Not prog

Perhaps this great site should consider a name change, to QUALITYMUSIC ARCHIVES.

Edited by Velvetclown

I've heard somewhere that Stereolab, sonic youth and radiohead were influenced by the old german prog minimal rock made by NEU! Honestly I can't hear that in their music...Radiohead has just mucky incompetences in term of progressive feelings

And while we're at it, I have always felt that Black Sabbath's album Sabbath Bloody Sabbath has a prog feel to it, especially with Rick Wakeman guesting on piano and synth. It's the only Black Sabbath album I like/own. All the tracks are good, but I especially like Spiral Architect.

 

lucas wrote: raggy wrote: The Enid, back in the day, (pre 1987) were the best (live) prog band around. BTW, did you listen to one of their last opus called "White goddess", I think it's a beautifully written album, blending classical music (sarabande, gavotte, chaconne, gigue) with prog-rock music (fantasy, riguardon...). They remain one of the few classical-prog bands (yes, I mean "classical" and not "symphonic", refering to their classical influences as quoted above) not to head away from their classical roots (as is not the case with ELP : "Dark moon" is such a crap, Wakeman and so on).

As a former member of The Stand, and dedicated fan having first seen them at Reading Rock fest in 83, aged 16, ("Something Wicked This Way Comes" make or break tour) I followed RJG and Steve Stewart's carreers, even staying over at their home in Suffolk after gigs. Being an Enid fan was like being a part of a familly. "Members, one of another" was the Stands motto.

 It all went desperately wrong around 88/89. RJG told me that things had been said between him and Steve that couldn't be unsaid and the two had decided to go their seperate ways, (bit of a lovers tiff if you ask me.)

Anyway, I got disillusioned and lost touch. I know they tried their hands at dance crossover when the wolf was at the door with disastrous results. I don't Know what they sound like these days but it was truelly incredible to experience their live shows in that period.

 

Not sure about Weather Report or Conflict - never listened to 'em.

Radiohead is a definite possibilty - why aren't they prog? They explore new territories all the time - never sitting still. OK Computer was a masterpiece - a fine balance of commercial appeal combined with stunning experimentation. The track Paranoid Android is a 7-minute epic with several forms - and breakdowns of those forms. Going back to "Pablo Honey" and "The Bends", there are some sublime moments of progressiveness - particularly "The Bends".

The Beatles I do not think can be considered a prog band, as such, any more than the Stones, as that was not their main thrust. Mostly they concentrated on writing cutting edge pop songs - although on the albums, there is a lot of inpsired experimentation. Even the Stones experimented - witness "Their Satanic Majesties Request".

"...Borrowed Time" is a prog album, IMO, as much as any by the likes of Saga, Savatage, etc - but not Iron Maiden. Iron Maiden wrote some long Heavy Metal pieces with aspirations to prog, but stayed within the confines of the genre. "Rime of the Ancient Mariner", for example can be considered prog, but the album "Piece of Mind", while superb, is not a progressive album per se. "Hallowed be Thy Name" is progressive, whille "Run To The Hills" and the title track of "Number of the Beast" are blatant HM "pop" songs.

OK, you might say, what about "Kayleigh"?

If you've ever heard the magnificent 1984 Hammersmith Odeon Concert, it's much easier to hear how Kayleigh fits into the concept. In the light of its saturation on FM airplay, it's much harder. It's all about context, I think.

 

raggy wrote: On the other hand the statement "I'm a prog fan, I like Diamond Head, ergo Diamond Head are prog." is ludicrous. Prog has its grey areas, but Diamond Head don't occupy any of them.

No-one said that.

Please give your reasoning why DH can't be considered prog rather than just stating that they're not - it looks like you've just said "I'm a prog fan, Diamond Head aren't prog, ergo Diamond Head aren't prog!".

It was DH that got me interested in prog, way back in 1980 - compared to the rest of the NWOBHM crop, these guys WERE prog, and regarded as genre-pushing gods in some circles.

I think they ARE prog because although the music has the surface sheen of typical 1980's NWOBHM, and the technical ability is only a little higher than average for that genre, there is something else - that magical "prog" ingredient that extends beyond the Rodney Matthews covers. Sean Harris' vocals are not the typical HM scream - they are considered, melodic, dramatic and exciting. There are no keyboards - maybe that is why DH are not prog?

