| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Mirror Image 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 13 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2111
|
 Posted: August 03 2012 at 22:15 |
 gusmao72 wrote:
Although Steven's comment came out as very rude, i totally agree with him. These two bands have never sounded original or unique, even if the songs are good. They are stuck in a particular style, clinging to this formula of writing 30 minute songs that sound exactly like ELP or Yes. I think what he was trying to say is that those bands are not breaking any ground in any way, and are just perpetuating an established genre of music, which is contrary to the true meaning of "being progressive". Now, bands like Mars Volta and Tool don't sound like anything you've heard before, as did Yes when they started out. THESE are TRULY "progressive" bands. |
FYI, The Flower Kings have plenty of songs that AREN'T 30 minutes long. I think you're grasping at straws here. A band doesn't have to be "groundbreaking" or "revolutionary" to make good music. If you don't like it, fine, but there are plenty of people here who do and being progressive is a style of music and not just an attitude about the music. Wilson was a complete arrogant jerk whose ego really needs to be kept in check. The same people that buy his music are, in many cases, the same people that buy TFK or Transatlantic recordings. As a musician, you NEVER slap away the hands to the people that are feeding you. I'm sure his attitude has changed on this now, but I think he just comes across as a know-it-all, holier than thou egomaniac in this interview.
Edited by Mirror Image - August 03 2012 at 22:16
|
|
“Music is enough for a lifetime but a lifetime is not enough for music.” - Sergei Rachmaninov
|
 |
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: August 03 2012 at 23:18 |
It is a little hard to express the TFK problem in words because they are clearly not out and out Yes imitators. I think the first song I heard by them, Back in the world of adventures, I immediately recognized the One More Red Nightmare riff so they have a lot of KC in them, irrespective of the extent of Yes influence.
It is a bit like the difference between Pearl Jam and Alice in Chains. I admit I haven't heard a lot of Pearl Jam songs but the ones I heard seemed to reference 70s rock in a very predictable and expected way. I may not have been able to say it was a cut copy of Sabbath or Lynyrd Skynyrd as applicable, but I could never hear a distinct idiom or compositional voice that would provoke me to investigate further. Whereas, I could recognize very distinct and interesting harmonies in AiC's music, even though it was strongly influenced by Black Sabbath. I also recognized a distinct lyrical vocabulary in Layne's writing, but that's a different discussion.
I think TFK essentially have the same problem as Pearl Jam. I cannot fault the execution and I cannot call them outright imitators but I don't hear a particularly distinct approach to draw me into the music either. Fans may either disagree with that or say it's not necessary to have a distinct approach to make good music and that's fine because there's room for different opinions. Anyhow, I don't hear a particularly distinct approach to the way Wilson makes music either, save that he tries to mask his own prominent 70s influences with snapshots of contemporary elements. Kid A feels more contemporary to me than In Absentia or GfD even though it is influenced by krautrock because it is presented through Radiohead's distinct approach and has a cutting edge that PT or Wilson solo generally seem to lack.
Edited by rogerthat - August 03 2012 at 23:19
|
|
richardh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 29438
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 01:58 |
Epignosis wrote:
richardh wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
richardh wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
I'm sorry I have not read the thread, but I read the excerpt from the interview.
I agree with Stolt, but not for the reasons he mentions.
When I think of "progressive music," I think of music that progresses in and of itself: That is to say, a piece of music that is adventurous or dynamic, as opposed to pure pop which has a verse and a chorus. Progressive music for me is that which explores rather than just entertains.
The definition Wilson gives that progressive artists must in some way "progress" (i.e., find something new and venture into new styles) has always been silly to me. Some bands do very well with that (King Crimson, er Bob Fripp, made a career out of it, but he is the exception here, and a likely one since KC was hardly ever the same band at all). Imagine if Yes had, after Fragile, took what they had stylistically as a band and made disco (an emergent genre at the time): Would that have been considered progressive rock? Well, many bands went toward popular music (and disco!) and progressive rock fans have regarded many of those albums as rubbish. What progressive rock fans wanted was more of what they had fallen in love with. Hence the rise of "Neo-Prog" bands like Marillion and IQ. They were doing in the 1980s what Yes and Genesis ceased to do.
So no, Steve. I don't want my prog to sound like Nickelback, thank you very much. I want bands to make the music they want to make, and I will continue to be the judge and jury with respect to their product.
Derivative trumps boring anyway, I say.
|
very well put but the problem that many have is that modern neo or symph prog is just copying something that has already been done rather than trying to forge a new way or approach. ELP ,Yes and Genesis never copied other bands.
