Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Can Retro Prog be Progressive?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedCan Retro Prog be Progressive?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
russellk View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 28 2005
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 19:42
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by russellk russellk wrote:



Really? There wasn't a genre or sub-genre called crossover prog until recently. We're changing history at this site all the time. If we want to have a genre called retro-prog, then we will.
 
That's not changing history, that's adapting to historical changes.

For example, in 1975 there was no need for BNeo Prof because there was no Neo Prog. in 1985 it was required, the person who coined the name diidn't changed history, only created a term that adapted better to historical changes in Progressive Rock

Now Crossover and prog Related together are a mistake in my opinion, but that's not my call, and if M@X wants to create a genre called Retro prog, it's his call.

For the record, I do NOT want such a genre. I think the word 'retro' applies to an attitude, not a genre.

But shouting the same argument time and again doesn't make it right, Ivan. There's an established genre called retro-rock, in which artists evoke the rock of the 1970s. I personally think - as do some others here - that some contemporary prog bands do this too. It's a way of referring to a broad group of artists, to distinguish them from other contemporary prog artists who are pushing musical boundaries.
 
Contradicting yourself doesn't make it right either Russellk:
 
In the first row you say:   I think the word 'retro' applies to an attitude, not a genre.
In the second parragraph you say: There's an established genre called retro-rock
 
So, Is it an attitude or a genre?
 
BTW: There is not a genre with defined paraneters called retro Rock, because it would never be accurate, being that what today is not Retro, tomorrow will probably be consider retro.
 
And even if it was, Progressive Rock plays with a different set of rules, you can talk about Retro when a once fashionable genre becomes out of fashion, but Prog is not created to a fashion as mainstream, so it's created to trancend time, to last as long as possible.

Retro Prog would imply that Prog vanished, diisapeared, died and somebody is trying to re-create it, that's inaccurate, prog never died, there are bands playing Symphonic friom 1967 until 2008, the sub-genre has 41 years and I hope will last 40 more..

Mainstream music is created to be popular, sell a lot in a short period of time and vanish,  art is secondary,

Quote Retro is a term used to describe, denote or classify culturally outdated or aged trends, modes, or fashions, from the overall postmodern past
 
 
Prog is created to be artistic and if possible last a lot of time, so we can't talk of retro when we refer to a genre created to trascend time.
 
As I said yesterday...Ars Longa, Vita Brevis...Art is created by the real artist to survive him if possible, because Art is forever and life is short.

I'm still yet to hear an ARGUMENT against this idea, just some repeated assertions.

Where those enough?
 
Iván



As for your arguments:

1) I didn't refer to neo-prog, I referred to crossover prog. That sub-genre wasn't created for an emerging new style, but as a different category to encompass existing music. That's changing history. If we do that, we could also do retro-prog. I repeat, I don't think we should, but we could.

2) No contradiction at all. I said that others had made up a genre called retro-rock, and said that I think 'retro' applies to an attitude, not a genre. I don't see any contradiction, just a disagreement. Others think there should be a genre called retro-rock, while I think retro-rock is an attitude to making music. So: I think it's an attitude, others think it's a genre. Clear? One is what I think, the other is what some others think.

3. Is there a genre called retro rock? Amazon seems to think so: http://www.amazon.com/Best-Neo-Punk-Retro-Rock/lm/XEYKD0KF53U1. VH1.com seems to think so: http://shop.vh1.com/Retro-Rock_stcVVcatId424123VVviewcat.htm. Last FM seems to think so: http://www.last.fm/group/Retro+rock.
As for defined parameters, we'd better not start insisting on agreed definitions as proof of existence, otherwise prog rock will be ruled out too! Wink

4. I don't buy your argument that prog was created to be timeless for a moment. It was a fashion like any other, in my opinion. That it's now out of fashion ought to be clear to everyone. Being a hippie is out of fashion, but there are a few out there still wearing the beads and cheesecloth shirts. Same with prog. It's still out there and going strong, but it's no longer the trendsetter it was 35 years ago. Of course prog is not dead, and you make a logical error in asserting that something can only be 'retro' if it is dead. Not so. But it is out of fashion, and so any recreation must by definition be retro.

