Keyboards/Electric Guitars?

I love both keyboards and guitar.. evidently.  My favorite bands are ELP and Pink Floyd.  Even tho I love the analog syth sounds from Keith in the 70s, I'm not so big on the Hammond.  However, his piano work is absolutely beautiful.  I get all excited when Greg's roadie comes out and takes the bass off him and helps him put on the electric... it doesn't happen that often with ELP, but when it does.. .stand back!! 

And Gilmour... no one plays like that... emotion flows from his guitar.  He has a fluid quality about his sound... it flows thru your soul....

Trouserpress wrote: James Lee wrote: Worthy of debate, I guess. You don't agree that progressive rock is part of rock and roll? Or that there are recognizable similarities in the sound of many of the bands that are called prog- in fact, enough of a similarity that they can be loosely classified with the prog label? I would say both of those are almost a given, but I'm interested in hearing your alternative thoughts. This would be true if we were discussing Symphonic Prog, but I take a much wider view of progressive rock. Personally one of my favourite subgenres is Canterbury - a label which incorporates everything from Gong to National Health! A lot of prog is grounded in classical, jazz or folk rather than rock (and other genres, but those constitute the main four branches, in my opinion) so I refuse to talk about progressive music as an extension of rock and roll when so much of it has little to do with it. Secondly, a prog "sound"... Not in my books! Out of my record collection, 90% of which could be classified prog, not many of the represented groups have a similar sound (which is the very reason I love them), so I would say it's very wrong to generalise as you have done. Really, is there any comparison to be drawn between, say, Genesis and Magma or Pink Floyd and Zappa? So, not "a given" at all, really.

It's a good point- Canterbury especially is probably more related to fusion jazz than to rock and roll. And prog in general is far more varied than most genres- I never meant to imply that all prog bands sounded similar, simply that they are more similar to each other than they are to bands outside the prog genre (i.e., when you hear a new band you can usually tell whether they can be called prog or not). I guess this leads right back to the whole 'what is prog' question, which is right up there with 'who killed Kennedy' on the unanswerable questions list.

However, I maintain that most of the bands we call prog derive their basis from the fundamental rock and roll structure- vocals, guitar, bass, and drums (a common element between Genesis, Magma, Pink Floyd and Zappa, for example). What they do with it, or add to it, is what makes each band unique- but they start from the same foundation.

Edited by James Lee

Keyboards

James Lee wrote: Worthy of debate, I guess. You don't agree that progressive rock is part of rock and roll? Or that there are recognizable similarities in the sound of many of the bands that are called prog- in fact, enough of a similarity that they can be loosely classified with the prog label? I would say both of those are almost a given, but I'm interested in hearing your alternative thoughts.

This would be true if we were discussing Symphonic Prog, but I take a much wider view of progressive rock. Personally one of my favourite subgenres is Canterbury - a label which incorporates everything from Gong to National Health! A lot of prog is grounded in classical, jazz or folk rather than rock (and other genres, but those constitute the main four branches, in my opinion) so I refuse to talk about progressive music as an extension of rock and roll when so much of it has little to do with it.

Secondly, a prog "sound"... Not in my books! Out of my record collection, 90% of which could be classified prog, not many of the represented groups have a similar sound (which is the very reason I love them), so I would say it's very wrong to generalise as you have done. Really, is there any comparison to be drawn between, say, Genesis and Magma or Pink Floyd and Zappa?

So, not "a given" at all, really.

I can take or leave guitar in prog

I love organ driven sounds,progs nothing without a keyboard.

I`m a guitar head. I love Emerson`s keyboard freakouts though.

Reed - Is that the version off "Keys to ascension" - Bluddy hell - First time I heard Wakemans Solo - I thought "Keith Emerson - Eat your heart out" - It's got to be one of the most OTT solos EVER !!!!!

Lifeson, Latimer, Gilmour, Howe, Page, Andy Powell, Ted Turner and Peter Frampton....all shaped my music tastes when growing up.

Although I love ELP the majority of bands that I'm into are guitar led.

i chose keyboards, but:

can you imagine marillion, iq, genesis, yes, gentle giant, camel without guitars? NO!

I'm a guitar nut. For the most part, IMO, the best moments in prog revolve around the guitar. Something about Gilmour's lead in SOYCD or Holdsworth's intro to U.K.'s Nevermore, just strike a chord in my chest that no keyboard ever has.