Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Polls
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Are you stubborn about the genre changes?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedAre you stubborn about the genre changes?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 678910 11>
Poll Question: Regarding new categories (crossover prog, etc)
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
5 [7.35%]
22 [32.35%]
41 [60.29%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Tony R View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 31 2007 at 19:48
Originally posted by bhikkhu bhikkhu wrote:

Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:



Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:


The three new genres are technically sub genres of Prog Metal, so I don't see any problem. All the genres being displayed on the same level is a technical limitation of the PA database, nothing else.
Bingo...  plus, at least they each include the word 'metal', something we deemed inappropriate for the Art split


That is all I have been asking. Everyone was acting like I was insane for suggesting that these bands belong together. The solution I would have preferred would be to do it like the schools in Symphonic. Perhaps M@X will eventually make the necessary technical changes to make the hierarchy possible.




Of course he will. However Mike will agree with me when I say that Max months are like everyone else's yearsWink

So give it a couple of months...Tongue
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: October 31 2007 at 19:52
I guess we'll simply ... have to be happy with what we have to be happy with.Smile
Recently listened to:
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: October 31 2007 at 19:55
Clap
 
"And this would seem to be as good as any other place to sing it till I'm blue in the face" LOL


Edited by darqdean - October 31 2007 at 19:55
What?
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: October 31 2007 at 20:27
Originally posted by darqdean darqdean wrote:

 
nope. 5 people out of 63 agree with you. Possibly...
 
The topic of this thread, "Are you stubborn about the genre changes?", has been bugging me since it's inception because of the ambiguity of Stonebeard's Poll Question: Regarding new categories (crossover prog, etc)
  • Totally
  • A bit
  • Not at all
First off, I can be "Totally" stubborn about agreeing with the splits or I can be "Totally" stubborn about disagreeing with them - In fact I can be stubborn about lots of things related to the "new categories" - As you may have noticed everyone involved in the discussions attached to this Poll are immensely  stubborn regardless of the view-point they are supporting.
 
So, the Poll is ambiguous - however, I think most of us assumed it was meant the way you have interpretted it, but perhaps some people did not. Wink
 
Secondly I don't get how you can be "A bit" stubborn, but that aside, I also don't see how you can count "a bit" stubborn as being "disagree with this split" - the best you can count is 7.9% disagree, 31.75% don't care and 60.32% agree,
 
Also, from Stonebeards initial post it appears he is not asking whether you agree or approve of the splits but he is asking whether you take any notice of them (at all).
 
 
 
Two things, about the being stubborn with the genre changes, we can only guess if people disagree with the Art Rock split or with the Metal split when marking the option a bit.
 
I doubt it's about the Art Rock split, because it's clearly evident that bands like Rush, Supertramp and Gentle Giant have nothing inn common, so the category of Art Rock was completely wide and vague, with almost nothing in common, while all the bands in the three new sub-genres have something in common, they are all Prog metal-.
 
But again we can only guess.
 
Mike wrote:
Quote Then please note for future reference that I think that prog metal can both be seen as a  sub genre of prog rock and as a separate genre on the same level. The situation is simply more complex than expressions like "sub genre of" can describe.
 
That's my problem, or it's a sub-genre or it's not, but the change has already been made and we only expressed our opinions..
 
My question is: Wasn't it easier to make something more transparent like:
 
Progressive Rock sub-genres:
 
  1. Canterbury
  2. Crossover
  3. Eclectic
  4. Progressive Metal
    1. Classical (or whatever) Prog Metal
    2. Experimental/Post Metal
    3. Tech/Extreme prog Metal
  5. Neo Prog
  6. Symphonic
  7. Etcetera

That would had reched the same purpose and not create this ambiguous situation when we don't know if prog Metal is a sub-genre, a parallel entity to Prog Rock or a supra division of Prog Rock.

You could had even created all the new divisions you required, 10 or 20 if you required.
 
But, we will have to wait for M@X to create some different structure that clears all this doubts.
 
Already expressed my opinion and I stand on it, but for the moment it's futile to continue, we will have to live with this situation.
 
Iván
            
Back to Top
Seyo View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 08 2004
Location: Bosnia
Status: Offline
Points: 1320 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 02 2007 at 05:46
I am "a bit" stubborn. Actually, being a minimalist by philosophical attitude, I am against creating new "genres", definitions, categories, drawers, cupboards, boxes.... Dead
I think the fewer genres, the better. I would like instead to see individual albums having tags or labels explaining a particular "sub-genre" or style of music.
Wink
Back to Top
Certif1ed View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 02 2007 at 07:41
FWIW, I don't see Prog Metal as a subgenre of Prog Rock at all - the two are simply not fundamentally related, except from the Rock root.
 
