I'm new here, so forgive me if this question has been asked endlessly. 

I was wondering if anyone could recommend modern bands whose recordings have the same warmth as 70s prog rock bands. 

Not sure if it was recording on tape, the amps, the quality of the players etc. but the classic 70s recordings just have a sound that I love. 

I like modern prog. However, most of the famous bands just sound bland to me on studio recordings. There's no air, warmth, depth to the recording IMO

Particularly love hearing them on roadtrips and on early mornings  

Genesis, Jethro Tull, http://alt77.com/rush-albums-ranked" rel="nofollow - Rush , http://alt77.com/yes-albums-ranked" rel="nofollow - Yes , Focus... Yeah, love that stuff. 

Would be thankful for any suggestion. 

That's not an easy matter, but my best suggestions across the different subgenres are:

      Amarok  (ESP)  -  Sol De Medianoche  (2007)

I think I only know Steven Wilson and have heard his remixes of classic prog albums. Not much a fan of his own work or Porcupine, but glad to check it out with an open mind. 

Would love to hear him do http://https://alt77.com/the-police-albums-ranked/" rel="nofollow - The Police or classic http://https://alt77.com/acdc-albums-ranked-2023/" rel="nofollow - AC/DC albums. Hehe. 

Really appreciate it!

Hi,

Welcome to the board.

I'm not sure, or convinced that the "tape", the "amps" and everything else, had anything to do with it ... we don't go around saying that Mozart, Beethoven and Bach is better today, than it ever was ... which is likely given that most places these days know acoustics a lot better than the simple living rooms and places on royal courts.

In general, all arts, change a wee bit, but the quality of the work continues and for us to think that one era is better because of the tape is ... strange to me ... what we're really saying is that we're bored with a lot of the music that is coming out today, and the fact that it is repetitious, and formatted, and badly designed, and in some cases, it has as much innovation, as you can find .... errrr ... in a toilet? 

The one thing that was "around" in those days, was the desire and ability to express yourself and do something different. With the Internet, today, too many folks are looking for "attention" instead of concentrating in their own work, and the result is ... a very bad loss of the feelings that you are looking for.

Hopefully, it all comes around, but what came about with "progressive music" was the aftermath of a terrific artistic scene, and today, there is no artistic scene to discuss that is helping provide so much new art ... and this is, in many ways, what you are looking for and might not necessarily see it.

The whole experimental and progressive side of things is gone. The Internet, and the FAN are a serious problem, because they like their "hits" and they do not want to see something new or different, in a manner of speaking, and this takes away the quality that you want to see and find. BUT, that music that you are looking for is out there, but simply not found in the same bands you are looking for, and you will have to expand your palate to find a few things out there that are far out, and have that feeling ... and it ain't the same thing that is normally found and discussed in many places ... it's kinda like "the undergrounds" as it was known in the old days.

Hi,

I don't think you are going to find it anymore, when so much of the new drumming sound is the electronic pads and stuff, and anyone with a regular old drumming set, is probably not going to be in your band very long, unless he is spectacular and special, and given that most of them can only do 4 count and hit the snare drum, the ability to make it "quality" is ... basically ... superfluous!

The time will come when someone else will do a digital drum set and make an old drummer look rather ... OLD ... in their design and set. It is the history of the arts, and us thinking that this or that is safe, and better, is a bit on the silly side, and just a factor or two that we seem to like, rather than a reality ... the fact of the matter was that the music itself HAD THE WARMTH, and it had less to do with the tape, than the music itself.

It's the SOURCE that is the reason, not what is "after" the source.

Do you mean that you have a better chance of achieving that sound using older gear, analog equipment etc. Genuinely interested.  

I guess not many audiophiles would say that today. 

Hi,

You might actually have hit it on the head. In those days, just about everything was done in the studio ... and thus the ability to make it sound better is easier ... nowadays, we work off the DAW and what we recorded into it, and I'm not sure that the quality ... studio wise ... that you are looking for is there, since the studio has special sound walls and items that are used to help clean up the sound more than we do within a home environment, or even in a garage.

But as you already mentioned ... drums shelved ... and yeah, not a surprise since the majority of folks can only hit the snare drum and not use the rest of the drum set. And then they think of themselves as "masters" if they can manage to get 8 hits in time, and then maybe 16 touches in time! good mathematicians in my book, but not quite good music "keepers" as I like to say ... 

Some of this is noticeable ... for example, in SW's latest PT album ... when/where you can easily tell the parts that were mailed around, and done at home, that were kinda mixed in well, but the feeling of the warmth and touch that you talk about, is nowhere to be seen ... I find that last album more "clinical" and "surgical" than anything else ... but not an "artistic" achievement at all!

Or maybe some of us like the tortured old sounds of rock as it was meant to be heard.

The science-based ones do. It's like Grumpyprogfan says: "the tape added the warmth". All these "audiophiles" who prefer the old, warm-sounding recordings are not really audiophile in the true sense of the word, meaning that the audio signal needs to be preserved as accurately as possible. Rather, they prefer a specific type of sound that the imperfect recording equipment of the 70s created (the technical term is harmonic distortion).

