Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281
Posted: August 18 2010 at 17:17
I haven't seen people pose with prog but when I was in university I remember people pretending to like old swing music and old singers like Bennet, Sinatra, Martin etc in order to appear sophisticated and cool. I've also seen this happen with hip-hop, where people pretend to be "big fans of hip-hop" in order to seem up-to-speed but if you actually talk to them about it, it's clear they know little to nothing.
Joined: May 22 2004
Location: So Cal, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4338
Posted: August 18 2010 at 17:52
I have to agree with Peter assessment of humans growing older and demands on our time being such that we have less time to experiment. That being said I try to listen to new bands and styles. but some are just not going to register and i don't have time for the mulitiple listens to "get it".
And you know in order to get your point across sometimes you might want to do what I do and bring in Terry Tate, Office Linebacker:
Edited by Garion81 - August 18 2010 at 20:15
"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?"
Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281
Posted: August 19 2010 at 00:08
As I get older I think it's more important to experiement. I want to be discovering bands I've never heard before when I'm 80. Write off the present and you're writing off life. I refuse to be one of those old people who goes on about the good old days and how music today isn't real music. Honestly, every time an older person goes on about how trashy modern music is, I play them this, usually shuts them up.
And if they go "Well that was a one-off" I go "Oh no it wasn't" and pull out some more. About 20% of the Top 100 from ANY year you please is just as vacuous.
Joined: May 20 2008
Location: Bridge of Knows
Status: Offline
Points: 512
Posted: August 19 2010 at 03:45
Devonsidhe wrote:
Rabid wrote:
Devonsidhe wrote:
I've used the term "poser" over the years for the same reason. People who pose as something they are not. Most posers or faux will move on when something else becomes popular or they lose interest. A few, however, will learn what they don't know and become real.
How the hell can someone be termed a poser, for listening to the music they like?
Are you saying that people willingly listen to the music they dislike?
And what's so wrong with 'moving on'?
MY musical taste is MY affair.
I was saying the exact opposite. People who pretend to enjoy something they don't so they are thought of as someone who enjoys it. If they really do enjoy it, then they are not posing.
So who would be dumb enough to do that?
And why do YOU feel that you have sole right to decide whether someone really enjoys something or not?
I don't feel I have to fit in with anything except my own tastes, and I don't have to justify my musical tastes to ANYONE.
THATS the biggest argument for close-mindedness I've EVER seen.
Joined: May 20 2008
Location: Bridge of Knows
Status: Offline
Points: 512
Posted: August 19 2010 at 07:27
Easy Livin wrote:
Like it or not, the music to which this site is dedicated, "Progressive music", "Progressive rock", call it what you will (let's call it "Prog"), came about in the late 1960's and early 1970's.
And here lies the problem.....there's too many categorizations. When an older member describes something as being 'neo-prog', this does'nt make a lot of sense to younger members, who was'nt about about when prog started. It's not an 'elitist' thing.........it's more of an 'agist' thing. Either you're old enough to remember the first wave of prog, or you're not.
Because the site is working within a limited time-frame (late 60s - early 70s......in keeping with the site founders ideals, the roots of prog, etc ), of course the same bands will crop up, time and time again. Obviously, the site founders created a site that would encompass those years, and bands. But popular bands eg Yes, Genesis, Pink Floyd, etc. have longeviety, and as musical stylyes change, so does the definition of the music. No-one could say that 'Saucerful of Secrets' is anything like 'The Wall, but it's still Pink Floyd. Time moves on, tastes change, music changes. If you keep adding new categories, it's only going to confuse people.
Maybe the site would be better off named Rock Archives, with Progressive rock defined as a sub-genre.
It would probably do a lot to diminish the endless threads entitled 'what is prog'?
Joined: January 06 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 4287
Posted: August 19 2010 at 09:00
Proletariat wrote:
Textbook wrote:
They don't have to like both but they have to try both.
this costs money. buying what you know is a sounder investment. that being sayed i like to go out on limbs and try things... but i dont feel like everyone who likes prog should be required to
If you just want a taste of a new band, there are places like Yourtube
Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: August 19 2010 at 12:55
Rabid wrote:
And here lies the problem.....there's too many categorizations. When an older member describes something as being 'neo-prog', this does'nt make a lot of sense to younger members, who was'nt about about when prog started. It's not an 'elitist' thing.........it's more of an 'agist' thing. Either you're old enough to remember the first wave of prog, or you're not.
Because the site is working within a limited time-frame (late 60s - early 70s......in keeping with the site founders ideals, the roots of prog, etc ), of course the same bands will crop up, time and time again. Obviously, the site founders created a site that would encompass those years, and bands. But popular bands eg Yes, Genesis, Pink Floyd, etc. have longeviety, and as musical stylyes change, so does the definition of the music. No-one could say that 'Saucerful of Secrets' is anything like 'The Wall, but it's still Pink Floyd. Time moves on, tastes change, music changes. If you keep adding new categories, it's only going to confuse people.