Prog Metal did not come down the same path as modern Prog - it came directly down the parallel metal branch, which has always been borrowing ideas and techniques from Prog Rock - the two are fundamentally different types of music, once you get away from the rock root.
 
Prog Metal is about using progressive techniques in the writing.
 
Prog Rock is about a progressive style of writing.
 
Maybe that's a subtle difference to some, but to me, it's like a void between the two styles.
 
This doesn't exclude any kind of crossover existing, of course - nothing is absolute in music - and also doesn't exclude any kind of relationship or claim that one is somehow better than the other.
 
But apart from the prefix and exchanged surface ideas, the two musical genres have very little in common. If people want to judge based on appearances only, that's fine for them - but personally, I find it unsatisfying.
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
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: November 02 2007 at 08:17
Originally posted by Certif1ed Certif1ed wrote:

 
Prog Metal is about using progressive techniques in the writing.
 
Prog Rock is about a progressive style of writing.
 
Maybe that's a subtle difference to some, but to me, it's like a void between the two styles.

I see what you mean, and I even agree to some extent. But I doubt that it's that extreme ... not all Prog Rock bands use progressive songwriting approaches all the time, and not all Prog Metal bands use simplistic songwriting techniques all the time. Furthermore I'd like to say that IMHO you put the bar way too high by using the "top of the heap" Prog Rock albums like Foxtrot, CttE or Dark Side of the Moon as benchmark for all prog. I doubt that more than 10% of all the Genesis fans among the users of this website even have the background in musical theory required to understand what separates those albums from the rest.

BTW: Have you listened to Heaven's Cry yet? I really think you would appreciate their music.Smile
 
This doesn't exclude any kind of crossover existing, of course - nothing is absolute in music - and also doesn't exclude any kind of relationship or claim that one is somehow better than the other.

Yet in your reviews there appears to be a clear separation ... if you compare your reviews of the top prog rock albums to those of the top prog metal albums. It appears to me like whenever you review a prog metal album you're being very thorough in picking the things you don't like, and when you review your favorite prog rock albums you focus on the good qualities. Of course this might only be my subjective impression ... 
 
But apart from the prefix and exchanged surface ideas, the two musical genres have very little in common. If people want to judge based on appearances only, that's fine for them - but personally, I find it unsatisfying.

I agree that they have little in common ... I would prefer seeing them on the same level to putting them in a "sub-genre of" relationship. But clearly Prog Metal would not have existed if it wasn't for the classic Prog movement in the 70s.

What I don't understand is why if you agree that they have little in common you still want to apply the same criteria on them?
Recently listened to:
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: November 02 2007 at 08:21
Originally posted by Iván Iván wrote:



My question is: Wasn't it easier to make something more transparent like:
 
Progressive Rock sub-genres:
 
  1. Canterbury
  2. Crossover
  3. Eclectic
  4. Progressive Metal
    1. Classical (or whatever) Prog Metal
    2. Experimental/Post Metal
    3. Tech/Extreme prog Metal
  5. Neo Prog
  6. Symphonic
  7. Etcetera

That would had reched the same purpose and not create this ambiguous situation when we don't know if prog Metal is a sub-genre, a parallel entity to Prog Rock or a supra division of Prog Rock.

You could had even created all the new divisions you required, 10 or 20 if you required.



Actually it would look more like this:

  1. Progressive Rock
    1. Canterbury
    2. Crossover
    3. Eclectic
    4. Symphonic
    5. etc.
  2. Progressive Metal
    1. Classical (or whatever) Prog Metal
    2. Experimental/Post Metal
    3. Tech/Extreme prog Metal
  3. Neo Prog
  4. Fusion
And you're asking why we didn't it this way? Simple: Because M@x won't implement hierarchical genres. So we did the same as has been done for Prog Rock: To simply list all the sub genres on the same level for the time being, until M@x has the time to implement hierarchical genres or simply manages to divide the list into several departments in the website navigation.
Recently listened to:
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: November 02 2007 at 13:01
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:


Actually it would look more like this:

  1. Progressive Rock
    1. Canterbury
    2. Crossover
    3. Eclectic
    4. Symphonic
    5. etc.
  2. Progressive Metal
    1. Classical (or whatever) Prog Metal
    2. Experimental/Post Metal
    3. Tech/Extreme prog Metal
  3. Neo Prog (?)
  4. Fusion
And you're asking why we didn't it this way? Simple: Because M@x won't implement hierarchical genres. So we did the same as has been done for Prog Rock: To simply list all the sub genres on the same level for the time being, until M@x has the time to implement hierarchical genres or simply manages to divide the list into several departments in the website navigation.
 
