Neo-progressive, new guidelines
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Internal news
Forum Description: Stay informed about the latest updates regarding the site
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57529
Printed Date: November 26 2024 at 18:44
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Neo-progressive, new guidelines
Posted By: Windhawk
Subject: Neo-progressive, new guidelines
Date Posted: April 28 2009 at 22:22
|
Some news from the Neo-Progressive team: We have worked out a new definition for the genre, which have been officially approved and has been implemented. In case anyone is interested, our redefined guidelines goes as follows: ---------------------------------- Neo-Progressive rock (more commonly “Neo-Prog”) is a subgenre of Progressive Rock that originally was used to describe artists strongly influenced by the classic symphonic prog bands that flourished during the 1970s. At the beginning of the neo-prog movement, the primary influence was early to mid-70's Genesis. Debate over when Neo-Prog actually came into being often takes place, with some asserting it began with Marillion's Script for a Jester’s Tear in 1983. Others contend it began with Twelfth Night at the dawn of the 80s, while some even suggest the popular symphonic prog band Genesis gave rise to Neo-Prog with their 1976 album, A Trick of the Tail. If one analyses the progressive movement just before 1980, then some albums which heavily influenced the Neo-Prog movement easily come to mind: Steve Hackett - Spectral Mornings, Genesis - Wind & Wuthering, Genesis - And Then There Were Three, Genesis - Seconds Out, Saga - Saga, all the Camel albums between Breathless and The Single Factor included, and some Eloy's albums, especially Silent Cries And Mighty Echoes. This new form of progressive rock originated in the UK, and is most strongly associated with bands such as Marillion, Pendragon and IQ; and while theatrical stage antics were a part of the live performances of many artists exploring this subset of the progressive rock genre it's the musical elements that are key to the genre; typified by the use of atmospheric guitar and synth soloing with symphonic leanings, with a tendency towards floating synth layers and dreamy soloing. An additional trait is the use of modern synths rather than vintage analogue synths and keyboards. The main reasons for Neo-Progressive artists to be separated from the ones exploring Symphonic Prog in the first place are the above, as well as a heavier emphasis on song-form and melody than some of their earlier symphonic counterparts. As time went by other artists appeared that also deviated from the norms created by the classic wave of progressive rock artists in the 70's. The late 70's had given the world punk music; the 80's gave the world new wave; and the 90's grunge. These, as well as other forms, had a tremendous amount of influence outside of the progressive rock realm. The advent of the modern synth also inspired artists like Tomita, Vangelis and Kitaro to explore dreamier musical works. These and other forms of more or less newly made musical genres influenced artists exploring progressive rock as well. Although many artists did so within the framework of 70's progressive rock, more and more artists developed a sound and style so heavily influenced by these more recent musical developments that categorizing them within the existing subgenres of progressive rock became increasingly difficult. While the Neo-Progressive genre initially consisted of artists exploring a modernized version of Symphonic Prog, these days artists coined as Neo-Progressive cover a multitude of musical expressions, where the common denominator is the inclusion - within a progressive rock framework - of musical elements developed just prior to and after 1980. The Neo-Progressive genre in it's refined form thus covers a vast musical territory, to some extent covering all existing subsets of progressive rock and also searching out towards genres as different as new age on one side and punk and metal on the other. Opening paragraphs written by Stonebeard, Cygnus X-2, Greenback Revised, edited and refined April 2009 by windhawk, The Doctor and E-Dub ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Replies:
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: April 28 2009 at 22:29
Very nice work guys. Clappies for all of you!
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: April 28 2009 at 22:41
 ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: April 29 2009 at 13:11
|
Excellent work! ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: DamoXt7942
Date Posted: April 29 2009 at 17:45
|
Thanks Neo-team for making progress in our prog thought and knowledge. Great work!
------------- http://www.facebook.com/damoxt7942" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: May 19 2009 at 10:00
|
Good! -------------  |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 19 2009 at 11:47
 ------------- What? |
Posted By: Dr Clovenhoof
Date Posted: June 29 2009 at 18:02
|
Thanks for this, its a valiant effort to identify some common ground in a diverse sub-genre.
