I'll listen to certain album, none I'll explicitly mention, and say to myself "man that sounds pretty damn progressive, it's all over the place!" and then find it has a 3.12 rating. 

Now I know these are all opinions and everyone has different tastes, but it still surprises me sometimes to see stuff I think is progressive and has a sub-par rating.

Please don't think of this as a rant, because it's not. Just an observation. Maybe I'm just a jackass (probably).

Feel free to elaborate. Discuss. Critique. Flame.

"Progressive Electronic" doesn't necessarily involve complexity. Tangerine Dream was all over the map in the '70s, engaging in Krautrock (first album), psych, experimental, and proto-ambient before finally settling on what would become known as Berlin School for Atem, Phaedra, and Rubycon. And then they did another about-face and did full-on progressive rock with electric and acoustic instruments, along with their keyboard-synthesizer arsenal, on Stratosfear, Cyclone and finally Force Majeure (1979, and their last record of the decade). In-between, their double-live Encore (1977) and their acclaimed soundtrack Sorcerer were genuine forays in Berlin School.

Johannes Schmoelling joined Tangerine Dream and beginning with the live album Quichotte aka Pergamon (recorded in East Berlin), the trio ventured into territory by which most would know them for, recording a string of albums and film scores with the latest synthesizers of the day (PPG and other manufacturers would let TD use their prototypes in turn for valuable feedback). Much of the music they made from '80-'85 qualifies as P-E, with no shortage of stylistic variety and sequencer action.

Klaus Schulze's output has been much more consistent, i.e. Berlin School, but no less prolific throughout the years. Like Tangerine Dream, he plateaued in the '80s and dropped some albums that weren't up to the usual standard. They had less to do with the albums being "progressive" (because these were artists working in a format they had continued to refine for many years) and simply more to do with the music itself just not being up to par.

Vangelis is categorized as "crossover" but he has a few albums that IMO are firmly electronic prog, like the underrated Direct (1988) and, yes, his legendary score for Blade Runner. His 70s albums like Heaven and Hell, Albedo 0.39, and Spiral are keyboard-dominated, naturally, and move between symph and P-E due to the incorporation of acoustic drums, real bass guitar and other instruments. But labels aside, Vangelis' repertoire is nothing short of tremendous.

Jean-Michel Jarre is a bigger question mark for me, personally. I own and enjoy several of his albums, but I don't like his stuff as much as I did in the '80s. Some of it's great, some of it's vanilla.

And let's not forget the USA's own contributions to the genre, like the inimitable Larry Fast, aka Synergy. 

Suzanne Ciani.

Aussie-Byrd-Brother wrote: And to make things even more difficult, a ton of them drift into ambient music and back again too! The definition of `prog-electronic' has become quite fluid and seems to be constantly evolving, but so long as it is atmospheric and has long keyboard-based pieces that are intelligent and challenging, then it's all worthwhile and interesting!

I just found this on youtube yesterday 

I always just assumed it was such a broad and limitless genre that its really impossible to categorize anything. Most of the electronic stuff I listen to tends to be more progressive, based on the widely used concept of progressive music, but it's much too complex to really narrow it down completely.

It's a good question.   Electronic is or was by nature progressive, adopted by rock artists, and before you knew it . . .

Hi,

I always thought that "electronic" did something different and was NOT looking at rock music to expand its horizons.

I do think that the new instruments helped some, since everyone is trying to figure out what to do with these (sometimes)  weird and bizarre sounds, and figure out how to incorporate them into some music, which was not as simple as some early synths did not exactly have a keyboard per se!

As an instrument, being born, growing and maturing, there probably isn't one that is as progressive and experimental as the synthesizer/electronic area has been for a long time, although these days it seems like a place like this only seems to know synthesizer folks that do songs! The days and ages of experimenting and learning are gone ... sort of!

