| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Dean 
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
 Posted: August 06 2009 at 13:20 |
I got carried away  .... and a couple of Prog related slipped in
several of these bothered the UK top 20, and a couple even got to #1
Dire Straits - Money For Nothing - 8:26
Dire Straits - Telegraph Road - 14:21
Laurie Anderson - O Superman 8:21
Donna Summer - Love To Love You Baby - 16:50
Donna Summer - I Feel Love - 10:00
Lynyrd Skynyrd - Free Bird - 9:06
David Bowie - Station To Station - 10:14
The Damned - Curtain Call - 17:13
Jane's Adiction - Three Days - 10:48
Elton John - Funeral For A Friend/Love Lies Bleeding - 11:09
Meatloaf - Bat Out Of Hell - 9:48
Smashing Pumpkins - Starla - 11:01
Spiritualised - Cop Shoot Cop - 17:43
NOFX - The Decline - 18:19
Neil Young- Cowgirl In The Sand - 10:06
The Who - Won't Get Fooled Again - 8:32
Television - Marquee Moon - 10:40
Siouxsie & the Banshees - The Lords Prayer - 14:09
Issac Hayes - By The Time I Get to Pheonix - 18:40
Marvin Gaye - Got To Give It Up - 11:48
Faithless - Slava Mea - 10:47
Art Of Noise - Moments In Love - 10:18
The Byrds - Eight Miles High - 16:03
Credence Clearwater Revival - Heard It Through the Grapevine - 11:07
Swans - Animus - 10:41
Roxy Music - Bogus Man - 9:20
Frankie Goes to Hollywood - Welcome To The Pleasure Dome - 13:58 (UK #1)
New Order - Confusion - 8:12
Cat Stevens - Foreigner Suite - 18:06
Enigma - Principles of Lust - 11:43
G'n'R - November Rain - 8:57
Weezer - Only In Dreams - 8:00
Jane Siberry - The Bird and the Gravel - 10:34
Green Day - Jesus of Suburbia - 9:10
Derick & The Dominos - Layla - 7:02 (damn!)
|
|
What?
|
 |
LanCaiHe
Forum Groupie
Joined: April 20 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 78
|
Posted: August 06 2009 at 11:52 |
Seems like the limit here is around 4:05. Maybe you should check the whole top 100 to see. I doubt they'll be much longer. When is the last time you heard a 8 or 10 minute pop tune? I can't remember ever hearing one. 
 Nuke wrote:
I think you were told wrong. Maybe the average song is 3:30 (I'd guess 4:00) but plenty of longer songs chart. Here's a peek at the top 40 today:
1. Black eyed peas - I gotta feeling - 4:05 (Radio Version)
2. Drake - Best I ever had - 4:18
3. Taylor Swift - You belong with me - 3:51 (Radio Mix)
4. Keri Hilson - Knock You Down - 4:12
5. Sean Kingston - Fire Burning - 3:54 (Radio Edit)
Anyways, I don't think cynic and athiest should have been considered prog metal since they only went back to jazz (and new age electronica for cynic). They are so insanely creative and technical though, that it was bound to get added despite lacking the lineage. They are an example of what I am talking about. We either ought to open the floodgates or close them. Either all progressive and forward thinking rock music is prog, or only something somehow from the lineages established in the 70s. I hate this in-between state we have going on. |
|
|
Jim
|
|
LanCaiHe
Forum Groupie
Joined: April 20 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 78
|
Posted: August 06 2009 at 11:37 |
>>I find it hard to believe you're the devil when you don't even like metal<<<
Actually, if the devil inspired works like the Mephisto Waltz, Devils Trill, Night on Bald Mountain, etc., then it must be someone else who inspires Metal bands, because the devil has much better taste in music! 
LanCaiHe wrote:
topofsm wrote:
LanCaiHe wrote:
topofsm wrote:
LanCaiHe wrote:
OK, now I see where you are coming from. "Forward Thinking" is something that I feel is all relative. If you compare anything that any prog band does to works by classical or contemporary classical composers you will find that there is nothing really "new" about what they are doing at all. In other words, it's all been done before. It's when it is blended with rock that it becomes progressive rock. I think that for rock to be progressive rock, it has to have some of these basic characteristics:
1. Song Length longer than 3 minutes, (around there, the standard allowable pop song length). this doesn't mean that it can't be under 3 minutes, the Residents do this type of thing all the time. Prog musicians do not write for the masses, if they were in it for the money, they wouldn't be playing prog.
