Symphonic or Progressive: What came first?

This is my recollection too. In El Salvador (and Central America in general), we used the term "Comercial" when we refereed to the pop/radio/dance music of the times. The music from bands like yes, Jethro Tull, King Crimson, Genesis, etc, was known and refered to as "No Comercial" for lack of a better term, and later, I believe it was towards the end of the 70s, was clasified as "Música Progresiva". This music was quite exclusive and hard to find, so not very many people knew about it, and it made you feel like you belonged to an elite group of music lovers.

 

Wacht out for Cert i remember that you and him had an issue of this kind of topic not many months ago

 

and yes Ivan, Lawyers Rocks!

 

 

There is no need to sound harsh. But getting a point accross can be hard, when the terminology is not properly defined and it is simply a term to describe music so it can be found in the internet for folks with similar tastes.

 

While I have no direct issue with that, in general, what a lot of these "fans" do not get or understand, is that they are not allowing themselves a chance to listen to "music" ... they are simply hearing one thing, and in the end, by the time you open up and realize the mistake, you will have missed way too much around you to get an appreciative philosophy about it all. And come to appreciate music for its beauty. So you like metal and the rest is crap? See the problem? It's a bit of respect, care, love and understanding about an art form.

 

This needs to be clear and cleaned up to help people understand music and not just fall into one addiction.

 

Being in the Symphonic team, has made me realize how inaccurate the term Symphonic is, I haven'te heard a propper Symphony written by any Prog band, as a fact I don't know how the term was born, maybe somebody heard the music and said: "Hey, this sound as a Symphony" or most likey when The Moody Blues used a Symphony Orchestra (rwice inaccurate because the Moodies were never Symphonic).

 

I've said this all along. On top of the fact that the big fight in the 60's was about the harsh controls in radio and no one could get through, and one way to get attention was to either be more musical knowledgeable than the popsters, or add some kind of symphonic arrangement so folks would be impressed that the band is better than just Chuck Berry!

 

And in essence, things like this led to Sgt Peppers, and Moody Blues and many others. And for all intents and purpposes they were not "symphonic" since they were mostly a pop band ... but it doesn't mean that their work did not have "symphonic" elements, which is recorded history of music for the last 200 years at least!

 

Most of them DID!

 

...The point is that mopst of the musical terms we use are inaccurate. For example Progressive Rock doesn't need to evolve or progress, even a Genesis clone band is part of the Progressive Rock genre despite they offer nothing new.

 

This has been my concern, and is clearly visible in bands that think they are continuing some kind of "progressive" theme or idea. And "idea" does not prog make! A synthesizer playing flutes with a choir, does not "prog" make. Wayside frankzappawannabes do not "prog" make! Why? ... it's a copy. Yes, it may have some very nice musicianship - no doubt about that ever - but in the end, it's just fridaynightbar music. You get a drink, and yo uspend your time trying to make it with that girl, and who cares about the music!

 

In general, I would prefer that the terminology be cleaned up. Sometimes it works, but sometimes it does not. An example that ended up interesting was the use of the word "ambient" ... when Eno and others kinda started it in those days. And it developed kinda nicely with some interesting variations, like when Hawkwind matched up their hard rock with the ambient mode to create an astounding soundscape ... and then you can catch Nik Turner on his own in the Isis/Osiris stuff that he did ... which is rather trippy, even if weird, but it fits the Ambient mood. It's more "psychological" and "mystical", (and not because of the theme either!) than it is "music" per se, but for one the term fits.

 

The term "progressive" is getting distorted. It scares me that at least one of the sub-genres are there simply because they use a guitar effect or a type of sound effect on their music ... and there is nothing progressive on that for one, and neither is it true "gothic/goth" music because the lyrics are "dark" ... which is a total mis-representation of the music itself and a corruption of the progressive music genre, into a commercial ideal simply to sell more music.

 

Now comes the hard part.

 

PA has to help sell these things. PA's job is to help identify and put this music in the map that you and I love Ivan. And here is the hard part. How are you going to identify all this to help people find it. That is not easy. PA would not be here, or have survived this long if it had not helped in that area. It's that simple!

 

I have no issues with saying that this or that has symphonic elements in it. I have a problem with it being called "symphonic", specially when it is not, and it is just a synthesizer playing string sounds! I have no problem with calling it "rio" or "rheul" or "rude"... but the description is horrendous, and says absolutel nothing about the music and the work within.

 

I'll tell you what is weird ... no one saying that there is a lot of Orff in Magma ... with the difference being that it is done with rock instruments and with a different language ... but somehow, we haven't called it "orff-prog" ... !!!!!!!

 

I mean the symphonic "genre" is an additional tag for make more specific a kind of genre, but you are right symphonic is not a genre anyway thanks for the info.

This was largely my experience in the US in the early 1970's, when Yes/ELP etc. were termed "classical rock" owing to their classical music influences, instrumentation (piano, Mellotron, pipe organ etc.).

I really have no recollection of the term "progressive rock" in wide use back then, but it probably was, and I agree that it was more for the emerging synth bands, avant-garde etc.  

Time and hindsight has elevated Days Of Future Passed to being an important album, but it wasn't the keystone release that many people make it out to be at the time -- it didn't launch a flotilla of imitators or inspire dozens of other bands to adopt the same approach. The Moodies themselves took the basic idea and progressed it - In Search Of The Lost Chord replaced the symphony orchestra with melotrons and exotic instruments, they would then develop that over the next two or three albums and grew more Progressive, but they never became Symphonic in my opinion.

