already irrelevant (if they ever were relevant).

You mention The Who, but from an album standpoint, their greatness as a band died with Keith Moon (Who Are You was released in 1978) as did sometime-proggy Led Zeppelin when John Bonham died (In Through the Out Door, 1979). As for Frank Zappa, his last gold-selling album (gold in Canada, mind) Joe's Garage, Part I was released in...you guessed it....1979.

Discipline a Talking Heads tribute album?......Get real!!!!\

Very new wave sounding, and reminiscent of Talking Heads, particularly with Adrian Belew's participation.
Originally posted by Chris S Chris S wrote:

Camel - Irrelevant?...........Smoke

Yes. Considering they never had a gold album in the first place, and after 1979 never charted again in the US and never beyond 57 in the UK for two albums released in 82 and 84. They would not even release another album until 1991. That, to me, speaks of irrelevance after 1979 in the public domain. Sorry if that is a mark against your bestest band, but reality trumps blind adherence to a fandom.
Originally posted by Chris S Chris S wrote:

Who - greatness died with Keith Moon? Smoke anotherSmoke
The Who reached their zenith with Quadrophenia. The following releases Who by Numbers and Who Are You are fine albums, but not masterpieces. When Keith Moon died, The Who died, but unlike Led Zeppelin, who had the common sense to end the band when Bonham died, The Who muddled on for a couple more albums. Unless you consider Face Dances  or It's Hard anywhere near the quality of their previous albums. I don't, and obviously Roger Daltrey felt the same, saying, "It's Hard should never have been released".

And if you have valid points, I would suggest they aren't made with cute little emoticons.

dig it, The Dark Elf
Back to Top
The Dark Elf View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13232 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 09:32
Originally posted by Chris S Chris S wrote:

Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

Originally posted by Svetonio Svetonio wrote:

Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

I have read very detailed recollections of forum member TODDLER capturing how prog got relegated to a sideshow in the 80s, of how it became difficult to play Zappa songs in clubs...in America, mind, not just Britain.  The album sales figures speak for themselves and I don't need to reiterate it.  Only Marillion achieved telling success on that front and they still could not approach the success of Floyd or Tull.  Moving Pictures would appear to be the last blockbuster prog rock album for a very long time, to be beaten only by OK Computer nearly two decades later.  I am not convinced the collapse was restricted only to Britain.  The scene began to dwindle in Italy as well.  What prog was left in Europe was mainly the avant/RIO groups. A parallel development was the relegation of jazz in America.  So it wasn't just prog, long winded improvisational music generally began to face a tough time.  To believe that prog was as healthy and robust a music scene in the 80s as in the 70s is to deny this seismic cultural shift in music happened at all.  None of this is to support an overly British centric view of prog, especially the one that holds symph prog as the basis of all prog.  I am making neutral observations based on various articles and reflections such as TODDLER's that I have read about the time.
You can not measure the popularity of someone like Frank Zappa with regard to the fact that obscure clubs in the early eighties playing post-punk (or whatever, I did not read TODDLER's post). Actually, Zappa was filled up the arenas from LA to Paris at that time. Pink Floyd released The Wall In 1979; Jethro Tull released Stormwatch; Bill Bruford released  One of a Kind; a ticket for a concert of "proto-prog" act The Who was a hot ticket in 1979, and so on. There was no collapse of the classic bands in 1979. It's a concoction that was later created to celebrate the British punk & new wave movement at the first place, but it can be useful for other things too, as you can see.
Nobody was collapsed but there was a huge commercialization of British (symphonic) progressive rock i.e. Genesis.
Svetonio, I'll have to disagree, up to a point. Although one can't use the year 1979 as the end-all, be-all milestone for the death of prog, one can certainly see that rigor mortis set in around that year. Pink Floyd released The Wall in 1979, but went straight to hell after that. Tull released Stormwatch in 1979, but that was the last album of their classic releases, and the last of their classic lineup. ELP was already done by 1978 (can you say Love Beach?), Yes released Tormato in 1978 (and the equally dreadful Drama in 1980), Genesis was well on their way to being commercial shells of their former selves (Hackett left in `77). King Crimson would not return until 1981 with their Talking Heads tribute album Discipline, and Gentle Giant, VdGG and Camel were already irrelevant (if they ever were relevant).

