Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Proto-Prog and Prog-Related Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Black Sabbath, the unsung prog trailblazers
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Black Sabbath, the unsung prog trailblazers

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20609
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 18 2020 at 06:58
Originally posted by moshkito moshkito wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

... 
That the record industry was welcoming to oddball acts was just due their own drive to find the next big thing, when there was an era in pop music when the old "cookie cutter" musical trends of 50s were temporally put on hold until new "cookie cutter" trends evolved and took hold in the late 70s. A practice that still exists up to this day, albeit with different music trends.

Steve, please watch the TOM DOWD special ... you will then see this completely different.

Since the 1910's and 1920's ALMOST ALL OF THE MUSIC RIGHTS AND REGISTERING was owned by the MOVIE STUDIOS ... and this means that a lot of artists after the war and in the 1950's that were recorded and released, were done for the studio artists and folks ... and Tom Down even goes so far as to say that this created a horrible problem for black artists ... who managed to survive ... but could not get distributed anywhere beyond their city, for the most part.

That the whole thing began crumbling down in the 1970's is not a surprise ... once The Beatles and Rolling Stones let out that ... guess what ... we don't own our music! ... and all of a sudden you got many bands creating their own registry system for the music ... and soon enough to own their own albums and productions ... but there was a problem ... they needed record company money (from other losing bands!) to be able to tour!

BS is not a trailblazer for anything, except the "image" of something dark, because of a cover and a sound that was registered lower than usual ... and btw, our favorite FM station had the turntables turned down 1% ot so ... which you can't quite hear, but it sure makes that bass sound heavier! Try it on one of those Stanton turntables ... oh yeah ... BS is heavy ... !!!!
I watched it mosh, what's your point?
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17524
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 18 2020 at 06:55
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

... 
That the record industry was welcoming to oddball acts was just due their own drive to find the next big thing, when there was an era in pop music when the old "cookie cutter" musical trends of 50s were temporally put on hold until new "cookie cutter" trends evolved and took hold in the late 70s. A practice that still exists up to this day, albeit with different music trends.

Steve, please watch the TOM DOWD special ... you will then see this completely different.

Since the 1910's and 1920's ALMOST ALL OF THE MUSIC RIGHTS AND REGISTERING was owned by the MOVIE STUDIOS ... and this means that a lot of artists after the war and in the 1950's that were recorded and released, were done for the studio artists and folks ... and Tom Down even goes so far as to say that this created a horrible problem for black artists ... who managed to survive ... but could not get distributed anywhere beyond their city, for the most part.

That the whole thing began crumbling down in the 1970's is not a surprise ... once The Beatles and Rolling Stones let out that ... guess what ... we don't own our music! ... and all of a sudden you got many bands creating their own registry system for the music ... and soon enough to own their own albums and productions ... but there was a problem ... they needed record company money (from other losing bands!) to be able to tour!

BS is not a trailblazer for anything, except the "image" of something dark, because of a cover and a sound that was registered lower than usual ... and btw, our favorite FM station had the turntables turned down 1% ot so ... which you can't quite hear, but it sure makes that bass sound heavier! Try it on one of those Stanton turntables ... oh yeah ... BS is heavy ... !!!!
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20609
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 18 2020 at 04:33
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

I've said it often enough, and it bears repeating: in the late 60s through about the mid-70s, bands with any ability did whatever the hell they wanted, whenever they wanted, because the record industry lost a lot of control during that time period.
 
The idea that the record industry "lost control" in that era is laughable to me, especially when iron fisted rulers like Ahmet Ertegen controlled labels like Atlantic Records. He put Neil Young together with CSN in order to make a super group and sunk big money into Yes And Genesis, who he stole from Charisma Records, because he felt that progressive bands were the next big thing. He also put a ton of promotional money into a little blues rock group called Led Zeppelin. He's just one example of many. The Beatles may have been the first to launch their own vanity label, but it had no bearing on the wealth of EMI records, who they were stilled signed to while the Beatles were losing their minds as well as their own money. And while Led Zep manager Peter Grant negotiated for 90% of the concert gate and more points for record sales, Atlantic never ceded total artistic control to the group.That's why Zeppelin album covers are quite tame when contrasted with the music that's on the record groves.
 
That the record industry was welcoming to oddball acts was just due their own drive to find the next big thing, when there was an era in pop music when the old "cookie cutter" musical trends of 50s were temporally put on hold until new "cookie cutter" trends evolved and took hold in the late 70s. A practice that still exists up to this day, albeit with different music trends.


Edited by SteveG - February 18 2020 at 06:56
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guldbamsen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 18 2020 at 02:46
It’s a little funny. What used to be metal nowadays is refered to as hard-rock. I had a friend over a few weeks back. He’s 21 and very handy around electronics, wires and a soldering iron. In short he was manhandling a headphone of mine and we were casually talking music.

He: ‘Metallica? Mjeah I’ve never really thought of them as metal...hard rock perhaps’
Me: ‘ New Wave Of British METAL doesn’t ring a bell?’
He: ‘Are Metallica British?’
Me: ‘Touché’

Still Black Sabbath seems to be one of the rare exceptions where youngins still seem to both appreciate the music as well as understanding the legacy behind.
BUT as Dark Elf previously alluded to: nothing exists in a vacuum..and while Tony did achieve a wholly unique and dark sound by way of ingenuity (and loss of fingertips), there were still bands out there around the same time with an equally proto-metal sound to them. Mountain fx. Leslie’s guitarwork was freaking heavy for the time! So was Paul Kossoff’s for Free...and then you got bands like Blue Cheer, MC5 and The Stooges.
Black Sabbath though had one thing distinguishing them from the rest of the pack: danger and mystique by way of the dark one.
That image is perhaps one of THE most replicated ones inside the metal world...possibly also why we all throw up the devil’s horns at seemingly cookie-cutter gigs nowadays. Justin Bieber gigs see this too!

Edited by Guldbamsen - February 18 2020 at 02:48
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17524
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 17 2020 at 18:53
Originally posted by dr prog dr prog wrote:

Sabbath and Purple were pretty cool in the 68-76 period. I’d say they had just as many good tunes as Yes, Genesis, Floyd, Elp and Crimson did in that period

There was no BS in 1968! Tongue
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Atavachron Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 17 2020 at 14:33
Originally posted by Psychedelic Paul Psychedelic Paul wrote:

I've never thought of Black Sabbath as a Prog-Rock band. They've always been a Heavy Metal band to me, in the same way as Led Zeppelin are Hard Rock and not Prog-Rock, although I'm glad they're both included in ProgArchives. Smile

Actually if you look at the evidence and know the band's repertoire and performance content, Zep were a prog rock band:  they took blues-rock to a whole other level, widened musical boundaries, indulged in lengthy complex tracks, and expanded their live performances like no one of their time ... or any time.   Each album was different, showed highly technically skilled arrangements for the time, experimented with all number of styles, and took cues from no one.   In other words, prog rock.

What's forgotten is at the time if you weren't progressing rock, you were nothing--  almost everyone except Judas Priest and maybe Seals & Crofts were, or wanted desperately to be, prog.   That's what rock had become, and until the cold water of the '80s hit us all in the face, that's what rock would surely continue to be in even greater ways.   Didn't work out that way but it sure seemed like it would.


"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy
Back to Top
dr prog View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 25 2010
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 2505
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dr prog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 17 2020 at 14:33
Sabbath and Purple were pretty cool in the 68-76 period. I’d say they had just as many good tunes as Yes, Genesis, Floyd, Elp and Crimson did in that period
All I like is prog related bands beginning late 60's/early 70's. Their music from 1968 - 83 has the composition and sound which will never be beaten. Perfect blend of jazz, classical, folk and rock.
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 17194
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 17 2020 at 14:09
Sabbath isn't capital -P-  prog, no...
Back to Top
Psychedelic Paul View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 16 2019
Location: Nottingham, U.K
Status: Online
Points: 40260
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Psychedelic Paul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 17 2020 at 13:49
Originally posted by dr wu23 dr wu23 wrote:

I like the early Sabbath lp's.......never thought of them as 'prog trail blazers' at all...many bands around in the 68-70 period that were doing interesting things. From day one I thought of them as 'underground' hard rock...I always put them in the same box as Zep and similar bands. 
 
Me too! I've never thought of Black Sabbath as a Prog-Rock band. They've always been a Heavy Metal band to me, in the same way as Led Zeppelin are Hard Rock and not Prog-Rock, although I'm glad they're both included in ProgArchives. Smile
Back to Top
dr wu23 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20624
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dr wu23 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 17 2020 at 12:58
I like the early Sabbath lp's.......never thought of them as 'prog trail blazers' at all...many bands around in the 68-70 period that were doing interesting things. From day one I thought of them as 'underground' hard rock...I always put them in the same box as Zep and similar bands. 
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17524
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 17 2020 at 10:07
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

...
Excellent synopsis.  Though prog as we understand it did in fact become the predominant rock style between about 1970 and '79 ~ it was mainstream before anyone knew it (Yes, ELP, Tull), and the idea of (and term) "progressive rock" certainly existed and was used from time to time in the '60s & 70s ~ prog itself is a thing we mostly see in hindsight.

Everybody else is just green--  have you seen the money chart ?

There were many bands that were doing "heavy" stuff, metal or otherwise, before BS came along ... in fact I even had the QUATERMASS album which was released (it looks like) the first album in 1970 by Harvest. And one song from it was used in various places and redone later by many bands!

I'm not a great fan of the big name kissing, and I find it bothersome, and childish, sometimes like a lollipop, and how we think that this band, or that band started everything ... and that discussion is endless, specially when the person writing has not heard anything elsewhere ... so, either than DE mentioning a couple of things here and there, it's almost like saying that no bands before BS in the Midwest ever did "metal" and were not progressive in some respects ... and we know that there were several of them ... that no one ... here or elsewhere, will spend a whole lot of time listening to.

Madison, WI had a band, I think it was The Crucible, that was a sort of BS with the heavy everything, but I can not find anything by it, or the name of one other band that they "competed" with, that I think was from Chicago ... and what made it harder for these bands on these things, was ... one typical idiot DJ in Madison, saying that the station would never play the crap in the streets ... and since he was "hip" and number one, no one said anything ... and new bands had a really hard time, not to mention that his jargon included trashing anything that was West Coast! While he spent his time getting stoned in front of the microphone!

It's really hard for us to conceive that other folks also did things that we think our big name bands did ... but that is like saying that PG invented costumes and conceptual staging, when it had been a historical thing in Europe for hundreds of years ... in fact, some French kings used to create vignettes around ... "bye, bye, blackbird" ... which was a joke that you can find in a Ken Russell film, that seems ... so out of place, but you know the meaning right away!
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
Mortte View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: November 11 2016
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 5538
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mortte Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 17 2020 at 04:16
I think Sabbath is the first band I´ve heard, at least the first I remember. My brother got somewhere "Master Of Reality" & "Vol 4" as a cassette when I was 3-4 old and I remember to listen those (my brother hasn´t got even stereos that time). Ozzy period is just great, never cared much all the other singers periods. I have always thought Sabbath got prog elements from the beginning (listen for example Behind the Wall Of Sleep from the first album). I am glad I saw Sabbath in original line-up 2004 or 2005, it was one of the greatest gigs I have seen!
Back to Top
Frenetic Zetetic View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 09 2017
Location: Now
Status: Offline
Points: 9233
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Frenetic Zetetic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 17 2020 at 01:05
Originally posted by LAM-SGC LAM-SGC wrote:

It was what it was progressive underground hard rock but it wasn't prog rock.

Agreed. I come from a metal and hard rock background, with over a decade of recording and live experience. and I will say I never, ever viewed Sabbath as progressing anything other than the heaviness of certain styles of rock and metal riffing. Sabra Cadabra was their closest IMHO. In fact, Sabbath is very one-trick pony beyond the tunings and slower paced riffs IMO. That's a logical progression someone would've stumbled upon, and falls prey to the "they did it first" fallacy, which is always BS.

"I am so prog, I listen to concept albums on shuffle." -KMac2021
Back to Top
AFlowerKingCrimson View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2016
Location: Philly burbs
Status: Online
Points: 18290
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AFlowerKingCrimson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 16 2020 at 20:21
They were a major contributor to early heavy metal but there were other bands around the same time who were leaning in that direction(Uriah Heep, Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple and lesser known bands like High Tide, Lucifer's Friend, Bloodrock, Sir Lord Baltimore and even Blue Cheer). 

Also, they don't get enough credit for having music that could be considered proto prog metal(Rush seems to get all the credit for that).

They were doing some jammy stuff and then more complex stuff before other heavy bands so in some ways they were a progressive metal band but that genre didn't reallly exist back then so they were more of a proto prog metal band. The term heavy metal did actually exist but it wasn't applied to them. Sabotage is probably my favorite but all of their first six are great. I haven't heard many of their later albums.


Edited by AFlowerKingCrimson - February 16 2020 at 20:30
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Atavachron Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 16 2020 at 17:58
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

I've said it often enough, and it bears repeating: in the late 60s through about the mid-70s, bands with any ability did whatever the hell they wanted, whenever they wanted, because the record industry lost a lot of control during that time period. They could not effectively pigeonhole bands and place them in slots if the said bands had any success or autonomy or balls. Frank Zappa once stated quite clearly that the old-school record marketing execs clearly didn't know what they had, didn't understand the music, and just pushed out product (and Frank mentioned that didn't change until younger execs took over in the mid-70s and started placing every performer in specific slots and regurgitated it throughout the air-waves). 

Therefore, bands like Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Santana, the Allman Brothers, Zappa, Pink Floyd, Traffic and Jethro Tull veered from blues to jazz to prog to straight-ahead rock as it suited them. Shall we do 2 double-album rock operas within a three-release span of time? Sure, why not! How about a 45 minute long song without a single? What the hell, go for it! Our next album is not going to have a title or our band name anywhere on the cover. Ummm...okay...if you think so. We are going to release an album that sl*gs the whole record industry. Sure, it could be made into a monster if we all pull together as a team. 

From 1968 to 1972, Frank Zappa released a parody of hippies, a doo-wop album, an avante-garde experimental album, jazz-fusion/prog albums, an avant-rock/free jazz album, a few comedy rock albums, and a big band jazz album. Tull released a blues rock album, a blues/folk/rock album, two hard rock albums (once arguably a concept album), and then two progressive albums with record-long sides of uninterrupted music. Floyd went from psychedelia to full-blown prog to a rock opera. Yes decided to record albums with 10 to 20 minute-long songs and abandon pop music altogether. The Who released Tommy and Quadrophenia with Who's Next sandwiched in the middle. Zeppelin went from blues rock, to folk/hard rock to prog to a double album that had nearly every genre (Middle-eastern, prog, blues, folk, hard rock, etc.). King Crimson went from being already eccentric King Crimson to a metal version of King Crimson. Santana left rock altogether for a while. And Sabbath got more and more proggy till they reached a max of prog on Sabbath Bloody Sabbath and Sabotage.

There really was no such thing as "prog" because on any given album, a band could suddenly turn to being Prog before they decided to do something completely different. Queen is another case in point. Stevie Wonder and David Bowie as well.
Excellent synopsis.  Though prog as we understand it did in fact become the predominant rock style between about 1970 and '79 ~ it was mainstream before anyone knew it (Yes, ELP, Tull), and the idea of (and term) "progressive rock" certainly existed and was used from time to time in the '60s & 70s ~ prog itself is a thing we mostly see in hindsight.

Everybody else is just green--  have you seen the chart ?


"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy
Back to Top
Psychedelic Paul View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 16 2019
Location: Nottingham, U.K
Status: Online
Points: 40260
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Psychedelic Paul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 16 2020 at 17:55
Originally posted by verslibre verslibre wrote:

Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

I've said it often enough, and it bears repeating: in the late 60s through about the mid-70s, bands with any ability did whatever the hell they wanted, whenever they wanted, because the record industry lost a lot of control during that time period. They could not effectively pigeonhole bands and place them in slots if the said bands had any success or autonomy or balls. Frank Zappa once stated quite clearly that the old-school record marketing execs clearly didn't know what they had, didn't understand the music, and just pushed out product (and Frank mentioned that didn't change until younger execs took over in the mid-70s and started placing every performer in specific slots and regurgitated it throughout the air-waves).
 

Ain't that the truth! Were it not the case, no Tangerine Dream, no Mike Oldfield, and no Vangelis.
I had no idea Black Sabbath and Blue Oyster Cult were both included in ProgArchives until now. That's great news! I'd always assumed those two very 'eavy, very 'umble bands weren't progressive enough to be included in ProgArchives. It makes me wonder now if the Hard Rock bands Led Zeppelin, UFO and Uriah Heep are included here too, but maybe that would be too much to hope for. Smile
 
If Tangerine Dream, Mike Oldfield and Vangelis are all included on ProgArchives too, then that would really make my evening. Smile
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 17194
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 16 2020 at 17:36
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

I've said it often enough, and it bears repeating: in the late 60s through about the mid-70s, bands with any ability did whatever the hell they wanted, whenever they wanted, because the record industry lost a lot of control during that time period. They could not effectively pigeonhole bands and place them in slots if the said bands had any success or autonomy or balls. Frank Zappa once stated quite clearly that the old-school record marketing execs clearly didn't know what they had, didn't understand the music, and just pushed out product (and Frank mentioned that didn't change until younger execs took over in the mid-70s and started placing every performer in specific slots and regurgitated it throughout the air-waves).
 

Ain't that the truth! Were it not the case, no Tangerine Dream, no Mike Oldfield, and no Vangelis.
Back to Top
The Dark Elf View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13063
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Dark Elf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 16 2020 at 17:15
I've said it often enough, and it bears repeating: in the late 60s through about the mid-70s, bands with any ability did whatever the hell they wanted, whenever they wanted, because the record industry lost a lot of control during that time period. They could not effectively pigeonhole bands and place them in slots if the said bands had any success or autonomy or balls. Frank Zappa once stated quite clearly that the old-school record marketing execs clearly didn't know what they had, didn't understand the music, and just pushed out product (and Frank mentioned that didn't change until younger execs took over in the mid-70s and started placing every performer in specific slots and regurgitated it throughout the air-waves). 

Therefore, bands like Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Santana, the Allman Brothers, Zappa, Pink Floyd, Traffic and Jethro Tull veered from blues to jazz to prog to straight-ahead rock as it suited them. Shall we do 2 double-album rock operas within a three-release span of time? Sure, why not! How about a 45 minute long song without a single? What the hell, go for it! Our next album is not going to have a title or our band name anywhere on the cover. Ummm...okay...if you think so. We are going to release an album that sl*gs the whole record industry. Sure, it could be made into a monster if we all pull together as a team. 

From 1968 to 1972, Frank Zappa released a parody of hippies, a doo-wop album, an avante-garde experimental album, jazz-fusion/prog albums, an avant-rock/free jazz album, a few comedy rock albums, and a big band jazz album. Tull released a blues rock album, a blues/folk/rock album, two hard rock albums (once arguably a concept album), and then two progressive albums with record-long sides of uninterrupted music. Floyd went from psychedelia to full-blown prog to a rock opera. Yes decided to record albums with 10 to 20 minute-long songs and abandon pop music altogether. The Who released Tommy and Quadrophenia with Who's Next sandwiched in the middle. Zeppelin went from blues rock, to folk/hard rock to prog to a double album that had nearly every genre (Middle-eastern, prog, blues, folk, hard rock, etc.). King Crimson went from being already eccentric King Crimson to a metal version of King Crimson. Santana left rock altogether for a while. And Sabbath got more and more proggy till they reached a max of prog on Sabbath Bloody Sabbath and Sabotage.

There really was no such thing as "prog" because on any given album, a band could suddenly turn to being Prog before they decided to do something completely different. Queen is another case in point. Stevie Wonder and David Bowie as well.


Edited by The Dark Elf - February 16 2020 at 17:20
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
Back to Top
LAM-SGC View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 26 2018
Location: se
Status: Offline
Points: 1544
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote LAM-SGC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 16 2020 at 17:02
It was what it was progressive underground hard rock but it wasn't prog rock.
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 17194
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 16 2020 at 16:08
Originally posted by dougmcauliffe dougmcauliffe wrote:

I've been listening to Black Sabbath a lot recently and they're often credited for being the first real metal band and I cant argue with that. But I feel that the material on their early albums is extremely progressive. The songs generally have several distinct sections with some really interesting unconventional non-straightforward uses of their instruments. I believe what they were doing was really unlike most music at the time. What they did was the definition of progressive.

Between Iommi's atypical Drop-D and Drop-C(#) tunings from Master of Reality through Sabotage, alternate voicings, multi-tracking his solo on "War Pigs," and his penchant for ostinatos, not to mention their lyrical oeuvre and a complete lack of hesitation to let the music swing, there's more than enough in Sabbath's compositional makeup to qualify them as progressive.

Originally posted by dougmcauliffe dougmcauliffe wrote:

On their debut they had these 10 minute suites of music with various changes throughout. Look at songs like War Pigs and Planet Caravan, Wheels of Confusion... Sabbath Bloody Sabbath and more. Are they a progressive rock band? Well, they're probably heavy metal before that label. But I think they deserve a spot in the heavy prog or arguably even the progressive metal sub genre rather than prog related.

Blue Oyster Cult, as well.

Originally posted by dougmcauliffe dougmcauliffe wrote:

No matter what they are, Sabbath is awesome!
 

True, that! Clap

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.137 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.