Consider the album "Living On Borrowed Time". It features the famous "Am I Evil" - an 8-minute epic that does not fit comfortably into the HM mould.

A typical HM track follows typical pop song format with the notable exception of the extended guitar solo. Guitars tend to be heavily overdriven. It also tends to be about a testosterone-fuelled subject. Songs about evil are acceptable, but songs about far-off fantasy lands of old tend to dwell in the realms of prog.

Your typical HM track will not have time changes and key changes - especially to the extent that "Am I Evil" does.

When Metallica covered it as the B-side to their epic "Creeping Death" (for crying out loud - a 7 and a half minute single!), they left out most of the delicate light and shade that DH were more than capable of.

While agreeing that some of my other suggestions are borderline, I would like to see a GOOD reason why we couldn't consider Diamond Head as prog.

I truly believe they are.

And I'll stop harping on about it right now

dude wrote: stormcrow:YEAH!! Journey had their "prog Moments"..not sure if they were cosistent though!!

They were not.  And the more Perry (pop rock genius that he might have been) influenced that band, the less progressive they became. To my increasing disgust and their increasing bank balances.

That is why I see the firing of Dunbar as the point at which they digressed into (although still very talented) just another hard-pop rock band.

Their first three albums (which very few people ever actually heard) still stand as good, entertaining examples of progressive fusion rock of the time.  It is no coincidence that that started to change on the hiring of Perry as a frontman for their 4th album.

Beatles (Abbey Road album face two, and even Sgt. Pepper's if you think it was made in 1967), ELO, Sting (yes, "Russians" song), Eels ("Novocaine for the Soul" song) and a very long list of poppy artist have been created some prog music. Why? Because, at least once in their careers, they decided to innovate trespassing the commercial limits. Of course, it isn't a merit enough to be considerated in sites like this, but innovation and the non-commercial interests could be a good definition for prog, beyond the sub-genre (pop prog, jazz prog, etc.).     

Quote "I think you're overdoing it now! I admit that Judas Priest did some proggish stuff for their second album, but that's all (don't get me wrong, I'm a huge fan of early Priest). And although I like Metallica, how can you call THAT prog?!  It's progressive, but that's not the only thing that counts. In their way, The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Mercyful Fate, and even Slayer were progressive!! You need to offer more than just tight metal songs and time changes to be considered prog. I love Diamond Head, but it's just NWOBHM, nothin more nothing less! And don't say that you think Raven is prog as well! " /Quote

(How do you do that box thing?)

I'm serious - especially about Metallica up to "Justice for All". The music broke boundaries and pushed the form of heavy metal to the point that everyone panicked and started inventing new terms - thrash metal, speed metal, etc. New bands like Helloween started sprouting - and, of course, Kai Hansen who tried valiantly to inject classical into thrash (or was it the other way around?). As a result, we got the Yngwies and Satrianis coming to the fore. Steve Vai has always been a law unto himself - and IS prog. So there.

I started another thread on "What is Prog" to help on this one - coz I really think that Diamond Head's "Living on Borrowed Time" IS prog. If IQ are prog, then so are DH

Damn right Zeppelin were progressive, in many ways - Whole Lotta Love being a prime example - and as for the Beatles... Man, Sergeant Pepper was the first prog album - the very first to use the Recording Studio as an instrument for starters! "Tomorrow Never Knows" off Revolver, and the White Album's "Revolution Number 9" are more prog than a lot of prog!

Slayer - well I was actually going to suggest them too, but really they just progressed a genre - the music they produced stayed well within the confines of Thrash Metal - defined it, even. You may as well try to suggest that Napalm Death were prog!

Mercyful Fate, Hmm. Raven - kinda, but no. Technically incredible, and boundary pushing but, much as I hate labels, still metal.

Check out Ride The Lightning, Master Of Puppets and Justice for All. They are definitely prog, IMNSHO

I know I go on a bit!

Cheers

danbo wrote: Welcome Aboard, Cert. I've always held the early Queen catalogue as Prog. Innuendo could be. Doesn't Steve Howe guest on a track? Anyway, ... Great post. Debate is the best way to share ideas.

yeah, right. Fat-bottomed girls make the world go round!

Edited by Joren