Lack Of Newer Prog Bands

OldFatherThames wrote: Sadly, with the exeption of Anglagard, I find no actual prog band that I really like. So, prog is not dead, but it is almost for me !

Do you know Wobbler? Check out the link in my database.

erik neuteboom wrote: Nonetheless I got the idea that most of the visitors from this site are mainly interested in the known bands, only a small group of progheads is more adventurous. The same happens with the prog concerts: sold out gigs with IQ, Marillion, Transatlantic, Spock's Beard and The Flower Kings but only 50 to 100 people with Ange, Anekdoten, After Crying or other less known but very interesting progrock bands. The progrock scene is very vivid but it remains mostly an underground scene.

Erik, I couldn't agree more with your statement here. The funny thing is that all the best contemporary groups are those little known ones. That's how i feel anyway. Great bands that only the adventurous get to know. What a pity!

erik neuteboom wrote: But I will keep positive and will write until my death about less known progrock!

Yep, I don't even have any interest to write about popular bands!

I'm a big supporter of contemporary prog but the popular bands do absolutely nothing for me. It seems to be that if it's popular it is also something i dislike.

It's our job as collaborators to promote these small bands properly. If only each collaborator wrote ten reviews for his favorite "underdogs" ...

I have been to the homepage of Coheed and Cambria and listened to all the examples there; I can't find anything proggy in them

"Good Apollo..." is the continuation of Claudio Sanchez' bleak sci-fi narrative of doomed husband and wife Coheed and Cambria.Following on from 'In keeping with secrets of silent earth:3',the New York foursome take their potent mix of '70s prog-rock,emo amd metal and have created a behemoth of a third album which demands repeated listens.For fans of Rush,Muse.


Kerrang Oct.1st issue.

Coheed, System of a Down, and Fall of Troy are all progressive rock bands.  It may not be the overproduced stuff of the 70's but its still progressive.  I think the definition on this website for progressive rock is wrong, because most of the bands really fit into the category are overblown pretentious and overproduced.  All of the bands I just mentioned are just as much art-rock prog as a band like Alan parsons project or even queen for that matter.  The fact that they are pushing the envelope in modern music today makes them progressive rock bands.  Just like the mars volta. 

 

 

It seems to me that people on this website and forum label the bands they like as prog and any band they dont like isnt progressive.  Just like people that bash dream theater or mars volta. 

 

On another note, I really don't understand the definition of progressive on this website.  I dont see how making music complex and long makes something "progressive".  The definition of progressive is that it brings about change.  A band like pink floyd brought about change in the music industry as a whole, just like bands like the beatles or rush, or even the mars volta in terms of modern music.  I would consider most of the bands on this website to be "Art rock" but not really "progressive", because "progressive" implies that they brought about change. 

Theres a difference between writing a 30 minute long song about slaying dragons and killing monsters and having it have 1000000 time signature changes and have it written in 5 different keys than writing a 4:00 long song that truly changes the face of rock as a whole.  The later is whats progressive to me.

^ you can listen to about 30 minutes worth of music on their homepage, just search for wobbler on my homepage (link in my sig).

xhamasaki wrote: Theres a difference between writing a 30 minute long song

Very few big prog bands of the '70s wrote more than two twenty minute songs. ELP probably did, but they were hardly a model of restraint

xhamasaki wrote: about slaying dragons and killing monsters

With the exception of Rush, you seem to be confusing prog with power metal...

xhamasaki wrote: and having it have 1000000 time signature changes and have it written in 5 different keys

There are many more ways of changing key (and time signature) than there are of... uh... not changing key (or time signature).

xhamasaki wrote: than writing a 4:00 long song

And there are more things that can be done in eight minutes than four. If you're determined to take the word "progressive" literally rather than its actual use on this website, ie. Prog, then I'll have to point out that progression could equally be referring to progress within the song itself, and as such the longer the song the easier it is to progress from one place to another. Build-ups and pacing are something important to my music listening, which is why I like GYBE!, EITS, et al so much although I personally wouldn't have put them on this site.

xhamasaki wrote: that truly changes the face of rock as a whole.

Who's doing this?

WWW.THEAURORAPROJECT.COM

they just did a gig with riverside.

bye
xentagz

[/QUOTE]
I'm a big supporter of contemporary prog but the popular bands do absolutely nothing for me. It seems to be that if it's popular it is also something i dislike.
[/QUOTE]

The same for me. All these popular bands like Dream Theater, Opeth, even Flower Kings, Porcupine tree (some goodstuff tough), Glass Hammer, The mars volta, leave me totally indifferent !