Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Proto-Prog and Prog-Related Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Can Pop be Prog?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedCan Pop be Prog?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>
Author
Message
coffeeintheface View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 02 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 397
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 08 2006 at 14:48
Originally posted by philippe philippe wrote:

pop cannot be prog and rock is hardly prog
 
you lose
OBQM: www.soundcloud.com/onebigquestionmark (solo project)
nQuixote: www.soundcloud.com/n-quixote (ambient + various musical ideas)
Back to Top
coffeeintheface View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 02 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 397
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 08 2006 at 14:49
Originally posted by philhepple philhepple wrote:

Originally posted by Rosescar Rosescar wrote:

As far as I'm aware, King Crimson was "pop" in 1969 because they were massively popular. Actually, most of prog was pop back then.

PLEASE do not make asinine comments about something that you are CLUELESS about!
 
Is there ANY need to cut someone down like this? He has a very strong point.
OBQM: www.soundcloud.com/onebigquestionmark (solo project)
nQuixote: www.soundcloud.com/n-quixote (ambient + various musical ideas)
Back to Top
billbuckner View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: May 07 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 433
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 08 2006 at 14:54
I'm surprised that Supertramp haven't been brought up here.
Back to Top
Rosescar View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 07 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 715
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 08 2006 at 15:24
Originally posted by billbuckner billbuckner wrote:

I'm surprised that Supertramp haven't been brought up here.

I was thinking the same thing, though some albums/songs aren't that proggy. The most popular songs usually are verse-chorus-verse-flute solo-chorus =(
My music!

"THE AUDIENCE WERE generally drugged. (In Holland, always)." - Robert Fripp
Back to Top
lucas View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 06 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 8138
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 08 2006 at 18:39
Originally posted by TheProgtologist TheProgtologist wrote:

Listen to A.C.T.

They are "prog-pop" if you ask me.
 
Nice call, here !
 
ACT are one of my favourite current prog bands. On stage they are very good. And they are a successful blend of ABBA, Dream Theater, Saga and Queen.
 
One name comes to my mind when it comes to pop-prog : Kevin GILBERT, cf his early career with  'NRG' and his solo albums. He defined himself 'the shaming of the true' as pop-prog album.
 
Most of the art-rock bands could be regarded as prog-pop :
Supertramp
Roxy Music
10 CC
Manfred Mann's earthband
Kate Bush
 
 
 
 
"Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood)
Back to Top
Harkmark View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: October 29 2005
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 538
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 08 2006 at 18:46
pop cannot be prog, prog can be pop...
Back to Top
NecroManiac View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: November 29 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 224
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 08 2006 at 20:58
Listen to Doves. Yes, "pop" can be prog. (I hate the term "Dream Pop", it's prog goddamn' it!"

What's yer faovrite album? =^_^=
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2006 at 02:30
The reality is that a band can play Prog, POP or borderline music.
 
BUT:
 
1.- If a Prog song becomes POP, it ceases to be Prog and becomes Pop.
2.- If a Pop song becomes Prog, it ceases to be Pop and becomes Prog.
3.- If a song is in the limit it's Prog related or borderline but no way a song can be POP and Prog at the same time.
 
Iván
 
 
 
            
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2006 at 02:55
Originally posted by lucas lucas wrote:

Originally posted by TheProgtologist TheProgtologist wrote:

Listen to A.C.T.

They are "prog-pop" if you ask me.
 
Nice call, here !
 
ACT are one of my favourite current prog bands. On stage they are very good. And they are a successful blend of ABBA, Dream Theater, Saga and Queen.
 
One name comes to my mind when it comes to pop-prog : Kevin GILBERT, cf his early career with  'NRG' and his solo albums. He defined himself 'the shaming of the true' as pop-prog album.
 
Most of the art-rock bands could be regarded as prog-pop :
Supertramp
Roxy Music
10 CC
Manfred Mann's earthband
Kate Bush
 
 
 
 


I always thought of Shaming of the True as "Art Pop".Smile
Back to Top
Garion81 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 22 2004
Location: So Cal, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4338
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2006 at 03:12
[QUOTE=Ivan_Melgar_M]The reality is that a band can play Prog, POP or borderline music.
 
BUT:
 
1.- If a Prog song becomes POP, it ceases to be Prog and becomes Pop.
2.- If a Pop song becomes Prog, it ceases to be Pop and becomes Prog.
3.- If a song is in the limit it's Prog related or borderline but no way a song can be POP and Prog at the same time.
 
Iván
 
 
 
QUOTE]
 
 
Again if we are talking what was "pop" when prog was popular (the ever popular AOR tag) then people are wrong when they call something like that pop today.  No one ever address this.  If you think it through is AOR really pop anymore?  What does it benefit a band to sound like that today?  This is the label I hear put on Spock's Beard, Kansas, The Flower Kings etc.  I actually don't get it.
If Neal Morse wrote only AOR music and secular lyrics do you think he is really going to get "popular"? 
 