You mention The Who, but from an album standpoint, their greatness as a band died with Keith Moon (Who Are You was released in 1978) as did sometime-proggy Led Zeppelin when John Bonham died (In Through the Out Door, 1979). As for Frank Zappa, his last gold-selling album (gold in Canada, mind) Joe's Garage, Part I was released in...you guessed it....1979.

Discipline a Talking Heads tribute album?......Get real!!!!\

Very new wave sounding, and reminiscent of Talking Heads, particularly with Adrian Belew's participation.
Originally posted by Chris S Chris S wrote:

Camel - Irrelevant?...........Smoke

Yes. Considering they never had a gold album in the first place, and after 1979 never charted again in the US and never beyond 57 in the UK for two albums released in 82 and 84. They would not even release another album until 1991. That, to me, speaks of irrelevance after 1979 in the public domain. Sorry if that is a mark against your bestest band, but reality trumps blind adherence to a fandom.
Originally posted by Chris S Chris S wrote:

Who - greatness died with Keith Moon? Smoke anotherSmoke
The Who reached their zenith with Quadrophenia. The following releases Who by Numbers and Who Are You are fine albums, but not masterpieces. When Keith Moon died, The Who died, but unlike Led Zeppelin, who had the common sense to end the band when Bonham died, The Who muddled on for a couple more albums. Unless you consider Face Dances  or It's Hard anywhere near the quality of their previous albums. I don't, and obviously Roger Daltrey felt the same, saying, "It's Hard should never have been released".

And if you have valid points, I would suggest they aren't made with cute little emoticons.
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
Back to Top
Neo-Romantic View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 09 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 928 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 08:31

 

Originally posted by Stool Man Stool Man wrote:

Tchaikovsky used cannons onstage a long time before Emerson, Lake & Palmer were born.  If that's not prog I'll eat my lunch LOL

LOLClapThumbs Up Nice
Back to Top
Svetonio View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 08:27
Originally posted by Toaster Mantis Toaster Mantis wrote:

Originally posted by Chris S Chris S wrote:

^^^ Great post

^^ I don't think we should underestimate modern day listernership of prog. I have three kids who love Dylan, Floyd, Rush and even Yes....( Yes...cosmic induced Yes!) to name a few. Sure Mum & Dad helped educate them, but since the turn of the millennium they have been accessing prog plus current musical trends via CD/internet. Their mates appear well briefed too and. One of my son's favorite live gigs was seeing Steely Dan...he was 13. We should not underestimate modern listener's knowledge. Beside how do we measure sales in prog, if most kids have burned their parents music too or share the iCloud

I digress somewhat but referencing new generations being oblivious to the late 60's/70's prog experience, does not sit well with me. It is all by association anyway.Smile


Even then, there are recent bands who clearly are rooted in 1970s prog/psych-rock but still have an updated take on that original movement... like Colour Haze for example.  They're obviously a continuation of the Kosmische Musik scene but updated with quite a few guitar playing techniques and sounds from newer doom metal styles that popped up in the 1980s and 1990s (Sleep being a clear point of reference) yet the resulting music never approximates it.

Then there's the case of certain groups from the Japanese noise rock milieu evolving into a more extreme version of Kosmische Musik, avant-prog or Zeuhl. Acid Mothers Temple, The Boredoms and Ruins are perhaps the prime representatives of this phenomenon.

....also an example of that phenomenon is The Worm Ouroboros as a young band from Belarus - regarding Canterbury style. 


Edited by Svetonio - April 13 2014 at 08:30
Back to Top
Stool Man View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 30 2007
Location: Anti-Cool (anag
Status: Offline
Points: 2689 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 06:57
It's simply a matter of personal opinion.  Person A might prefer 21st century prog by any prog acts.  Person B might prefer those bands who didn't even exist until after the end of the 20th century. Person C might be into early Neo (quite a few Marillion fans who prefer Fish-era, for example). Person D might like everything that's been released since they first heard prog thirty years ago.  All these examples are post 70s, of course.  I'm simply saying that no cut-off point (1979 or 1974 or whenever) should be valid.
 