"Breathe" by Pink Floyd is under 3 minutes.
Quite actually, I never said that it couldn't be under 3 minutes, there is just a "rule" out there for top 40 airplay that it has to be a certain length and that length is something like 3 minutes and so many seconds. The Residents have done many songs under that time limit and so have the Art Bears. Also, I don't see what Pink Floyd has to do with it? I never considered them Prog. At least nobody that I hung around with back in the 70's considered them Prog. We just considered them Rock. I'm sure I'll hear a lot about that. Pink Floyd worshipers are about as bad as the people who worship YES.
Fair enough, plenty of people don't consider them prog here, though they're here.
2. Rooted, or based upon Western classical music, not a heavy emphasis on the blues, i.e. lots of blues scales and funk motifs rhythmic or otherwise.
"21st Schizoid Man" is in the C minor blues scale
Actually, I think 21st Century Schizoid Man is in a minor pentatonic scale, not a straight forward blues scale. Also, I didn't say that it could not be used, just to a much lesser degree than every single pop hit does. So you could say it has it's influence in traditional Chinese music, with the addition of Indian and jazz rhythmic influences.
It is pentatonic for the most part, but it does switch. The riff is definetely blues scale in any event, and the chord progression, especially during the complicated rythm part, relies on lots of chords in the 12 bar blues scale.
3. Lyrics that have subject matter about things other than "I love your hips, I love your thighs, they make me high." LOL Prog lyrics are very programmatic or come from an entirely different point of view.
Roxy Music! Yuck! I'd rather listen to the B-52s for more interesting lyics. ;-)
I'm not personally a fan, but there are people here who will defend to the death their inclusion here as prog.
4. Players that have a greater than average technical skill at playing their instruments. This has always been the case with Progressive Rock.
Pink Floyd never flaunted their technical skill
It's because they never HAD and technical skill! You certainly nailed that one right on the head. 
I disagree, and there are people who can talk about their compositional virtuosity and Gilmour's flawless playing for many a post.
5. Of course things that have a lineage back to what I call the real Prog of the 70's, related to Gentle Giant, ELP, Yes, PFM, etc.,
Tons of prog metal like Atheist and Cynic only goes back to jazz.
You will really have to prove to me that there is a God for me to believe that! Just my opinion, but I think metal is crap. I don't care how many people like it. If that's the case, just listen to jazz. ;-)
If you don't hear jazz influence in these bands you likely aren't familiar with jazz at all. In any opinion, it doesn't matter whether you think they're crap or not, they are considered prog here. Just cause you're a prog fan doesn't mean everything you like is prog and everything you dislike isn't prog. I dislike ELP, but there's no way in hell I'm going to argue that they're not prog.
Well, so far I've listened to a part of a song by Atheist. It started out kinda interesting then it degraded to the most horrible sh*te I've ever heard in my life! Nobody can tell me on this earth that there is anything interesting, blah, blah, good about someone screaming like an idiot. How am I supposed to listen to the music with all screaming going on???? I didn't hear anything that was akin to jazz in what I listened to so far. I'm very familiar with jazz, and I am a musician, so don't even go there please. 
Maybe many of you might add to this list?
Nuke wrote:
In my opinion, in order for something to be prog, it needs to be somehow descended from or else be one of the main genres that were called prog in the 70's. If it doesn't follow in the lineage of symphonic prog, italian prog, krautrock, zeuhl, or whatever, then it ought not to be prog, but if it happens to be adopted by the prog community and called prog because of it's innovative nature, then their style of music ought to be considered prog and all of their contemporaries as well. This means it is very weighty to call something prog just because it is progressive in nature. However, by progressive I just mean "forward thinking" or "innovative." Incidentally, lots of prog bands write music that is progressive, although not all (see neo-prog). I wouldn't call matte kudasai either progressive nor prog... |
|
I'm just playing the devil's advocate... don't mind me.  I am the devil, don't mind me either!  I find it hard to believe you're the devil when you don't even like metal. |
|
It appears that I've pulled an Ivan here. Don't take this argument too personally please.
|
|
|
|
Jim
|
|
LanCaiHe
Forum Groupie
Joined: April 20 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 78
|
Posted: August 06 2009 at 11:30 |
Ok, listened to Samba Briza, I don't have any problem at all with that. It doesn't make much sense compared to the other thing I heard, sounded like two completely different bands. Be that as it may, I don't think there is anything to "get" about metal. Ok, we play as fast as we want, so we end up sounding like a polka band from hell, and let someone scream like they are having their heart ripped out by a demon? There isn't one redeeming quality about it. Listening to Atheist made me really appreciate rap music! If I wanted to listen to Latin jazz, I think I would rather listen to THE CARRIBEAN JAZZ PROJECT or ANTONIO CARLOS JOBIM, and definitely not to a death metal band called ATHEIST. Ironic Indeed!