------------- Existence is no advantage! |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: June 30 2009 at 02:59
Thanks 
-Joel ------------- 
|
Posted By: DaysBeforeTomorrow
Date Posted: June 30 2009 at 10:22
| Now I don't know who I am! Are Days Before Tomorrow still neo-prog in your book, or are we something different? Somebody tell me just who I am :-p. |
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: June 30 2009 at 10:44
|
In terms of stylistic expression, your musical style was thought to fit marginally better in the Neo-Prog category than in the others. A few years ago it would probably have been labelled art rock. Feel free to contact any of the other genre specialist teams if you want them to consider moving you to their part of the progarchives - click the genre names on the frontpage, and the team members of that particular genre can be found at the bottom of the page; with a menu giving the choice to send a personal message :-) ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: DaysBeforeTomorrow
Date Posted: June 30 2009 at 10:55
| Nah, we're totally fine with neo-prog, even if our influences were more 80s than 70s. :-) |
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: June 30 2009 at 11:33
|
Corresponds nicely with paragraphs 3 - 6 of the new Neo definition, actually ;-)
------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: DaysBeforeTomorrow
Date Posted: June 30 2009 at 12:05
| Yes it does :-). |
Posted By: clarke2001
Date Posted: June 30 2009 at 19:08
|
I salute the expanded Neo Prog, but I must ask one question: how to carefully allocate ehm... interchangeability with Crossover Prog? I mean, in the very core Neo Prog is a form of rock music often resembling its Symphonic Prog origins in dense and compact form with high production values. In essence, Crossover Prog is Art Rock often stepping in more traditional pop rock structures. They're both having high degree of eclecticism. Nowadays they're both sharing (as other forms of prog as well) a rich pedigree of potential influences, varying from punk& new wave, AOR, metal to new age and electronica. As music is constantly evolving, subgenres are spreading away from the core. I'm asking this because my knowledge of the genre is anything but deep, and I would appreciate any answers. Please keep in mind this is by no means a negative criticism - in fact, this widened definition is a great answer to all neo-haters that Neo-Prog is one of the many members of large Prog family, constantly changing, evolving and pushing forward |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 30 2009 at 19:41
|
That's a fair question Moris - there is a small degree of overlap between Neo-Prog and Crossover but the two subgenres remain rooted in their "parent" subgenres (for want of a better terminology) and are used to maintain that seperation between them. To date the interchangeability has generally flowed in one direction (from Neo to Xover) governed by the "mainstream" quotient of the music (eg Gazpacho)
The eclecticism of both subs is from non-Prog sources rather than Prog sources so it is the "prog" element that defines where any artist should reside, not the punk, new wave, AOR, metal etc. elements. Therefore any symphonic influence would probably push the addition towards Neo rather than Xover.
------------- What? |
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: June 30 2009 at 23:21
|
Generally, I'd push music with more typical mainstream musical tendencies over to the Crossover team myself. But there's no denying the fact that part of the reason for the definition change here was to be able to include bands that fell between the cracks - artists generally thought to belong here that due to one reason or another isn't seen to belong in the other subs. We will usually take them rather than witness prolonged sessions of pass the ball.
------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 01 2009 at 04:28
|
I'd also like to mention that it was good you changed the Marillion entry... -------------
|
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: July 01 2009 at 19:58
|
next step - getting neo prog the respect it deserves !