Maybe the site would be better off named Rock Archives, with Progressive rock defined as a sub-genre.
It would probably do a lot to diminish the endless threads entitled 'what is prog'?
I agree with a lot of this and have argued frequently for a general progressive music website. Prog rock is either the 70s stuff and/or music composed with the same broad approach or it does not exist, period. Prog metal is NOT prog rock and saying so is NOT a nostalgia trip. Unfortunately, some people will faint at the very suggestion of including mainstream artists who were/are very progressive in their approach to music and that defeats any move towards making the site inclusive. But inclusive is absolutely the way to go in keeping with the spirit of prog.
Joined: July 17 2009
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 46
Posted: August 19 2010 at 15:01
Textbook wrote:
As I get older I think it's more important to experiement. I want to be discovering bands I've never heard before when I'm 80. Write off the present and you're writing off life. I refuse to be one of those old people who goes on about the good old days and how music today isn't real music. Honestly, every time an older person goes on about how trashy modern music is, I play them this, usually shuts them up.
And if they go "Well that was a one-off" I go "Oh no it wasn't" and pull out some more. About 20% of the Top 100 from ANY year you please is just as vacuous.
Well this is just silly.
Older people, especially aging progrock fans know darn well that there is goofy music in every age. You're certainly not telling those folks anything they didn't already know 40 years ago. That's why they got into bands like Yes and the progrock stuff to begin with. By the way, Tommy James had some decent stuff as far as commercial radio goes. You chose one of the goofier ones.
Anyhoo . . .
One thing about aging rockers, or aging prog rockers: They understand, some of them, that it isn't all about ProgRock Till You Drop. Just because they don't listen to the latest Neo-ProgMetal-Thrash-Post-ProgGoth extravaganza from some obscure (or not) band doesn't mean they've written off the present, or written off life. Hey Man, they're LIVING life! They've got kids and a million things going on, they aren't just self-absorbed Prog die-hards.
And chances are they are learning new music from their kids and other family members.
As a young progrock snob myself, I hated punk rock. But having had kids, and the dad of two young men in an up and coming punk band, I've gained a whole new appreciation for punk. I've recorded, engineered, mixed and mastered three of their albums. I played bass on three tracks of their latest CD. I'm always learning. And they grew up going to YES concerts from an early age. Last year we all went to a dozen concerts together, including Yes, Motorhead, The Church and Irish folk artist Luka Bloom. Their band plays two or three shows a week, I've been to alot of them and seen dozens of new punk bands on the bills. I saw Chris Isaak a few weeks ago because my wife likes him. He puts on a great show and has an excellent band and I learned alot about showmanship from that concert.
So aging prog rock fans aren't just stagnantly writing off life just because you think we should be exploring all this great new Prog rock, to avoid being considered a (horror) FAUX prog fan.
Seriously, take your labels and . . . well, you know. . . . come back in 30 years and tell us all what you've learned.
Joined: May 20 2008
Location: Bridge of Knows
Status: Offline
Points: 512
Posted: August 19 2010 at 16:08
Pangaea wrote:
As a young progrock snob myself, I hated punk rock.
I did, too, and still do. It did NOTHING for me, musically, but on reflection, I'd say the whole Punk movement was more to do with attitude, with music being the means for capturing a wider audience.
'I wanna destroy, pass it by........'
That's MY view of the whole Punk scene......
a willingness to give the establishment a swift kick in the nuts
whether it was music, fashion, art, etc.
Pangaea wrote:
Seriously, take your labels and . . . well, you know. . . .
Special Collaborator
Crossover & JR/F/Canterbury Teams
Joined: October 22 2005
Location: The Idiocracy
Status: Offline
Points: 5482
Posted: August 19 2010 at 16:49
Rabid wrote:
Pangaea wrote:
As a young progrock snob myself, I hated punk rock.
I did, too, and still do. It did NOTHING for me, musically, but on reflection, I'd say the whole Punk movement was more to do with attitude, with music being the means for capturing a wider audience.
'I wanna destroy, pass it by........'
That's MY view of the whole Punk scene......
a willingness to give the establishment a swift kick in the nuts
whether it was music, fashion, art, etc.
I was a progrock snob in the seventies as well, but I reserved my disdain for the disco crowd. Sure, there were a few songs here and there that didn't suck, but the smell of polyester permeating the scene was just too much to bear,
I was freelancing as a sound engineer at the time, and had the good fortune to mix for some punk bands around Boston. During that time, I got to see The Dead Kennedys and Flipper. Those bands could play.
That got me looking for other good punk bands. Like in any genre, they could be difficult to find, but they were there.