Nuke wrote:
Listen to samba briza by athiest. That sort of latin jazz is what really influences their music. I don't expect you to ever like athiest to be honest, because metal is very much a thing you either "get" or "don't get." At least you will know that athiest are capable of creating sonically pleasing jazz music though. It's my favorite samba to be honest, and I find it very ironic indeed that a death metal band created my favorite samba... |
|
|
Jim
|
|
Nuke
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 25 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 271
|
Posted: August 06 2009 at 11:13 |
|
Listen to samba briza by athiest. That sort of latin jazz is what really influences their music. I don't expect you to ever like athiest to be honest, because metal is very much a thing you either "get" or "don't get." At least you will know that athiest are capable of creating sonically pleasing jazz music though. It's my favorite samba to be honest, and I find it very ironic indeed that a death metal band created my favorite samba...
|
|
|
|
LanCaiHe
Forum Groupie
Joined: April 20 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 78
|
Posted: August 06 2009 at 06:37 |
topofsm wrote:
LanCaiHe wrote:
topofsm wrote:
LanCaiHe wrote:
OK, now I see where you are coming from. "Forward Thinking" is something that I feel is all relative. If you compare anything that any prog band does to works by classical or contemporary classical composers you will find that there is nothing really "new" about what they are doing at all. In other words, it's all been done before. It's when it is blended with rock that it becomes progressive rock. I think that for rock to be progressive rock, it has to have some of these basic characteristics:
1. Song Length longer than 3 minutes, (around there, the standard allowable pop song length). this doesn't mean that it can't be under 3 minutes, the Residents do this type of thing all the time. Prog musicians do not write for the masses, if they were in it for the money, they wouldn't be playing prog.
"Breathe" by Pink Floyd is under 3 minutes.
Quite actually, I never said that it couldn't be under 3 minutes, there is just a "rule" out there for top 40 airplay that it has to be a certain length and that length is something like 3 minutes and so many seconds. The Residents have done many songs under that time limit and so have the Art Bears. Also, I don't see what Pink Floyd has to do with it? I never considered them Prog. At least nobody that I hung around with back in the 70's considered them Prog. We just considered them Rock. I'm sure I'll hear a lot about that. Pink Floyd worshipers are about as bad as the people who worship YES.
Fair enough, plenty of people don't consider them prog here, though they're here.
2. Rooted, or based upon Western classical music, not a heavy emphasis on the blues, i.e. lots of blues scales and funk motifs rhythmic or otherwise.
"21st Schizoid Man" is in the C minor blues scale
Actually, I think 21st Century Schizoid Man is in a minor pentatonic scale, not a straight forward blues scale. Also, I didn't say that it could not be used, just to a much lesser degree than every single pop hit does. So you could say it has it's influence in traditional Chinese music, with the addition of Indian and jazz rhythmic influences.
It is pentatonic for the most part, but it does switch. The riff is definetely blues scale in any event, and the chord progression, especially during the complicated rythm part, relies on lots of chords in the 12 bar blues scale.
3. Lyrics that have subject matter about things other than "I love your hips, I love your thighs, they make me high." LOL Prog lyrics are very programmatic or come from an entirely different point of view.
Roxy Music! Yuck! I'd rather listen to the B-52s for more interesting lyics. ;-)
I'm not personally a fan, but there are people here who will defend to the death their inclusion here as prog.
4. Players that have a greater than average technical skill at playing their instruments. This has always been the case with Progressive Rock.
Pink Floyd never flaunted their technical skill
It's because they never HAD and technical skill! You certainly nailed that one right on the head.
I disagree, and there are people who can talk about their compositional virtuosity and Gilmour's flawless playing for many a post.
5. Of course things that have a lineage back to what I call the real Prog of the 70's, related to Gentle Giant, ELP, Yes, PFM, etc.,
Tons of prog metal like Atheist and Cynic only goes back to jazz.
