Why old prog - for me - is better than new prog

Hmm... Like many of the Beatles songs written by Paul McCartney, Penny Lane owes a lot of its musical heritage with (predominately Anglican) hymns and that is reflected in lyrical structure (verse-heavy with the chorus used as a refrain) and musical harmonies though I don't think Penny Lane features the Amen cadence that you get in other hymn-like Beatles songs like Yesterday. Add into this the triplet embellishments over the standard 4/4 beat and the very non-classical trumpet solo and the piece becomes nothing more than the sum of its parts. This does not make it Progressive Rock by any stretch of the imagination because other British "beat" groups also drew on this Anglican hymnody (such as the Stones, Procol Harum, The Move and The Animals), either as a result of the Beatles influence, though more likely as a result of their own musical education (i.e. singing hymns in church and school assemblies). Note: this is not the same as gospel music, which is in itself a development out of Anglican hymnody.

^ Welcome on Forum, comrade Shamal!

jayem wrote: There are many tracks that can be called prog that wouldn't launch a new genre by themselves, because you'd say "this is psyche inventive classic oriented" this or that. Then there would be THE first one that'd have you say "now this clearly defines a new genre" (for many, me included, ITCOTCK would be it).

Komandant Shamal wrote:  What about Strawberry Fields Forever, another A side of the single?

Edited by Dean - February 02 2015 at 07:43

Svetonio wrote: I don't think that the term even existed at the time when Strawberry Fields Forever / Penny Lane the single was released. However, I don't listening to that ancient but timeless single through Bilboard single charts nor wiki, I listening to THE single with my own ears and I hear PROG ("Crossover Prog" if you like).

Hi,

Just recently, there was an article on "The Oregonian", about a guy in Portland that has a major studio and he records folks directly to a "disk", in the old LP style. The article, was actually very nice, and well meaning, but in the end, it was nothing but a selling point for LP's and their superior ability for whatever reasons one could find and come up with.

While there are reasons why the analog recording might be superior to the digital recording, or vice versa, there was one thing that the article never discussed or touched. The individual piece of music or the artist himself/herself ... that will never change and their creativity will not die ... regardless of how it is recorded!!!!!

I sent an email to the gentleman about this, and of course, a month later, it's still being ignored. it just shows how "commercial" his work is, and how much he is incapable of discussing a reality that he fears could hurt his business!

NOW, about this thread and topic ... if this is about the recording (hasn't been -- thank Gawdddd!!!), this discussion would be boring, except for Dean's exceptional details about the scientific side of it all! BUT, if this is about PERSONAL TASTES, then, where it comes from and it sounds like ... is something that us music writers like to spend our time studying and sometimes mentioning in different areas. It's not secret to me, how much of the "hymn" and "folk" traditions in the Brittish Isles came alive in the Progressive Rock music in that area. It's more of a "secret" how the folk-rock and other folk elements in those isles are not considered even more progressive, than the rock music ever was, which is a shame ... these folk traditions are insane in their variations and styles, and there is nothing to compare it to in that area.  AS an European, it is no secret to me how much classical music influenced the Italian Progressive Music scene. Likewise in America, how the "Blues" and "Jazz" came to influence it as well ... which, btw, is "black music history" in America ... which would give our discussion yet another point of view that is very difficult to trace on a piece of paper!

For "Progressive" music to make a stand, and come up in the annals and history of music, and not be regarded as just another overblown pop song, these are the discussions that are necessary, and the one "scene" that is very well defined, believe it or not, will always be "krautrock", because it came out of a couple of music schools, and was not, necessarily, just another social or psychological event -- when much of Europe, England and America were severely affected by the Vietnam war protests, which became an excuse for change in America, and resulted in a lot of un-necessary and brutal confrontations -- which were described musically by many of our favorite musicians in all of these countries ... much of which is considered to have helped give rise to a lot of this music, because of the "depth" of the feelings, which were decidedly more than most "pop musiK".

Is today better than yesterday? Or vice versa?

NO.

People are people, and creativity was there before and is here today!

Do you PREFER yesterday or today, is a completely different discussion, since some folks like the ELP loudness assaults on organ and synth, but hate the loud guitar on a DT or other band! What's the difference? None for me ... it's all "interpretation" of their themes and ideals and visions.

AND, most importantly, we are all becoming the "historians" that are helping define an element that started out of the social and popular medium, whereas most "arts" were always defined by the upper class that frequented those things. THIS, in itself, is one of the biggest changes in the arts in the 20th century and will change the definitions of all arts forever!

YOU, are doing this music a favor ... as is someone like DEAN by seeing those links ... and thanks for mentioning it. makes me proud ... we're not wasting our time in this life!

Edited by moshkito - February 02 2015 at 09:14

Svetonio wrote: jayem wrote: There are many tracks that can be called prog that wouldn't launch a new genre by themselves, because you'd say "this is psyche inventive classic oriented" this or that. Then there would be THE first one that'd have you say "now this clearly defines a new genre" (for many, me included, ITCOTCK would be it). there was e.g. Music In A Doll's House  the album by English band Family released in 1968.

'Touch' is a perfect example for me of old prog/psych /proto prog... whatever you want to call it .....that evokes memories and associations. I can recall buying it in the fall of 1970 on vinyl of course...about 2 years after it was first recorded. Many ..many.. memories of playing that one late at night in my apartment at college while we were all in an altered state of consciousness.

'PiphanyRambler wrote: Gerinski wrote: moshkito wrote: Is today better than yesterday? Or vice versa? NO. People are people, and creativity was there before and is here today! Do you PREFER yesterday or today, is a completely different discussion. This is not necessarily a valid argument. Things, even creative ones, can be better or worse in different places or epochs, and saying so must not be considered a sin (I mean talking in general of course, not about particular individuals). Carpenters were much better decades, perhaps even centuries ago than modern carpenters, you rarely find a carpenter today which can sculpt the amazing carvings or furniture which were commonplace in wealthy mansions from 1 or 2 centuries ago. Or many would say that (in terms of quality, surely not quantity), painters from the Romantic period were better than modern painters, or that composers from the Baroque period were better than modern classical music composers. Evolution of culture and technology can result in some skills becoming rare (probably replaced by others, but which are not the same). I will not make an argument towards either Classic or Modern Prog here, I just want to point that your argument is not valid per se, it is perfectly possible for today being better than yesterday or the opposite, even if we talk about creative activities such as creating music. I think it becomes a very valid argument if we add the fact that art is part of the culture and the mentality of a certain time and place. Isn't it wrong to judge older art by modern standards?

 

Edited by moshkito - February 02 2015 at 14:38