Developments which changed course of prog history

Here also with James, Rio fest wasn’t a peak, at least not a definitive peak, genres don’t have a linear advance, they have small up and downs, but the real peak, is yet to come.

 

On the contrary, I would say that the RIO fest was a definite peak; it involved the bringing together of many of the best bands in the genre.  I'm not saying it can never be topped, but it was certainly a peak relative to the years immediately before and after.

 

Obviously, I hope that it will reach even higher heights (and I am confident it will).

 

That’s a wrong conception, there was an ongoing process of change.

 

I don't deny this, but I do think that because it was so low key on the national radar that it's possible to point to where symph "died" and neo was "born" as definite points.  The shift between the two was part of that general period of experimentation with new avenues after the first wave went down.

 

Couldn’t we say ut’s reaching an up, and not yet the definitive peak?

 

At the moment, it is at a peak.  If it continues to rise, as I expect it shall, then we can redefine this time as "reaching up" and move what is the definitive peak.  Right now, avant-prog is the highest it has ever been, and it remains to be seen whether the mountain it's climbing continues or comes back down.

Edited by Pnoom! - May 07 2008 at 12:29

Pnoom! wrote[quote]

 

Originally posted by James Avant-prog has never started going down, in my opinion.

It's always been around, but it was somewhat quieter after the RIO movement bands slowed down/disbanded.

 

I agree with James, Avant has not gone down yet, first they have to reach the peak, something hard in a so elaborate and ever changing sub-genre.

 

Symphonic could most likely reach the peak, because the formula was exhausted and the changes were too slow (Except in determined moments like the change between SEBTP and The Lamb or TFTO to Relayer, in which the style of a major band dramatically advanced), but if you keep changing as in Avant, there will always be something new to offer.

 

Neo-prog and avant-prog also have no correlation (in terms of listeners).

 

Agreed.  My argument was that if we define prog to include everything, some sort of prog has been peaking at any given time.  They may not be correlated (Symph peaks, then avant-peaks, then neo peaks), but some sort of prog is always on the rise.  In my initial argument, I was referring specifically to symph prog, which definitely did die out.

 

Agreed, there are moments like in 1992 to 1994 in which Symphonic gave a great advance and Avant kept advancing, even today, in which we have a small Symphonic boom, Avant keeps avamcing.

 

Infact, I'd go so far and say avant-prog never really peaked, well, not in the 1980s.

 

The RIO fest and it's aftermath was a definite peak, especially given that you had the Residents and This Heat in addition.

 

Here also with James, Rio fest wasn’t a peak, at least not a definitive peak, genres don’t have a linear advance, they have small up and downs, but the real peak, is yet to come.

 

Sure, you had The Residents, Miriodor, Cartoon, PFS and many others but only really The Residents were popular.

 

Again, the RIO movement.

 

Agreed, but lets be honest in something, genres like Symphonic had a slow change of icons, Yes is still on stage, Genesis was in the Prog Peak for a very long period, ELP, well had their up and downs but until a few years they were active, while Avant is in constant change of bands, new ones replace old ones in shoprt periods of time.

 

I'd say avant-prog is more popular now (Zorn, Patton projects) than it ever has been.

 

Agreed, but that just means that avant-prog is re-peaking.

 

Couldn’t we say ut’s reaching an up, and not yet the definitive peak?

 

Neo came from Symphonic but there was a gap from about 1976/77 to when the early 1980s where you have mostly New Wave, post-punk and No Wave and the Yes and Genesis pop (including Asia. Japan and others).

 

This is what I was initially referring to when talking about symphonic prog dying.  If it had just bled into Neo, it wouldn't have ever died, it would've changed.

 

That’s a wrong conception, there was an ongoing process of change.

 

In 1976 more or less, the sound of the bands started to change towards Neo Prog, some people even believe ATOTT and W&W are the first examples of Neo Prog, with what I don’t agree, it was just part of the process.

 

Bands like ASIA or Japan where a conservative evolution of Symphonic that couldn’t prosper, because it was too complex for the vast majority and seen as “C” class Prog or Prog wannabes by Progheads.

 

I believe that when you try to blend a cult or semi underground genre as Prog or Punk with general mainstream, you get a hybrid that most surely doesn’t have future.

 

The AOR bands as a hybrid genre vanished like New Age as a hybrid genre of Punk also vanished soon.

 

So Symphonic  evolved to Neo Prog through a period of 4 or 5 years, period in which you had different attempts to replace Symph that didn’t prospered.

 

Iván

 

[quote]

James wrote: Avant-prog has never started going down, in my opinion.

iguana wrote: if the latter is applicable, i'd also go for the release of TFTO by YES, which proved to be the joint nexus, peak, turning point and fateful seal for progressive rock. plus the birth of the scapegoat and the laughing stock.

I dont think any of these developments had much affect on the development of prog as awhole. I went with the folding of KC in '74 because it was more of a portent of things to come, Fripp trying to prevent KC becoming an ineffectual dinosaure which to greater and lesser degrees started to happen to all the other major prog bands shortly afterwards (some notables held off for a few years though). The only real effect that I can see that the chopping and changing of band members had on the prog scene was the small changes made to the indavidual bands, because normally it wasnt the creative leader of the band that was moving on.   

Its been mentioned in here already but the forming of certain bands and the release of certain albums and the change in some peoples attitudes were infinitely bigger effects on the course of prog.  

Dr. Prog wrote:   (by the way, how did the Fripp disbanding KC go from 9 votes to 37 so quickly? Is someone monkeying with the vote totals here?)

Because you allow multiple votes, and by that making the poll results pretty useless. The suggestion with the biggest nerdclick fanbase (who'll bother to vote again and again to see their heroes take the lead) always wins.

I usually disagree with whatever Ivan writes, but suggesting relevant stuff not included in a poll is half the fun and not irrelevant. It starts discussions and keeps threads alive for a couple of pages more. Sometimes its even a slightly interesting read.


Edited by Rocktopus - May 07 2008 at 06:26

Deleted


Edited by James - May 07 2008 at 09:39

I think you mean 2 albums, Iván.

Lizard with Gordon Haskell
Islands with Boz Burrell

After that came Larks' Tongues in Aspic with John Wetton.

Unless you're including the live album Earthbound, which in this situation, I presume you are.

Edit: I didn't see your edit.


Edited by James - May 06 2008 at 23:48

I'd go with different options, includimng one by Cacho:

1. Hackett joining Genesis: The IMO best keyboard - guitar ensemble was born
2. Mike Oldfield releasing Tubular Bells: A 19 years old kid taking that risk is amazing.
3. Jethro Tull switching from Blues to some sort opf Folk/Symphonic Prog
4. Moraz replacing Wakeman for Relayer: A one in a kind album was released and proved a band can change, still I like CTTE more, but Relayer is outstandibng
5. Wetton replacing Lake: Proved that anybody can be replaced.

Iván 

The BBC's insistence on not playing american rock n roll, and instead relying on classical music, english music hall, and trad jazz.