You will really have to prove to me that there is a God for me to believe that! Just my opinion, but I think metal is crap. I don't care how many people like it. If that's the case, just listen to jazz. ;-)
If you don't hear jazz influence in these bands you likely aren't familiar with jazz at all. In any opinion, it doesn't matter whether you think they're crap or not, they are considered prog here. Just cause you're a prog fan doesn't mean everything you like is prog and everything you dislike isn't prog. I dislike ELP, but there's no way in hell I'm going to argue that they're not prog.
Well, so far I've listened to a part of a song by Atheist. It started out kinda interesting then it degraded to the most horrible sh*te I've ever heard in my life! Nobody can tell me on this earth that there is anything interesting, blah, blah, good about someone screaming like an idiot. How am I supposed to listen to the music with all screaming going on???? I didn't hear anything that was akin to jazz in what I listened to so far. I'm very familiar with jazz, and I am a musician, so don't even go there please.
Maybe many of you might add to this list?
Nuke wrote:
In my opinion, in order for something to be prog, it needs to be somehow descended from or else be one of the main genres that were called prog in the 70's. If it doesn't follow in the lineage of symphonic prog, italian prog, krautrock, zeuhl, or whatever, then it ought not to be prog, but if it happens to be adopted by the prog community and called prog because of it's innovative nature, then their style of music ought to be considered prog and all of their contemporaries as well. This means it is very weighty to call something prog just because it is progressive in nature. However, by progressive I just mean "forward thinking" or "innovative." Incidentally, lots of prog bands write music that is progressive, although not all (see neo-prog). I wouldn't call matte kudasai either progressive nor prog... |
|
I'm just playing the devil's advocate... don't mind me. I am the devil, don't mind me either! I find it hard to believe you're the devil when you don't even like metal. |
|
It appears that I've pulled an Ivan here. Don't take this argument too personally please.
|
|
|
Jim
|
|
topofsm
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 17 2008
Location: Arizona, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1698
|
Posted: August 06 2009 at 00:36 |
LanCaiHe wrote:
topofsm wrote:
LanCaiHe wrote:
OK, now I see where you are coming from. "Forward Thinking" is something that I feel is all relative. If you compare anything that any prog band does to works by classical or contemporary classical composers you will find that there is nothing really "new" about what they are doing at all. In other words, it's all been done before. It's when it is blended with rock that it becomes progressive rock. I think that for rock to be progressive rock, it has to have some of these basic characteristics:
1. Song Length longer than 3 minutes, (around there, the standard allowable pop song length). this doesn't mean that it can't be under 3 minutes, the Residents do this type of thing all the time. Prog musicians do not write for the masses, if they were in it for the money, they wouldn't be playing prog.
"Breathe" by Pink Floyd is under 3 minutes.
Quite actually, I never said that it couldn't be under 3 minutes, there is just a "rule" out there for top 40 airplay that it has to be a certain length and that length is something like 3 minutes and so many seconds. The Residents have done many songs under that time limit and so have the Art Bears. Also, I don't see what Pink Floyd has to do with it? I never considered them Prog. At least nobody that I hung around with back in the 70's considered them Prog. We just considered them Rock. I'm sure I'll hear a lot about that. Pink Floyd worshipers are about as bad as the people who worship YES.
Fair enough, plenty of people don't consider them prog here, though they're here.
2. Rooted, or based upon Western classical music, not a heavy emphasis on the blues, i.e. lots of blues scales and funk motifs rhythmic or otherwise.
"21st Schizoid Man" is in the C minor blues scale
Actually, I think 21st Century Schizoid Man is in a minor pentatonic scale, not a straight forward blues scale. Also, I didn't say that it could not be used, just to a much lesser degree than every single pop hit does. So you could say it has it's influence in traditional Chinese music, with the addition of Indian and jazz rhythmic influences.
It is pentatonic for the most part, but it does switch. The riff is definetely blues scale in any event, and the chord progression, especially during the complicated rythm part, relies on lots of chords in the 12 bar blues scale.
3. Lyrics that have subject matter about things other than "I love your hips, I love your thighs, they make me high." LOL Prog lyrics are very programmatic or come from an entirely different point of view.
Roxy Music! Yuck! I'd rather listen to the B-52s for more interesting lyics. ;-)
I'm not personally a fan, but there are people here who will defend to the death their inclusion here as prog.
4. Players that have a greater than average technical skill at playing their instruments. This has always been the case with Progressive Rock.
Pink Floyd never flaunted their technical skill
It's because they never HAD and technical skill! You certainly nailed that one right on the head.
