Genesis of Classic Prog : When did it all begin ?

Edit: Also, ITCOTCK helped influence symphonic prog more than any other prog genre.

We have psychedlia for one side, Jazz of course, and also what we may call just symphonic rock wich first group i consider to be Procol Harum ( and in this category will lie the Moodys).

Pink Floyd first is sonic experimentation of the first degree but its psychedelia after all.

ITCOCTCK is prog......no one that have heard "21 century..." could say that its not prog, all the ingredients are there musicianship, technical virtuosity, compositional care, rythim changes...and its rock!!!  

 

Thanks Floydman.  Inspiration has always fascinated me.

 

The fun thing (or difficult depending on your point of view) about this thread is exploring what could be described as a nebulous beginning and defining when that existence started.  From this discussion, I've narrowed that beginning down to somewhere between the Big Bang (or Creation) and ITCOTCK.

 

One of the difficulties has been in what the definitions are that we are trying to find the beginning of.  Definitions have ranged from progressing music to Progressive Rock.  Then what constitutes a prog song let alone an album?  Of all the myriad components of prog, how many of them does an album have to have?  Are any of the components mandatory?  The problem from this is that definition while explanatory, can also be limiting.  We may be able to define the classic definition by saying it has to have a different time signature or no chorus or many other identifying ticks of prog.  But, by definition, prog is having the freedom to leave a previous definition and explore something never done before.  By defining prog, we will be readying the stage for the new prog to be something the old prog isn't.

 

It all boils down to the definition.  One definition could be an academic one.  Band A was the first to do an album containing components X, Y and Z therefore it is the first prog. But, what if only three people listened to the album and none of them created an album to further the movement?  The first prog album would only be recognized by looking back in an archeological sense.

 

It could also be defined scientifically.  For the fun of it, using quantum physics, prog didn't exist until someone was in the forest listening to it.  Which may have some truth to it.

 

It could also be a populist definition.  What do most of the people say?  The big problem with this is prog has never been  a populist movement.  Kasey Kasem never did a top 40 for us.  The Grammies don't have a category for us.

 

Prog's definition may be, if I can paraphrase the one from porn, we will know it when we hear it.  Personally, I would rather have the definition come from the prog community rather than a quantum archeologist on am radio.

 

For whatever reason, the prog community, for the most part, has recognized ITCOTCK as the first prog album.  Though there have been a few disagreements, none have been able to disprove it to the community.  What came before it has been influential and what came after has been derivitive.  King Crimson may not get support for being the originators of the components but they are getting credit for what they did with those components.  Therefore it has all the definitions: one of the first to use all of the components; many people were listening to them when it came out; and the popular consensus of the prog community.  Until someone can show another band answering these definitions prior to KC, KC will wear the crown.

 

Keep in mind one thing.  All of us can point to our own origins to prog.  Many of us listened to the classic prog from our dad's albums and discovered it in a retro fashion.  Some of us bought the ITCOTCK when it first came out.  And a few of us listened to Sgt. Pepper, The Nice, Moody Blues, Frank Zappa, etc and started to get it before it was even there.  The true beginning will not be when it happened for us but when it happened for the community.  Everything else is either inspirational or derivitive.

 

As with all things, there is no one explanation for anything.  Especially when we consider prog which is all about freedom to make our own definitions.  There are exceptions to this out there and that will only make the discussion more interesting.

If you ever see that DVD about Tom Dowd you will change your mind about how you said this ... there were a lot of "interstellar overdrives" done, and "close to the edge"s done, but they were slightly different and may have been not as electrified as you expect. The transposition of elements in time causes confusion and bringing the "rock/electric" element to the 30's is like watching Michael J Fox do his guitar thing on that movie ... "I guess you're not ready for that yet!" ... It's out of time and place. BUT, you missed the important point. That there was music out there that was being done with similar inspirations and tastes in mind. And it might have been done within different contexts in music. How else would you explain the Stravinsky's and so many others from the turn of the century on?

 

Music is not that "exclusive" to the point where nothing else matters ... and while you do not have to look at it in a quotidian manner, it helps, and in the end gives you a rather nice perspective. But thinking that what you "want" today, and why it did not happen yesterday ... is not going to get you any answers! It doesn't reverse a lot of bad history! ... you do know that right?

 

You probably want to go through the 40's and 50's jazz stuff that ended up giving us Miles and such, people that did nothing but long cuts and played for a long time, which is where some of the "prog" and "rock" things that we love got their inspiration, including classical music. See the experiments in literature, film and thater in the 30's and 40's and what was being done ... a lot of music history might make a lot more sense to you. And please, look up that Tom Dowd DVD ... it is the history of 30 years of music like you have never heard it and it will surprise the living heck out of you! ... assuming you love music enough to even appreciate having your knockers knocked senseless all day long!

Thank you Baldie ... sometimes I think we need to lock some of these people up with Miles in a room somewhere in 1954 and listen to these guys for 30 minutes ... not to just appreciate jzz, mind you, but to get people to realize ... the inspiration and the love for creating "music" ... has absolutely nothing to do with the wording and terminology that we talk about 50 years later!

 

Not sure some folks here want to hear that about "prog", though!