Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Crimson King is often cited as the first because Genesis and Yes and myriad other bands got their inspiration from it. But yeah there was certainly stuff before it like The Nice, Moody Blues, Procol Harum and even Pink Floyd.
Joined: August 27 2014
Location: riding the MOAB
Status: Offline
Points: 1505
Posted: May 03 2017 at 13:35
micky wrote:
aglasshouse wrote:
BarryGlibb wrote:
Prog wasn't "invented" until 1969 was it? So....... no.
Ehhh, debatable. Moody Blues released Days of Future Passed in '67, which is often considered to be prog. Self-conscious prog didn't come until 69-70 though, I guess. Just depends on your outlook really.
still surprises me this myth still persists...
no.. and no
while the Moodies in 67 might be debatable..personally I think it is and was...
this one from 68 isn't... hard core sympho prog man a year earlier than K.C supposed invented it.
I think Days is a more clear cut example of symph rock that Ars Longa was, as they quite literally had an orchestral accompaniment. The Nice were more symphonic in the realm of effects and keyboards, mainly due to Emerson, which is almost an equal amount of kudos given right there. I think Days also encapsulates that prog attitude, with it's silly romanticism, in one of it's earliest forms.
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838
Posted: April 29 2017 at 14:21
aglasshouse wrote:
BarryGlibb wrote:
Prog wasn't "invented" until 1969 was it? So....... no.
Ehhh, debatable. Moody Blues released Days of Future Passed in '67, which is often considered to be prog. Self-conscious prog didn't come until 69-70 though, I guess. Just depends on your outlook really.
still surprises me this myth still persists...
no.. and no
while the Moodies in 67 might be debatable..personally I think it is and was...
this one from 68 isn't... hard core sympho prog man a year earlier than K.C supposed invented it.
Joined: August 27 2014
Location: riding the MOAB
Status: Offline
Points: 1505
Posted: April 29 2017 at 11:51
BarryGlibb wrote:
Prog wasn't "invented" until 1969 was it? So....... no.
Ehhh, debatable. Moody Blues released Days of Future Passed in '67, which is often considered to be prog. Self-conscious prog didn't come until 69-70 though, I guess. Just depends on your outlook really.
Joined: August 27 2014
Location: riding the MOAB
Status: Offline
Points: 1505
Posted: April 29 2017 at 11:49
Baroque music can get confused sometimes for being prog, but I think it more acts as the progenitor rather than actually being prog itself. It definitely inspired music to be considered as such but itself I don't think so.
Joined: August 28 2010
Location: Melbourne, Oz
Status: Offline
Points: 1781
Posted: April 29 2017 at 07:08
Prog wasn't "invented" until 1969 was it? So....... no.
But I remember as a 8 year old that its was the most significant release in a lifetime up until that point....that is coming from an 8 year-old's consciousness mind you.
Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17964
Posted: April 28 2017 at 09:59
SteveG wrote:
Catcher10 wrote:
SteveG wrote:
^And the Beatles!
Boring response.....U would have got had u said Lady Gaga
Boring but true. The Beatles were the most influential rock band in history. They were the ones that first made long playing LPs filled with musical value and not just filler. They wrote their own songs instead of using the past practice of using outside songwriters and influenced every other major artist to do the same. They made the recording studio part of the composition of the music and changed forever the role of the recording studio in rock music. They evolved radically in a short time and forced every other major recording artist at the time to do the same.
These few examples are credentials that Lady Gaga, Madonna and Michael Jackson will never own. It's time to give the Beatles their due, Jose, as many of the prog and non pro artist that you enjoy today would not exist if the Beatles had not come first. Cold fact.
The only cold fact is they gave up after 10 years...cold fact. Also have no real argument with most of what you state, clearly influential to the music world. But I give no credit to the statement "had they not existed your fav bands would not exist..." Well I have a ton of fav bands so you are saying I would have no musical experience in my life.......horse sh*t!
Bands that came after still would have found their creative juice, what some of these bands did was to copy what the Beatles were doing, that's all. All new bands copy in some way an old band they like...
Almost all bands in that era lived in the studio when recording, not just the Beatles, all music at that time had that something extra special because music was recorded live as a group, not sampled and pieced together as it is now on a computer.
I don't get the "wrote their own songs part", most bands I enjoy that were recording in the mid to late 60s wrote their own music. Remember these early British bands were influenced by the American R&B movement and also they enjoyed that 60's counterculture movement, they came on at the right time.
When I think about the music that was being created during that time, they were in a nice niche....but. Once '68 hit their music style was boring and too much teenage pop elements, too clean....It was not hard/metal enough like Zeppelin, Cream, The Who or Jimi nor psychedelic/experimental enough like the Floyd, KC, CAN or Tangerine Dream. To me this new music wave that was happening was leaving them behind or they were not progressive enough to evolve and adjust, although it seems to me they saw the writing on the wall.
I mean the people who like the music of Wings in the 70's, are just the grown up people who liked the Beatles music as teenagers in the 60's.
I will get red ink for my post, whatever ....It's my view and I love it!! I will go to my grave knowing full well that my musical life was not missing anything, by not including the Beatles in my collection.....Hell, they commanded the FM radio waves so why waste money and buy their albums, I heard their krapp for free!
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20617
Posted: April 28 2017 at 04:32
Catcher10 wrote:
SteveG wrote:
^And the Beatles!
Boring response.....U would have got had u said Lady Gaga
Boring but true. The Beatles were the most influential rock band in history. They were the ones that first made long playing LPs filled with musical value and not just filler. They wrote their own songs instead of using the past practice of using outside songwriters and influenced every other major artist to do the same. They made the recording studio part of the composition of the music and changed forever the role of the recording studio in rock music. They evolved radically in a short time and forced every other major recording artist at the time to do the same.
These few examples are credentials that Lady Gaga, Madonna and Michael Jackson will never own. It's time to give the Beatles their due, Jose, as many of the prog and non pro artist that you enjoy today would not exist if the Beatles had not come first. Cold fact.
Edited by SteveG - April 28 2017 at 04:34
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Posted: April 27 2017 at 23:37
micky wrote:
very true my friend.. very true.. it is called maturity. 10-15 years ago the internet heavyweights like you and me were dictating what was and was not. You here and me on that other site before you convinced me to join you over here.
Today...there is no answer .. only different interpretations of what it is.. thus there is no right or wrong answer.. thus the winning answer.
Is it Prog?
who gives a f**k...
That's true.
That's why today I stick to say if something is Symphonic or not, if "KC and The Sunshine Band" or "Van Mc'Coy and the Soul City Symphony" are added to Avant Garde, I wouldn't say a word.
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838
Posted: April 27 2017 at 16:49
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
Catcher10 wrote:
Come on Ivan, the album has been out since 1967...more than enough time to pick a side.
In the last 10 years I saw the definition of Prog change so much, that I don't know anymore.
10 years ago I would had said NO, but today.......
very true my friend.. very true.. it is called maturity. 10-15 years ago the internet heavyweights like you and me were dictating what was and was not. You here and me on that other site before you convinced me to join you over here.
Today...there is no answer .. only different interpretations of what it is.. thus there is no right or wrong answer.. thus the winning answer.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.164 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Is Sgt Pepper Prog?
Topic Options
micky wrote:
....It's my view and I love it!! I will go to my grave knowing full well that my musical life was not missing anything, by not including the Beatles in my collection.....Hell, they commanded the FM radio waves so why waste money and buy their albums, I heard their krapp for free! 
.