------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: July 03 2009 at 03:34
|
While I appreciated all of the work the neo-prog team has done on this, I think the new definition goes way too far in grasping back to the roots in symphonic and does not go far enough acknowledging the harder edge of neo-prog (i.e. Pallas, and a shout out to Triumph [even though they are in prog-related.]) ------------- 
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: July 03 2009 at 04:13
|
Actually, the old definition had stronger ties grasping back to symphonic than the new one. The opening three paragraphs of the new one are more or less unchanged from the past version; while the latter three replaces paragraphs detailing what was outlined in the first three with descriptions that opens up quite a lot of new ground/new possibilities for the genre. Including what has been coined Nu-prog (sic) by some. ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: Passionist
Date Posted: July 05 2009 at 04:15
| I'd like to thank you for the hard work you have done. I really love to be a part of a community that does such a great favor to what I feel so passionate about. And finally I have a way of reasoning my preferences to my female friends the way they themselves will better understand. Wish I myself had had a part in doing that, though you seem to have managed it all fine yourselves. Nice job guys. |
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: July 05 2009 at 12:05
|
Would the genre get more respect if we found a thousand unknown obscure Neo bands ? Sometimes I wonder if that's pre-requisite for admittance in to that special club of "artistes" . ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: ProgressivexGrooves
Date Posted: July 21 2009 at 22:11
|
Dear Windhawk and Neo Prog team . Thanks for this inspiring read - keep up the good work !  ------------- Progressive x Grooves ..... bridging both styles ! |
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: July 21 2009 at 22:33
Thanks for the feedback - it is appreciated :-) ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
ProgressivexGrooves wrote:Posted By: sussexbowler
Date Posted: July 23 2009 at 04:51
|
Utter rubbish I'd say. Neo-prog is based on early Marillion, and when I say early I mean pre-Misplaced child which was less extreme and more mainstream (ie Pop). And early Marillion was based on early Genesis, which definately pre-dates 'Trick of the tail'. I get fed-up hearing Fish/Marillion soundalikes, it's time to move on and thankfully I think we have. Out of the 'top 20' I can definately say that;- Galahad - Empires never last Sylvan - Posthumous silence Pallas - The dreams of men ...are not Fish/Marillion soundalikes. I know that Magenta and Frost* are equally not, but then again they shouldn't be in the top 20 anyway... (The song Envy by Magenta - from Seven - is an Entangled copy, but despite that it is totally, totally brilliant. Pity about the rest of the album...) In a way, Marillion shouldn't be in this group. They are the standard that others are aiming for. Seasons End is by far a better album than any of the copyists have achieved. It doesn't feature in the list... (Strange, Easter is another Entangled copy. Again though, totally brilliant!) Okay, you've got it. I'm fed up hearing Fish/Marillion soundalikes. I think that they've held back the genre. What about The Flower kings? Because they are labelled as Symphonic Prog they have to mix it with the big boys like Genesis and Yes. That seems hardly fair, because they are plying their trade in the Neo-Prog era. Their last two albums, Paradise Hotel and The sum of no evil should definately be in the Neo-Prog top 20 by my reckoning, and V by Spocks Beard too. Personally, I think that Neo-prog should be represented by bands that took up the Prog mantle in the nineties and noughties, and have taken it to where it is now. Yes, Entangled is from A trick of the tail, but surely the real flavour of Neo-prog was defined in an era before this. rumeni. |
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: July 23 2009 at 05:22
Personally I'd love to have more of the acts that took up the prog mantle in the 90's and noughties listed as neo - but that isn't my call. But as for additions to the genre after this revision, you might want to take a listen to Chest Rockwell, Slow Motion Reign and Fractal. I believe we have samples of all the acts on their artists pages here as well. I can guarantee that you won't find much Fishy or Gabrielly there *s* ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: DaysBeforeTomorrow
Date Posted: July 23 2009 at 09:43
|
Fractal is about as far away from neo-prog as you can get, though. They are not melodic prog in the same way as Marillion-influenced bands. They're much more like King Krimson. |
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: July 23 2009 at 10:38
|
No protests from me on that one. Most people seem to think that they should reside in Eclectic; and the Eclectic team here have a standing offer to move the band over to their part of the archives ;-) For me it is most important that the band is in the databse here though *s* ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: DaysBeforeTomorrow
Date Posted: July 23 2009 at 11:21
| Eclectic definitely applies to Fractal :-p. |
Posted By: Quasar
Date Posted: August 10 2009 at 17:52
|
One one hand, I am happy that the support for prog music is there, where would we be without it!
But, on the other hand.....the Neo-Prog thing is getting to be a "has to sound like Marillion" genre. This is unhealthy, while flattering to Marillion of course, but Fish, for one, was a great force in continuing prog music in the 80s, not just for himself, but for all prog bands.
Why can't we just drop the genres, and just talk about the bands? Especially if they do something new (which is what progressive is supposed to mean)!
Or better still, bring back the term Progressive. So 'Prog' would mean bands that sound like they're heavily influenced by what went before, and 'Progressive' would mean bands that are out there, doing something new?
But most of all, I don't want to diminish the efforts of those who contribute!