I disagree, and there are people who can talk about their compositional virtuosity and Gilmour's flawless playing for many a post.
5. Of course things that have a lineage back to what I call the real Prog of the 70's, related to Gentle Giant, ELP, Yes, PFM, etc.,
Tons of prog metal like Atheist and Cynic only goes back to jazz.
You will really have to prove to me that there is a God for me to believe that! Just my opinion, but I think metal is crap. I don't care how many people like it. If that's the case, just listen to jazz. ;-)
If you don't hear jazz influence in these bands you likely aren't familiar with jazz at all. In any opinion, it doesn't matter whether you think they're crap or not, they are considered prog here. Just cause you're a prog fan doesn't mean everything you like is prog and everything you dislike isn't prog. I dislike ELP, but there's no way in hell I'm going to argue that they're not prog.
Maybe many of you might add to this list?
Nuke wrote:
In my opinion, in order for something to be prog, it needs to be somehow descended from or else be one of the main genres that were called prog in the 70's. If it doesn't follow in the lineage of symphonic prog, italian prog, krautrock, zeuhl, or whatever, then it ought not to be prog, but if it happens to be adopted by the prog community and called prog because of it's innovative nature, then their style of music ought to be considered prog and all of their contemporaries as well. This means it is very weighty to call something prog just because it is progressive in nature. However, by progressive I just mean "forward thinking" or "innovative." Incidentally, lots of prog bands write music that is progressive, although not all (see neo-prog). I wouldn't call matte kudasai either progressive nor prog... |
|
I'm just playing the devil's advocate... don't mind me. I am the devil, don't mind me either! I find it hard to believe you're the devil when you don't even like metal. |
|
It appears that I've pulled an Ivan here. Don't take this argument too personally please.
|
|
|
|
Nuke
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 25 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 271
|
Posted: August 05 2009 at 16:16 |
I think you were told wrong. Maybe the average song is 3:30 (I'd guess 4:00) but plenty of longer songs chart. Here's a peek at the top 40 today: 1. Black eyed peas - I gotta feeling - 4:05 (Radio Version) 2. Drake - Best I ever had - 4:18 3. Taylor Swift - You belong with me - 3:51 (Radio Mix) 4. Keri Hilson - Knock You Down - 4:12 5. Sean Kingston - Fire Burning - 3:54 (Radio Edit) Anyways, I don't think cynic and athiest should have been considered prog metal since they only went back to jazz (and new age electronica for cynic). They are so insanely creative and technical though, that it was bound to get added despite lacking the lineage. They are an example of what I am talking about. We either ought to open the floodgates or close them. Either all progressive and forward thinking rock music is prog, or only something somehow from the lineages established in the 70s. I hate this in-between state we have going on.
|
|
|
|
LanCaiHe
Forum Groupie
Joined: April 20 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 78
|
Posted: August 05 2009 at 12:22 |
topofsm wrote:
LanCaiHe wrote:
OK, now I see where you are coming from. "Forward Thinking" is something that I feel is all relative. If you compare anything that any prog band does to works by classical or contemporary classical composers you will find that there is nothing really "new" about what they are doing at all. In other words, it's all been done before. It's when it is blended with rock that it becomes progressive rock. I think that for rock to be progressive rock, it has to have some of these basic characteristics:
1. Song Length longer than 3 minutes, (around there, the standard allowable pop song length). this doesn't mean that it can't be under 3 minutes, the Residents do this type of thing all the time. Prog musicians do not write for the masses, if they were in it for the money, they wouldn't be playing prog.
"Breathe" by Pink Floyd is under 3 minutes.
Quite actually, I never said that it couldn't be under 3 minutes, there is just a "rule" out there for top 40 airplay that it has to be a certain length and that length is something like 3 minutes and so many seconds. The Residents have done many songs under that time limit and so have the Art Bears. Also, I don't see what Pink Floyd has to do with it? I never considered them Prog. At least nobody that I hung around with back in the 70's considered them Prog. We just considered them Rock. I'm sure I'll hear a lot about that. Pink Floyd worshipers are about as bad as the people who worship YES.
2. Rooted, or based upon Western classical music, not a heavy emphasis on the blues, i.e. lots of blues scales and funk motifs rhythmic or otherwise.
"21st Schizoid Man" is in the C minor blues scale
Actually, I think 21st Century Schizoid Man is in a minor pentatonic scale, not a straight forward blues scale. Also, I didn't say that it could not be used, just to a much lesser degree than every single pop hit does. So you could say it has it's influence in traditional Chinese music, with the addition of Indian and jazz rhythmic influences.