In the 60s using orchestras on pop records was common - they were used to provide filler to pad out the thin sound of guitar and drums, this would be added later by the record producer using a sessions orchestra. From Genesis To Revelation and David Bowie's eponymous debut album are examples of this (to the point where it's hard to hear the original "band" playing). Producers like Phil Spector made orchestration an integral part of the music, George Martin encouraged the Beatles to use orchestral instruments as more than just filler, the result of this was "Revolver" - one of the early examples of Baroque Pop - the fusion of classical instrumentation within a basic pop song structure. Days Of Future Passed takes that one step further by adding orchestral intros and codas to that structure, but the end result is still a pop song, it does not contain symphonic structures or arrangements, it is Baroque Pop. Procol Harum developed it further still, bringing in classical themes and motifs as counterpoint alongside the classical instruments, but again (Repent Walpurgis excepted) it does not venture far from standard pop structures - their early albums were Baroque Pop, later ones Baroque Rock.
[/QUOTE]

Baroque rock and pop. Well, Baroque is a very much older form of classical, certainly A Whiter Shade Of Pale has a Bach leaning. Perhaps Symphonic rock might be best described as indicated by Jon Lord as Concerto Rock. True, no spoecific allegros and Andantes turn up. I rather thought it was the depth of harmonic structure and sound texture that defined symphonic. The rock part merely did away with conventional classical modes and applied the sound to broaden and deepn the rock format.

Personally I think Baroque Pop is an overlooked genre that has produced some classic songs and is with us still today. Many of the Dream Pop bands from the 80s to the present day are essentially Baroque Pop, Tori Amos is a fine example of modern Baroque Pop, as are the so-called New Prog bands like Mew and Elbow. None of these artists are Symphonic, but they all employ orchestration and either real or synthesised classical instruments.

uduwudu wrote:

Orchestral additions are nothing new, it's really the extent they get used, most often a quartet does a pop record and a twenty piece can fit a more extended work. But symphonic, baroque or concerto rock had to begin at some stage much as it had to develop until rejected as it wasn't classical enough or rock enough. In some people's opinions that is, not mine.

Perhaps it all began with George Martin after all.

Time and hindsight has elevated Days Of Future Passed to being an important album, but it wasn't the keystone release that many people make it out to be at the time -- it didn't launch a flotilla of imitators or inspire dozens of other bands to adopt the same approach. The Moodies themselves took the basic idea and progressed it - In Search Of The Lost Chord replaced the symphony orchestra with melotrons and exotic instruments, they would then develop that over the next two or three albums and grew more Progressive, but they never became Symphonic in my opinion.

 

In the 60s using orchestras on pop records was common - they were used to provide filler to pad out the thin sound of guitar and drums, this would be added later by the record producer using a sessions orchestra. From Genesis To Revelation and David Bowie's eponymous debut album are examples of this (to the point where it's hard to hear the original "band" playing). Producers like Phil Spector made orchestration an integral part of the music, George Martin encouraged the Beatles to use orchestral instruments as more than just filler, the result of this was "Revolver" - one of the early examples of Baroque Pop - the fusion of classical instrumentation within a basic pop song structure. Days Of Future Passed takes that one step further by adding orchestral intros and codas to that structure, but the end result is still a pop song, it does not contain symphonic structures or arrangements, it is Baroque Pop. Procol Harum developed it further still, bringing in classical themes and motifs as counterpoint alongside the classical instruments, but again (Repent Walpurgis excepted) it does not venture far from standard pop structures - their early albums were Baroque Pop, later ones Baroque Rock.

 

Personally I think Baroque Pop is an overlooked genre that has produced some classic songs and is with us still today. Many of the Dream Pop bands from the 80s to the present day are essentially Baroque Pop, Tori Amos is a fine example of modern Baroque Pop, as are the so-called New Prog bands like Mew and Elbow. None of these artists are Symphonic, but they all employ orchestration and either real or synthesised classical instruments.

uduwudu wrote: Yes and Genesis may have been relative late comers (like 2010 instead of 2005) as time seems more constricted in those days as more happened on one album  (freer times artistically and commercially) but did they not then own the sub genre? Yes had an orchestra in 1970 and I'd rate The Yes Album as a symphonic rock album.

This is subjective: The orchestra on Time And A Word doesn't fit comfortably, it's not integrated into the music but added on - much like the orchestra on From Genesis To Revelation, I cannot see this as being Symphonic Rock, but Rock with a Symphony Orchestra - I certainly don't consider those to be the same thing. The Yes Album is a transitory album - Howe is making his presence felt, but Kaye is still dominant in the music - the introduction of Wakeman and his Synths would complete the picture making Fragile the more complete Symphonic (Prog) Rock album.

 

And yes, timing is key during this period of music history. The Nice were very important to the fusion of Psyche Rock, Jazz and Classical Music, but it was ELP that actually produced Symphonic Rock, King Crimson are important in developing that fusion into a new form of music that didn't lean on the past, but created something different that contains the hallmarks of symphonic rock. Yes (and to a lesser extent) Genesis took that further (along with Focus, Banco and PFM), but after the pioneering development work had already been done. Renaissance tried the same thing years before and basically failed to get the recognition they deserved until they found the right forumla with Annie Haslam voice some years later.

uduwudu wrote: But to the question... symphonic was first. Progressive rock was mentioned a bit but it was always so vague (as most hear know all too well...) Art Rock is better as a term even though that gets placed on the less chops lighter and more song oriented bands such as Roxy, Supertramp and 10cc (ie.e. not ELP. )

Geography