And I agree - those records sound great, while many modern recordings sound "cold". And of course compressing the dynamic range (aka the loudness wars) adds to the problem. But the accuracy of the recording is not the issue - if anything, modern technology captures things too accurately.

Oh... Wobbler

https://tagyourmusic.org/chart?page=0&prog=prog&types=lp%2Cep&genmod=retro&genre=rock&listStyle=covers" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/chart?page=0&prog=prog&types=lp%2Cep&genmod=retro&genre=rock&listStyle=covers

Didn't see any DT albums in the list. For Opeth - Heritage the tag is valid IMHO, also for Spock's Beard. Of course the question is: "retro" in what sense? Spock's Beard were partially retro in terms of songwriting, but probably not in terms of sound/production. And of course bands like Wobbler are simply much more retro than SB.

You're correct, the perils of tagging. But also the blessings, since one can go through the list and take it for what it is (albums which some people chose to apply the tag "retro" to). 

Theoretically speaking, all digital recording is sampling which doesn't record all of the musical information, while analogue recording, like the name says, as a principle does.

Edit:

Anyway, the most important in my opinion is how much one likes the sound quality one seems to hear.

 2010: Magic Bus - Magic Bus -  https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_m2D3V8geTiFt95x8laj4MjPojHWpAfoww" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_m2D3V8geTiFt95x8laj4MjPojHWpAfoww

 

 

I'd even say it's not a good habit to have if it's the case. 

I like to hear Hammond B3 organ through Leslie speakers, genuine Mellotron (or high-quality Mellotron samples), Rickenbacker bass, authentic Mini-Moog, Fender Rhodes electric piano, Gibson Les Paul with distortion & analog echo, etc. 

This will give you an idea of what I always look for!   Many bands experiment with these instruments, such as Glass Hammer, Night Watch etc. 

Glad to see you are finally living up  to your name. 

You mean that people focus on the style/genre rather than the sound? I'm not so sure about that, since there is a correlation.

But sure, I guess the OP is primarily looking for albums that have a "retro production" rather than emulating the style of the 70s. So less Transatlantic, more Wobbler/Anekdoten/Änglagård etc.. 

David_D wrote: Anyway, the most important in my opinion is how much one likes the sound quality one seems to hear.

 

Well, that's one thing, but the reason why '70s music sounds the way it does is objectively due to the limitations of the technology.

 

 

David_D wrote: Theoretically speaking, all digital recording is sampling which doesn't record all of the musical information, while analogue recording, like the name says, as a principle does.

 

Many people look at the stepped digital waveform and neglect that it is: (1) an exaggeration, (2) smoothed to the same as the analogue signal by (among other things) the ear.

 

 

Nyquist is rolling over in his grave...

Thanks for sharing this!

 

It depends on the nature of the distortion and to what it is applied. For example, overdrive applied to a harmonically poor sound will enrich it and make it sound much better. But amplitude-clipping an already harmonically rich sound will make it sound scratchy and generally terrible. Distortion is something that is applied to individual sounds, possibly even to all the individual sounds individually, but not to an entire ensemble together.

 

 

 

Maybe the technical analogue/digital discussion could go to a dedicated thread?

To the OP: I would recommend to listen to https://logosprog.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - Logos (if you don't mind they're singing in Italian), especially their albums L'enigma della vita and Sadako e le mille gru di carta.

I said "harmonic distortion", and I meant the subtle kind of distortion which a slightly overdriven tube adds. I didn't say "amplitude clipping". And yes, vintage tape machines do add this to an entire "ensemble" during mastering.

Sorry friends but the short of a long story is that digital recordings for the most use definitely to lack some of the very important 

sonic qualities I hear live.

EDIT: I need to be more specific: It's not because digital recording technology is inferior, but it may be because these recordings don't have the warmth that some analog recordings have. Which is not the fault of the technology, but a decision by the sound engineer. So blame them! 

and in general certainly more than analogue recordings.

Indeed they are a ringer for 1971 era ELP. Absolutely superb.

Other bands that have superb 'anaolog sound' are Elephant 9, Krokofant, Wobbler, Motopsycho etc. In fact Norwegian bands have more or less cornered the market on this. I consider it to be like RPI but for the modern era.

Jordsjø

+ Needlepoint

One more modern recording I find to be quite good is

Univers Zero (B) - Clivages (2010)

From the album Heritage to nowadays, yes ! But NO (apart Damnation) before that because death-metal didn't exist in the 70's.

And dont forget: listen to Phideaux !  

MikeEnRegalia wrote: How about Ayreon? Arjen has always used analog equipment as much as possible.

Like a lot of the suggestions so far, they still sound nothing like 70's prog.

Btw: I agree with everything you write in regards to analogue verses digital, and I'm among those who prefer the former. I guess when some of us get to hear something closer to perfection, we just don't like it. Some remastering may be closer to what the artist might have wanted, but I often prefer the original nevertheless (not always).

^ I think they sound "typically modern" - as in 20-25 year old music and not 50. I replied like I did because I'm guessing it's the kind of new prog GoldenNoseSlim isn't looking for. I mean the title of the topic, the opening post, this: "Genesis, Jethro Tull, Yes, Focus... Yeah, love that stuff" all sort of signalize that to me.