3. Lyrics that have subject matter about things other than "I love your hips, I love your thighs, they make me high." LOL Prog lyrics are very programmatic or come from an entirely different point of view.
Roxy Music! Yuck! I'd rather listen to the B-52s for more interesting lyics. ;-)
4. Players that have a greater than average technical skill at playing their instruments. This has always been the case with Progressive Rock.
Pink Floyd never flaunted their technical skill
It's because they never HAD and technical skill! You certainly nailed that one right on the head.
5. Of course things that have a lineage back to what I call the real Prog of the 70's, related to Gentle Giant, ELP, Yes, PFM, etc.,
Tons of prog metal like Atheist and Cynic only goes back to jazz.
You will really have to prove to me that there is a God for me to believe that! Just my opinion, but I think metal is crap. I don't care how many people like it. If that's the case, just listen to jazz. ;-)
Maybe many of you might add to this list?
Nuke wrote:
In my opinion, in order for something to be prog, it needs to be somehow descended from or else be one of the main genres that were called prog in the 70's. If it doesn't follow in the lineage of symphonic prog, italian prog, krautrock, zeuhl, or whatever, then it ought not to be prog, but if it happens to be adopted by the prog community and called prog because of it's innovative nature, then their style of music ought to be considered prog and all of their contemporaries as well. This means it is very weighty to call something prog just because it is progressive in nature. However, by progressive I just mean "forward thinking" or "innovative." Incidentally, lots of prog bands write music that is progressive, although not all (see neo-prog). I wouldn't call matte kudasai either progressive nor prog... |
|
I'm just playing the devil's advocate... don't mind me. I am the devil, don't mind me either! |
|
|
Jim
|
|
topofsm
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 17 2008
Location: Arizona, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1698
|
Posted: August 05 2009 at 11:02 |
LanCaiHe wrote:
OK, now I see where you are coming from. "Forward Thinking" is something that I feel is all relative. If you compare anything that any prog band does to works by classical or contemporary classical composers you will find that there is nothing really "new" about what they are doing at all. In other words, it's all been done before. It's when it is blended with rock that it becomes progressive rock. I think that for rock to be progressive rock, it has to have some of these basic characteristics:
1. Song Length longer than 3 minutes, (around there, the standard allowable pop song length). this doesn't mean that it can't be under 3 minutes, the Residents do this type of thing all the time. Prog musicians do not write for the masses, if they were in it for the money, they wouldn't be playing prog.
"Breathe" by Pink Floyd is under 3 minutes.
2. Rooted, or based upon Western classical music, not a heavy emphasis on the blues, i.e. lots of blues scales and funk motifs rhythmic or otherwise.
"21st Schizoid Man" is in the C minor blues scale
3. Lyrics that have subject matter about things other than "I love your hips, I love your thighs, they make me high." LOL Prog lyrics are very programmatic or come from an entirely different point of view.
Roxy Music!
4. Players that have a greater than average technical skill at playing their instruments. This has always been the case with Progressive Rock.
Pink Floyd never flaunted their technical skill
5. Of course things that have a lineage back to what I call the real Prog of the 70's, related to Gentle Giant, ELP, Yes, PFM, etc.,
Tons of prog metal like Atheist and Cynic only goes back to jazz.
Maybe many of you might add to this list?
Nuke wrote:
In my opinion, in order for something to be prog, it needs to be somehow descended from or else be one of the main genres that were called prog in the 70's. If it doesn't follow in the lineage of symphonic prog, italian prog, krautrock, zeuhl, or whatever, then it ought not to be prog, but if it happens to be adopted by the prog community and called prog because of it's innovative nature, then their style of music ought to be considered prog and all of their contemporaries as well. This means it is very weighty to call something prog just because it is progressive in nature. However, by progressive I just mean "forward thinking" or "innovative." Incidentally, lots of prog bands write music that is progressive, although not all (see neo-prog). I wouldn't call matte kudasai either progressive nor prog... |
|
I'm just playing the devil's advocate... don't mind me.
|
|
|
|
LanCaiHe
Forum Groupie
Joined: April 20 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 78
|
Posted: August 05 2009 at 10:46 |
Apparently, for air play length there is a limit to how long a pop song can be....I mean a top 40 song more specifically. It is 3 minutes and some odd seconds. It has to stay within this limit or it doesn't have an icecube's chance in hell for airplay. Or, so I am told. 
