Was Sgt. Pepper the first Prog Album?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: Proto-Prog and Prog-Related Lounge
Forum Description: Discuss bands and albums classified as Proto-Prog and Prog-Related
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=83944
Printed Date: December 19 2024 at 02:14
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Was Sgt. Pepper the first Prog Album?
Posted By: spknoevl
Subject: Was Sgt. Pepper the first Prog Album?
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 07:35
|
It pre-dates ITCOTKC and has all the classic prog attributes including mellotron, harmonies, studio pastiches, orchestral parts, odd song juxtapositions.
Any thoughts? ------------- http://martinwebb.bandcamp.com The notes are just an interesting way to get from one silence to the next - Mick Gooderick |
Replies:
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 07:41
|
No ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 08:39
| You have to do a lot of investigation/research into the history of other bands and sum it up for yourself. You have to observe any change of band members and also taking notice of exactly what specific time period a particular band changed to progressive in the mid or late 60's. Piper At the Gates Of Dawn should at least be considered one of the first prog albums. I believe the album created "Space Rock". The songs were sometimes like "insane children's songs" and it contained space rock jams. I'm not sure what year it was released but "Music In A Doll's House" by Family was very different. I would still have to speculate that the Beatles influenced them all. Check to see what year Days of Future Passed was released. It's revolting to try and figure out who got there first, and if you observe what was revolving around the Beatles during that period in time you might get a "when all is said and done, eat me" kind of answer. |
Posted By: spknoevl
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 09:39
|
Nothing happens in a vacuum, and no one band is probably fully responsible for the emergence of prog-rock in the late 60s/early 70s, however, when one takes into consideration the enormous popularity of the Beatles at that time, you would have to consider that an more experimental release, like Sgt. Pepper, must have had an enormous impact on the musicians of the day. Likewise, I'm sure the Beatles were listening to other bands, like early Floyd, in the London scene. I suppose, one can't dismiss the effect that LSD was also having with musicians of that period. ------------- http://martinwebb.bandcamp.com The notes are just an interesting way to get from one silence to the next - Mick Gooderick |
Posted By: tamijo
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 09:52
|
Prog is not 1 genre, is many, sounds to me more relevant to look for early prog albums within each genre ------------- Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours |
Posted By: irrelevant
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 10:45
------------- https://gabebuller.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - New album! http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385 |
Snow Dog wrote:Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 11:22
|
There is no such thing as the first prog album. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: progistoomainstream
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 13:12
|
Answer: No Reason: All the reasons you have stated can be attributed to out of the ordinary psychedelic rock. Not to mention, it was of the psychedelic rock era. And the album is missing some key charecteristics of Prog Rock (long songs, jazz influence, keyboard domination, over-complexity). Did it inspire progressive/art rock? yes. But it was not the first prog album. If anything I would say it inspired glam rock more than anything. ------------- 
|
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 13:17
I wouldn't, and I was around at the time. This topic has been discussed so many times, I tend to lose interest. As Slarti implied, the range of opinion on the topic is so large and wide, there really isn't a definitive answer. ------------- 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: richardh
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 14:23
| Sgt Peppers begat ITCOTKC as Fripp would admit. The Beatles were an amazing band that revolutionised popular music with the help of George Martin. So the answer could well be yes although of course there were plenty of bands that slot inwbetween those albums such as The Nice, Procal Harum and Pink Floyd who were also progressive but none of them were 'the first' and none of them produced such a complete artistic statement as King Crimson managed. |
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 14:34
|
The first prog album has yet to be recorded. That's how prog it is.
------------- My other avatar is a Porsche It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased. -Kehlog Albran |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 19:53
|
what about Revolver, Smiley Smile, and Thoughts of Emerlist Davjack ? |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 20:45
 
no -------------   
|
Posted By: progistoomainstream
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 21:07
Well, they all had costumes and put on alter-egos for the album. That is what glam rock is. -------------
|
Posted By: Horizons
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 21:14
|
Gabriel's Genesis inspired glam rock? ------------- Crushed like a rose in the riverflow. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: January 04 2012 at 21:54
|
For me it is albums like that are perfect examples of proto. I consider it a prog album myself but the distinction isn't really all that important to me. To elaborate on what I wrote before, there is no single album you can point to as the first prog album. Prog began as sort of a primordial soup. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: January 05 2012 at 03:22
|
I think Snow Dog put it best when he stated (I'm paraphrasing here) 'No' Sgt Pepper was a brilliant but flawed popular music album that every music journalist in the entire world has been brainwashed into voting as the best of all time ad infinitum. There are many Beatles albums I rate higher. Prog would have happened without Pepper (might have taken longer, who knows/cares?) ------------- 
|
Posted By: irrelevant
Date Posted: January 05 2012 at 05:08
Agreed. ------------- https://gabebuller.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - New album! http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385 |
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: January 05 2012 at 06:02
|
I would say the first birth pangs of prog rock is a mixture not one album 1966 
1967
The debut of Pink Floyd is one of the most important albums of the 60s.
