porcupine tree-crap

I said early 80s. Rush, Crimson, Devo, Talking heads, Tull, Split enz and many other bands produced very good stuff in the early 80s. Alot better than what you would hear from 1985-2005.

Prog-man wrote: All prog is good!! I like PT (I'm a really fan). But I like old prog bands too. - I like all Genesis (Gabriel-Collins-Wilson) and Yes line-ups (Yes, "Drama" and Rabin stuff too!). I'm very into King Crimson, Focus and Jethro. I like Kansas and Asia (Wetton or Payne, really!!). All Rush albums. And bands like Wobbler, Anekdoten, Sinkadus, Liquid Scarlet, who re-create that old sound   - I like neo: Marillion (Fish), Pendragon, Arena, IQ, Pallas, Galleon, Jadis, Twelfth Night, Grey Lady Down, etc.  - I like new prog like Dream Theater, Spock's Beard, Ayreon, Sylvan, RPWL, The Pinneapple Thief, Marillion (Hogarth),  etc.  - And I like prog-related bands like Muse, Radiohead, Saybia, Codplay, etc. 1) Of course, I think the master pieces form the "old school" are "In the Court of the Crimsom King","Selling England by the Pound", or "Close to the Edge". 2) But there are more modern prog masterpieces like "Deadwing", "In absentia", "Trying to Kiss the Sun", "Deliverance", "V", "Snow", "Metropolis Pt. II", "The Masquerade Overture", "the World" "The Wake", "Ever", "Subterranea", "The Visitor", "Into the Electric Castle", "Moonshine", "Into the Electric Castle" "Mind over Matter", etc.  3) And stuff like "Absolution" and "OK Computer", too! Prog is a recognyzable hybridized rock music. Is music that aspires. Epic or love songs. Long or short songs. With classic or modern influences. 4/4 o 9/8. Old or New.        If you sound exactly like in 1970 you're not in progress!  Let it be progressive, not retrogressive! My friend: Try another albums from PT (and BLACKFIELD, NO-MAN, BASS COMUNNION, I.E.M., STEVE WILSON, and others of his works with O.S.I., FISH, MARILLION, PAATOS or OPETH) , and give another chance to the most important prog musician-writer-producer of this time!!!!!!

Very good post!

i don't dislike them cos they are modern. I just don't think modern music is very good ;)

Ok, I'm 20, I wasn't alive at the 'Golden Times' of prog, but my first experiences with prog were because of a friend's father ( that was a really good drummer), that seeing that i tended to like more complex and meaningfull music, he showed me album's from yes, jethro tull, gentle giant genesis, pink floyd, etc. So my ears were accostumed to that music, at the point that i used to find modern regular rock reaaly boring, it hadn't got that complex melodies, neither the mood changes, and the dinamic of the old music, i it didn't seem to point anywere but sells. Then I listened to a liquid tension experiment album, i was surprised that modern music can be good also, but i didn't like it, because it didn't sound like yes or ELP. Afortunatelly i was intrested because of the complexity of the music, so i kept on listening to the album , until one day i gut used to that metal sound with influences from the old groups, and at that time my ligth turned on and i got to understand the album. Then i went into modern prog, and i discovered that there is really good stuff nowadays, i recognise that old groups have the plus of being the pioneers of this artistic style, but in quality terms there are bands that are as good as the old ones, and there is very innovative stuff.

The same thing happend to me with in absentia, the first time i listened to it i was disapointed, and i tought the album was overrated. But i didn't give up, i kept on listening, until i started to understand it, in every listen i gave to the record i was founding new things i had't found before, and now i really like the album, it is easily a 4 stars album, and in my opinion one of the best albums since 2000.

Gentletull, give this album a second chance, i won't say that you'll find this as good as the old school groups (although some people finds it), but i assure you that if you get used to the style and songwritting, you'll have to admitt at least that it is good stuff.

And i disagree with those who says that there haven't been innovative stuff since the 70's. They should try for example anglagärd, a band that takes some influences from the seventies symphonic groups, but they made something new with that, they made symphonic prog like nothing i had listened before, one of the best i've ever listened. Of course they have influences, but i think it's imposible not to have it if you have grown up listening to that music. 

Also after 1995 there has been innovative stuff, try God speed you! black emperor, sigur ros, wheatstone bridge, Planet X, and many others. The Mars Volta is a very innovative group making really high quality art, and i'm sorry that you didn't like it, but please give them a second chance.

And if you don't like new prog not because it is not innovative, but because it lacks of quality, try stuff that sounds like the older groups and in my opinion they reached to have the same quality, like Glass Hammer, Dream Theater, Neal Morse, The Flower Kings (a band that i don't think that it sound's as similar as the old ones as other people say),Anekdoten, etc.   

