best neo-prog

tuxon wrote: gdub411 wrote: What can I say...i'm addicted to these guys!! have you listened the first two albums yet, great also/

I have Songs from The Lion's CAge and while I like it , I do not love it.

CLEPSYDRA: More grains of sand, Hologram

But I remain confused - didn't Genesis, Yes, ELP and Pink Floyd all play to massive audiences? Didn't they sell loads of albums? I guess that makes them commercial too!

After the fall of the big bands, MOST the Progressive bands fom the 80's tried a new approach to the genre, including shorter songs format that could easily fit a radio program, the lyrics changed dramatically from Mythologycal, histroric or Political towards romanticism, it was easier to find a couple or more love songs in the prog' albums, the conceptrual releases were less frequent each time, as in the case of the lenght to fit easier in the radio.

It was most common to find hit singles in almost every prog' record from the 80's, this is what I call commercial approach.

If commercial means making singles, then all the bands I mentioned did that in the early 1970s. For instance, "The Knife" was a single, as was "In The Court of the Crimson King" - these bands ALL wanted airplay. All these bands had tracks that were written with commercial radio in mind - "More Fool Me", "Arnold Layne" - and I don't need to tell you about ELP.

In the 70's, with 4 - 5 songs (sometimes less) per 45 minutes LP, no popular radio was very pleased to play prog' songs, in the 80's (The golden age of Neo Prog), this was very frequent.

Radio itself was more enlightened by then - you could hear "Supper's Ready", for example, on Radio 1 on a Friday night!

That's what I mean by a more commercial approach. The 709's bands soldd albums despite they created a genre that for any normal musician would be anti commercial, in the 80's bands worried more for how would the album sell. Andthat's not bad, simply different.

For sure - and one of the reasons was that it became ever harder for bands to survive in the cash-hungry Yuppie era of the 1980s.

About being derivative, from the lot of Neo Prog bandss (Most not even remembered today) more than 50 or 60% tried to sound like Genesis mainly, this why I believe it's mostly  a derivative genre.

I'm not sure where that statistic comes from, but so far, from what I've heard of neo-prog, only the first couple of tracks on the first IQ album and the penultimate couple of minutes of "Grendel" accurately fits the Genesis-derived description - I honestly believe that the belief that neo-prog is predominantly Genesis-derived is a fallacy and I'm trying to blow that idea out of the water.

As ever, I'm just trying to find points that I can find technical substance in - not simply arguing for the sake of it. Thanks for taking the time to respond, Ivan - I know neo-prog isn't your favourite topic!

Iván

It is stupid to consider neo-prog as a genre to be something less than "symphonic" prog - I could take the same snobbish line and state as fact that so-called "symphonic prog" is grossly inferior to a proper symphony by a classical composer - the fact that an entire band of rock musicians couldn't come up with something as complex as individual guys wrote 200 years ago says something, no?

Never said it was inferior, all I said is that I don't like most of Neo Progressive, I find most of it too simple and derivative, it's just a question of particular and personal taste.

OK, Ivan - it's just that the implication was there.

Just on the technical points, leaving taste and opinion aside, the "simplicity" as you put it is deceptive - at least in the good stuff. The whole of "Script..." is much more cunningly put together than the polished surface would have you believe.

As for derivative, well, you could take a couple of angles on that;

1) The good stuff is much less derivative of the old school - particularly Twelfth Night, Marillion and IQ's later work. I have yet to be convinced of the similarities between Marillion and Genesis - I just don't hear them, and it's not for lack of trying. There are just too many differences in overall style - including Fish's vocals. And as for Twelfth Night, the influences are too varied to call them derivative.

2) All music is derivative somehow. 

I'm sure there are lots of people that like Neo more than symphonic prog, but as a general rule, the genre is simpler and more commercial oriented, creating a new style more accessible to massive audiences (Again there are some exceptions).

I'm glad you hear it as a new style

I don't prefer one over the other - I just like what I like. Again, not all neo-prog is simple, and where it is, it is often deceptive - it wouldn't be prog otherwise.

But I remain confused - didn't Genesis, Yes, ELP and Pink Floyd all play to massive audiences? Didn't they sell loads of albums? I guess that makes them commercial too!

Iván