This is something clear, but the possible combinations are many, it could be the one I posted above if all the sub-genres are in the same level, it could be also if we go to the three different roots:
 
Progressive Rock
  1. Progressive Rock
    1. Symphonic
    2. Neo Prog
    3. Folk
    4. Crossover
    5. Eclectic
    6. etc
  2. Progressive Metal
    1. Tech
    2. Extreme
    3. As many as there are
  3. Fusion.

The only problem I see in the one you post is that Neo Prog is a sub-genre of Prog, in no way an individual branch, as a fact it's derivative of Symphonic. As member of both Neo and Symphonic teams I don't see it that way and I guess Eric as head of the Neo Team and HT as member would agree. 

Still I believe Metal has the same Rock root than all Prog-sub-genres but that's subject of debate so every position is personal.and valid, in the meanwhile, I continue with my option posted in my previous post, because Prog Metal is being considered a sub-genre in the actual configuration of the site and all the Metal sub-genres should go under Prog Metal.
 
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: November 02 2007 at 13:28
^ like I said so many times: a simple hierarchy cannot express the relations properly. Of course Neo Prog can be seen as a continuation of Classic Prog Rock ... but like you yourself said a couple of times: not all Neo Prog is Symphonic.

Neo Prog and Prog Metal both have in common that they don't belong to the original Prog movement. Neo Prog can be seen as a combination of Prog and typical 80s pop music, Prog Metal can be seen as a combination of Prog and modern metal.


Recently listened to:
Back to Top
tardis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: Victoria, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 14378 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 02 2007 at 13:30
Nah, I couldn't really care...I'm just a simple prog fan Wink
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: November 02 2007 at 14:11
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

^ like I said so many times: a simple hierarchy cannot express the relations properly. Of course Neo Prog can be seen as a continuation of Classic Prog Rock ... but like you yourself said a couple of times: not all Neo Prog is Symphonic.
 
By the contrary Mike, I said hundreed of times that Neo Prog should really be Neo Symphonic, but the term is so widely extended that it' would cause more harm and confussion than benefit.
 
As a fact I wrote even more times that a high percentage of Neo Prog is rooted in one band called Genesisand the othjer bands are rooted deeply in Classic Symphonic of the 70's with some other influences, because no genre is 100% pure.

Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

Neo Prog and Prog Metal both have in common that they don't belong to the original Prog movement. Neo Prog can be seen as a combination of Prog and typical 80s pop music, Prog Metal can be seen as a combination of Prog and modern metal. 
 
Neo Prog as it name implies clearly is a new version of Classic Prog for the 80's, a decade that was tired of Giant Plants and Starship soldiers.
 
The fact that the genre accepted some mainstream influences is just a consequence of the hard hit that Prog received from Punk, but in no way Neo is a genre created by a mixture of Prog and Pop, Neo Prog is a 100% Prog sub-genre that has SOME external influences from mainstream as manmy other sub-genres.
 
There are various sub-genres that have mainstream influences like Crossover, Heavy Prog, Psyche, Electronic or even some Folk bands that have World influence, but this doesn't make them independent branches.
 
Neo Prog is evidently Symphonic for te 80's, the structure and roots are shared by both genres, for this reason the two teams have merged, being that we bbelieve we can work consistently and coordinated having so many similarities.
 
The justification for Prog Metal split can't be found in other genres that historically and musically are rooted in Progressive Rock, there's absolutely no site or Prog literature that considers Neo Prog a different branch from Progressive Rock, it's simply a sub-genre as all the others we have in this site.
 
Iván


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 02 2007 at 14:15
            
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: November 02 2007 at 14:20
^ there's that word again: "simply". The whole matter isn't as simple as you make it appear to be.Smile
Recently listened to:
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: November 02 2007 at 14:59
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

^ there's that word again: "simply". The whole matter isn't as simple as you make it appear to be.Smile
 
Again, the things are simple, we make them complex, I know it's fun to explore the posibilities but sometimes the answer is before you.
 