I absolutely agree with your definition of retro, and would argue that the prog revival is retro by that definition.

So thanks for taking the time to make some arguments.

Can retro be progressive? Yes. Is it a negative term? I don't think so. Just my opinion.

Back to Top
russellk View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 28 2005
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 19:26
^ absolutely.
Back to Top
OzzProg View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 02 2008
Location: Quebec
Status: Offline
Points: 540
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 17:44
Well, I didn't read every post, so I don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet;

Your question answers itself. If it is in fact "Retro Prog", it is of course progressive.

Many say Retro Prog just copies the old stuff, therefore being Regressive. However, even though they use the old formula for music, these bands bring lots of progressive elements to the table. A notable band, that is a prime example of this, is Beardfish. They sounds like 70's prog, the Retro aspect of Retro Prog, but  Beardfish brings all sorts of new stuff, that is completely progressive to the rock genre (I can't point any single point of their music that makes them progressive, its just a completely unique and new style.) So in my opinion Beardfish = Retro Prog. (Now, DUH! there are tons of more bands that do this, Beardfish just leaped forward in my mind)

However, there are a lot of bands that are just Retro 70's rockers, which create good music that sounds like 70's, but does not introduce anything new, therefore Not being progressive. A good example of a band like this (for me) is Spock's Beard, which sounds like poppy 70's prog. I still like them, but I don't think they are terribly progressive.

OzzProg!
Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32552
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 15:17
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:



I can guess.  Your motivations are to be right and be heard.  LOL
 
No, my motivations are to debate in search for the closest approach to truth, through research not guessing.
 
Iván


Hey, hey- note the smiley!  Smile
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 15:16
Originally posted by russellk russellk wrote:



Really? There wasn't a genre or sub-genre called crossover prog until recently. We're changing history at this site all the time. If we want to have a genre called retro-prog, then we will.
 
That's not changing history, that's adapting to historical changes.

For example, in 1975 there was no need for BNeo Prof because there was no Neo Prog. in 1985 it was required, the person who coined the name diidn't changed history, only created a term that adapted better to historical changes in Progressive Rock

Now Crossover and prog Related together are a mistake in my opinion, but that's not my call, and if M@X wants to create a genre called Retro prog, it's his call.

For the record, I do NOT want such a genre. I think the word 'retro' applies to an attitude, not a genre.

But shouting the same argument time and again doesn't make it right, Ivan. There's an established genre called retro-rock, in which artists evoke the rock of the 1970s. I personally think - as do some others here - that some contemporary prog bands do this too. It's a way of referring to a broad group of artists, to distinguish them from other contemporary prog artists who are pushing musical boundaries.
 
Contradicting yourself doesn't make it right either Russellk:
 
In the first row you say:   I think the word 'retro' applies to an attitude, not a genre.
In the second parragraph you say: There's an established genre called retro-rock
 
So, Is it an attitude or a genre?
 
BTW: There is not a genre with defined paraneters called retro Rock, because it would never be accurate, being that what today is not Retro, tomorrow will probably be consider retro.
 
And even if it was, Progressive Rock plays with a different set of rules, you can talk about Retro when a once fashionable genre becomes out of fashion, but Prog is not created to a fashion as mainstream, so it's created to trancend time, to last as long as possible.

Retro Prog would imply that Prog vanished, diisapeared, died and somebody is trying to re-create it, that's inaccurate, prog never died, there are bands playing Symphonic friom 1967 until 2008, the sub-genre has 41 years and I hope will last 40 more..

Mainstream music is created to be popular, sell a lot in a short period of time and vanish,  art is secondary,

Quote Retro is a term used to describe, denote or classify culturally outdated or aged trends, modes, or fashions, from the overall postmodern past
 
 
Prog is created to be artistic and if possible last a lot of time, so we can't talk of retro when we refer to a genre created to trascend time.
 
