Why is prog rock always called "snooty"?

Well, I don't know if it's "liberals", M27Barney. ;-) (But that's just my opinion. ;-) )

August 65 here. ;-)

The problem with the internet is that people form an opinion and then go off and find evidence which supports that opinion, rather than get a proper overall view. No matter how deluded your opinion, you can also find other people who share your view, so,there being strength in numbers, that makes you correct and with the ability to shout down anyone who disagrees with you. 

When you look at music: music is something which inspires and moves most people. The problem is that music can't really be easily measured - football inspires people and you can measure that (to an extent) with scores and statistics, but music is more difficult. Especially if you're a non musician, and let's face it, most people aren't musicians. 

As a musician, I used to think that music COULD be measured - based on technical expertise, creativity - arrogant of me as a musician, it can't. Music evokes feelings and emotions: if I get off on a Ginger Baker drum solo and someone gets off on Boney M, it doesn't make Ginger Baker better than Boney M. It just appeals to me more. I can argue that I've heard more accomplished and complicated music than Boney M, but it's not, at the end of the day, a technical exercise. It's just that some people prefer prog rock and some people prefer country and western. There you go. 

Prog rock. Prog rock is - like all other musical terms - a manufactured term. Someone does something different, music press labels it as "progressive" - before long, other bands get the idea that if you have a Mellotron or do a ten minute drum solo in a weird time signature, it can be marketed as "progressive rock". It's pitched as being a new form of musical art which must be listened to to be appreciated - "musician's music" - hence for the elite or the cognoscenti. If you can't sink that amount of time into appreciating it, go off and listen to Marc Bolan / Slade etc etc. 

So it's sort of viewed as a kind of wine snob music. "Oh, this might be a bit complicated for you." Hence snooty.

Matter of fact, if your brain works that way and you like it, well. Your brain works that way and you like it. It's music hence art, there are a few rules to music and they can be broken, if you know what you're doing. 

But. Someone elses' opinion is of no interest to me whatsoever. I know what art I like, music I like, it's my personal taste, I'm really not interested in anyone elses' opinion, they're entitled to it, if our opinions coincide, fine, if not, not really important.

I'm not going to tell them what to like, I expect the same back, but welcome to the internet, which is how people think in private (but can now harp on about it in public under internet anonymity) - that seems to be how the internet works, leave your manners at the door. 

Davesax1965 wrote: Well, I don't know if it's "liberals", M27Barney. ;-) (But that's just my opinion. ;-) ) August 65 here. ;-) The problem with the internet is that people form an opinion and then go off and find evidence which supports that opinion, rather than get a proper overall view. No matter how deluded your opinion, you can also find other people who share your view, so,there being strength in numbers, that makes you correct and with the ability to shout down anyone who disagrees with you.  When you look at music: music is something which inspires and moves most people. The problem is that music can't really be easily measured - football inspires people and you can measure that (to an extent) with scores and statistics, but music is more difficult. Especially if you're a non musician, and let's face it, most people aren't musicians.  As a musician, I used to think that music COULD be measured - based on technical expertise, creativity - arrogant of me as a musician, it can't. Music evokes feelings and emotions: if I get off on a Ginger Baker drum solo and someone gets off on Boney M, it doesn't make Ginger Baker better than Boney M. It just appeals to me more. I can argue that I've heard more accomplished and complicated music than Boney M, but it's not, at the end of the day, a technical exercise. It's just that some people prefer prog rock and some people prefer country and western. There you go.  Prog rock. Prog rock is - like all other musical terms - a manufactured term. Someone does something different, music press labels it as "progressive" - before long, other bands get the idea that if you have a Mellotron or do a ten minute drum solo in a weird time signature, it can be marketed as "progressive rock". It's pitched as being a new form of musical art which must be listened to to be appreciated - "musician's music" - hence for the elite or the cognoscenti. If you can't sink that amount of time into appreciating it, go off and listen to Marc Bolan / Slade etc etc.  So it's sort of viewed as a kind of wine snob music. "Oh, this might be a bit complicated for you." Hence snooty. Matter of fact, if your brain works that way and you like it, well. Your brain works that way and you like it. It's music hence art, there are a few rules to music and they can be broken, if you know what you're doing.  But. Someone elses' opinion is of no interest to me whatsoever. I know what art I like, music I like, it's my personal taste, I'm really not interested in anyone elses' opinion, they're entitled to it, if our opinions coincide, fine, if not, not really important. I'm not going to tell them what to like, I expect the same back, but welcome to the internet, which is how people think in private (but can now harp on about it in public under internet anonymity) - that seems to be how the internet works, leave your manners at the door.

yeah, I have to agree. My feeling is that whatever I'm listening to and enjoying is such a private experience that anyone else liking or disliking my choice of music is quite inconsequential. Ditto for my opinions on what others enjoy. We're generally not listening to music together in a pub, for Christ's sake.