Nuke wrote:
Oh yes, I read it a while ago, although I think I kind of ignored it when I read it because I still suffered under the misconception that progressive was an adjective and not a noun. I think the most important factor in calling something prog is the lineage, because with prog being inherantly creative, it's never going to confine itself to a list of characteristics, however your list does seem to cover well the prog of the last 40 years, so I can assume it will remain accurate for a while. But why 3 minutes? Even most pop music is longer than 3 minutes, as a matter of fact I can't think of a pop song less than 3 minutes off the top of my head. I think that making songs much shorter than 3 minutes is getting dangerously short, actually, something a progressive band might try... |
|
|
Jim
|
|
Nuke
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 25 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 271
|
Posted: August 05 2009 at 10:40 |
|
Oh yes, I read it a while ago, although I think I kind of ignored it when I read it because I still suffered under the misconception that progressive was an adjective and not a noun. I think the most important factor in calling something prog is the lineage, because with prog being inherantly creative, it's never going to confine itself to a list of characteristics, however your list does seem to cover well the prog of the last 40 years, so I can assume it will remain accurate for a while. But why 3 minutes? Even most pop music is longer than 3 minutes, as a matter of fact I can't think of a pop song less than 3 minutes off the top of my head. I think that making songs much shorter than 3 minutes is getting dangerously short, actually, something a progressive band might try...
|
|
|
|
LanCaiHe
Forum Groupie
Joined: April 20 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 78
|
Posted: August 05 2009 at 07:42 |
haha, yes, thank you very much, I know that this is on here, but I guess it was a personal thing. I wonder if Nuke has read this page?
Dean wrote:
LanCaiHe wrote:
OK, now I see where you are coming from. "Forward Thinking" is something that I feel is all relative. If you compare anything that any prog band does to works by classical or contemporary classical composers you will find that there is nothing really "new" about what they are doing at all. In other words, it's all been done before. It's when it is blended with rock that it becomes progressive rock. I think that for rock to be progressive rock, it has to have some of these basic characteristics:
1. Song Length longer than 3 minutes, (around there, the standard allowable pop song length). this doesn't mean that it can't be under 3 minutes, the Residents do this type of thing all the time. Prog musicians do not write for the masses, if they were in it for the money, they wouldn't be playing prog.
2. Rooted, or based upon Western classical music, not a heavy emphasis on the blues, i.e. lots of blues scales and funk motifs rhythmic or otherwise.
3. Lyrics that have subject matter about things other than "I love your hips, I love your thighs, they make me high." LOL Prog lyrics are very programmatic or come from an entirely different point of view.
4. Players that have a greater than average technical skill at playing their instruments. This has always been the case with Progressive Rock.
5. Of course things that have a lineage back to what I call the real Prog of the 70's, related to Gentle Giant, ELP, Yes, PFM, etc.,
Maybe many of you might add to this list? |
|
|
|
Jim
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: August 05 2009 at 07:38 |
LanCaiHe wrote:
OK, now I see where you are coming from. "Forward Thinking" is something that I feel is all relative. If you compare anything that any prog band does to works by classical or contemporary classical composers you will find that there is nothing really "new" about what they are doing at all. In other words, it's all been done before. It's when it is blended with rock that it becomes progressive rock. I think that for rock to be progressive rock, it has to have some of these basic characteristics:
1. Song Length longer than 3 minutes, (around there, the standard allowable pop song length). this doesn't mean that it can't be under 3 minutes, the Residents do this type of thing all the time. Prog musicians do not write for the masses, if they were in it for the money, they wouldn't be playing prog.
2. Rooted, or based upon Western classical music, not a heavy emphasis on the blues, i.e. lots of blues scales and funk motifs rhythmic or otherwise.
3. Lyrics that have subject matter about things other than "I love your hips, I love your thighs, they make me high." LOL Prog lyrics are very programmatic or come from an entirely different point of view.
4. Players that have a greater than average technical skill at playing their instruments. This has always been the case with Progressive Rock.