Progressive/Prog grew out of a desire to expand the ability of the known music out there, specially the top ten, with longer pieces of music, and music that was better written, instead of it just being a riff and some incidental lyrics over it. I would almost say, totally, that "electronic music" (progressive or not) has more of a sound board in film and classical music as it is designed, and sometimes defined, by its longer excursions into atmospheric areas of "sound", something that we do not allow the daily music and top ten things to come anywhere near it!

Determining what is progressive or not is difficult, as the criteria is not clear and undefined in a way that makes sense within the context of music history ... right now, the definition of "progressive" anything is not even giving a damn about music and its place within a linear context that would help make the music more "concrete" in its history, instead of some fly-by-night thing that had a blue guitar, or some church organ on stage that did leaps and bounds, and some stage fireworks that got everyone excited! THAT, is not about the "music" per se, but teasing you into thinking that it is special (as a show, yes!), and valuable in the music itself, and it isn't more often than not!

It's best, for my tastes, not to define things and just love music as it is ... in the end, the saddest thing here is that these rock fans, can not appreciate a Menuhin/Shankar duet and think that dueling thrashing guitars are what "prog" or "progressive" is all about when those two together created some excitement in the theaters that had the fat old ladies screaming on the way out ... "... all that improvisation, how can you call that music!..." (true fact from the Chicago show I saw, the same night we saw Richard Kiley in Man of La Mancha).

You just don't know, how scary that is, and unsavory ... a mountain of perfume and makeup, being the person that "decides" what is right or wrong in music ... and sometimes, I feel like that is what I fight here ... it's not even about the choices (most are OK), but the fact that most folks do not engage in positive/experimental listening experiences, to have an idea of what they are really saying ... and at that point it's all "my favorite" and that has absolutely NOTHING to do with music!

And few, in here, clear that even more, to help make what we do here, even more important and valuable, while also teaching, what so many schools can't ... you should know that almost no music department out there in most universities considers just about everything we talk about anymore than just crap, and low level, uneducated music!

I fight that every day, including here!

It's a good question. There have been many "prog: progressive rock genre with certain characteristics" vs. "truly progressive music" discussions here, and "progressive electronics" probably sits uncomfortably between the two. According to its characteristics, sound, absence of rock instruments, it can be quite different from what one could call "mainstream progressive rock", even more so than much avantgarde/RIO. That it is even listed here is a testimony to the fact that, despite some claims of the opposite, "prog" as covered here is open to quite some innovation and progression even if it ultimately leads away from the rock element. Except that all too progressive experimental electronic music would probably not be listened here if its aesthetic is all too far out. (I don't think Art Zoyd would qualify for inclusion on the basis of the sound of Champ des Larmes or Pure Noise, just to give a somewhat inappropriate example; these albums are actually listed, but I guess that's because of AZ's earlier merits and RIO membership; similarly Tangerine Dream's Zeit).

So there's a weird "it needs to be progressive enough but not too progressive" about the "progressive electronic" category which indeed seems very hard to evaluate. Chances are it also has to do with culture and social systems;  Tangerine Dream, Klaus Schulze etc. were properly embedded in the Kraut/progressive rock community; musicians that seem too academic regarding the people that surround them like, say, Eliane Radigue, rather won't be listened (arguably she's too far away from rock aesthetic anyway, but that also applies to Zeit, Champ des Larmes, some Asmus Tietchens etc.). 

Properly being progressive of course is not about time signatures and complexity, it's about pushing the borders; "mainstream progressive rock" on the other hand can probably be defined by such characteristics. Surely at some point in their career Tangerine Dream and others in Progressive Electronics have pushed the borders. Do they qualify because of that? I'm not so sure but fine by me if they do. Now rating is obviously an entirely different matter because chances are that if you push the borders too far from what people who love much of mainstream progressive rock like, only a minority will appreciate it here; there's the tension between being progressive and having the standard characteristics of prog rock.  A primary example is Tangerine Dream's Zeit, at the same time very progressive and not progressive at all (in the sense of "sounding like prog rock"). Given that this is so, 3.68 is actually a rather respectable rating, probably owed to the fact that many here who really wouldn't like it wouldn't even listen past the first 10 minutes and then rather not rate it than rating it low.