Tchaikovsky used cannons onstage a long time before Emerson, Lake & Palmer were born.  If that's not prog I'll eat my lunch LOL
rotten hound of the burnie crew
Back to Top
AtomicCrimsonRush View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: July 02 2008
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 14258 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 06:43
Its a no brainer really. Prog progresses on and only the really pedantic approach would suggest it ended in the late 70s. Yes that era was quintessential to prog, but it continues onto this day and has transformed, even reinventing itself. i think Porcupine Tree are just as important to prog as King Crimson. Or bands like Haken measure up to Rush. No problem with that, as they come from different perspectives of the same medium. Without the modern prog scene prog would be dead! We cant live in the past or wallow in nostalgia as it gets tiresome after a while. Its nice to dip the feet into new waters, and broaden the listeneing experience, while still being reverant to the decade where prog originated.

Edited by AtomicCrimsonRush - April 13 2014 at 06:44
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 06:38
Originally posted by Chris S Chris S wrote:

^^ fair comments but we work with the modern day mediums for accessing music.....how do we really measure that? YT hits, how many plays on spotify? We cannot measure listernership anymore so how do we really quantify it. The world population in 1970 was 3.7 billion, we are now over 7 billion. Maybe prog listernership has increased it is just more diluted.....just saying.

Awesome poll results so far......85% say yes
 



Hmm, as a test case, I looked up the no. of views generated for youtube videos of Roundabout (which was much higher than for Close to the Edge).  3.7 million.  Sounds very, very impressive until you compare it to the no. of views for Close to You, the Carpenters version: 16 million!  See, I am comparing one of the top (non Floyd) prog rock acts of the 1970s with one of the top pop groups from the same period and there is certainly a huge disparity there.  Hotel California: 12 million views.  Dancing Queen: 45 million views.  Sultans of Swing:11 million, a live version even has 28 million views.  Staying alive: 36 million.  I am basically listing the songs that define the 70s in the eyes of youngsters today.  Stairway to Heaven would sit along side these tracks as would Wish You Were Here or Brick in the Wall.  But not Roundabout, not Dancing with the moonlit knight, not Karn Evil 9.  Yes doesn't seem to even have their own VEVO channel and while ELP have one, they probably got into the game too late.   

EDIT:  Would like to further add that Dave Brubeck's composition Take Five garners 6.5 million views on youtube.   That really puts the relative popularity of Roundabout in perspective, as in, not a whole lot.  And what's REALLY, REALLY popular, like viral, on youtube is usually something relatively 'current;.  Like Bruno Mars's Just the way you are.  389 million.  Rolling in the Deep up even higher at 488 mn.  Not even bringing up Gangnam Style.  


Edited by rogerthat - April 13 2014 at 07:01
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2014 at 06:26
Originally posted by Chris S Chris S wrote:

^^^ Great post

^^ I don't think we should underestimate modern day listernership of prog. I have three kids who love Dylan, Floyd, Rush and even Yes....( Yes...cosmic induced Yes!) to name a few. Sure Mum & Dad helped educate them, but since the turn of the millennium they have been accessing prog plus current musical trends via CD/internet. Their mates appear well briefed too and. One of my son's favorite live gigs was seeing Steely Dan...he was 13. We should not underestimate modern listener's knowledge. Beside how do we measure sales in prog, if most kids have burned their parents music too or share the iCloud

I digress somewhat but referencing new generations being oblivious to the late 60's/70's prog experience, does not sit well with me. It is all by association anyway.Smile


Even then, there are recent bands who clearly are rooted in 1970s prog/psych-rock but still have an updated take on that original movement... like Colour Haze for example.  They're obviously a continuation of the Kosmische Musik scene but updated with quite a few guitar playing techniques and sounds from newer doom metal styles that popped up in the 1980s and 1990s (Sleep being a clear point of reference) yet the resulting music never approximates it.

Then there's the case of certain groups from the Japanese noise rock milieu evolving into a more extreme version of Kosmische Musik, avant-prog or Zeuhl. Acid Mothers Temple, The Boredoms and Ruins are perhaps the prime representatives of this phenomenon.
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.219 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.