Modern prog

Guldbamsen wrote: schizoidman wrote: RoeDent wrote: Is there anyone else here who prefers the modern wave of prog music (say, 1989-present->) to the so-called "classic" era of the 70s? The music of bands like Dream Theater, Porcupine Tree and Spock's Beard just does more for me than Yes, Genesis, ELP et al. Maybe it's because I wasn't around during that era, but still, I am proud to have a progressive era of MY time, to call my own, and I firmly believe we are in a new Golden Age of progressive rock.   I grew up listening to Yes, Genesis, ELP, etcetera and there is no substitution for that. They will always have that special place in my psychological and emotional make up that can never be replaced by any other music.   I give you huge credit for having the good sense to reject the crap that's played on commercial radio and TV and seek out music with substance created by musicians that can actually play their instruments.   The zeitgeist of the late 60's and 70's was completely different than today. The world is a different place than it was back then. Young people today have more information, music, technology, et al at their fingertips than I ever did. You have the luxury of having around 50 years of prog to select and choose from. That wasn't the case back then. Prog was inventing itself as time passed and the bands that are listened to today are the ones whose music has so far withstood the test of time.   I have my favorites now (Porcupine Tree, Big Big Train, Taal, Loreena McKennitt) just as I did back in the day (Yes, Genesis, ELP, Tull....never did care for Rush, Gentle Giant, Uriah Heep, Can, IQ).    Be as proud as you like of the prog being made today. It's the soundtrack of your life for the rest of your life. Very nice post mister schizoid One I very much agree with. I do prefer the old stuff myself - even if I love a lot of the new as well. I gather most of the modern music I listen to, that's featured on PA that is, probably won't be called 'prog' by most of the old timers. Ulver, Vespero, Cabezas de Cera and the likes. I'm not really into the modern prog scene though - bands like Transatlantic, Spock's Beard, Haken and Flower Kings sound like cheese to me. I am very glad that they're pulling people in from afar to experience a whole new music experience though.  People should just follow their gut when it comes down to music - whatever others may say. New old - as long as it puts the zing in your mickey, it's all good.

I like both eras as there are many superb groups from then and now. I find that modern prog suffers from too much prog metal and post rock experimental acts that just have no concept of good melodic structure and songcraft!!

dr wu23 wrote: As some one said earlier.....it's all good. But 2 points to consider is that the old classic prog bands led the way and certainly influenced and provided a style and template in many cases for  the newer bands , and of course there was a discussion not long ago about how progressive the newer material is (is it progressing in any meaningful way..) and is it all that different.? I like many of the new bands but still favor the older ones but then I also grew up with the classic bands.

old classic prog bands led the way and certainly influenced and provided a style and template in many cases for the newer bands

I've said this before and is my reasoning for my In the Court.. Isn't this untouchable masterpiece. Influence or impact doesn't change the actual quality of music. So I'm not sure how this statement means that classic progressive rock is any better?

And to your second statement, wouldn't having to create music that deviates from classic prog be more difficult than to follow the roots? There's an interview I've seen where Roger Daultry said that he sympathizes with newer bands because its much more difficult to make music than the era he was a part of. He used the analogy that there is more paint on the canvas of the musical world.

Gallifrey wrote:  I actually think 70's prog is notoriously overrated trite for the most part, and I really don't see what it has to do with the great stuff coming out today. I think it's just the massive circlejerk this board has for "classic" prog ...  I even think that Neo-Prog is better than Symphonic.

It's a nice album but similarly it's not top 50 for me of modern albums.

Edited by Nogbad_The_Bad - October 17 2013 at 10:51

Svetonio wrote: Neo-Romantic wrote: ^Nice inclusion of that iamthemorning track. I love that one, and the album as a whole  Yea   ~  album is THE masterpiece of modern Progressive Rock

Exactly my thoughts. I'm much more interested in what's being put out now, and I just find the music easier to really dig my nails into. Im not going to say that's wrong to listen to progressive rock of now instead of 40 years ago, but it certainly makes some sense to me. Even my favorite act from the 70's, Rush continued to make good music exitting that decade. So it makes sense that I've been able to consistently listen to them and enjoy all of their albums whether its Hold Your Fire or Counterparts.

Edited by Horizons - October 17 2013 at 09:38

I think to a large extent, it depends on when you started getting into prog.

As a teenager in the late seventies, I came to prog through Genesis, Yes etc. (admittedly slightly past their golden age, but soon picked up their back catalogues). I therefore have an emotional attachment to them that I don't have to modern prog.

While I have enjoyed discovering modern band like Big Big Train and Moon Safari, I don't have the same connection with them. I can enjoy listening to them and appreciate the music, but it doesn't "grab me" like the 70s bands I grew up with.

Probably younger listeners will have the same experience - what they got into as teenagers will have the emotional connection that earlier/later bands don't have. Not to say one is better or worse than the other, it's just the bond isn't quite there.

I too, am currently indulging in lots of modern Prog, simply put, the production values lift the music to incredible heights. When I re-visit old 'classics', as incredible as they are, they are sounding 'old' - still very dear to me, but I can really appreciate the freshness and vibrancy of modern Prog.

Errmm there is absolutely nothing around now that can get close to an album like Aphrodite's Child 666 that was initially even rejected by the record company as too 'out there'. 1969-1972 was a massive time for experimentation. 1972 to the present day represents the settled prog era as far as I'm concerned as the style and ideas in use (the 'genre') was pretty much set from that point on and the only innovation since has been the morphing of metal bands into prog bands by playing longer tracks rather than radio fodder. Neo Prog is just a less adventurous form of symph prog. Nowadays I think there is more taste for heavy prog as best represented by Porcupine Tree. Is it better? No but its different. I would consider Deadwing to be the only modern classic prog album. Beyond that there is not so much for me that can butt heads with the ELP/Genesis/ Yes classic era although Anathema have produced a couple of very nice albums recently that are not far off.