Great link to Suzanne Ciani by the way, wasn't aware of her.

Suzanne Ciani's career in synthesizer sound design began (at least) in the early '70s, but she didn't begin to release albums until 1982, the first being the splendid Seven Waves. 

After the follow-up, The Velocity of Love, Ciani's music turned down a much more "easygoing" New Age path, till she finally "rediscovered" her love of the piano. The music she recorded for a while (say, the next fifteen years!) probably wouldn't interest most people here.

But a few years back, Ciani re-embraced synthesis with a newfound fervor; with Kaitlyn Aurelia Smith, she recorded Sunergy (2016).

A recent performance.

I didn't even know of this upload!

She has an amazing history...worked for Don Buchla stuffing boards for $2 an hour until she could afford one of his synths and went on to become (with Pauline Oliveros) one of the first female electronic music pioneers.  I was excited about this youtube link because the only solo Buchla recording I'd heard was Morton Subotnik's "Silver Apples of the Moon", which is historically important, but I much prefer Suzanne's approach.

If you're curious about the whole East Coast Moog vs West Coast Buchla 60's evolution (including a lot about Suzanne and her fellow electronic music pioneers) I'd highly recommend the excellent book, "Analog Days: The Invention and Impact of the Moog Synthesizer" 

https://www.amazon.com/Analog-Days-Invention-Impact-Synthesizer/dp/0674016173" rel="nofollow - https://www.amazon.com/Analog-Days-Invention-Impact-Synthesizer/dp/0674016173

Very interesting her comment how the keyboard "hijacked" electronic music and took it down a different path.  The book I mentioned takes you back to a time when Moog decided to add a keyboard and it created this Buchla vs Moog conceptual war.  Moog obviously won on the commercial front since subsequent synth manufacturers overwhelmingly took his keyboard as a controller approach and it became the standard...yet Buchla won the hearts and minds of academics and non-commercial composers not wanting to be limited to 12 note per octave tuning.  It's also my understanding that the Buchla somehow incorporated probability theory into it's mode of operation, meaning it didn't just play a sequence it was told, but could change parameters based on various conditional settings (I've never even seen one so don't know the specifics).  I believe Suzanne mentions she'd turn her Buchla 200 on at night and let it run for hours...in the morning it would be playing something completely different than when she left it 

Anyway, a fascinating time to learn about especially since Keith and prog were at the forefront of bringing synth to the world.

That's a great point. Tangerine Dream and Ash-Ra-Tempel started their careers in Krautrock, so their shift into electronic music was without a doubt going to contain some hints of progressive rock, albeit subtly in most cases.

Lesser known musicians that plunged themselves into electronic music from the get go tend to lack those archetypal elements found in rock music. "Blackouts" and "Ricochet" feature a generous helping of guitar in an otherwise ocean of synthesizers and sequencers.

Moral of the story; generally it is quite hard to categorize electronic music into a single genre, let alone rank it based on its progressive elements. Just listen to what you like!

By and large, the music of Ash Ra Tempel/Ashra and Manuel Gottsching is largely guitar-centric. Ashra has always more or less featured live drums, too (Harald Grosskopf, who also indulges synths and percussion programming, and has recorded solo). The propulsive sequences on Correlations are up-mixed, but Manuel's guitar is right there chugging away as though two locomotives are racing to see who reaches the terminus first. IMO, Ashra's classification in the Archives as P-E is for lack of a grey area between that and Krautrock, though the 15-minute bliss-out "Code Blue" on Belle Alliance is a stunning ambient piece.

I spent all morning listening to Ciani operate the Buchla 200E, and I tell you, amigo, that was the soundtrack to Heaven! 