 


"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?"
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2006 at 03:22
Originally posted by Garion81 Garion81 wrote:

 
 
Again if we are talking what was "pop" when prog was popular (the ever popular AOR tag) then people are wrong when they call something like that pop today.  No one ever address this.  If you think it through is AOR really pop anymore?  What does it benefit a band to sound like that today?  This is the label I hear put on Spock's Beard, Kansas, The Flower Kings etc.  I actually don't get it.
If Neal Morse wrote only AOR music and secular lyrics do you think he is really going to get "popular"? 
 
 
 
I get your point Garion but for me POP involves much more than popular.
 
Pop is mainly
  1. Verse - Chorus - verse structure
  2. Easy listening.
  3. Not challenging
  4. Essentially commercial
  5. Repetitive and non important lyrics. 

Just the opposite of what Prog means. Dark Side of the Moon was popular, but it was a challenging and deep album.

Even the most challenging mainstream artists or bands are usually catalogued as "ALTERNATIVE"
 
Iván
            
Back to Top
Gaston View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 26 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 401
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2006 at 03:23
no such thing as prog, it's just a silly name we give to a broad spectrum of music we'd like to think of as our own. To be truly prog you must have end point, like start as point A and progess knowingly to point B. If not you're just experimental. Bleh. Experimental.

lol, y'all know i'm joking, you can classify a range of music into prog and damned right we do. you know, i'm involved in making a masterpiece prog album right now, you know how many times i post here a year? i don't care if anyone even reads this post let alone listens to our music. i'm doing this for you, not for us.

as soon as you understand that, you'll understand why there is no prog.

don't worry about my music either, we'll all be a part of it soon enough. i want everyone to enjoy us, not nit pick us. we do what we want in other words. long live, er... prog. lol


Gaston


It's the same guy. Great minds think alike.
Back to Top
Philéas View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: June 14 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 6419
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2006 at 07:13
Pop can definitely be Prog, just as Rock can be Prog. There are plenty of Pop bands around today whose music show a lot of Prog influence, Mew and Muse are two good examples, and there are many more. Be open-minded people!
Back to Top
Fusionman View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie


Joined: July 27 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 86
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2006 at 08:18
Your phrasing is wrong. Pop is a description of a genre, not a genre its self.

Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2006 at 10:53
Originally posted by Fusionman Fusionman wrote:

Your phrasing is wrong. Pop is a description of a genre, not a genre its self.
 
Not sure Fusionman:
 
Quote
pop music
     n : music of general appeal to teenagers; a bland watered-down
         version of rock'n'roll with more rhythm and harmony and
         an emphasis on romantic love [syn: pop]
http://dict.die.net/pop%20music/
 

Characteristics as a Sub-Genre

 

Pop "is designed to appeal to everyone" and "doesn't come from any

particular place or mark off any particular taste."

 

In musical terms, it is essentially "conservative" in that it attempts to resonate

with a large segment of its target demographic rather than pushing artistic

boundaries.

 

It is "provided from on high (by record companies, radio programmers and

concert promoters) rather than being made from below..."

(Frith 2001, p.95-96).

 

But over time, pop has gone from "popular in general" to "a genre" consisting

of unchallenging, catchy songs, usually lasting between three and four minutes.

 

A pop song can take its sound from many different genres, but current pop

songs usually consist of sounds from hip hop, dance and soft rock or ballads.

 
 
 

Music Accessible To the Widest Audience

Since the mid-1950's pop music has usually been identified as the music and the musical styles that are accessible to the widest audience. This means the music that sells the most copies, draws the largest concert audiences, and is played most often on the radio. After Bill Haley's "Rock Around the Clock" hit #1 on music charts in 1955 the most popular music became the records influenced by rock 'n roll instead of the songs and light standards that had dominated TV's Your Hit Parade weekly countdown show. Since 1955 the music that appeals to the widest audience, or pop music, has been dominated by sounds that are still rooted in basic elements of rock 'n roll.

 
Well, it sounds as a musicall genre to me.
 
Iván
            
Back to Top
SolariS View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 27 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 891
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2006 at 12:56
Originally posted by coffeeintheface coffeeintheface wrote:

Definately. A perfect example is Bohemian Rhapsody, which i consider to be a prog song even though some people would say they're not a 100% prog band.





HAHAHAHA. GREAT picture in your signature!




I also wanted to add this, that I posted in another thread, but I think the idea is still the same.





I think we try to call progressive rock a genre, but it's not really. I mean how can "progressive" be a genre. A genre implies something static. It implies sameness. If you really want define a band by it's sameness, then it's not progressive by definition of the word right?