SteveG wrote: I'm not sure what type of Indian music these people gravitated to but it always featured sitar, sarangi and tablas. It must have been related to Ravi Shanker due to the George Harrison connection. They may not have really enjoyed it but I'm sure they thought that it was sooo cool!

Did someone mention Annie Haslam's "Dawn of Ananda"? Great album!

SteveG wrote: Psychedelic Paul wrote: Did someone mention Annie Haslam's "Dawn of Ananda"? Nope, you're just imagining things again.

rdenney wrote: rogerthat wrote: Spacegod87 wrote: In the words of my prog hating brother: "I get that they're good in a technical sense, but it sounds so pretentious and noodly." I mean, I can understand him to a certain point, even I've been listening to a 20+ minute song that I've loved for years and will find myself sometimes thinking, "God, these lyrics are a bit long-winded and bizarre.." I can definitely overlook the pretentiousness to appreciate the structure and emotions (you heard me) of a prog song, but it's understandable that others might not. Especially if you don't hear that kind of music a lot, it hits you hard in the beginning. I think sometimes the prog world fetishes the 20 min epics rather much.  I personally prefer 'long pieces' running up to 10-12 min.  Enough to go well beyond the confines of regular rock and roll and not so long that it overstays its welcome.  I may well be in the minority here but other than a few like CTTE/Echoes/Supper's Ready, my all time favourite prog tracks wouldn't be the epics but rather tracks like Starless, Cinema Show, South Side of Sky, Script for a Jester's Tear and, yeah, Natural Science since there's a poll going on with that track as one of the options.    Hmmm. In the classical world, a 20-minute work would be average. I think of the usual 3-minute pop song as having one thing to say. I think a song of 10 or 12 minutes ought to say more than one thing, or say one thing in interestingly various ways. An epic of 20+ minutes (which would not be epic at all in the classical world) should say several things, each with their own interesting variations.   The trend in modern classical music has been towards shorter forms, but I listen and think that the composer didn't have much to say, even if he said that little bit well. I find myself being unsatisfied by these short-form works.   What makes a work "noodly" is solo improvisation. Some of it is exciting, some not so much. But we can't blame a whole genre for poor execution thereof. But Johnny Ramone specifically said (in the excellent Ramones documentary) that they couldn't play those big guitar solos so they didn't. He also said that they just wanted to play music people could dance to. That's similar to the difference between a swing band, which specifically plays for dancing, and, say, a Dixieland band, that doesn't, even though both are jazz in the traditional sense. Or between ballet music and symphonic music, and they are quite different, even though the unfamiliar listener might not be able to distinguish the two.   What makes a work pretentious is when the artist obviously attributes greater meaning to the expression than the listener gleans from it. By that definition, prog has no corner on the pretentiousness market. For me, though, it's about the music, and I have a hard time understanding the words (the words themselves, not what they mean) so I don't even try. My wife sings along, but as an instrumentalist I never know the words so I hum along. So, if the words are pretentious, I don't know it. But I listen to many groups, and clearly they intend their words to have meaning on a deep philosophical plane. Usually, no matter what the genre, the words are the work of professional musicians who are nevertheless amateur philosophers and writers. This is as true for grand opera as it is for prog rock, etc. I mean, can anyone really take the mythology in Wagner's Der Ring die Nibelungen seriously? (Anna Russell had it right. And Peter Schickele.) That some listeners do find deep meaning in those words is fine, I suppose, and I'm probably being snooty when I roll my eyes (inwardly, of course). But I roll my eyes equally for those who apply deep meaning to Wagner's Ring and Anderson's Olias. Or any song by the Ramones, or Black Sabbath, or the Beatles, or even---yes even---Ian Anderson (whose words I do sing along to).   One word I see a lot here that I don't understand is "pompous". It is used variously has a pejorative, as a loving chide, or as a bona fide mark of quality. Is all music that uses orchestral forms "pompous"? Is all music with church organ pompous? To me, pompous describes music suitable for occasions of (perhaps artificially) high ritual and ceremony, and I rather doubt I would play many prog works on such occasions, but that's me.   Rick "preferring longer forms if they have a musical story to tell" Denney

Davesax1965 wrote: The problem with the internet is that people form an opinion and then go off and find evidence which supports that opinion, rather than get a proper overall view. No matter how deluded your opinion, you can also find other people who share your view, so,there being strength in numbers, that makes you correct and with the ability to shout down anyone who disagrees with you.  When you look at music: music is something which inspires and moves most people. The problem is that music can't really be easily measured - football inspires people and you can measure that (to an extent) with scores and statistics, but music is more difficult. Especially if you're a non musician, and let's face it, most people aren't musicians.  As a musician, I used to think that music COULD be measured - based on technical expertise, creativity - arrogant of me as a musician, it can't. Music evokes feelings and emotions: if I get off on a Ginger Baker drum solo and someone gets off on Boney M, it doesn't make Ginger Baker better than Boney M. It just appeals to me more. I can argue that I've heard more accomplished and complicated music than Boney M, but it's not, at the end of the day, a technical exercise. It's just that some people prefer prog rock and some people prefer country and western.