Or simpler, listen to the album cinque from Deus Ex Machina and tell me if it isn't one of the best things you've ever listened to and if it's not comparable to the old group's productions

2) But there are more modern prog masterpieces like "Deadwing", "In absentia", "Trying to Kiss the Sun", "Deliverance", "V", "Snow", "Metropolis Pt. II", "The Masquerade Overture", "the World" "The Wake", "Ever", "Subterranea", "The Visitor", "Into the Electric Castle", "Moonshine", "Into the Electric Castle" "Mind over Matter", etc. 

 

Out of this list, in 20 years time, how many do you think these will still be masterpieces?

those modern prog "masterpieces" being called as such, almost as soon as they have been released always make me dubious on how many of those progheads claiming those to be, know actually what a masterpiece is. Are most of you sure you are not getting excited for next to nothing about minor works.

I am talking to the older progheads who have heard hundreds if not thousands of prog records, not the newbie who fell on Ayreon's Electric Castle as his first experience with prog and loving it and when buying Nursery Cryme, loving it as much and therefore thinking Ayreon's ITEC is as good as Genesis's NC.

A lot enthusiast progheads (and to my discredit I am not an enthusiast about prog's future anymore and stopped being enthusiastic about the second prog "boom" in 2001) should really be a little more discerning and have a better perspective of things.  It is not because you get caught up into an album, that the albulm is any closer to a masterpiece than if you just disregard it because you do not understand it.

But then again , WTF do I know, I am just on old crusty proghead

 

Give me two days reflections and I will give you list of real prog masterpieces from 1990 onwards. Less than ten, I think, however personal that choice list may be.

Rashikal wrote: IcedSabbath wrote: Rashikal wrote: porcupine tree is prog i guess by fusing nu-metal and piano pop???  That rules! It's sad but true, man! All these modern prog/prog metal bands think it's a good idea to put crappy chug-along riffs into their music to make it sound "metal." They need to realize...it's fake metal! That being said, I don't like Porcupine Tree's last 2 albums. Too nu-metallic for my tastes. I disagree with that if you're reffering to Tool. I would call Tool sludge rock with droning doom bass lines. But hey, they're just labels.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Tool isn't sludge rock/metal.

Bands like Neurosis,Isis,Pelican,Red Sparowes and Cult of Luna are sludge rock/metal.

Edited by TheProgtologist

Sean Trane wrote: Rorro wrote: Iwould Say that Frances The Mute And Hybris are real Masterpieces, but maybe we have different thougts about what a masterpiece is. Yup!!!! And this is where it huts badly for some: you must have enough references and experience and background to actually judge what a masterpiece is. masterpiece is Meisterwerk (german roots) and it is exceptional!!  for some people almost every album they buy is a masterpiece and to be found behind every street corner- and if it is not they will convince themselves of it by beating their brains into a pulp with repeated listenings until they succeed in self-brainwashing TMV cannot be a masterpiece , yet  - in anybody's minds who knows what a masterpiece is. FTM is not even one year old!!!! How about the test of time????

Ok i accept the critic that i don't have enogh experience to judge what a masterpiece is, but i thought i had the right to express what would i call now a masterpiece. Maybe when i get more experience i change my mind, but i was just saying what i thought, if you think think my opinion is valid just because of that, well, don't give it importance, maybe when i become a more experienced listener i understand what a masterpiece is. For now i really think that Hybris is the best album i've ever listened to, and that FTM is a Masterpiece, and i don't know what you're talking about when you say test of time, please explain.

Sean Trane wrote: Rorro wrote: Iwould Say that Frances The Mute And Hybris are real Masterpieces, but maybe we have different thougts about what a masterpiece is. Yup!!!! And this is where it huts badly for some: you must have enough references and experience and background to actually judge what a masterpiece is. masterpiece is Meisterwerk (german roots) and it is exceptional!!  for some people almost every album they buy is a masterpiece and to be found behind every street corner- and if it is not they will convince themselves of it by beating their brains into a pulp with repeated listenings until they succeed in self-brainwashing TMV cannot be a masterpiece , yet  - in anybody's minds who knows what a masterpiece is. FTM is not even one year old!!!! How about the test of time????

I have to slightly disaree with you, Sean. There's a degree of relativity and retrospect in calling something a "Masterpiece". It's certainly required for a work to stand the test of time in order for a clear consensus to form around what qualifies as "meisterwork". You seem to imply that a contemporary work of art automatically cannot qualify as a masterpiece purely due to the fact that it _is_ contemporary.

To be contrary for a moment... Mozart had _many_ contemporary detractors. How many people dismissed any of the top 20 all time prog releases at the time as pretentious tripe?

Now, I'm not stating that any of the aforementioned works _are_ masterpieces, I'm just saying the jury's still out.

lol, thanks for making my last post irrelevant, Sean. 

Empathy wrote: lol, thanks for making my last post irrelevant, Sean.

And thanks for making mine also

 

 

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.............. Frigging cross-fired posts