You comment about Yes not changing style after Fragile and so invalidating themselves as 'progressive rock'. Yes created the syle and they owned it so why should they then change? Flower Kings and nowadays Glass Hammer seem to be trying just to replicate it. Pointless unless they are going to improve it and that is simply not going to happen.Yes on the other hand looked to improve what they were doing up to Relayer at least. After that I think some criticism is deserved. They were not untouchable!
|
I don't have time to respond to the whole post, but I have to address this before I go.
ELP, Yes, and Genesis were all to one degree or another "copying" other bands.
I know when I started I would have been happy to sound like the Beatles or Joe Tex or whoever. You want to sound like most bands, you want to sound like their records and that's how you learn your chops. - Jon Anderson
ELP essentially sprang from an earlier band called The Nice and Emerson's desire to do renditions of classical pieces (that's not exactly original, is it?).
Genesis began as pretty much a pop band.
So no, Yes did not "create" a style. TFK and GH won't "improve" a style because stuffy codgers would never allow them to. No musical style exists in the background. All musicians owe a debt to other musicians. This is inescapable.
|
Emerson only 'copied' (actually he plainly didn't) a band that he had created himself.
Yes started off wanting to be the Beach Boys but 'evolved' or 'changed' or whatever word is best suited. Roine Stolt and the like don't seem that interested in change or evolution
Genesis began as a pop band. Your point is what?
Yes created something very distinct it seems to me as near as you can be to nailing down 'progressive rock' as a style. You claim they didn't create a style but don't offer any reason to support that.
''All musicians owe a debt to other musicians'' just means that we all owe a debt to what comes before.So its okay to copy then and not be inspired? |
No one has "copied" anyone. If they did, it's called copyright infringement and lawsuits happen.
Has Genesis or Yes ever done a song like "Paradox Hotel?" If so, point me to it. The Flower Kings is a distinct band that sounds very little like Yes. Sorry.
Jonas Reingold? Very different from Chris Squire.
Hasse Froberg? A boisterous voice and very different from Jon Anderson.
Tomas Bodin? I have never heard anyone play keyboards like him before, least of all Rick Wakeman.
Roine Stolt? He has the eclecticism of Steve Howe, but that's about it. And he sings better.
So I have no idea how we get this crew to be Yes Jr. Roine Stolt was a member of Kaipa, which coexisted with Yes, but was in a different country.
I think it's just that Yes was more famous than Kaipa in the 1970s. Had Kaipa been huge in the 1970s, and Yes not, would your viewpoint remain the same?
As far as creating a style goes, no one creates one because whatever he does is merely an amalgamation of other styles. Nothing (completely) new under the sun, my friend.
|
I gave up on TFK before Paradox Hotel (I own Unfold The Future , Stardust We Are ,Space Revolver and Adam and Eve). To have collected all those albums and the DVD 'Meet The Flower Kings' I must have liked them at one point. In fact I felt I had to like them probably because they were following the prog path so closely. JUst came to a point that where I was getting nothing out of the music so just had to give up. Its ironic that occured about the same time I started to like Porcupine Tree and it would have been about the time SW came out with the comments that we are discussing.
Anyway as I said before I do like some 'retro prog' but it annoys the hell out of me that TFK gets so much attention above Par Lindh Project who in my own personal opinion are not quite as 'derivative'. But I understand that all about personal perspective and is highly subjective.
Thanks for your responses.
|
|
richardh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 29438
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 02:04 |
Mirror Image wrote:
gusmao72 wrote:
Although Steven's comment came out as very rude, i totally agree with him. These two bands have never sounded original or unique, even if the songs are good. They are stuck in a particular style, clinging to this formula of writing 30 minute songs that sound exactly like ELP or Yes. I think what he was trying to say is that those bands are not breaking any ground in any way, and are just perpetuating an established genre of music, which is contrary to the true meaning of "being progressive". Now, bands like Mars Volta and Tool don't sound like anything you've heard before, as did Yes when they started out. THESE are TRULY "progressive" bands. |
FYI, The Flower Kings have plenty of songs that AREN'T 30 minutes long. I think you're grasping at straws here. A band doesn't have to be "groundbreaking" or "revolutionary" to make good music. If you don't like it, fine, but there are plenty of people here who do and being progressive is a style of music and not just an attitude about the music. Wilson was a complete arrogant jerk whose ego really needs to be kept in check. The same people that buy his music are, in many cases, the same people that buy TFK or Transatlantic recordings. As a musician, you NEVER slap away the hands to the people that are feeding you. I'm sure his attitude has changed on this now, but I think he just comes across as a know-it-all, holier than thou egomaniac in this interview. |
Wilson's comments have really upset people by the looks of it.
