Losing interest in prog

As Slarti says, 2011 is a banquet...you've got to find SOMETHING to like this year.  There's the Fripp project, Wilson's solo album, prog metal as usual, so much to choose from.  But I guess you can't expect each new album you hear to be a masterpiece that surpassed any you've heard before, that expectation starts to develop unconsciously as you listen to more music and can make one feel fatigued and bored of a chosen genre of music.

progprogprog wrote:   IMO for not having a boring debate, sometimes it's good to have some generalizations, it's actually may lead to more dynamic discussion.   What I want to hopefully point out, is not limiting ourselves just in those period of time, it's actually having more creativity in the whole music, like what they did back in the golden years of prog scene. If there was a similar spurt in the recent products, like 70's, then we could find some comparison in these two eras of music. You gotta categorize things in order to judge them.The OP was talking about the quality of recent prog.

Lose interest in Prog? Never! 

el böthy wrote: Old fart syndrome  Naaaaaaaahhh, you´re way cool Baldie!!!!

Edited by The Miracle - December 31 2011 at 18:18

Ditto on the "production" point. Its possible to mix a separately recorded track to sound like its intermingled - but the style these days is definitely separation and "cleanliness". Its partly to do also with digital technology. For instance - listen to some of The Tea Club's tracks. They record separately but on all analog equipment. Pretty amazing, warm and organic sound.

Well maybe you should stop listening to modern music. The only prog is the 70s prog. I continue to find lots of great 70s prog. So much better than rock of the last 25 years. I continue not to buy albums by any band who formed after 1975 and I'm proud of it. The best rock is from the 1968-83 era made by bands who formed in the late 60s or early 70s 

Edited by dr prog - December 31 2011 at 17:42

I know that if I had stuck with one flavour of music only, I would have become bored. Variety in music is just as needed as variety in life in general.Some crave it, others don't.

To become tired of prog, as I regard it, is to become tired of sophisticated rock music. Which is essentially what prog is about to my mind. No fault in that. There's so much else to discover out there.

To not appreciate new prog music is another case entirely. And to some extent something that comes with age. The older one gets the harder it is to become fascinated with new music. Especially if one has been actively listening to lots of music for many years.

As some have said, there's nothing new under the sun, it's all been made before. And that's how it always has been. Many artists that takes music a slight nuance in a new direction, and whenever something -new- has been discovered, it's usually a case of an artist assembling a plethora of those subtle nuances and being discovered by listeners and music journalists touting this as the all brand new. That's the way it has been, and that is the way it will be. In my personal opinion, obviously.

BaldFriede wrote: Catcher10 wrote: BaldFriede wrote: Catcher10 wrote: What is "prog" anyways? .......Don't answer that!!!   I can see your points, but I generally don't get tired or bored of a genre, more so an artist or group of artists. So I then just move on to something different. I can't get into classical music to the point where I feel I need to spend the next 5yrs trying to understand it...call me lame I guess, but I don't care for it that much.   Jazz is different, always has been for me, it will always be a work in progress, positive progress for sure. As far as music production and it sounding sterile...welcome to the age of digital files and the dreaded CD! I do expect in the next 5 yrs the CD will get better and so will digital music. Since I am a vinyl aficionado, I don't suffer from your hearing dilema......and jazz should only be listened to on a turntable. It should be a crime to listen to A Love Supreme on a CD......   I would not take your issue as a bad thing, at least you are still exploring new music, the problem will be if you get tired of music in general! I actually think the sound difference between turntable records and CDs, apart from some unwanted wild noise which you get on turntable records after some time, is in the mind only.   Well that is very true......my ears are connected to my head where my mind lives and it tells me its awesome!!   So you are complaining of some "wild noise" but yet you prefer live music (which we all do), and have no problem with people screaming or talking during a live show?.......or say at a classical concert recital hearing someone coughing the whole time? That to me is "wild noises".........   Anyhow........Happy New Year! That is part of the atmosphere. People are not wild noise, they make music alive. I much prefer live concerts and live albums to studio albums. And especially when a band does not stick to the studio version. Actually that was how classical concerts used to be too, by the way (and luckily there is a tendency of them becoming that way again). In a piano concert or a violin concert (or any concert foro a soloist and orchestra)  the artist used to improvise a lot. The Romantic era with its genius-cult changed all that; suddenly only the written notes counted. Actually compositions with "basso continuo" were very much like jazz compositions - the soloist or soloists improvised, and the rhythm section improvised too (along a given harmonic scheme). Bacg, Beethoven, Mozart, Händel and many other composers were masters of improvisation; Bach could even improvise a fugue on any given theme; most composers consider composing a fugue a very difficult task already. John Cage, by the way, pointed out that in live concerts there is no "wild noise" when he wrote his famous composition 4'33.

With the Romantic era, as much as the written notes counted, equally important was what you did with those notes, A Beethoven or Bruckner symphony interpreted by a different conductor was maybe using the same score of notes, but it did not end there, as the conductor could almost "improvise in interpretation" of those notes. Thus, you were able to have "Furtwangler's Beethoven" compared with "Toscanini's Beethoven" as two different things. Unfortunately, today's conductors are not so distinctive.


Edited by presdoug - December 31 2011 at 17:32