all these albums are integral to the beginning of what we term prog rock. not to mention non prog albums such as Pet Sounds and psychedelic underground bands. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: January 05 2012 at 10:07
|
^ Exactly -------------
|
Posted By: progistoomainstream
Date Posted: January 05 2012 at 12:24
Answer: Partially Reason: David Bowie was already popular when Genesis had Peter Gabriel prancing aroung in "The Fox on the Rocks" costume. My opinion is that glam rock had its basis in the Beatles Sgt.Pepper and was adapted by many other bands (including Genesis and David Bowie). -------------
|
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: January 06 2012 at 02:17
|
Sgt Peppers did pull together a lot of the elements that we recognise as prog. It was a statement which is the point that many seem to overlook. Most of the other albums by bands at the time were experimental. The Beatles were no longer experimenting. The idea that journalists have been 'brainwashed' into voting for it is a load of hogwash. When asked, many leading prog musicians such as Bob Fripp ,Greg Lake ,Ian Anderson etc name Sgt Peppers as the most important album release of the sixties.
BTW whether you rate at that highly is unimportant. I hardly ever listen to it and would probably rate it at 3 stars but thats still beside the point. Its what was pulled together and the fact thats its an artistic statement thats important.
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: January 06 2012 at 03:13
|
^ Three stars eh? This statement that pulled together a lot of the elements we recognise as Prog is good but not essential? Why then do so many independent thinkers in the music press place the critter at number one in practically every poll that has ever been published since the dawn of time? Answer: It's simply the most well known and polished example of a flux of influences that were the Zeitgeist of the late 60's. Sgt Pepper is clearly a pivotal statement in the development of popular music of any genre but it's tiresome to read it equated as tantamount to the primordial soup from which Prog slithered out of. The only song structures on the album that depart from the tried and tested tin pan ally format are Kite, Within You (which sucks IMO) and Day in the Life. The rhythms are at best plain vanilla rock plod and there is not a trace of jazz chromaticism/improvisation or classical music anywhere. R'n'B, jazz, classical and pop are the core ingredients of the 1st generation proggers. Don't confuse the starter with the main course  -------------
|
Posted By: progistoomainstream
Date Posted: January 06 2012 at 12:07
Thank you for not over-glorifying it. I really do not get how every year it is #1 on the Rolling Stone best albums list. -------------
|
Posted By: tamijo
Date Posted: January 06 2012 at 12:13
Sometimes with art, the critics are cought in the tradition, Mona Lisa, Mozart, Sct. Pepper.
Nobody dares to say in print, that they are not top of the top's. No matter that loads of people are actualy more into
Picasso, Bethoven, Pink Floyd.
NB:Im not saying they are better, its just as examples. ------------- Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours |
Posted By: tamijo
Date Posted: January 06 2012 at 12:25
T.REX, Bowie, Sweet, Slade, Roxy Music.
Its more likely that they tought Gabriel about stage dressing, than the other way around, what he did was taking it a few steps further, making a theatrical preformance grounded in his lyrics, not just dressing up ------------- Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours |
Posted By: progistoomainstream
Date Posted: January 06 2012 at 13:41
True. But the Fox costume was introduced in 1970. That was Gabriel's first costume and it was put on the cover of Foxtrot years later. At the revelation of the costume, there were fewer glam rock bands but there still were some. I agree with you that Gabriel did not inspire glam rock but took it to a new level of theatricality and artistic credibility. -------------
|
Posted By: NYSPORTSFAN
Date Posted: January 07 2012 at 09:15
|
I don't think there is a thing as a first prog album. The Beatles were always progressive. I would not call them progressive rock but I do think they verged on it with "A Day in the Life" and "I Want You (She's So Heavy). The Beatles were lauded by fellow rockers for their unusual chord progressions and harmonies way before Zappa or the Beach Boys got to Pet Sounds and were talking as early as 1963. The Beatles superb pop songwriting with a combination of experimentation is what made the Beatles standout to people like Robert Fripp, Stevie Wonder, Roger McGuinn, Brian Wilson and countless others. Being weird or experimental doesn't mean it's good or really being innovative. For all of Zappa experimentation the one thing is missing in my opinion in a lot of this his music is the actual song itself. There are more innovations in a song like 'Tomorrow Never Knows" than most of the bands being mentioned here but to me it has a special quality that is missing in the majority of bands being mentioned. You know it's good from the first seconds you hear it. Take for example listen to "Strawberry