And this is the kind of thing that you can listen to and appreciate if you sit and go do some serious listening to the early pioneers in electronic music ... I'm not sure where I read it, but there used to be an EAST/WEST kind of argument, that one was not music, since it was being used for Be-Ins and other tripping exercises, as opposed to be used as an "instrument" of some sort, which the East Coast folks were more interested in.

Even that comment, shows the "magic" differences between the two "styles", one that was more free form and experimental, and the other, which was almost the same, but was being turned into something that was more recognizable in people's ears, because some of the tripping stuff, WASN'T.

I never thought, that ZEIT was this or that. It was, quite obviously, an exercise in learning the instruments and seeing where they would take us, and it succeeded really well, and gave way to ATEM and right after the mother of them all ... PHAEDRA. Likewise, KS's first couple of albums, also showed that he was trying to figure out what the machines could do ... and for many of us, specially today, all of those albums are probably too repetitive for us to enjoy and like the other folks in Germany (can't help mentioning them), things like Kraftwerk, Neu and other examples, where you could tell that it was about this knob turning, slowly, so that its complete turn would take up a good few minutes and sound completely different 2 minutes later ... looking at it, with the history of listening that we have since then, it could easily be stated, that those were NOT progressive at all, but given the conditions at the time, and how young the instrument was and sounded, it's results end up getting a very interesting definition, that ... today ... we would not even consider.

Time, warps everything, and music is one example.

I think that for us to define all this properly, we can NOT look at yesterday's music with today's eyes, and likewise at today's music with yesterday's eyes, which we know would get trashed senselessly, sometimes just like some things do here, for what might be considered ... poor reasons. Time, is one of those that tends to hurt this equation.

We do this ... we don't even care, or give a damn, about how much classical music has changed in the past 500 years, from a small 3 or 4 piece room in front of a king or queen, to a huge hall with 40K, or 50K folks watching and cheering, and having one machine do the job of a whole orchestra, or maybe even go to the symphony once in your life ... and see how much of that music really turns you on ... you'll find that most does not anymore ... and while this is sad, it hurts that the whole thing is ignored like that ... there is beauty in all music, and sound (sound is not music, and music is NOT all sound!), if only we allow it to live within our inner minds, but we have lost that sense, and only exercise our top ten, and FAVORITE stuff, and the end result is a loss in appreciation for the history of the art, which does not make the advent of the synthesizer any better.

Go back and listen to the soundtrack for FORBIDDEN PLANET and look at the year. Go back and listen to George Harrison's Lectronic Music ... and then go back and listen to the early pioneers, like BEAVER & KRAUSE and many others from the 50's and early 60's ... it's a great bet that most of you won't like it, but I will tell you that there are some far out things out there ... wait until you hear the 3AM at the ... by B&K and see how it showed folks like TD what to do with an instrument! AND, above all, how it even influenced someone named KUBRICK, although that connection is a bit tougher to deal with. But he also went out and got some really aesthetic stuff for his film.

Speaking of George and Krause...

According to the book, "Analog Days: The Invention and Impact of the Moog Synthesizer", George's synth album, "Electronic Sounds" was actually Bernie Krause not George!  Long story short, George was in LA in November '68 working on a Jackie Lomax album and Krause was booked on the session to add Moog stuff.  After the session ended at 3:00am, George asked Krause to stay behind and show him what the Moog could do.  He was playing stuff he was planning for the next Beaver & Krause album.  What he didn't know was George told the engineer to tape the whole thing without asking him.

Months later George bought a Moog and flew Krause over to London to show George how to play it.  On arriving at George's mansion he was surprised to find George had already composed a piece of music on it.  As George is playing it for him, Krause recognized it was the same thing he played after the Lomax session.  

According to the book, here was their exchange:

Krause: Harrison, this is my stuff.  What is it doing here and why are you playing it for me?

Harrison: Because I'm putting out an album of electronic music.

Krause: George, this is my stuff, we need to talk about how we're going to split this, how we're going to share this - if you want to put this out, I don't like it very much, but if you want to put it out we have to work something out."