For me he is just stating an opinion like anyone on here expresses an opinion about what they like and don't like. Is that really arrogant? This is a public forum and anyone can read the comments so why is SW guilty of being a raving ego maniac for having an opinion and expressing it in public? After all you can vote with your feet. Just don't buy his music if it really bothers you that much.
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 04:19 |
richardh wrote:
Wilson's comments have really upset people by the looks of it.
For me he is just stating an opinion like anyone on here expresses an opinion about what they like and don't like. Is that really arrogant? This is a public forum and anyone can read the comments so why is SW guilty of being a raving ego maniac for having an opinion and expressing it in public? After all you can vote with your feet. Just don't buy his music if it really bothers you that much. |
Because he has framed his opinion in a manner that almost seems to blame Flower Kings and their like for prog rock getting bad press and hurting awesome progressive bands like his, which would supposedly fare better without this prejudice being reinforced. I quote again: "Bands like the Flower Kings and Transatlantic? The DEATH of
progressive music. These are the bands that reinforce every prejudice
people have about progressive rock" It's not too far off from accusing these bands of doing something detrimental to the interests of other prog rock artists. I am absolutely fine with his next para, which is just a dissection of their music and if TFK fans won't like it, that can't be helped. He could have done without the "death of progressive music" part though.....in my opinion. 
|
|
Nov
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 28 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 523
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 04:55 |
richardh wrote:
ELP ,Yes and Genesis never copied other bands.
|
Genesis were massively influenced by The Beatles, Family, The Moody Blues, King Crimson, Yes, etc, etc.
The Flower Kings are massively influence by Genesis, Yes, The Beatles, Frank Zappa, etc, etc.
There is no "copying" involved, just influencing.
|
|
Nov
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 28 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 523
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 05:13 |
I think Steven Wilson should just stick to what he naturally does best (in the same way that Roine, Neal, Mike P, etc, etc, do) and quit trying to make people believe that he is some kind of Mark Hollis, Thom Yorke, Jeff Buckley enigmatic-type musical innovator.
It's transparent that he tried to shift Porcupine Tree away from the trad prog camp and into the Radiohead, Talk Talk, Elbow, Mars Volta, etc, hip prog camp but then (with PT) released album after album awash with de-tuned heavy metal guitar riffs and depressing lyrics in an apparent bid to attract a wider audience of teeny-bopper prog metal fans. Where's the intergrity in that?
What Steven Wilson conveniently forgets is that Roine was there as a teenager in the 70s with Kaipa. He is very much the Swedish Steve Hackett or Andy Latimer (in my opinion) and so he has every right to continue to produce the type of music that he helped innovate in the same way that Steve Hackett still does. Yet, Steven Wilson is quite happy to hob-nob it with Steve Hackett, presumably because he is a far bigger name than Roine Stolt.
I do quite like PT and SW's last solo album but Roine has more integrity in my opinion.
Edited by Nov - August 04 2012 at 05:17
|
|
Nov
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 28 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 523
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 05:19 |
Ytse_Jam wrote:
By the way, I've never agreed with SW's definition of prog and never liked SW's music. This is just my stinky opinion, but my vote goes to Roine. |
|
|
Nov
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 28 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 523
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 05:27 |
gusmao72 wrote:
These two bands have never sounded original or unique, even if the songs are good. They are stuck in a particular style, clinging to this formula of writing 30 minute songs that sound exactly like ELP or Yes. I think what he was trying to say is that those bands are not breaking any ground in any way, and are just perpetuating an established genre of music, which is contrary to the true meaning of "being progressive". Now, bands like Mars Volta and Tool don't sound like anything you've heard before, as did Yes when they started out. THESE are TRULY "progressive" bands. |
Yeah - The Flower Kings always, always always write 30 minute songs that sound exactly like ELP and Yes.
Here's an example:
Whether you like that or not, it's as truly progressive as Yes or ELP ever were.
Yours was a lazy comment and completely false.