As I said yesterday...Ars Longa, Vita Brevis...Art is created by the real artist to survive him if possible, because Art is forever and life is short.

I'm still yet to hear an ARGUMENT against this idea, just some repeated assertions.

Where those enough?
 
Iván



Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 15 2008 at 15:22
            
Back to Top
russellk View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 28 2005
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 14:47
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by crimson87 crimson87 wrote:

 
As simple as that , retro prog sounds progressive but it suffers from stagnation. And stagnation is not a  main characteristic of prog rock.
 
 
 
Please, when you will get it..Progressive Rock is the name of a musical genre, as Modern is the name of music from 1820 to 1899.
 
There will be many more contemporary composers, but Wagner or Chopin or Dvorak will always be MODERN MUSICIANS, even in the XXX Century, because MODERN IS JUST A NAME.
 
In the same way Progressive Rock is just a term, call it Art Rock or whatever but a band that was part of the Progressive Rock genre in 1971, will be  a Progressive Rock band in 2099.
 
There's not a genre or sub-genre called Regressive or retro Prog, only progressive Rock, and things wion't change, because you can't change history
 
Is this so hard to understand?
 
Iván


Really? There wasn't a genre or sub-genre called crossover prog until recently. We're changing history at this site all the time. If we want to have a genre called retro-prog, then we will.

For the record, I do NOT want such a genre. I think the word 'retro' applies to an attitude, not a genre.

But shouting the same argument time and again doesn't make it right, Ivan. There's an established genre called retro-rock, in which artists evoke the rock of the 1970s. I personally think - as do some others here - that some contemporary prog bands do this too. It's a way of referring to a broad group of artists, to distinguish them from other contemporary prog artists who are pushing musical boundaries.

I'm still yet to hear an ARGUMENT against this idea, just some repeated assertions.
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 14:39
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:



I can guess.  Your motivations are to be right and be heard.  LOL
 
No, my motivations are to debate in search for the closest approach to truth, through research not guessing.
 
Iván
            
Back to Top
Moogtron III View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 26 2005
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 10616
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 14:39
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

 
The term Retro Prog is absurd IMO, or must a genre live 2 years and be forgotten? Why can't a genre live 40 or 100 years, why must we change at the Speed of MTV and Billboard?
 
Baroque Music existed from 1600 to 1750 more or less, and nobody called a composer playing in Baroque style in 1700 a Retro Musician, why must genres live only a couple of years?
 
 
Wonderful, what a breath of  fresh air. Thanks, Iván! Clap
 
I agree, but still I'm just thinking about Ed Macan, who says in his book about progressive rock two things that stick in my head:
- that progressive rock has used most of its possibilities between 1970 - 1975, and that there are only a few creative bands which give the genre some extra mileage, and nothing more
- that any music exists through a relation within society; I wonder if it's just the record companies who are guilty of making prog obscure (and DJ's/ music critics), or, on top of that, is modern man just easily bored?
 
Still, I agree, because I do see the need for a lot of people to stay with the genre, explore it further, listen to it over and over again. Like me. Seems like a more natural thing. Prog should be fresh until 2130, and a neo prog revival should come about 100 years later LOL
 
 
Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32552
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 14:34
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

So please. if you don't know what I listen or not or what are my motivations, don't try to guess.

 


I can guess.  Your motivations are to be right and be heard.  LOL
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 14:17
I take my hat for your diplomatic abbilities Mister Henry Kissinger Logan Wink
 
Iván
            
Back to Top
Logan View Drop Down
Forum & Site Admin Group
Forum & Site Admin Group
Avatar
Site Admin

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 36859
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 14:15
I can't say why he got that specific impression -- I won't speak for him -- and I know you listen to more than symph, and symph related music.  Yes, it's an assumption that leads to an invalid conclusion.  I think it was poorly phrased.  It might have been stated as  "Assuming you prefer symph and symph-related bands when it comes to Prog, rather than experimental, avant garde bands, then it is not surprising that you think this way because...."
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 13:50
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

In defence of Matias, he did say "from what I understand...."
 