The essebnce of Neo Prog is in Symphonic, they share the same roots but Neo adds some extra influences, it's simpler than you can imagine.
 
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: November 02 2007 at 15:00
^ so all neo prog bands are symphonic ... why not call the genre Neo Symphonic Prog then?
Recently listened to:
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: November 02 2007 at 16:36
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

^ so all neo prog bands are symphonic ... why not call the genre Neo Symphonic Prog then?
 
Mike if you had read my previous posts you wouldn't ask this question:
 
Iván said:
Quote
By the contrary Mike, I said hundreds of times that Neo Prog should really be Neo Symphonic, but the term is so widely extended that changing it would cause more harm and confusion than benefit.
 
As a fact I wrote even more times that a high percentage of Neo Prog is rooted in one band called Genesis and the other bands are rooted deeply in Classic Symphonic of the 70's with some other influences, because no genre is 100% pure.
 
  1. I specifically said that Neo Prog IMO is essentially neo Symphonic even before you asked, so if you had read that post, you wouldn't be asking.
  2. Sadly names in Prog are not accurate, for example Symphonic is a terrible name, almost no Symphonic band has ever done a Symphony.
  3. Even Progressive Rock is a wrong name because it implies a constant evolution and we all know that's not a requirement of Prog, a band like Anglagard that re-created Classic Symphonic is as Prog as King Crimson or Genesis.
  4. Neo Prog appeared in the 80's when Prog was much simpler than today, most of the people identified Prog with Symphonic, so the logical name for them was neo prog.
  5. The three terms are not accurate but as I say in the Symphonic definition, they are so spread that would be futtile to change them
  6. I don't say ALL Neo Prog bands are Symphonic, I say most of them and that the genre is rooted in Symphonic with exceptions because no genre is 100% pure, that's a fact

As a fact every Prog site agrees with this:

Quote 3) Neo-prog - This term I saw for the first time being used to describe the sound of the band Marillion. Generally, neo-prog acts have a very identifiable, keyboard driven sound that to my ears seems to have originated with old Genesis. Marillion carried this torch in the 80s, with bands like IQ, Saga, and Arena being the biggest names in neo-prog currently.
 
They say exactly what I've been saying for years, Neo Prog is generally originated in Genesis.
 
Quote

Neo-Progressive

Symphonic rock done in a typically more simple or commercial format. Also very lush but lacking the complexity of the upper bands.

Bands

 
 
GEPR has used this definition that IMO is very disrespectful way for Neo Prog but which clearly emphasizes the almost identity of Symphonic and Neo Prog.
 
Mike McLatchey has done a more complete work for GEPR in which he talks about the correct and wrong definitions of Neo Prog.
 
Quote Neo-Progressive/"Neo-Prog"
While the face value of this definition means "new progressive," its definitions have multiplied and evolved over the years. It is likely the term's original meaning referred to a contemporary artist who performed music in the 70s symphonic vein with an eye to modern stylings, technology, and production. It has also been used as being synonymous with the early 80s English symphonic rock revival. Nowadays, the term "neo-progressive" is often used to indicate an artist's accessibility, mainstream leanings and relative popularity. Unfortunately the term is also used widely as a synonym for pop-progressive or, worse, bad symphonic rock, despite its departure from the original meaning. This term is an excellent example of how widely meaning can vary.
 
 
It's clear, the meaning is linked with 80's Symphonic revival and it's used with lack of respect by different persons to place it as a sub-distandard Prog, by no means a separete branch of Progressive Rock.
 
But of course, we must also use our own definition:
 
Quote

Neo Progressive

Neo-Progressive rock (more commonly “Neo-Prog”) is a subgenre of Progressive Rock that grew out of a strong influence by and admiration for the classic symphonic prog bands that flourished during the 1970s. Debate over when Neo-Prog actually came into being often takes place, some asserting it began with Script for a Jester’s Tear by Marillion in 1983. Others contend it began with Twelfth Night at the dawn of the 80s, while some even suggest the popular symphonic prog band Genesis gave rise to the sound that would typify or at least highly influence the sound that characterizes Neo-Prog with their 1976 album, A Trick of the Tail.