Joined: May 22 2004
Location: So Cal, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4338
Posted: August 19 2010 at 17:12
Textbook wrote:
As I get older I think it's more important to experiement. I want to be discovering bands I've never heard before when I'm 80. Write off the present and you're writing off life. I refuse to be one of those old people who goes on about the good old days and how music today isn't real music. Honestly, every time an older person goes on about how trashy modern music is, I play them this, usually shuts them up.
And if they go "Well that was a one-off" I go "Oh no it wasn't" and pull out some more. About 20% of the Top 100 from ANY year you please is just as vacuous.
And how old are you?
I just don't reminisce about the good old days in the way you say although they are the foundation of what I like you just can't escape it. I do discover new bands but there are things such as family and career that intervenes in what I have time to do and what I don't. They are called priorities. I am lucky to be with a mate who understands what i like and encourages me to continue with it unlike other exes that I have had. I discover about 5-10 new bands a year and that is about it. I don't have time for much else. Those bands get just as much or more of my attention as the older groups do. Now my bottom line is an emotional connection. If I don't really feel it there is not much point for me to continue to pursue it. That is true of the old groups as it is of the new.
BTW here is one I am digging right now and they don't even have a CD out yet. I also attend Calprog every year as a Patron so there is a good chance I am going to experience at least 4-5 new bands live every year. How many do you get out to see?
Joined: May 20 2008
Location: Bridge of Knows
Status: Offline
Points: 512
Posted: August 19 2010 at 17:15
Evolver wrote:
Rabid wrote:
Pangaea wrote:
As a young progrock snob myself, I hated punk rock.
I did, too, and still do. It did NOTHING for me, musically, but on reflection, I'd say the whole Punk movement was more to do with attitude, with music being the means for capturing a wider audience.
'I wanna destroy, pass it by........'
That's MY view of the whole Punk scene......
a willingness to give the establishment a swift kick in the nuts
whether it was music, fashion, art, etc.
I was a progrock snob in the seventies as well, but I reserved my disdain for the disco crowd. Sure, there were a few songs here and there that didn't suck, but the smell of polyester permeating the scene was just too much to bear,
I was freelancing as a sound engineer at the time, and had the good fortune to mix for some punk bands around Boston. During that time, I got to see The Dead Kennedys and Flipper. Those bands could play.
That got me looking for other good punk bands. Like in any genre, they could be difficult to find, but they were there.
Good point.........I've got nothing against New-Wave bands......XTC, Gang of Four, etc.......but I always felt that the UK Punk movement music was more to do with 'look at us, we REALLY can't play', as an antidote to those who said 'look at us, we REALLY can play'.
And disco? The more I learn about the Disco scene, the more sordid I realise it was. For the most part, it was ex-porn actors and actresses finding new outlets when the porn industry got censored, with a resolve to sell cocaine to every US citizen. I agree, tho......the smell of polyester sucked !!
Joined: August 09 2010
Location: West Country,UK
Status: Offline
Points: 3966
Posted: August 19 2010 at 17:34
Salvia?? .. as a Horticultralist, i'm intrigued...
As an Ethnobotanist im even more intrigued
As an amateur musician, i always that it would be a good name for a band...
What about the band 'Magazine'.. i thought (and still do) that they were fantastic!! They attempted to make modern (then) progressive music without it being 'prog' with punk/ new wave energy but as their single prophetically stated, they were 'Shot by both sides'.There always was so much more to what happened in 1977 than the sex pistols and sham 69 and it did stir things up and bring in new elements. Stuff from before was still fantastic and bands that came after benefitted greatly if they were open to it.
Music taste is personal freedom. Period. (as our cousins across the water say, i believe)
But this thread has thrown up some interesting views and opinions; vive la diffrence....
Joined: May 20 2008
Location: Bridge of Knows
Status: Offline
Points: 512
Posted: August 19 2010 at 18:11
Cosmiclawnmower wrote:
Salvia?? .. as a Horticultralist, i'm intrigued...
As an Ethnobotanist im even more intrigued
As an amateur musician, i always that it would be a good name for a band...
What about the band 'Magazine'.. i thought (and still do) that they were fantastic!! They attempted to make modern (then) progressive music without it being 'prog' with punk/ new wave energy but as their single prophetically stated, they were 'Shot by both sides'.There always was so much more to what happened in 1977 than the sex pistols and sham 69 and it did stir things up and bring in new elements. Stuff from before was still fantastic and bands that came after benefitted greatly if they were open to it.
Music taste is personal freedom. Period. (as our cousins across the water say, i believe)
But this thread has thrown up some interesting views and opinions; vive la diffrence....
Salvia.......the most interesting way to not spend 20 minutes
The best thing Punk did for me, was to get me more into Funk !!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.142 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Faux Prog Fans
Topic Options
Devonsidhe wrote:
me5h