Harrison: When Ravi Shankar comes to my house he's humble.  I'll tell you what, if it makes any money I'll give you a couple quid.  Trust me, I'm a Beatle.

George released "Electronic Sounds" in 1969 and it flopped.  Krause's name didn't appear on the cover, but did on the inner sleeve where one side of the album is credited as being made, "with the assistance of Bernie Krause."

Why? Just because something is progressive doesn't automatically mean that it's good. 

Unbelievable. Harrison cited humility in the form of what we call nowadays a "humblebrag," but his swipe of all the music demo'd for him a continent away — while also dropping "trust me, I'm a Beatle" — is arrogance personified. 

richardh wrote: I've just skimmed through the posts but not sure there has been much talk about Kraftwerk? Didn't they build their own instruments?! Cannot be more progressive than that although I will always prefer Vangelis or Tangerine Dream. The issue with the Vangelis categorisation on this site (a  major bone of contention for me) is that he didn't start using synths until 1975 (Heaven and Hell or Ignacio were his first , not sure which) so he has about 5 or 6 albums like Earth and The Dragon that are entirely a different genre. However Albedo 0.39 and Spiral are so obviously 'Progressive'. If they are not then what the f*** is??

 

The thread is still young. 'Sides, we got to drool over some of Ciani's output, and she seldom, if ever, gets referenced within these forums.

But, yes, Kraftwerk were certainly pioneers of a whole new agenda. Their image is also 50% of their success, but the music's no less viable.

I was shocked the first time I read it...it just seemed such an "un-George" thing to do.  Oh well.  The book also says if you can find an early vinyl pressing you see a silver stripe on the album cover below George's name that covers the name of Bernie Krause.  Of course, without George around to comment we only have 1 side of the story 

This was the side that made the Beatles a bunch of idiots like everyone else. George was not the only one that became arrogant. John had his days in it, specially when he had to justify Yoko to anyone! Paul was the untouchable and would not do anything with anyone, even his own brother who also had a small legacy of his own, but was not able to get the name out because of Paul. Ringo ... not so much, but his bands and solo stuff was more of the same ... 

It was all about ... I have the money, I can do what I want, and no record company is going to tell me what to do! And none of the Beatles could give a damn about "art" or "progressive". They were not exactly "educated" and kinda "bought" their intellect with an album cover and a couple of movies!

I love Tangerine Dream, and never get tired of listening to their stuff from the 1970-1986/7 range.  I don't know if I could really pick a favorite album... but for now I'd say "Rubycon" and "Exit."  After Franke left the band, I think they went way downhill.  I'd go so far as to say that without Franke, it's just not TD.  But I can't mention TD without mentioning a few gems from the solo albums:  Froese's "Epsilon in Malaysian Pale," Schmoelling's "Wuivend Riet," and [I always had a soft spot for] Baumann's "Trans-Harmonic Nights."

I'm a big fan of Vangelis, too - he was my entry point into electronic music, back in the 70's, with "Albedo 0.39."  I love that one and always will, but I also love "See You Later," "Heaven and Hell," "China," "Spiral," and "Beaubourg."

Jean-Michel Jarre - I don't like his stuff quite as well as other electronic music, but of all his I've heard, my favorites are "Equinoxe" and "En Attendant Cousteau."

I love Klaus Schulze's stuff, my favorites being "Dig It," "Picture Music," and "Audentity."

Logic System's "Logic" is definitely a winner.

I like Thierry Fervant's "Seasons of Life" album quite a bit.

I have a soft spot for Ciani's "Seven Waves."

Trans-Millenia Consort's "Plot Zero" is an excellent album.

Here's an obscure, but excellent recording: Darren Kearns - "Optimal Being."

Younger Brother's "Last Days of Gravity" is an excellent album, as is Benji Vaughan's "Even Tundra."