As a transition, if one analyses the progressive movement just before 1980, then some very influential albums easily come to mind: Steve Hackett - Spectral Mornings, Genesis - Wind & Wuthering, Genesis - And Then There Were Three, Genesis - Seconds Out, Saga - Saga, all the Camel's albums between Breathless and The Single Factor included,  and some Eloy's albums, especially Silent Cries And Mighty Echoes. In the 80's, the movement was primarily UK-based, but bands eventually came from countries all around the world, especially in the 90's.

Neo-Prog is characterized by deeply emotional content, often delivered via dramatic lyrics and a generous use of imagery and theatricality on-stage. The music, at odds with a few genres of music held under the Progressive Rock banner, is mostly the product of careful composition, relying less heavily on improvised jamming. The subgenre relies very much on clean, melodic & emotional electric guitar solos, combined with modern, lush, floating and atmospheric keyboards. The main musical influences on the Neo-Prog genre are Genesis, Yes, Camel, and Pink Floyd.

 
Again the definition makes special emphasis in SYMPHONIC and GENESIS, only one non Symphonic band is mentioned and that's Pink Floyd, but as we know Pink Floyd also added Symphonic elements to some of their albums.
 
Well Eloy also, but the Symphonic component of Eloy is very strong.
 
So Mike, it's clear for everybody that:
  1. Neo Prog is an evolution of Symphonic mainly.
  2. Neo Prog is a sub-genre of Progressive Rock
  3. Neo Prog is by no means a separate branch of Progressive Rock

So it's clear for everybody, I agree you can change the perception of Prog Metal, even when some of us don't completely agree, but please don't try to change the structure of Neo Prog, that's our job, we are doing a band by band work because the situation oof the band list is chaotic (Even worst than Symphonic was before the cleaning) and soon Eric (E-Dub)will announce the improvements that this sub-genre will have, remember he is the head of this team for a short period of time while HT and me are here for less than a week.

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: November 02 2007 at 17:32
wow ... why are you so defensive about this? Well, if this is so then I'd really recommend renaming the genre to "Neo Symphonic" to avoid misunderstandings.

BTW: The longer your posts are, the less I'm inclined to read them ... the same goes for the number of font sizes.Tongue
Recently listened to:
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: November 02 2007 at 18:09
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

wow ... why are you so defensive about this? Well, if this is so then I'd really recommend renaming the genre to "Neo Symphonic" to avoid misunderstandings.

BTW: The longer your posts are, the less I'm inclined to read them ... the same goes for the number of font sizes.Tongue
 
You are always lees inclined to read arguments. WinkLOL
 
BTW: I'm not defensive, as I said, I said years ago that Neo Prog is really Neo Symphonic, but it's not convinient to change it.
 
BTWII: Pńease Mike, I'm not arguing because the Neo Symphonic thing, denominations are the less important iossue, I'm in disagreement with your position of:
 
Quote Neo Prog and Prog Metal both have in common that they don't belong to the original Prog movement. Neo Prog can be seen as a combination of Prog and typical 80s pop music, Prog Metal can be seen as a combination of Prog and modern metal.
 
That's the point in debate, the Neo Symphonic denomination is secondary.
 
 
Iván


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 02 2007 at 18:17
            
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 02 2007 at 18:48
Not to insult anyone, but I just wanted to take the opportunity to use this:
In all seriousness, I do enjoy the debates sometimes.  8 pages so far, WOW.
I could do without all the prog metal subs and personally am ok with the demise of Art Rock as a sub.

What I want now are progressive alternative, progressive country, progressive classical, progressive blues, progressive polka, progressive jazz, progressive Zappa, progressive bluegrass, uhm, split up avant-garde and Rio, jazz rock and fusion, uhm progressive gospel, oh yes of course progressive punk, progressive bubblegum dance, and oh, progressive hillbilly music.  I think that should about do it for now.
(thanks a little to Wikipedia's listing of music genres)


Edited by Slartibartfast - November 02 2007 at 19:08
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
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: November 02 2007 at 19:24
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Quote Neo Prog and Prog Metal both have in common that they don't belong to the original Prog movement. Neo Prog can be seen as a combination of Prog and typical 80s pop music, Prog Metal can be seen as a combination of Prog and modern metal.
 
That's the point in debate, the Neo Symphonic denomination is secondary.
 
 
Iván


Can we agree that Neo Prog wasn't part of the original prog movement, and that its key bands were influenced by the sound of 80s music? That's essentially what I was trying to say. Sorry if the word "pop" offends you, to me it's not a curse word.Embarrassed
Recently listened to:
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 678910 11>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.211 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.