Fields Forever" a haunting melody, frequent time changes, eastern
instruments, mellotron, backward drums, the fade out/fade in jam etc... You can
say that Zappa was just as experimental but the musicians and the people who
were buying the records went along in what the Beatles were doing. Remember Pet
Sounds was not a huge commercial success but Revolver and Sgt Pepper were. As
much I respect what Brian Wilson did with Smile it was never released until now
and because of that it didn't influence anyone at that time. I remember reading that Ian Macdonald of King
Crimson in his opinion the roots of prog-rock started with
"Yesterday" because of the way the strings were used. I was listening
to Revolver the other day and you are hearing twin backward guitar solos
"I'm Only Sleeping", live tape looping from 5 different sources, Leslie
vocals, a new drum style "Tomorrow Never Knows", a classical/pop
hybrid strings and vocals "Eleanor Rigby", and a full blown Indian
song "Love You To". You wonder where Syd Barrett was getting some of
his ideas well listen to a childlike psychedelic switching to 3/4 4/4 on
"She Said She Said" and "Yellow Submarine". I don't think
one band invented prog-rock it evolved but I have to say if there was one band
who I would say who had the most influence on the start of it I would easily
say the Beatles. Let's not forget that the Beatles popularized feedback and
hugely influenced the appregiated 12 string guitar style "You Can't Do
That" that the Byrds would adopt a year later. |
Posted By: earlyprog
Date Posted: January 07 2012 at 09:28
|
^that's why we continue to discuss the same topics like the present one. Always hoping for that new and fresh input.
Welcome newbie
 |
Posted By: ProgressiveAttic
Date Posted: January 07 2012 at 22:19
|
First off King Crimson's style comes from a combination of The Beatles' most experimental moments (Revolver, Sgt. Pepper's), Miles Davis' early experimentation with electronic and rock music (In a Silent Way, Filles de Kilimanjaro), Jimmy Hendrix's psychedelia and expressionist music (Bartok, Stravinsky, etc.). And this is the kind of musical syncretism that gave birth to Prog.
The Beatles are at most an experimental pop/rock band that borrowed elements from other genres. ------------- Michael's Sonic Kaleidoscope Mondays 5:00pm EST(re-runs Thursdays 3:00pm) @ Delicious Agony Progressive Rock Radio(http://www.deliciousagony.com) 
|
Posted By: ProgressiveAttic
Date Posted: January 07 2012 at 22:47
|
Here you have samples from albums that where released in 1967 and are at least as proggy as Sgt. Pepper's:
so... saying that Sgt. Pepper's is the first Prog album (something that's very difficult to pinpoint -not to say impossible-) or even THE single most important influence in the genre isn't quite accurate... (sorry for the huge post) ------------- Michael's Sonic Kaleidoscope Mondays 5:00pm EST(re-runs Thursdays 3:00pm) @ Delicious Agony Progressive Rock Radio(http://www.deliciousagony.com)
|
Posted By: progistoomainstream
Date Posted: January 08 2012 at 01:40
I would have to disagree and say that The Beatles are the most sucessfully progressive band ever. They may not be progressive rock, but they are much more than "at most an experimental pop rock band with elements from other genres"
-------------
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: January 08 2012 at 02:24
|
One of the Beatles' gifts was to distill musical ideas into concise but
concentrated pieces; whether that makes them progressive is debatable,
and though new compared to the typical Pop of the day, it was still
very different from the extreme development and thematics of the
post-Psych artrock movement that came after. They were,
without much doubt, a rock 'n roll band with a flair for pop
songwriting and innovation within that format. If I may paraphrase Mr. Churchill, "It was not the end. It was not even the beginning of the end. It was, perhaps, the end of the beginning." That concludes this Pompous Moment of the Week. Thank you. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: January 08 2012 at 06:01
|
Sure, whatever, it was. What was the second and third?
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: NYSPORTSFAN
Date Posted: January 08 2012 at 08:41
Uh, no and that is like saying that Jimi Hendrix was a great guitarist who borrowed from other genres including the Beatles themselves.
The Beatles were superb songwriters, who greatly influenced the change of the sound of popular music, and changed how records were made. Not only that they were the key band that started the British Invasion which in turn started what I call the transatlantic exchanging of musical ideas between British and American rock bands. I highly doubt that Zappa or Bob Dylan would have ever heard of the Rolling Stones if it were not the Beatles paving the way for them to be successful in the states.