But from where he understands?
 
That's a wiold guess only, and a wild guess used to reach a conclusion.
 
Ivñan
            
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 13:49
Originally posted by crimson87 crimson87 wrote:

 
As simple as that , retro prog sounds progressive but it suffers from stagnation. And stagnation is not a  main characteristic of prog rock.
 
 
 
Please, when you will get it..Progressive Rock is the name of a musical genre, as Modern is the name of music from 1820 to 1899.
 
There will be many more contemporary composers, but Wagner or Chopin or Dvorak will always be MODERN MUSICIANS, even in the XXX Century, because MODERN IS JUST A NAME.
 
In the same way Progressive Rock is just a term, call it Art Rock or whatever but a band that was part of the Progressive Rock genre in 1971, will be  a Progressive Rock band in 2099.
 
There's not a genre or sub-genre called Regressive or retro Prog, only progressive Rock, and things wion't change, because you can't change history
 
Is this so hard to understand?
 
Iván


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 15 2008 at 14:18
            
Back to Top
Logan View Drop Down
Forum & Site Admin Group
Forum & Site Admin Group
Avatar
Site Admin

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 36859
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 13:47
In defence of Matias, he did say "from what I understand...."
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 13:40
Originally posted by el böthy el böthy wrote:


That´s just your way of seeing things.
 
Of course it is my way of seeing things, would be at least silly to pretend I express your opinions or the opinions of other person appart than me.
 
But seems by the reaction of the posters, that my opinion has some supporters.
 
Originally posted by el böthy el böthy wrote:

And from what I understand you don´t really listen to more experimental or non symphonic/neo bands, so it´s obvious you will think that way.
 

Please refresh my memory:

  1. Have you ever been in my house and seen my record collection?
  2. Are you my priest and I have told you in secret confession that I only listen Symphonic?
  3. Have I ever sent you a PM telling you: "Hey El Bothy, I only listen Symphonic?"

Otherwise I don't see how you pretend to know what I listen or what I don't listen. Of course you haven't checked the bands I added, out of the 150 (More or less), the vast majority is non Symphonic.

As a fact I have recently added or in process of addition, 5 bands from your country (Factor Burzaco - Avant/RIO; Andres Ruiz - Eclectic; Antihéroe - Jazz Fusion; Panza - Rio - Crossover; UBU - Prog Folk) which maybe you haven't even heard, none of them Symphonic.

Probably you have checked my reviews....But wait, out of my last 20 reviews, only 5 are Symphonic and 4 are Avant - RIO.

So please. if you don't know what I listen or not or what are my motivations, don't try to guess.

Now back to the point, if you believe my opinion is wrong, What is your solution?

Maybe sending a PM to the members of Glass Hammer, Magenta, Spock's Beard, Anekdoten, Par Lindh Project, Anglagard, Anton Roolaart, Iacintus, Shadow Circus (You can find John Fontana as JPlanet in this forum), etc, and tell them "Hey you better start exploring or we will remove you from Prog Archives because I decided you are not progressive".

I never said that Prog must not evolve, I said a band may or may not evolve and still be part of the Progressive Rock genre.

Iván

 


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 15 2008 at 13:43
            
Back to Top
crimson87 View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 03 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 1818
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 13:32
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Retro can be Prog (noun), but retro (regressive) is not progressive (adjective).  I find "retro" a useful term to describe music that sounds like it is of, harkens back to, a past era/ time.  I commonly say, "it has a retro aesthetic" or "it has retro elements" when evaluating music.
 
As simple as that , retro prog sounds progressive but it suffers from stagnation. And stagnation is not a  main characteristic of prog rock.
 
