A brief history of prog

The starnge thing about history is that it is always, yes always, written after it all happended! So it is no wonder if name prog was given only after it happended. How could somebody know it in fore hand. Like: I'll start playing a bit differently and I'll call it  xxxxx. No the boys just did what they wanted and afterward it has been possible to analyze what they did.

Despite my youthful years (18), there are some statements I agree with and disagree with.

Certif1ed wrote: YouthfulTheTid wrote: Actually, mostly heavy blues bands like Led Zeppelin, Free, Deep Purple, though also Pink Floyd and King Crimson too of course. Ah - I see - you're talking about progressive rock/music rather than Progressive Rock. King Crimson were very different to Zep, Free and Purple - especially in 1969, I might point out. YouthfulTheTid wrote: Pink Floyd's 'residency' at the UFO Club along with Soft Machine circa 1967 And the rest, I'd venture to point out... YouthfulTheTid wrote: places both bands into a separate category. A separate category each, perhaps... YouthfulTheTid wrote: Psychedelia is basically British freakbeat / RnB but with added things like weird instruments for the time (sitars, flutes, mellotrons, harpsichords etc) plus a whimsical lyrical approach. Why do you think that psychedelia was a British invention? I don't think that it necessarily had weird instruments either - witness the Great Society for one. YouthfulTheTid wrote: (...) little was emerging that was genuinely new (except on the soul, disco and punk front, but that's another story). There was a lot that was progressive in Disco - and punk itself was a kind of progression - so I don't see why it's another story, it seems like the same one - now you've reset the goal posts. YouthfulTheTid wrote: We were looking forward to the new albums that came out, but they didn't have the startling impact they had had a couple of years earlier. The other thing that happened is that the HUGE success of Dark Side of the Moon and Tubular Bells made what was previously thought of as unnderground suddenly became mainstream. By this time most new rock bands were rediscovering "rock'n'roll", so we got pub rock bands playing short songs, not going for the weird and wonderful any more. It wasn't exactly 'killed off', it just lost momentum for a while. One to me, I feel - you can thank me later... YouthfulTheTid wrote: Well I think you will find that a fusion of hip hop with Celtic roots music is just about the most progressive thing you will find these days. Not really - Hip Hop has been around for ages and got mixed up with all sorts of things. If you're going down that path you should really consider progressive trance, drum and bass and a plethora of other styles that were intrinsically progressive to start with, but quickly got diluted. YouthfulTheTid wrote: But you see, I rate PROGRESSIVE and always have. PROG is something of a distraction. Ok it's been around (as a genre) for 30 years, but it didn't exist in its heyday, if you can get your head around that! (Not being named until 1976, is what I mean). OK, I get that - but what about the other progessive fields? How about Prog in punk itself? How about the electronic pioneers of the late 1960s and again in the late 1970s - leading up to present day Autreche et al? YouthfulTheTid wrote: 1963 is significant as the year that The Beatles started messing about with unusual chord structures, "doing their own thing", and there wouldn't be much rock music, let alone prog, without their experimenting. Yes, and 1955 is significant as the year that Elvis Presley released "Heartbreak Hotel"... YouthfulTheTid wrote: Most of those artists are definitely progressive. Whether they are 'prog' or not doesn't matter to me, as prog is a mythical category which you rightly say no two people will ever agree on.     OK, but now you've opened up a whole can of worms and possibly missed out on some significant fields of music. The book you are planning on writing must surely stretch to encyclopaediac lengths in order to cram in the progressive music of the last 60-odd years. And no matter how much I dislike the music of ELP, it's obvious to me that what they did was to produce Progressive Rock - I rather think that you're deliberately muddying the waters with some of your comments. The area you seem to be addressing is huge - but not beyond the scope of a site like this, where I'm sure you'll pick up loads of really useful information: There are a lot of knowledgeable people here - and I would not condescend to blow my own trumpet.

hahha.. well let me blow it for you... I'm cheap and easy... and you make a hell of a lotta sense CertifIed.   I can't get my head around two things... the ELP thing... and his view on psychedelia.. oh well.. better you than me... I would have just called him an idiot by now   I could see one who has a very narrow view of prog seeing that it died a young death... but even in the interim between the end of the classic era and the neo-prog scene.. we had a thriving Prog Andaluz scene in Spain in the late 70's.  Prog, never died, it just progressed and moved to other places...