King Crimson, Hendrix, Miles Davis, and everyone else borrowed elements from other genres. The Beatles songs, the chord changes and melodies were in stark contrast to what I would say that came before in rock and roll. The unique drum beats, the way they used other instruments, the harmonic arrangements, for example 'Strawberry Fields" marked a significant move away from Revolver, and indeed a significant step forward in pop music, both musically and studio innovations. But you see that is only one song. As for the Beatles being progressive rock? I would say they walked that tough tight rope of being rock/pop while being progressive with the public and musicians going along with it.
By the way for another example what do you call a song like "Happiness Is A Warm Gun"? It has more time signatures than what I would say most progressive rock bands would do. It has 4 distinct sections with various musical styles and vocal styles.
|
Posted By: ProgressiveAttic
Date Posted: January 08 2012 at 10:34
I am not saying that The Beatles didn't have their Prog moments (for me tracks like I Want You are Prog Rock) or that they weren't "progressive" (in the strict sense of the word). My point is that despite of all the experimentation, the innovation and the blending of genres they never stopped being a pop/rock group (a very sophisticated one though). While The Beatles blended many genres and styles together, their signature pop/rock style always prevailed. On the other hand, bands like King Crimson gave a step further and reduced the pop/rock element to give space for the other genres and styles to have more influence in their own style, finally divorcing themselves from other forms of rock and popular music... and that's how Prog Rock was born... ------------- Michael's Sonic Kaleidoscope Mondays 5:00pm EST(re-runs Thursdays 3:00pm) @ Delicious Agony Progressive Rock Radio(http://www.deliciousagony.com)
|
Posted By: DisgruntledPorcupine
Date Posted: January 13 2012 at 10:20
|
For me Days of Future Passed and The Thoughts of Emerlist Davjack are the first prog albums. Just my opinion though. |
Posted By: MagicMoo
Date Posted: January 13 2012 at 10:35
|
Hi everybody!
Interestingly enough, many Prog musicians themselves do cite Sgt. Pepper as the first (Proto-)Prog album, cause of its conceptual qualities. Second then historically, would be Floyd's Piper at the Gates of Dawn (Pepper June 67 / Piper August 67). Musically for sure Piper has, imo, the first 'real' Prog song with Interstellar Overdrive (long and innovative improvisation), even if it was labelled 'psychedelic' in those days. There's also Zappa's Freak Out! as early as March 67 to think of. How about Velvet Underground's debut in October 67 or the Doors debut with The End-epic also in March 67. But since the term 'concept' is relevant for Progressive Rock albums of the early Seventies, one could indeed say with some reason that Pepper paved the way. |
Posted By: NYSPORTSFAN
Date Posted: January 13 2012 at 17:02
I don't understand what is so Proggish about Freak Out? Combining doo-wop with avant influences doesn't make it progressive rock IMO.
Just because "The Return of the Son of the Monster Magnet" is 12 minutes long doesn't make it prog.
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: January 13 2012 at 19:47
|
No way to delay that trouble comin' every day.
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: geneyesontle
Date Posted: January 29 2012 at 21:54
| Nooooooooooooooooo !!! Freak Out! was released before Sgt. Pepper. Paul McCartney even said in an interview that there would be no Sgt. Pepper without Freak Out!. |
Posted By: ProgressiveAttic
Date Posted: January 29 2012 at 23:25
...or without Pet Sounds... ------------- Michael's Sonic Kaleidoscope Mondays 5:00pm EST(re-runs Thursdays 3:00pm) @ Delicious Agony Progressive Rock Radio(http://www.deliciousagony.com)
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: January 29 2012 at 23:34
| If you wanna take a somewhat looser definition of prog rock, possibly. Though even in that regard, I usually heard that accolade given to Freak Out! by Frank Zappa. |
Posted By: NYSPORTSFAN
Date Posted: January 31 2012 at 12:29
Sgt. Pepper was a countinous progression starting from Rubber Soul or maybe from the songs from Help for example "Ticket To Ride" with it's drone and Ringo odd drum patterns in which you can hear later on "Rain" and "Tomorrow Never Knows". Or even the chamber type strings you hear on "Yesterday" later heard on "Eleanor Rigby" and "She's Leaving Home".
Freak Out is a fusion of American R&B vocal styles with influences from composers like Varesse. I don't think it is prog at all. Then we would be considering Bob Dylan "Like A Rolling Stone" progressive rock if we were counting long songs as prog.
|
Posted By: NYSPORTSFAN
Date Posted: January 31 2012 at 12:31
But there would be no Pet Sounds without Rubber Soul and Brian Wilson admits to it.
|
Posted By: progistoomainstream
Date Posted: January 31 2012 at 17:40
Factual. -------------
|