But to some of us (the younger ones) it's great for a band that had it's prime more than 35 years ago to release an album that reminds us of it's days of old. (VDGG)
Besides there ain't a perfect "progressive" band  King Crimson produced great music in the 80's 90's and 00's but it was formulaic. one formula in the 80's other different later.
Back to Top
Logan View Drop Down
Forum & Site Admin Group
Forum & Site Admin Group
Avatar
Site Admin

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 36859
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 12:47
Retro can be Prog (noun), but retro (regressive) is not progressive (adjective).  I find "retro" a useful term to describe music that sounds like it is of, harkens back to, a past era/ time.  I commonly say, "it has a retro aesthetic" or "it has retro elements" when evaluating music.
Back to Top
el böthy View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 27 2005
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 6336
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 10:07
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Again, Progressive Rock has absolutely no relation with progress or evolution, a band can play in the style of Procol Harum, and still be part of the PROGRESSIVE ROCK movement.
 
The term Retro Prog is absurd IMO, or must a genre live 2 years and be forgotten? Why can't a genre live 40 or 100 years, why must we change at the Speed of MTV and Billboard?
 
Baroque Music existed from 1600 to 1750 more or less, and nobody called a composer playing in Baroque style in 1700 a Retro Musician, why must genres live only a couple of years?
 
This is not pop where you have to be new in order to exist, this is Prog where people buy The Lamb or CttE 40 years after their release.
 
Iván

That´s just your way of seeing things. And from what I understand you don´t really listen to more experimental or non symphonic/neo bands, so it´s obvious you will think that way.
"You want me to play what, Robert?"
Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32552
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 07:46
Not that I wish to jump head first into this melee, I just want to point out (from the sidelines!) that I go to lots of record stores, in many different cities and states, and I think I've only ever seen Selling England by the Pound about three or four times, including the time I bought it.  Most of the Genesis I see is the post-Hackett material.
Back to Top
Petrovsk Mizinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: December 24 2007
Location: Ukraine
Status: Offline
Points: 25210
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2008 at 07:30
In fact, I'm not done yetLOL

Now for the bigger crunch coming up: Prepare to have your faces melted off and put in a pot to be cooked i.e post with more musically academic content warningTongue
Non-musicians, be warnedLOL
Well, okay, it's not that bad.

What is considered progressive?

Let's discuss some musical devices that have been used for quite a while in music's history.

Let's take counter and polyphony for instance.
Two musical devices favored by many of the Baroque era composers.

Now, let's take these into a more modern context.

Say if a prog rock band, hypothetically speaking and thinking more along late 60s/early 70s for the first time, uses counterpoint and polyphony in their music.

Is it progressive? (in the sense of actual progression, not in terms of it being 'prog rock')
Or is it just 'retro?

These devices have been used for hundreds of years before the people in x band have been born.
One side of the argument says "What is new about this? Bach was all over it by the 1700s at least, if not even earlier, and chances are, people used these musical devices before him".

If we choose to look at it from a more historical point of view, and take all music, not just rock, into account, then, nothing was really innovated, hence it's retro really.

But now, let's leave music before 1965 out often equation, and better yet, let's pretend classical music in the vein of the Baroque style or whatever, is not being written at all.

What we have now, is progression, in the true definition of the word.
We have seen someone incorporate elements in rock music never done before.
And then we have the first guys started to take it to another level and use Fifth Species counterpoint instead of merely just the first species, for the first time etc.
Still, progression is happening

And now, we can apply this to other later periods of prog music (although we no longer need to say it's necessarily about counterpoint or polyphony anymore, it can be a whole multitude of things, like other musical devices, genre mish-mashing etc).

Let's prog metal for example.

Retro if we view as metal and elements we consider prog already having been done.
Progressive if we recognize metal was never played in such a complex way before.



So, it's a matter of perspective/what angle we approach it, the historical context we chose to see it in, and even more I can't be bothered to think of at the top of my head as I really need sleep.




Edited by HughesJB4 - November 15 2008 at 07:30
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.