Jarre: Progressive Electronic or Prog Related?

Seeing my favorite progressive electronic artist getting demoted to Prog Related is something I take personally.

Well, not exactly. But you get the idea. I mean, the guy is JUST AS progressive as Kraftwerk, Brian Eno, Tangerine Dream, and other artists at the top of the genre. So my vote goes to Progressive Electronic, not Prog Related.

Atavachron wrote: Jarre is indeed an electronic musician. Whether he's progressive or not is a matter of opinion. I do like his stuff, though.

Well, by definition, I don't think progressive electronic necessarily means progressive electronic rock... I definitely wouldn't characterize Klaus Schulze, Tangerine Dream, or Brian Eno's ambient stuff as rock, but it's all certainly progressive. Jean-Michel Jarre is at least as progressive as these guys, if not more - meaning, it's more musically intelligent and adventurous than a lot of other music when it was composed. I would say Jarre's experimentation is certainly more musically interesting than some of Eno's highly regarded ambient work, at least.

Well this brings us back to whether or not this is a "Progressive site" or a "Progressive Rock" site. I always believed this to be a "Progressive Rock" site. Otherwise we have become a mirror image of Bradley Smith's book "The Billboard guide to Progressive Music". I, for one would be disappointed if that were so. Although the inclusion of many of the artists already on this site would actually seem to infer the latter. Artists such as J. M Jarre, Tangerine Dream, Captain Beefheart, Eno, Kate Bush, 10cc, Roxy Music, Kraftwerk, Klaus Schulze and many, many others, I believe, have no place whatsoever on a Progressive rock site and should, if at all, be classified under prog-related (and some just are out-and-out pop IMO). With that in mind, where do you stop with "prog-related"? It seems like every Tom, Dick and Harry (an English term for all you who are saying "what?" - meaning seemingly everyone) is in that category. I have just seen a proposal for Tom Waits. The aurgument against was that he was "progressive" but not "progressive rock" - I would classify him as a viurtual twin of C. Beefheart - so, why one and not another? This type of debate will rage on and on, obviously, with people's perceptions and desires being what they are. I don't like seeing some of the classifications / inclusions on ProgArchives because of how I view genres, but I have to accept that it is NOT my site and I am a participating guest. It certainly does not mar my enjoyment, after all, I can just skip all that I do not agree with. It's all an a image of the democratic society that we live in anyway - so, live and let live.

I also got trouble over the move at first, but now I conceive the situation better. 

Jean Michel Jarre has the problem of making popular sound for the mass and of having clenched long enough towards his own style. Electronic seems slightly the characteristic of technique and the mind movement that...creats them all.

Then there is the techno issue of the last years, which resemble a change even more "obscure".

I would say towards fan to don't get alarmed, as Jarre is still considered and cannot be considered anything else that an electronic musician, making electronic music within an electronic personal definition. The only thing was his progressiveness and his progressiveness by comparison with many others. Considering the entire spectrum of electronic music, Jarre is slightly but considerably isn't a prog entitled artist.

Prog Related, the best compromise, as philippe said.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Somebody described Jarre as a POP artist who plays with Electronic instruments and I agree with that.   Iván

I can't entirely go by that.
The classic movements of Jean Michel Jarre sound only easy, it's not a pop "refinement".
The early rubbish sound tests are even an experimental/sound manipulation thing.
The 1986-1988 is the most accurate at easyness, but you don't find it in the Rendez-Vous emotions, only in the Revolutions' stagnation.
Waiting For Cousteau the title track is an essence of ambient focused glance music; it's a great examples towards the fact that Jarre didn't do just easy stuff.
Chronologie is a very constructive electronic performance.
Metamorphoses is indeed a pop album, by the vocals and by the awfully soft illustration.
Sessions 2002 a nice jazzy-attempt electronic (technically) composition.
Geometry Of Love - a light ambient minimalism.
Printemps De Bourges (has anyone bothered to hear this album? it's great and so different!). Four pieces that don't resemble anything at all from Jarre's usual, mutual, non-singular music passion. Experimental in the diffused way, of epic flavour, of a characteristic that draws parallels to Tangerine Dream sizes or to very intelligent music modelation.

For me Tangerine Dream and Klaus Schulze are Coca Cola and JM Jarre is Coca Cola Light, the question is or Coca Cola Light still deserves to be mentioned Coca Cola

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Printemps De Bourges (has anyone bothered to hear this album? it's great and so different!). Four pieces that don't resemble anything at all from Jarre's usual, mutual, non-singular music passion. Experimental in the diffused way, of epic flavour, of a characteristic that draws parallels to Tangerine Dream sizes or to very intelligent music modelation.   That's the only one I haven't heard, but the rest IMO is popish stuff with some refinements.   Another Collaborator mentioned that his love life was more interesting than his music.   Iván

popish is slightly better.

well, Adjani is Adjani.

I absolutely cannot believe people consider Jarre "popish". I've listened to Oxygene a million times and hear NO pop in this music - the "pop" of that day was disco and silly AOR-type stuff.

If you consider a better grasp of melody a sign of "pop", you're sorely mistaken. In fact, some of the best prog songs have catchy melodies - listen to "Roundabout" by Yes or "Money" by Pink Floyd.

And in my opinion, Jarre has QUITE a better grasp of melody than Schulze, Eno (well, at least, during Eno's ambient days), or Tangerine Dream. Not to mention he actually changes the chords once in while (one of my largest complaints with Schulze's "X").

And besides, even if his influences are obviously Schulze and that ilk, that doesn't mean he's merely prog-related. I think he successfully built upon their musical style and turned it into something even better. Hence, progressive electronic.

I'm sorry, I read in a review somewhere that Michel was influenced by people like Schulze, but apparently I either misread it or the reviewer was wrong.

But that strengthens my argument - Jean-Michel Jarre was creating better music than Schulze outside of Schulze's influence.