Ozric Tentacles (maybe not as much as some people seem to think though)

Rush (after roll the bones)

The Flower Kings (to some degree)

I know I've heard others but can't really think of them off the top of my head. 

Yep - great, aren't they?

 

You're right! Ozric Tentacles' albums all sound the same to me too.

 

Another band whose albums all sound the same to me are Acid Mothers Temple & the Melting Paraiso U.F.O.

REM changed a lot over the course of time. So did the Beatles and probably Green Day. The others I can see though. I would also add Iron Maiden.

Yes they are. More younger prog fans need to discover them too. They have sort of been lost in the sauce. Plus they need a new album.

Well, jeez, you could probably say the first several Black Sabbath albums sounded a lot alike too then. I think the Moodies were at least as diverse as BS though.

good list plus--
 

I tend to like bands were each album stands out---

When I was growing up just about everyone seemed stylistically  consistent but I remember thinking that Genesis hardly ever veered from a basic sound. Tull and VDGG were also the same album after album.

I believe Gentle Giant are a really bad example but hey ho. This could become the ultimate trolling thread. I give it about 3 pages max before its locked by admin.

I'd vote Dream Theater.  Endless, high-speed noodling doesn't equate good prog.

Anyway I think most of today´s bands albums sounds the same album by album. That´s because today´s bands can´t take the risk they fans get mad, if they change their music or sounds. Really any band of today doesn´t come my mind that has changed it music radically after earlier album, Knifeworld latest has more organic sounds than two earlier and that´s just a good thing, also music gone more to the seventies style from more heavy stuff.

Came here to say DT as well.

 

I read an interview with Angus Young once when the interviewer said to him "what do you say to the people who say that AC/DC have made the same album 12 times?"

 

His response was something like "No, I won't have that, that's outrageous. We've made the same album 13 times".

Some of the nominations here make me wonder whether people can name a band of which all albums do not sound the same.

Interestingly when reading the thread title I had the same first thought as most (?) others, namely the Ozrics. Meaning at least I like them enough to have checked, well, a good number.

I disagree even with DT. They were trying new things up to Octavarium.

Most albums post 2005 are a hit and miss with me. So post Octavarium music, I agree.

Well, some of the music on TLLDOB was written around the time of the debut album (I think it was Anyway and possibly some others).

Thank You Scientist have more or less made the same album 3 times, just refining their core sound with each one. Another case of the band being quite good regardless

There is the Vapor Trails remixed version though, which was done to "fix" the production issues. 

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/rush-remix-their-polarizing-album-vapor-trails-premiere-101247/" rel="nofollow - https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/rush-remix-their-polarizing-album-vapor-trails-premiere-101247/  

 

So far, we've had "what's so good about The Flower Kings and King Crimson?" along with  "albums that all sound the same." What's next? List all the ways that Phil Collins ruined prog? Band's whose members look old and can barely carry their instruments? I can't wait.

On it! 

progaardvark wrote: And then when a band suddenly changes their sound, you'll all be poo-pooing about how inconsistent they are....

I don't think I have seen much of this on this forum.

Solid thread topic as far as I'm concerned, with some interesting (if crazy) contributions. (Jethro Tull! King Crimson!   The Beatles! )

Now to the ridiculous notion that all Gentle Giant albums sound the same - listen to the debut, then Free Hand and then Civilian and they sound like three different bands to me!!!

Did anybody mention Dire Straits? 

 

Good god, the list is endless.

Well even the Ramones adopted a new wave sound at some point and incorporated keyboards. I'm not sure how much of their material was like this but I know that at least some was different than their initial punk sound.

Also, no one has mentioned any of the heartland rockers such as Bob Segar, JCM, Tom Petty etc. Tom Petty in particular had a very uniform sound throughout for the most part imo(with the exception of "don't come around here no more").

Might as well throw ELP in there, 'cause it all sounds like the same old prog...

Like where's the vaporwave breakdownz?

Where's the "Featuring Kanye" vocoder guest-rapping?

How about the tropical house chiptune choruses?

Where's the bubblegum-bass drops?

 We are but a ghetto of aging male Prog fans, drifting through life, griping and groaning all the way!  

Some of the repetition relates to the fact that the same band personnel recorded multiple records....material in the studio that is not used on the current release is often saved & recycled for a later release, usually with some updating.  

Also, bands often feel pressured by labels & fans to chug out a repetition of a previous hot LP/CD.  Wakeman pushed for a followup to CTTE that would be song-based, rather than the monstrous epic of TFTO.  

I give Anderson a lot of credit for breaking the mold and throwing the band in the deep end of the pool on that one, it remains controversial to this day, which is the sign of true innovation.  

Case in point, KC, like how dare they experiment.

I do think of AC DC and Motorhead as well as a bunch of extreme metal bands (and even Iron Maiden to some extent) when it comes to making the same album over and over but not any prog rock band.  None that I know of.  A lot of bands may stick to the boundaries of a certain style but that's not what I'd consider making the same album.   Same album is when the band recycles so many licks you have trouble distinguishing the songs or remembering which one was on which album.  

lol, later Beatles made more strides between albums than some prog rock bands.