Naturally there is some amount of sameness between bands, and that's why we can categorize them at all. I'm speaking very abstractly, but for example you have bands that obviously play something that sounds like metal. If a band that plays metal-like music does something completely new and original with the sound of metal, then it is "making progress" on the sound of metal. In my eyes, the band is worthy of being called a progressive metal band. But if two bands are doing something different in the same way, then one of them can't be progressive.

Does this "make a genre"? Well, not really, but it's a good way of characterizing music that people like you and I will enjoy. So in my opinion, a band in ANY subgenre of metal can be progressive. In fact, any band in any genre can be progressive if they are striving for originality. Do you agree?







Edited by SolariS - September 09 2006 at 14:25
Back to Top
coffeeintheface View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 02 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 397
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2006 at 16:44
Originally posted by SolariS SolariS wrote:

Originally posted by coffeeintheface coffeeintheface wrote:

Definately. A perfect example is Bohemian Rhapsody, which i consider to be a prog song even though some people would say they're not a 100% prog band.





HAHAHAHA. GREAT picture in your signature!




I also wanted to add this, that I posted in another thread, but I think the idea is still the same.





I think we try to call progressive rock a genre, but it's not really. I mean how can "progressive" be a genre. A genre implies something static. It implies sameness. If you really want define a band by it's sameness, then it's not progressive by definition of the word right?

Naturally there is some amount of sameness between bands, and that's why we can categorize them at all. I'm speaking very abstractly, but for example you have bands that obviously play something that sounds like metal. If a band that plays metal-like music does something completely new and original with the sound of metal, then it is "making progress" on the sound of metal. In my eyes, the band is worthy of being called a progressive metal band. But if two bands are doing something different in the same way, then one of them can't be progressive.

Does this "make a genre"? Well, not really, but it's a good way of characterizing music that people like you and I will enjoy. So in my opinion, a band in ANY subgenre of metal can be progressive. In fact, any band in any genre can be progressive if they are striving for originality. Do you agree?





 
I think that's the best point made so far. And thanks for the comment about my signature, haha. I made that in 10 minutes due to boredom. I made a facebook group about it as well, haha.
OBQM: www.soundcloud.com/onebigquestionmark (solo project)
nQuixote: www.soundcloud.com/n-quixote (ambient + various musical ideas)
Back to Top
aapatsos View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: November 11 2005
Location: Manchester, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 9226
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2006 at 18:26
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Well, it sounds as a musicall genre to me.


Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2006 at 19:09
SolariS wrote:
Quote I think we try to call progressive rock a genre, but it's not really. I mean how can "progressive" be a genre. A genre implies something static. It implies sameness. If you really want define a band by it's sameness, then it's not progressive by definition of the word right?
 
Well, IMO that's a common mistake PROGRESSIVE ROCK DOESN'T NEED TO PROGRESS.
 
Progressive Rock is a name (Just a name) for a genre with certain characteristics that was more advanced than the music of the late 60's early 70's when it was born, the name remains.
 
There's a classical era called Modern, it starts in 1900 (More or less) so how can music from 1900 be considered modern? Simple, because it's also a name. Modern Music will be still considered Modern in 100 years as Baroque or Romatic have remained because those are only names.
 
Bands like Anglagard in 1992 or Magenta in the 2000's are still Progressive Rock bands despite they are re-creating the style of the 70's because they write and perform music in certain paramethers.
 
Don't mistake progressive as an adjective that qualifies the approach of a band towards music with Progressive Rock as a genre.


Naturally there is some amount of sameness between bands, and that's why we can categorize them at all. I'm speaking very abstractly, but for example you have bands that obviously play something that sounds like metal. If a band that plays metal-like music does something completely new and original with the sound of metal, then it is "making progress" on the sound of metal. In my eyes, the band is worthy of being called a progressive metal band. But if two bands are doing something different in the same way, then one of them can't be progressive.
 
Well Pendragon in the 90's, Anglagard in the same decade, Magenta and Glass Hammer in the 2000's are doing music that has not advanced an inch since the 70's and are still Progressive Rock.
 
As a fact Anglagard refused to play in the 90's with instruments and tecnological advances not availlable in the 70's.


Does this "make a genre"? Well, not really, but it's a good way of characterizing music that people like you and I will enjoy. So in my opinion, a band in ANY subgenre of metal can be progressive. In fact, any band in any genre can be progressive if they are striving for originality. Do you agree?


Any band or artist can be progressive (as an adjective) if they are beyond the acceopted mainstream of their era, but that doesn't make them part of the Progressive Rock genre.
 
Iván



Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - September 09 2006 at 19:12
            
Back to Top
markosherrera View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 01 2006
Location: World
Status: Offline
Points: 3252
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2006 at 22:05
SIMPLE MINDS,STILTSKIN
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.227 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.