Can Pop be Prog?

BrufordFreak wrote: And what of confessed 'pop-oriented' artists who produce fresh, innovative music with all the bells and whistles and other signature 'prog rock' qualities? For example, Kate Bush's Seventh Wave, many David Sylvian songs, Cocteau Twins Treasure and Tiny Dynamite period, U2 Boy, Police Ghosts in the Machine. When groups or individuals are experimenting with the latest technology and with concept album themes, and with variable song structures or vocal and instrumental delivery styles (Eno, Fripp, Sylvian, Gabriel, Elizabeth Frazier, etc. etc. etc.!!) to me, that constitutes repeated and careful listening BECAUSE IT IS PROGRESSIVE!

1. progressive (with low case): A an adjective which qualifies the approach of a band or artist towards music, a progressive band not necesaruilly is Profg, for example Cocteau Twin and The Police are not Prog bands.
2. Progressive Rock (With low case as any name): A genre that appeared suring the late 60's and developed until today with several characteroistics and frames.

A Prog band doesn't need to experiment with the lates instruments, in 1992 Anglagard refused toi play with any instrument not availlable in the 70's but they are 100% Prog.

Well me too, my father played(s) me Fragile, Yes Album, DSOTM, Meddle, AHM, CTTE, Animals, WYWH, and much of Zappa, so that means I discovered prog at the age of 7 or 8 more or less too. I played Weasels Ripped my Flesh cause the cover.

Shakespeare wrote: Sorry if this has come up before, I don't feel like reading the whole thread. If pop was prog, it wouldn't be pop, it would be prog, therefore no, pop cannot be prog, unless it is prog.

Besides the fact that Prog is just a branch of pop music.

Progressive Rock to me starts with bands like The Beatles example a song like  "Strawberry Fields Forever".  An overtly experimetal rock song using Indian elements, Avant, Electronic music with psychedelic pop music. Progressive Rock really starts with bands who used outside rock sources with rock-pop music.  Pink Floyd was another band who dabbled of combining pop and experimental music.

of course they are not exclusive... but as we all know..  we sort of all have our personal interpetations of what prog is and is not.  Some do believe the prog is some cheerished musical form that can not be tainted by pop. That they are exclusive. Personally I think that is a bunch of hogwash but ...to each his own.  Having Xover prog here pretty much puts the stamp.. and legitimizes that notion.  After Crossover Prog was introduced here, one of the admins pointed out to me that other sites... groups on  their myspace pages now identify themselves as such.  Some will disagree...  but they are sort of pissing in the wind so to speak... many see it.. and recognize it. 

Decidedly back in the day progressive rock was not pop nor was the opposite possible.  Part of the problem is that in the early years even progressive rock was not considered progressive, it was considered really good rock by musicians who actually knew how to play their instruments well.  Thus in the early-70's a prog-rock enthusiast might be listening to ELP, Tull, KC, Zep, Jeff Beck, Spirit, and a host of other pretty competent bands.  This was absolutely opposed (as in 1 and 0) to what was considered pop at the time (say from the Top 40 chart a few pages back, Tony Orlando and Dawn, or Captain and Tennielle).  There was no in between area, no gradation between the 0 and 1. 

Only coincidentally.

< The avatar will explain that progressive music (as Roxy certainly always was) can become popular , simply because it had a mass appeal as well as musical magic. Instrumentally a great prog band can be pop but somehow the reverse is not as obvious.