Edited by Nov - August 04 2012 at 05:29
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 07:05 |
Nov wrote:
What Steven Wilson conveniently forgets is that Roine was there as a teenager in the 70s with Kaipa. He is very much the Swedish Steve Hackett or Andy Latimer (in my opinion) and so he has every right to continue to produce the type of music that he helped innovate in the same way that Steve Hackett still does.
|
Not quite, he didn't. The first Kaipa album was released in 1975 and I believe the band themselves formed only in 1974. That's already the tail end of 70s symph prog, for all practical purposes. Gabriel had already left Genesis, Yes were on a hiatus and ELP's most celebrated album had been released by then. So while Stolt did play prog rock in the 70s, he was always in the shadow of the Hacketts and Howes and not nearly as pivotal in shaping the direction of symph prog as they were. I am not taking away his right to play whatever he likes, by the way; even if he wasn't from the 70s, he would still be entitled to make prog in the 70s style as a citizen of the free world.
|
|
napoca
Forum Newbie
Joined: March 08 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 24
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 09:10 |
I've read all comments and I have the impression that something is missing, overlooked. We have a clear question from an interviewer: "As far as progressive rock goes and had gone, what do you feel about what's happening now? What do you think needs to happen for it to survive?" and we have a blunt answer from the interviewed: "OK, I think that answer is very simple: bands like Mars Volta. Tool and Radiohead - these bands are the future of progressive music. Bands like Flower Kings and Transatlantic? The DEATH of progressive music." Now if the interviewer was George Clooney, Mother Tereza or Ronaldo, I would have understand such an answer: nothing else than a personal oppinion based maybe on personal tastes in music, but when the interviewer is a musician involved in that particular scene, that raise elbows. And he continues: "But there's a new wave of bands that for me are being influenced just as much by hip-hop as they are by King Crimson or Godspeed You Black Emperor and bands like us as well, I hope". Really Steve? So basicly bands influenced by yourself are the future? But there is something else though, the question was about progressive rock but the answer seems to avoid it and talk about some "progressive music" (?!). What progressive music Steve? Music as a general term? Well in this regard even rap was progressive because it brought something new in music, an aproach never heard before, didn't it?
"For me, being progressive is
about taking the word at face value: if a band is going to try to be
progressive, they shouldn't be looking at the past - they should be
looking at everything that's going on around them now,
from hip-hop to trip-hop to death metal to trance. The
word 'progressive' is about the FUTURE." Go ahead Steve, incorporate hip-hop, trip-hop (what the heck is that?), death metal (maybe you should drink only frozen beverages for a month and start to growl) and trance and make PT a "progressive" music act. You won't be the first neither the last to loose fans (myself included) and gain some new audience. I don't try to ban anything here and I don't try to say something is good and something is bad, but I think we are talking here about diferent things. I personally don't care what somebody has to say about the music I love, even if that person is a respected musician. I love progressive rock and not progressive music, and the discussion here is about about rock that progressed and is still progressing, and not blues, classical, country, electronic, disco, pop, ambient, RIO and whatever (try to say progressive-blues, progressive-disco, progressive-pop etc, does it make sense?). Progressive rock was and is primary about rock, and rock is a genre by itself. And progresive rock is and it will be its peak, in regard of a limied genre.
Edited by napoca - August 04 2012 at 12:29
|
|
appudds
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 25 2012
Location: Chennai, India
Status: Offline
Points: 101
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 13:39 |
|
Even though progressive rock is about experimenting by adding new elements into the music, you just cannot criticize bands just because they want to recreate the past. There are 2 types of prog bands. Those who want to innovate and those who want to recreate. Both are equally important for the progressive scene. I am surprised a guy like Steven couldn't think of that.
|
|
prog4evr
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 22 2005
Location: Wuhan, China
Status: Offline
Points: 1455
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 17:21 |
Mirror Image wrote:
Now, those that read this, what do you think about it? Who's right? Who's wrong? |
First of all, who gives a f**k? Secondly - Stolt is awesome beyond words...
|
|
IMPF
Forum Groupie
Joined: February 15 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 73
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 21:25 |
|
Roine Stolt. I'm a big fan of both Porcupine Tree and The Flower Kings, and while I musically do prefer PT to TFK, Steven Wilson has just about always been the biggest douchebag in the universe, and this is no exception.
|
|
Mirror Image
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 13 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2111
|
Posted: August 04 2012 at 21:41 |
prog4evr wrote:
Mirror Image wrote:
Now, those that read this, what do you think about it? Who's right? Who's wrong? |
First of all, who gives a f**k? Secondly - Stolt is awesome beyond words... |
Evidently you do or else you wouldn't have posted on this thread. 
|
|
“Music is enough for a lifetime but a lifetime is not enough for music.” - Sergei Rachmaninov
|
|
richardh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 29438
|
Posted: August 05 2012 at 04:39 |
rogerthat wrote:
richardh wrote:
Wilson's comments have really upset people by the looks of it.