Keith Turner
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: August 10 2009 at 22:16
Agree. The new Neo definition is actually some giant steps away from that one. As far as the subgenres are concerned they'll probably stay - we have many and most prog sites operate with even more of them (believe it or not). They should be thought of as more guides than rules cast in stone though; so that new fans of the genre won't be overly confused by checking out a musical genre containing acts as different as Stanley Clarke, Cynic and Camel - to name but a few contrasting artists :-) ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: Quasar
Date Posted: August 11 2009 at 02:40
I, for one, am beginning to feel like a piece of meat on the grocery store shelf. Our "prog" music has to be neatly packaged, pre-defined and properly labeled, to meet consumer need, or else no-one will get to hear it.
 We'll never be Yes, Genesis, Rush or....Marillion, etc. They already exist, what's the point?
Keith Turner
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: August 11 2009 at 03:56
|
I can understand and sympathize with those thoughts. But such categories have always been in place in music as far as I know. It was easier in the 70's of course, although it was somewhat confusing to find out what bands were art rock, prog rock, symphonic rock, pomp, AOR or hard rock.
Such subdivisions are really not vital - most people say "I like this music" and don't think about classifications. But the art of getting people to listen to new music in the first place creates a need for some sort of system; so that those looking for new music know where to look to find something there is a chance they will like.
And love it or loathe it - I have yet to find a system that works better in the long run than the one we use here; or similar systems used on other music fan sites which are pretty similar to this system. Minor variations of course but the same general theme applies; either in form of pre-defined descriptions or descriptive terms used when a band or an album is presented. ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: Quasar
Date Posted: August 12 2009 at 00:05
|
Well, of course, I can't look at it from a prog fans point of view, and I can see that it helps to narrow the search, I do see that. It's probably inevitable that sub-genres appear.
But.......it's also (maybe) encouraging listeners to avoid some genres, when there could be something there that they would like?
From a bands point of view though, our problem is "who" puts the bands in those genres, I'm fine with bad reviews, after all, any opinion is to encouraged, but we (for example) get called "Neo Prog" all the time, just because we started in 1979 along with Marillion, IQ etc. Which makes me wonder if anyone really listens, and then if prog fans don't go for Neo Prog, they will be discouraged from trying.
It's quite common, I know lots of bands who try to get 'out' of the 'box' they've been put in by others. One could argue that the prog fans are the best 'experts' at defining what genre a band is in, as they are more subjective, and in essence it's almost the same as a review, so a band should be happy with that.
But it is a bit discouraging sometime to have any prog fans 'put off' from giving a band a chance because of genre classification, and - (God knows it's hard enough to find the money to continue making albums as it is, as it doesn't come from CD sales that's for sure) - most prog bands spend tens of thousands $ recording every album and any discouragement often hits hard, or do prog fans think we're all living like rock stars (even Marillion), really you all probably make much more that ANY of the prog bands (even Marillion).
So how about making as many sub-genres as pleases you, but, put prog bands into all sub-genres that could apply, instead of just one?
And....sorry if I sound like I'm whining! LOL! Just trying to put the 'other side' opinion in! I love prog music and have/will always do it even if eveyone hates us. LOL!
Keith Turner
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: August 12 2009 at 03:51
|
I find that it seems as soon as anything that might basically be considered Neo-Prog maybe toned down the keyboards and plays more mellotron, it's called symphonic prog. Honestly Neo-Prog gets pigeon-holed so much, especially when it's difference from so called "symphonic prog" is tenuous.
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Quasar
Date Posted: August 12 2009 at 04:20
Did it matter to you that the bands were art rock, prog rock, symphonic rock or whatever?
Did it make any difference to you liking them or not?
Did it make you zone in on the genre you liked and tend to ignore the other genres?