The metal elements, the clean sound (as you mentioned) none of what I've heard (two albums) has made me think it sounds 1970's. But maybe they've completly changed since I tried and concluded they weren't for me 15-20 years ago , I wouldn't know.

I do like a lot of new music with a distinct modern production (I suppose mostly outside of prog).

That list is not coming from me - it's from many users who all assigned the "retro" tag for their own reasons. What you are looking for is simply a small subset of the list, since you have much more specific requirements than just "retro". The "retro" box is simply too inclusive for you.

Here's a little improvement, now there's an additional filter for the "symphonic" style. Probably still too inclusive ...
https://tagyourmusic.org/chart?page=0&prog=prog&genmod=retro&genre=rock&listStyle=covers&style=symphonic&types=lp%2Cep" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/chart?page=0&prog=prog&genmod=retro&genre=rock&listStyle=covers&style=symphonic&types=lp%2Cep

yep I have both those on my extended Norwegian playlist

Also

Shamblemaths

Seven Impale

Airbag

Gazpacho

Caligonaut

Magic Pie

http://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=81103" rel="nofollow - https://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=81103

it does sound very like a lost Rainbow/Deep Purple album but I'm loving the Jon Lord inspired keys!

I don't think GoldenNoseSlim is a 70's prog purist. He even says that he likes modern prog. I'm no purist in any way either. I like "everything under the sun" (well not really). Including some newer bands and projects that make music that sound like it was recorded in the 1970's. I like some contemporary exotica ensembles that sound like they're from the early 1960's too. And guys that compose pretend giallo/horror soundtracks in the style of Goblin/Fabio Frizzi. And plenty of recent Spiritual Jazz that sound very much like it did back in the days. Sometimes it even surpasses the originals. Anyway I just think I understand that he asks for here, and I get the impression that you don't. It's not about being a purist. Purism might as well be having issues with "retro-projects" such as these.

Anyways, going back to what he wrote: He asked for modern recordings that have the same warmth as some of the recordings of the 70s. Apart from that line at the end, he wasn't talking about style at all. I agree that me posting the list of "retro" releases didn't address that properly. To fix that I have added new tags: "Warm Production", "Cold Production". No releases are tagged yet, but I think that this is what he asked for, and indeed, creating a chart with these releases would be something that more people might find useful.

So here it is: https://tagyourmusic.org/chart?addstyle=warm_production&page=0&listStyle=covers" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/chart?addstyle=warm_production&page=0&listStyle=covers

As I'm writing this, there are only two releases in it (that I've tagged myself just now), but it's a start 

-Visible Wind (Canada),

-Sky Architect (Netherlands),

-Hipgnosis (Poland),

-Annot Rhul (Norway), 

-Gargamel (Norway),

-White Willow (Norway),

-Anekdoten (Sweden),

-Anglagard (Sweden),

-Beardfish (Sweden),

-Landberk (Sweden),

-My Brother The Wind (Sweden),

-Morte Macabre (Anekdoten/Landberk) (Sweden),

-Thieves' Kitchen (UK),

-Glass Hammer (USA),

-IZZ (USA),

-Phideaux (USA),

-Salem Hill (USA).

-

This is a great answer! 

I have a very early generation CD of Yes' "Close to the Edge" that was digitized directly from the master tapes.  It's all there....the studio tape his, just as Eddie Offord heard it.   I've compared this CD to others including re-mastered versions, and the later attempts don't sound nearly as "organic." 

Mind you, I didn't care of the hiss/crackle/pop of vinyl records in the early 1970s, and found CDs to be a great improvement.  

The other aspect of this conversation is the instrumentation.  The early prog used analog synths, Mellotrons, Fender Rhodes pianos and Hammond B3 organs, so these all had a generous helping of "funk" in their sound!  

Modern digital instruments are just a tad too precise and clean for my tastes.   The best bands know how to mix and match these technologies. 

Hi,

I'm pretty sure that if "digital" recordings were not done DIRECTLY to a box, or computer or DAW, that it would also have some warmth ... if you recorded a guitar with all amps, inside a room, digitally, it would likely have a much warmer sound than the clinical sound it would get by going directly to the board and computer.

Thus, "warm", and "cold" simply refer to how it was recorded. If all you did or put it together in the bedroom, it will always sound (mostly) cold, unless the person doing it is a specialist in this area of sound, and is capable of manipulating it to fool your ears!

But, let's not say that a lot of the old stuff done in studios, with very well defined and studied techniques did not have their cold side either ... we might have a harder time finding those, but there probably were enough of them to help us realize, that it is only as warm or cold as the day outside, and how much the folks at the desk "KNOW". Nothing else.

Alan Parsons was about warmth ... but look where he learnt it all! It was in the studio creating very special and specific positions and situations that helped the instrument sound better, and "warmer". But there are/were many that don't go by that ... a lot of the rap stuff actually comes off better as "cold" rather than the "warm" thing that we think we like to hear.

I like explanations that reference multiple factors.  Closer to reality.