For me he is just stating an opinion like anyone on here expresses an opinion about what they like and don't like. Is that really arrogant? This is a public forum and anyone can read the comments so why is SW guilty of being a raving ego maniac for having an opinion and expressing it in public? After all you can vote with your feet. Just don't buy his music if it really bothers you that much. |
Because he has framed his opinion in a manner that almost seems to blame Flower Kings and their like for prog rock getting bad press and hurting awesome progressive bands like his, which would supposedly fare better without this prejudice being reinforced. I quote again:
"Bands like the Flower Kings and Transatlantic? The DEATH of
progressive music. These are the bands that reinforce every prejudice
people have about progressive rock"
It's not too far off from accusing these bands of doing something detrimental to the interests of other prog rock artists. I am absolutely fine with his next para, which is just a dissection of their music and if TFK fans won't like it, that can't be helped. He could have done without the "death of progressive music" part though.....in my opinion.
|
I think you are correct. No one can actually define exactly what is 'progressive music' least of all Steven who obviously has his own agenda. Its the fans that decide what is progressive not the musicians. You pays your money you takes your choice is an old adage and one I adhere to. Another way of putting it is the public gets the public wants and if the puiblic wants recycled prog then there were always be artists like Stolt happy to deliver it.
|
|
kole
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 15 2009
Location: Slovenia
Status: Offline
Points: 296
|
Posted: August 05 2012 at 06:58 |
|
First you say: Its the fans that decide what is progressive not the musicians.
And then you go on saying: if the puiblic wants recycled prog then there were always be artists like Stolt happy to deliver it.
This pretty much confirms that fans DO NOT decide what is progressive. But I don't want to turn this into another What is progressive rock thread.
|
|
brainstormer
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 20 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Status: Offline
Points: 887
|
Posted: August 05 2012 at 09:12 |
|
Many great composers have had hard words about other
musicians. Read some classical music biographies. I think
Bach was a very critical person of lesser rate musicians
and composers, if I remember correctly. Christian Vander also
at one time supposedly didn't have much respect for many other
bands. It seems when you are trying to do something new, you
really have to distract yourself away from other more well-known forms.
I think the "fan-boy" or "fan-girl" syndrome can come into play.
That was OK for me in high school, but as I got older, I realized
that I had to focus on my own music more, and have a reason why
it was special. I think this is the kind of thinking that Wilson is
having, not that I've ever really heard his music. There is so much
hype around more popular music, even more popular prog, and
one has to ask oneself, "is this really what I want to hear deep
in my heart? Is this really causing my soul to grow?"
|
|
--
Robert Pearson
Regenerative Music http://www.regenerativemusic.net
Telical Books http://www.telicalbooks.com
ParaMind Brainstorming Software http://www.paramind.net
|
|
Mirror Image
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 13 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2111
|
Posted: August 05 2012 at 09:34 |
richardh wrote:
No one can actually define exactly what is 'progressive music' least of all Steven who obviously has his own agenda. Its the fans that decide what is progressive not the musicians. You pays your money you takes your choice is an old adage and one I adhere to. Another way of putting it is the public gets the public wants and if the puiblic wants recycled prog then there were always be artists like Stolt happy to deliver it. |
The fans don't decide anything. The fans also don't dictate what a band does or will ever do. I think you're reasoning here, especially in regards to Stolt is pretty damn negative. If anybody is the death of progressive rock, it's YOU.
|
|
“Music is enough for a lifetime but a lifetime is not enough for music.” - Sergei Rachmaninov
|
|
Guldbamsen
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin
Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104
|
Posted: August 05 2012 at 10:06 |
Let's cool it here people 
As mentioned earlier, this was 7 years ago - and no matter how you slice it, there's always going to be somebody out there with a different idea of what progressive means, constitutes and entails. Seems odd to revitalise old heated discussions between two of the most successful musicians inside our respected 'genre'. Prog is prog, but what is prog and how do you spot the real thing?  Let's not go there...
Personally, I don't hear anything really progressive in either of these guys' catalogues, but I do however enjoy Swilson's work far more. I'll go as far to say that I love it.
I think it is dangerously narrow minded to slap on a 'progressive' sticker on something just because one thinks it's good. I think we've all seen that in the suggestions department here on PA..... I am not referring to anybody here.
It seems to me that a lot of folks visit this thread to fight for their hero - or just campaign against the 'villain' and that kind of defeats the purpose of the thing imo. It's allright to vent ones distaste for what Steven stated, but turning this thread into another endless 'what is prog' thing, surely is uncalled for.
|
|
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”
- Douglas Adams
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Steven Wilson Vs. Roine Stolt