Cheesecakemouse wrote: I don't know what Youthfulthetid means by prog being dead in 1973, if he/she means but not being innovative or breaking new groung I think he is quite incorrect the following albums took prog into new directions:after 1973, look at King Crimson with Starless & Bible Black and Red, also Genesis the Lamb was pushing it into new territorys, Kraftwerk really pulled it off in the late 1970s breaking ground in electronic music, Brian Eno in the late 70s with ambient albums and his collaborations with David Bowie, Univers Zero and Art Zoyd although never big broke ground by making prog scary. New Zeuhl bands were popping up in France in the late 70s. Return Forever's groundbreakingMasterpiece Romantic Warrior was released after 1975 ELP not prog? Keith Emerson was an innovator with the keyboards always getting the latest technology, the fact ELP was a three piece performing covers of classical music is quite astounding, they created a hyperactive intensity like no one else anyone can see that in Toccata on Brain Salad Surgery. I think Youthfulthetid's defintion of prrog is rather narrow/misguided? Of course I mean no offence to you Youthfulthetid, just giving my views[IMG]height=17 alt=Smile src="http://www.progarchives.com/forum/smileys/smiley1.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle>

I did overstate the case about 'prog being finished in 1973'. What I meant was, there a definite break between the golden age (1969-1973) and the later progressive movements in all sorts of genres. What I was trying to say was that the oft-stated 'fact' that punk rock killed off prog is wrong. As fans of rock music in the 70s, we didn't even know there was a 'prog rock' to die as the term wasn't coined until 1976. What we did see was that rock music in all its infinite and diverse forms became somewhat less infinite and less diverse between 1973 and 1976. (Pub rock? Oh please - the 'great new rock idea of 1973' was neither great, nor new, and is now largely forgotten except as a footnote in rock histories. Glam rock? Great fun, but what significant albums ever emerged from it, Bowie and Roxy Music excepted?)

What is true is that there was a lot of good work being done that LATER came to be seen as hugely influential, Kraftwerk for example, laying the foundations of the whole electronica genre; Roxy Music and more especially Eno and Phil Manzanera. At the time though, it seemed like the great days of rock were over and we were turning to reggae and soul and disco where there was real action going on in those 3 or 4 years.

As for the ELP debate, I guess I'm going to be outvoted on this. What I personally feel is that all their classical 'nurdlings' (Pictures At An Exhibition and other) is exactly the trap that The Nice fell into and fell back on after the guitarist Dave O'List left the band (their first album Emerlist Davjack was strongly psychedelic, you could even say progressive, and also their working of Bernstein's 'America'.) But what is even remotely progressive about churning out classical music in a rock form? I will agree that ELP are among the early pioneers of metal. Ultimately its down to personal opinion though. Which I am beginning to find out there is a whole lot of in this forum! (All over the Internet in fact).
I'm just adding my four cents (oh ok, then, 444 cents...)
     

To use Keith Emerson's own words for the reason critics did not get ELP:

YouthfulTheTid wrote: What I meant was, there a definite break between the golden age (1969-1973) and the later progressive movements in all sorts of genres.

Not a break per se - I would say that it's more a settling into the newly created soundscapes.

YouthfulTheTid wrote: What I was trying to say was that the oft-stated 'fact' that punk rock killed off prog is wrong. As fans of rock music in the 70s, we didn't even know there was a 'prog rock' to die as the term wasn't coined until 1976. What we did see was that rock music in all its infinite and diverse forms became somewhat less infinite and less diverse between 1973 and 1976.

However, in 1976, we did know that there was a prog rock to die, and we effectively saw punk lay the boot in.

The irony is that Punk itself was a kind of progression - and it literally became progressive - witness many great albums by the Stranglers, some nice psychedelic forays by the Damned and XTC, the stark soundscapes of Killing Joke and the "punk" synth movement - Tubeway Army, the Human League, Cabaret Voltaire et al.