5. Of course things that have a lineage back to what I call the real Prog of the 70's, related to Gentle Giant, ELP, Yes, PFM, etc.,
Maybe many of you might add to this list? |
|
|
What?
|
|
Geizao
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 23 2008
Location: Key Largo
Status: Offline
Points: 393
|
Posted: August 05 2009 at 07:24 |
It's classy:
- Opel by Syd Barrett
- Bouree by Jethro Tull (Tull's version)
(But) This is conceptual works:
- When The Wind Blows, by Roger Waters
- A Passion Play by Jethro Tull
|
|
LanCaiHe
Forum Groupie
Joined: April 20 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 78
|
Posted: August 05 2009 at 06:39 |
OK, now I see where you are coming from. "Forward Thinking" is something that I feel is all relative. If you compare anything that any prog band does to works by classical or contemporary classical composers you will find that there is nothing really "new" about what they are doing at all. In other words, it's all been done before. It's when it is blended with rock that it becomes progressive rock. I think that for rock to be progressive rock, it has to have some of these basic characteristics:
1. Song Length longer than 3 minutes, (around there, the standard allowable pop song length). this doesn't mean that it can't be under 3 minutes, the Residents do this type of thing all the time. Prog musicians do not write for the masses, if they were in it for the money, they wouldn't be playing prog.
2. Rooted, or based upon Western classical music, not a heavy emphasis on the blues, i.e. lots of blues scales and funk motifs rhythmic or otherwise.
3. Lyrics that have subject matter about things other than "I love your hips, I love your thighs, they make me high." LOL Prog lyrics are very programmatic or come from an entirely different point of view.
4. Players that have a greater than average technical skill at playing their instruments. This has always been the case with Progressive Rock.
5. Of course things that have a lineage back to what I call the real Prog of the 70's, related to Gentle Giant, ELP, Yes, PFM, etc.,
Maybe many of you might add to this list?
Nuke wrote:
In my opinion, in order for something to be prog, it needs to be somehow descended from or else be one of the main genres that were called prog in the 70's. If it doesn't follow in the lineage of symphonic prog, italian prog, krautrock, zeuhl, or whatever, then it ought not to be prog, but if it happens to be adopted by the prog community and called prog because of it's innovative nature, then their style of music ought to be considered prog and all of their contemporaries as well. This means it is very weighty to call something prog just because it is progressive in nature. However, by progressive I just mean "forward thinking" or "innovative." Incidentally, lots of prog bands write music that is progressive, although not all (see neo-prog). I wouldn't call matte kudasai either progressive nor prog... |
|
|
Jim
|
|
Nuke
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 25 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 271
|
Posted: August 04 2009 at 19:59 |
|
In my opinion, in order for something to be prog, it needs to be somehow descended from or else be one of the main genres that were called prog in the 70's. If it doesn't follow in the lineage of symphonic prog, italian prog, krautrock, zeuhl, or whatever, then it ought not to be prog, but if it happens to be adopted by the prog community and called prog because of it's innovative nature, then their style of music ought to be considered prog and all of their contemporaries as well. This means it is very weighty to call something prog just because it is progressive in nature. However, by progressive I just mean "forward thinking" or "innovative." Incidentally, lots of prog bands write music that is progressive, although not all (see neo-prog). I wouldn't call matte kudasai either progressive nor prog...
|
|
|
|
Hyardacil
Forum Groupie
Joined: August 04 2009
Location: Estonia
Status: Offline
Points: 70
|
Posted: August 04 2009 at 17:27 |
|
They are more than good, I'd say. I have to admit, that, after listening to Genesis for many years straight as my favorite band and analyzing every note with my relative amount of musical knowledge (if any at all...) I think that up until W&W the band was at a constant improving. Every consecutive album is better than the last one. TOTT probably being the best though. Even with Gabriel leaving they still had it going - as good as ever, I'd say.
But into the thread subject - To me it does not matter. There are, ofc, songs that cannot be put to the term "prog", but that term is such a loose one anyways. I can't answer what prog is for sure.
I can enjoy most of the short songs prog bands put out too.
|
|
"I am sitting in your eyes..."
|
|
dbeckster
Forum Newbie
Joined: August 12 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1
|
Posted: August 04 2009 at 15:26 |
|
Trick of the Tal and Wind and Wuthering are good. After that it's downhill. (Those two were probably only good because of Hackett!)
|
|
-dbeckster, The Prog rock kid
|
|
LanCaiHe
Forum Groupie
Joined: April 20 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 78
|
Posted: August 04 2009 at 13:46 |
First, I would like you to explain your reasoning, since I have very specific requirements for rock music to be regarded as Progressive Rock. It would be fun to see yours first. Certainly it will give me greater insight into your thought processes.
Nuke wrote:
Well what do you think prog is? |
|
|
Jim
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Prog's not prog.