This has quickly morphed into a thread where people simply list the bands they hate and therefore  didn't listen to properly and have no idea in reality whether their albums sound the same or even what their albums sound like.  I am not saying all posts are like that, but you can clearly see it with some of the choices.

Apparently, the departure of the first drummer as well as Phil Shulman don't mean nothing to some people. Besides, how is it possible to even imagine a song like Just The Same or Free Hand on the Three Friends album?  I will tell you what "sounds the same" about Gentle Giant; it's Derek Shulman's terrible, one dimensional vocals.  They should have done something about it.  But that would be like saying all Radiohead albums sound the same because Yorke whines away on all of them.

Once many of the legendary seventies bands found their groove they tended to stick to it until punk told them they had to change.

I don't count FGTR for obvious reasons. Genesis in the PG era from Trespass to Lamb were very consistent sound wise although Eno's influenced did change the sound of Lamb so I concede that one. After that there were some changes mainly due to personell changes.

Tull hardly changed from TAAB through the next 4 or 5 albums and then punk bit

Yes through The Yes Album to GFTO likewise

ELP dived off the end of the cliff with Works Volume One . That was a real change but no one liked it!

I think Floyd certainly achieved more evolution than many of their seventies counterparts but again like ELP they ran into problems with Animals which was a major bone of contention.

I am very puzzled though why anyone thinks Gentle Giant albums sound the same. To their credit they carried on changing and evolving from album to album from 1970-1976. This is one of the biggest reasons they failed to achieve commercial success in the seventies and are now much more highly regarded. IMO

indeed

What I don´t want to become is a bitter, cynical old man. I´d rather stay naive and believe people may change better some day.

Have to say about Nirvana´s three albums, that they´re all quite different both musically and in their sounds. First is really punky, second pop album with very clear production and the last somewhere between those two (typical Steve Albini sounds).

http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7439" rel="nofollow - Distorted Harmony has become much of a favourite band for me. Three excellent albums. No change whatsoever.

I actually think each Genesis album (like most albums of the analogue age) has its own distinctive sound. which is the main reason that I don't believe "Twilight Alehouse" was recorded during the "Foxtrot" sessions as Wikipedia says. the sound of "Twilight Alehouse" is the sound of "Nursery Cryme", not the sound of "Foxtrot"

You don't really believe him do you? 

it is not the rendition; it is the sound. as I said, all analogue albums have a specific sound. this is due to the circumstances under which they were recorded. therefore it is in my opinion impossible that "Twilight Alehouse" was recorded during the "Foxtrot" sessions. if it were it would have the same overall sound of "Foxtrot" that each single track of that album has.

I also disagree about the composition sounding like "Trespass"

Not necessarily old, but aging.  Bob Fripp is still lighting up the amps at his age, I'm more than happy to hang around for a few more years!  (I'm 64 y.o. BTW).

Interesting. Kind of like Yes with "america."

try the following: create a CD of your own consisting of "Foxtrot" with the addition of "Twilight Alehouse". "Twilight Alehouse" sticks out like a sore thumb there due to the sound. then do the same with "Nursery Cryme". the track fits perfectly there. the only explanation for this is that "Twilight Alehouse" was NOT recorded during the "Foxtrot" sessions (if it were it would sound that way) but during the "Nursery Cryme" sessions.

you can actually make this experiment with any analogue album. add a track from album "A" of a certain band to album "B" of that band; you will definitely here the difference in production. this is due to the different parameters that existed during the recording of these analogue albums. with modern digital production the effect is much less pronounced

Such repetition -- it's really lame!

But if we changed one spot on that same ol' dog --

Holy sh*t! They're no longer prog!

dougmcauliffe wrote: Genesis just shouldn’t be mentioned in this thread, the two most similar albums are wind and wuthering and ATTWT and those are still quite different. Genesis changed probably more than any prog band besides king crimson.

 

The trouble with this thread is that there is no distinction between sound, style or approach. Genesis never made any particularly remarkable changes and mostly just trundled out the same thing album on album until their most radical change that was on ABACAB . Genesis are one of the most mimicked bands for a reason.

Yes and Tull virtually became a parody of themselves and Rush only made changes on Permanent Waves onwards

King Crimson certainly changed a lot and that was partly because of multiple line up changes and Fripp regarding the whole thing more as a project rather than a band.

The band that everybody loves to hate actually made the most radical changes despite it always being the same 3 guys. 

Emerson ,Lake and Palmer (1970)

Brain Salad Surgery (1973)

Works Volume One (1977)

Love Beach (1978)

they were not frightened of changing sounds style , equipment , using an orchestra etc. The changes across those 4 albums easily outstrip any of the more vaunted seventies bands.

Hmm, that's an odd one. I'm listening to the version on Genesis Archive and the snare drum sound is clearly different to the Nursery Cryme sound that sounds like someone hitting cardboard boxes with a wet kipper. My feeling is Twilight Alehouse is more similar to Can_Utility than anything on Nursery Cryme.