You don't listen to prog...

It's true. I mean sure people can get caught up in labels, but they really do serve a useful purpose. Even music without labels would be almost impossible to communicate...

"Hey man, I found a new band, you'd like them"
"What do they sound like?"
"They make, like, music, man. They sound like music."

You don't listen to prog... when your girlfriend threatens to withhold sex if she hears "Thick as a brick" one more time. Until she gives it up at least. Then you listen to the whole thing again. Start to finish.

It's interesting all the talk about listening hard to truly 'get' prog. Not just in this thread, but in general. Sure, some can be a little hard to get into at first, but there is a wealth of progressive music out there that is instantly gratifying, and with a sub-genre like fusion especially, I find myself enjoying new material a lot the first time round without actually making that much effort.

LastDaysofParadise wrote: I'm not necessarily talking about the physical act of listening to the music, I'm just saying that it's a genre that must be appreciated not just listened to casually.

If that's the case, yes, I appreciate it, but you must listen to appreciate music, so I would say I do both simultaneously.

Iron Nate wrote: You don't listen to prog... when your girlfriend threatens to withhold sex if she hears "Thick as a brick" one more time. Until she gives it up at least. Then you listen to the whole thing again. Start to finish.

Certainly it's much better if it's you who is hearing "thick as a brick" from the girl's lips. In my experience, telling girls "I'm a big, big boy" repeatedly didn't really get them in the mood either.

ExittheLemming wrote: LastDaysofParadise wrote: You appreciate it.    The implication here is that Prog is deeper, less accessible and therefore somehow BETTER than other styles of music by virtue of these characteristics ? The Long and Winding Road by the Beatles is quite simple harmonically and lyrically, but is capable of moving me to tears every time I hear it (Does that make it better or worse than Prog ?)

LastDaysofParadise wrote: ExittheLemming wrote: LastDaysofParadise wrote: You appreciate it.    The implication here is that Prog is deeper, less accessible and therefore somehow BETTER than other styles of music by virtue of these characteristics ? The Long and Winding Road by the Beatles is quite simple harmonically and lyrically, but is capable of moving me to tears every time I hear it (Does that make it better or worse than Prog ?) That's not what I'm trying to say at all. I'm merely implying that prog is more than just a form of music. Obviously it's music but the elements of it are very deep and rich. Of course there are other genres that are like this, but what I'm really getting at is that with prog it takes more than just an average listener to really get into the genre and to really appreciate it.

Define average listener.  And to expand a little, and in a somewhat different direction, on ExittheLemming's point, there are Beatles songs that are more involved than some stuff that passes for prog today and yet they were hugely successful.  I would say the same about Stevie Wonder's 70s output (his 80s stuff... ).  Another thing, I find Dave Brubeck's Time Out more immediate than a lot of prog per se, actually most prog, but the musicians's skills are fantastic, their playing expressive and rich in dynamics and the interaction between piano, saxophone and bass at levels of sophistication  you don't hear, again, in some of today's prog or even some of the old stuff. 

What I am trying to say is perhaps the depth of the music and/or the awareness of the listener are not directly linked to how immediate the music is (and this may in fact be related to the quality of the songwriting).   A lot of prog is not immediate and accessible BECAUSE it is not immediate and accessible.  With perseverance, it proves more rewarding than generic rock/metal music but you would also find some great jazz or classical music that requires less coming-to-terms with.  In essence, it is in the very nature of some prog rock that it would not be immediately appealing and would require getting around some quirks, that is just how the music is written...it may not have much to do with whether the listener is average.  Yes, a typical rock/metal listener who does not like songs exceeding 4-5 minutes of length would find it hard to sit through prog epics but is there something in that one of the great prog rock bands Gentle Giant didn't have their own CTTE or Supper's Ready?

LastDaysofParadise wrote: The Beatles got big because of those simple songs and catchy tunes. I can't really dwell deep into a conversation on them because I'm not well versed in their material, so I can't say that they did or did not have intricate songs.

Well, here's the catch...music can be catchy and easy to ABSORB while being full of intricacies within.   I heard this piece for the first time when I was 10.  I would revisit it when I was 16, somehow forgot about it for that much time , and it would take me no more than two listens to be able to enjoy it.  Again, this is certainly at least as involved as typical prog material:




I don't dispute that prog takes some coming to terms with.  I am trying to put forth my views on why that is the case and that is not necessarily completely tied in with the amount of complexity involved, at least that's my take.  It has more to do with that the emotional expression in prog is often not very direct (sometimes not very powerful either, sorry, has to be said).  It took me a lot of listening to get a complete handle on the piece I have linked here but the emotional thrust was more immediate and easier for me to relate to it and this let me get drawn more and more into the song.  Some of the well known prog rock bands are not very different...Yes, Genesis, ELP (ELP riding more on energy perhaps, but that nevertheless is a good hook too), perhaps this may be why they are relatively popular in prog circles.  Much of the second tier or below of prog though is not so immediate and it's possible if I had been introduced to prog through those, I might have not been attracted so strongly to prog as I was through listening to these bands.  Now because of the familiarity level established through listening to lot of prog, I am patient enough to persevere with prog because the chances of my liking it are generally high.    This might PARTLY explain why jazz or classical listeners may not often be patient with prog because handling complexity would not generally be a problem for them. 

rogerthat wrote:  It took me a lot of listening to get a complete handle on the piece I have linked here but the emotional thrust was more immediate and easier for me to relate to it and this let me get drawn more and more into the song.  Some of the well known prog rock bands are not very different...

rogerthat wrote: LastDaysofParadise wrote: This is what I've been trying to say. I will agree with your comment that not all prog bands (or artists in general) are this way. I suppose saying 'prog' as a whole is appreciated by us wasn't what I should have said. It's really that the prog we listen to individually is something we appreciate for what it is because not everyone digs it. In all fairness, prog is hard to generalize anyway.   Anyhow, yes, the thing that probably makes prog appreciation tricky is it's a whimsical business and very often, lot of people won't get it, not because it's terribly involved but because the expression being projected in it may be elusive to many.  I don't know if that's a strength or weakness, I mean hunting for the 'meaning' rather than it being evident immediately is fun in a way , but it seems to explain why prog doesn't have wide appeal.