Keith Turner
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: August 12 2009 at 09:25
I've never been a person highly preoccupied by genre definitions myself, so I'm probably not the right person to ask *chuckles* In my youth it was somewhat more important though. Once I had heard music by a band what they were classified as meant zilch for me as such; but for unknown artists it certainly was useful with a genre description and/or comparison to other bands. Typically I'd buy albums by (for me) unknown artists if they were either described as exploring a stylistic variant I generally liked or if they were compared to a band I already fancied. ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: Kestrel
Date Posted: August 12 2009 at 20:25
|
I don't really get the anti-genre sentiment. Humans have an innate want to categorize things - we've been doing it for centuries - and I think they're much more useful than detrimental. When you say symphonic prog, I have a general idea of what you are discussing. Yes, there are bands that transcend their genre or just flat out switch genres in the middle of their career, but I think those are the exception. Maybe not so much in prog, but in general, bands certainly stick to their genre. I don't see Rascal Flatts or Shania Twain playing anything but pop/country. Although a tagging system might be better, a la last.fm and progfreak, but it's essentially a more exact system of genres and categorization. |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: August 12 2009 at 22:13
This - Imagine going into a CD store without Genre sorting... On that note, JB HIFI (Australian CD retailer) have the worst genre selections ever! Marillion in "Heavy metal/Hard rock" in one store, and in "Urban Grooves" in another!? It has to be a joke! They also put Porcupine Tree in "World Music" in one store and "Popular/top 40" in another, which is literally ridiculous. -------------
|
Posted By: Quasar
Date Posted: August 12 2009 at 23:41
You have obviously not tried to convince the industry and/or the fans that ones 'given' genre is incorrect!
My point is, IF you had never heard of Marillion before, you would maybe never find them, unless you liked "Urban Groove" also. And you'd be sorry about that, eventually.
The problem is not the genres, it's who dictates a genre for a band! If they get it really wrong, it's detrimental to the band and fans.
Of course, it should help all concerned to make available, and to find new music.
At least in Prog, there could be/generally is, a general consensus and/or co-operation to put bands into reasonable genres, or multiple genres (might be better, as many prog bands cross over genres)? Which is what the originator of this Topic was trying to do, and I for one, appreciate the effort.
Oh, and there is no anti-genre sentiment here, just a point of view, which might be added to the genre issue!
Keith Turner
|
Posted By: DaysBeforeTomorrow
Date Posted: August 13 2009 at 09:36
|
I think there are just too many sub-genres. Prog Rock is already considered a niche of its own... to give it more than a handful of sub-genres is a mistake from the perspective of information architecture. Sometimes a data set is broken down into so many parts that it becomes inefficient to find what you're searching for and it's ultimately better to leave a few larger sets together rather than minute stratifications (relational database developers will know exactly what I'm talking about).
There really isn't a need to distinguish between neo-prog and symphonic prog, for example. Both are typically melodic music with hooks, and both feature orchestration in many songs. To split hairs over just how loud the string section or mellotron is seems a bit foolish. The average listener will probably enjoy both kinds of bands, and not realize there is any difference. Heck -- I'm one of the musicians in neo-prog and I don't know the difference, and it's not even important to know the distinction. In Days Before Tomorrow, we call ourselves neo-prog only when talking to people in prog circles like this, but to the outside world, we are simply "melodic progressive rock," and even that requires explanation to a "typical" rock listener. Some of our music has really beautiful orchestration with cello, violin, viola, etc. but we're not a symphonic prog band as far as we're concerned. Some of our new stuff borders on prog metal, too, easily identified by bands like Dream Theater or Trivium, but the core of our sound is just melodic progressive rock. And to us, progressive means intricate musicianship, numerous time signature and key changes, longer song arrangements, conceptual lyrics and musical themes, etc. Categorization is necessary, but when you've broken the data (artists) down into so many categories that you have to debate where a band fit, you've gone too far. Just my humble opinion :-). |
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: August 13 2009 at 16:03
I'm a big fan of simplification myself. But as long as I make an effort at this place, I need to follow the rules here too. And I have yet to discover a site doing a better job for those who enjoy listening to and/or make prog than this site ;-) In my ideal world we would have 5 main categories at a site like this, perhaps with a select few secondary descriptors. But somehow, I don't think that would ever have a chance of becoming a reality ;-) ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: DaysBeforeTomorrow
Date Posted: August 13 2009 at 16:08
| I'm not complaining -- you guys do a great job here. Just commenting :-). |
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: August 13 2009 at 16:26
|
Yup. And I'm not criticizing - just reflecting back that I understand and sympathize with your points of view :-)
------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |