DREDG: prog or not prog?

Some people have problem with it - they want to hear the 70's influences in modern progressive rock bands, but... is it really progressive when you repeat something that Genesis, Yes or KC had done yet??? Why modern prog bands must sound like 70's prog bands??? That's the question.

Some people are so desperate to say their part that they don’t read previous posts before witting what they want. I answer this post because it’s clearly directed to my previous posts without having read all of them.

I clearly said that I don’t care if Prog sounds like the 70’s or 2000’s, if you check you will find Bryan and myself were the ones who pushed and made possible the addition of FANTOMAS, I personally added OSIBISA and MIRANDA SEX GARDEN others that doesn’t sound at all like the 70’s Prog, already have ready the addition of Mediaeval Baebes for Folk with whom I believe Sean agrees, so it’s not a problem of sounding like the 70’s, it’s a problem of being or not being Prog, that’s all.

Third and most important, Progressive Rock is a genre, not an attribute of music, it doesn’t necessarily have to progress, change or evolve, if the characteristics are present and they are inspired in Genesis or ELP, they are still Progressive Rock.

For example, I like Dredg, Oceansize. They are PROGRESSIVE for sure! I like them because they bring to music something NEW. And I hate Genesis or Yes-clones, just because when I'm listening to them, I say: "Heh...I've already heard tis somewhere..." And it kills me. I love Genesis, Yes, KC, they are fathers of prog, they are Gods for me. Yeah.

Nobody wants clones, but playing in a style is not cloning, for example ANGLAGARD played in the 70’s style and was absolutely original, I have all their albums but I don’t own one by STARCASTLE because I couldn’t care less for cloning bands, my opinion about most tributes is also clear.

Some people deny modern prog rock, just because they think they hear SOAD or other crap influences in it. They are frightened of hearing SOMETHING NEW in music. Modern prog bands stay close to 70's prog rock, but at the same time they try to add other influences in their music.

Don’t call SOAD crap if you want your taste respected, I don’t like their music personally, but they have been inducted several times and it’s obvious some members like them, if I said Dredg has some SOAD influences is because I honestly believe they have SOAD influences, but even you must accept they are mainly an alternative Indie band, and I don’t believe that’s Progressive Rock, in that case we should add REM who were much more original, used mandolins and had dramatic changes.

Dredg is linear, flat, their songs have all the same mood and practically the same sound, there’s no versatility, variations, they are not a bad Alternative/Indie with a bit of EMOP band but being good is not a synonymous of being Prog.

And about your phrase: “Modern prog bands stay close to 70's prog rock, but at the same time they try to add other influences in their music.” Dredg has nothing in common with the 70’s, they have more (Not that this is a requisite) but they are closer to Cobain’s Nirvana, REM or Coldplay than to anything else.

Prog will never die, and I'm happy that NOW we have such bands like Dredg or Oceansize.

Prog has survived Disco, Punk, New Wave, New Age and a lot of more popular musical genres because they kept a safe distance from mainstream, a cult or semi underground genre that blends with mainstream looses the real fans and doesn’t gather new fans from the mainstream scenario, so if you want to destroy Prog’s identity,  then go on and add every mainstream alternative Indie band because you like them.

Our generation never succeeded making Prog popular, but we managed to keep the genre alive when all the critics were asking us to bury it and at the end we survived Punk that appeared trying to destroy Prog.

 
Maybe my post is a total mess.

No, it’s coherent but still I disagree with it.

Sorry, my English is bad.

Not bad.

Iván