YouthfulTheTid wrote: What is true is that there was a lot of good work being done that LATER came to be seen as hugely influential, Kraftwerk for example, laying the foundations of the whole electronica genre.

Not Kraftwerk - you need to do some more homework! There were plenty of electronic bands before Kraftwerk who produced some amazing music - White Noise "The Electric Storm" is an album that will blow your mind if you've never heard it, whatever generation you're from - and it's massively influential.

You think Goldfrapp are progressive? Listen to this LP.

The Goldfrapp/Celtic connection reminds me of the composer Karl Jenkins's excursions with Enigma in the late 1980s.

YouthfulTheTid wrote: As for the ELP debate, I guess I'm going to be outvoted on this. What I personally feel is that all their classical 'nurdlings' (Pictures At An Exhibition and other) is exactly the trap that The Nice fell into and fell back on after the guitarist Dave O'List left the band (their first album Emerlist Davjack was strongly psychedelic, you could even say progressive, and also their working of Bernstein's 'America'.)

I don't see the trap - The Nice progessed from album to album.

YouthfulTheTid wrote: But what is even remotely progressive about churning out classical music in a rock form?

It's all in the way you do it.

Andrew Lloyd Webber's "Variations" is a superb example of how it can be done subtly - there was nothing subtle about ELP as you point out. But that was the nature of their progessiveness - they took a "tamed" art form and let themselves as a rock band loose on it, with often wild results.

It seems obvious to me that it was progressive in a literal sense - very few others did it - or even could do it. While "Pictures..." could be seen as a reflection of Prog Rock at the height of absurdity, it's also a brilliant (and progressive) idea in and of itself.

The approach was clearly not to do a note-for-note copy, but a rock band interpretation. Although they had "treated" other works in the past, a full-scale work was the next logical step in the progression - and psychedlia was no longer progressive in the latter half of the early 1970s.
    
    
    
    

Edited by Certif1ed - August 08 2006 at 08:10

Tony R wrote: I still insist that the term "Prog Rock" existed before 1976. I am just having trouble proving it.... Where's Dick Heath when you need him?

i remember an album in 1969 called "wowie zowie the world of progressive music"

Edited by mystic fred - August 08 2006 at 08:57

Certif1ed - I did a HUGE response to your big post at the top of page 3 - I did nested replies to all your points, using different colours etc, it took me an hour to do, but when I hit the 'post reply' button, I must have got logged off because it disappeared without trace. You made some very good points and I made some very good replies, but sorry, I don't have the heart to do it all again.

Originally posted by YouthfulTheTid


What I was trying to say was that the oft-stated 'fact' that punk rock killed off prog is wrong. As fans of rock music in the 70s, we didn't even know there was a 'prog rock' to die as the term wasn't coined until 1976. What we did see was that rock music in all its infinite and diverse forms became somewhat less infinite and less diverse between 1973 and 1976.


However, in 1976, we did know that there was a prog rock to die, and we effectively saw punk lay the boot in.

The irony is that Punk itself was a kind of progression - and it literally became progressive - witness many great albums by the Stranglers, some nice psychedelic forays by the Damned and XTC, the stark soundscapes of Killing Joke and the "punk" synth movement - Tubeway Army, the Human League, Cabaret Voltaire et al.


Yes, but the whole point I have been making is that 1976 saw the invention of a genre by journalists who had several pet hates, of which Stadium Rock was the number one (not prog, that came a bit later). Punk put the boot into a genre which they invented themselves, so what was the point?

What you do say very clearly - and I agree entirely - is that the whole post-punk period was one of the most creative periods ever, and yes - progressive. Have you read Simon Reynolds book Rip It UP And Start Again? Magazine, just to take one example, were just as progressive as anything successful that had gone before: it's just they were guitar-based, not keyboard, so it was not recognised as Quote Progressive at the time.

[Sorry about the confusing colours in my quotes but I don't want to get logged off again and lose an hour's work, so I've done it the 'quick and dirty' way.]
    

Edited by YouthfulTheTid - August 08 2006 at 08:46

^ I think you underestimate the proclivity of 13/14 year old boys to "invent" slang - we didn't waste all those valuable seconds enunciating "progressive rock music" every time we boasted about our music collections - it was prog!!!