Michael Garrison, Adelbert Von Deyen, Deuter, Richard Pinhas, there's just so much really cool electronic music out there.  It's my favorite genre - though I never really considered it progressive.  It's its own thing, as far as I'm concerned.

Edited to add: If you have not heard Vangelis' "See You Later," I'd highly recommend it, I feel like it is his most "progressive" album.  ("Beaubourg" is just flat-out weird, but I love it...)

ProgPanglos, I think you'd like Passage by Chris Spheeris & Paul Voudouris, released the year before Optimal Being.

ProfPanglos wrote: I love Tangerine Dream, and never get tired of listening to their stuff from the 1970-1986/7 range.  I don't know if I could really pick a favorite album... but for now I'd say "Rubycon" and "Exit."  After Franke left the band, I think they went way downhill.  I'd go so far as to say that without Franke, it's just not TD.  But I can't mention TD without mentioning a few gems from the solo albums:  Froese's "Epsilon in Malaysian Pale," Schmoelling's "Wuivend Riet," and [I always had a soft spot for] Baumann's "Trans-Harmonic Nights."

Peter's Romance '76 is awesome, too. His recent solo return Machines of Desires is superb. You should get it. 

While Chris was an integral part of the classic TD sound, his solo career has been unimpressive. I kept The London Concert and let go of everything else.

If you haven't heard Johannes' solo albums, Early Beginnings, Instant City and A Thousand Times, do so when possible. The guy outdoes himself again and again. Early Beginnings has some TD material on it, too.

And let's not close without dropping a mention for Michael Hoenig's two excellent solo albums Departure from the Northern Wasteland and Xcept One, which I consider indispensable!

Add Blade Runner, Direct and Soil Festivities! 

Le Chants Magnetique aka Magnetic Fields is the one I stick with, followed by Oxygene 7-13, Equinoxe. and Rendez-Vous. But as with you, Jarre takes a backseat to the other EM titans I like.

Check out the first album by Rudiger Lorenz, titled Invisible Voices.

Timewind, Moondawn, and Mirage for me.  The much more recent album Shadowlands is also quite good.

Here's a good modern example:

Thanks for the tip - I'll give it a listen!

Agreed on Stuntman, that's a great album.  I thought Pinnacles was good too, but haven't heard it in years.

I like Schmoelling's solo stuff too.  Wuivend Riet is my favorite, and I liked White Out too.  I also own Songs No Words on CD, but I thought it was a little thin.

Agreed also on your comment re: Franke's solo works.  I've often considered Froese/Franke like I consider McCartney/Lennon, Waters/Gilmour, Woolfson/Parsons, etc. - the sum is greater than the parts.

Michael Hoenig is a part of the original Berlin folks that helped develop the medium.

They are all "progressive" in the sense that they were experimenting and trying to find something within the electronics available. Some did, and some didn't. Some became better known and others didn't.

That's right!

Making my way through this massive box set. Anyone else get it?

 

I had an LP long ago in my youth, with a surrealistic drawn cover, containing experimental electronic music. It was so bizarre (both the music and the near-hideous but rather terrific cover art) that I eventually recycled it. Recently I tried to find out what the hell it was.

 

Remembering only 'Birch-something' of the artist name, I managed to find it from discogs.com: Reality Gates: Electronic Meditations by Steve Birchall.

 

 

 

https://www.discogs.com/Steve-Birchall-Reality-Gates/master/479291" rel="nofollow -

No, I've been buying a lot of newer TD albums, does it add much to the originals? I noticed the Tangents book said the group chose not to release Oedipus Tyrannus at the time as they weren't happy with it.

richardh wrote: ^ I decided just to get the 7 studio reissues with the bonus tracks . Cost me considerably less than half the price of the box set. Guess I'm just missing the DVD material. Is it that good?

 

I don't believe Oedipus Tyrannus is getting a separate issue. At the time I ordered the box (16 audio CDs, 2 Blu-ray discs, and a hardbound book), it all boiled down to $9 per disc, shipped. That's not counting the book. For me, that's even cheaper than buying the reissues separately. (Of course, ISOH is now commanding higher prices.)

Oedipus Tyrannus is a fine lost album; it sounds like a cross between Phaedra and Rubycon, of course, with a smidge of Stratosfear. And that can never be e bad thing!

It's just a great set to have, something of this size for that kind of money.

Here are the complete contents. 

Hopefully I'll be getting this soon. 

It's massive and it's wonderful. All the unreleased stuff feels like it could have been released at some point, either as bonus tracks or separate releases. 

And this is where we're trying to separate two things ... sort of like the day that the original synthesizer became an "instrument" because of a keyboard, instead of some far out and weird noise making device that was difficult to control.

I can understand your question, however, I question the motive ... why are we now considering "Progressive Electronic" just another song, and not the EXPERIMENTAL material that it was for its first 20 or 30 years?

PHAEDRA, right after ATEM, was sort of a buildup into an orgasm, more or less. And it was something that we could relate to, that gave the synthesizer an identity (not to mention SEQUENCERS), that someone like W. CARLOS did not have. It was sort of like the noise before was not quite considered "music", and now, it has to.

I, personally, would like to remove the "progressive electronic" determination ... completely. I find it offensive, and prohibiting ... in the manner that all of a sudden you can not experiment, and create another BEAUBOURG, because it ain't music, and we don't like weird, abstract stuff, because it has no lyrics to tell us that it is about having sex after 3 drinks!

We have to be careful with the idea ... I think that we are trying to classify a COMPOSER as an idiot, because he can not do songs ... and all of a sudden an ARTEMIEV is stupid, because during his time, in RUSSIA, the three or four modules he had was all he and his friends could help him with and afford, and yet he created something extraordinary, and even showed it in a movie ... that was electrifying ... though I seriously doubt that many of us in this board will sit through it instead of one of the Marvel comic strip movies ... with all the "action", so you replace the one you are missing in your life? (... and the lousiest music for it as a soundtrack!)

I can't afford it ... just like I could not KS's WORKS 1 and then WORKS 2 later ... both of which I deeply regret because there is some really far out and neat stuff in there ... and I like a lot of it, much of it even more than the regular KS material.

Saddest part was his friend (KM) telling me to f**k off when I requested that he make that stuff available in some form ... my guess is that they don't want to pay the hundreds of folks involved in it.

SAD ... there is some really beautiful stuff in there, and I can not have it ... I have to stay with the tube, until such a day as they remove it. 

I understand TD having to release things to make a decent living and add to their legacy ... redoing the early stuff is not the answer for me ... I was there at the time, and had a few of the bootlegs, and I heard how different and far out the stuff was, much of which NEVER EVER made it to an album! Some of the live stuff that has been released tried to make sure that the bootlegs did not take off or sell a whole lot more ... and it worked for the most part ... but now, we're back to the same issue ... no one knows how hard it was to play what they did, and how different it was on stage ... and how much it added to the experience, something that today, would not go over well at all ... when folks want hits and songs THEY KNOW, and ALREADY HAVE!

micky wrote: oh man.. even after all these years...what a sore spot of a question that is.  In fact still never have forgiven f**king Phillipe for demoting JMJ from Prog Electronic to the dustbins of hell..  I mean Prog Related ...  his reason..  who knows.. then again.. considering our history which wasn't flowers and roses...and that he knew I loved JMJ..... he probably did just to spite me.

 

I just don't trust the classification at all. I mean Neuronium are classed as 'progressive electronic' yet I would struggle to think of any electronic band that is less 'progressive'. I do like them but more often than not use them as an aid to sleep as I do with say Thom Brennan.

2dogs wrote: Yeah, Tangerine Dream were very progressive in the field of rock music but from the viewpoint of the experimental electronic music produced by the “classical” community over the previous couple of decades could actually be considered a “dumbing down” and popularisation by reintroducing beats, repetition, older forms of melody and harmony.