Nu Prog? WTF

^ why not call something Grunge Prog if it's progressive and based on Grunge? Regardless of whether something like that exists or not, it would be better to use two established words to describe it than invent a new word, or abuse a combination of words which is either much more general or means something different.

^ Well some of the bands that are coming out may require a different name because they do not fit well into another category. How many Grunge Prog bands would we see in the future? Probably few, based one major element of Grunge is angst, and Fish-Marillion was the last of that, IMO. But other elements, a hard rock, yet not metal sound is evident is some of these newer quasi-Prog bands. They may in fact be part of the future and evolve into definitive Prog. I still think Nu Prog gives them a place to reside as they don't really fit anywhere else.

Tony R wrote: Nu-Prog's a reasonable title. Just because you dont agree with the bands named doesnt mean its a bad idea. NU-Prog....Muse,Radiohead et al...why the heck not?

Because neither Muse nor Radiohead sound anything like Limp Bizkuit or Linkin Park.

StyLaZyn wrote: Well some of the bands that are coming out may require a different name because they do not fit well into another category. How many Grunge Prog bands would we see in the future? Probably few, based one major element of Grunge is angst, and Fish-Marillion was the last of that, IMO. But other elements, a hard rock, yet not metal sound is evident is some of these newer quasi-Prog bands. They may in fact be part of the future and evolve into definitive Prog. I still think Nu Prog gives them a place to reside as they don't really fit anywhere else.

I just think that calling all these bands "Nu" is ridiculous ... and calling them "New Prog" without any other connotations is ok, but essentially just saying that they're new bands making prog music, which doesn't tell you much about them.

Trademark wrote: Seems perfectly legit to me. Tey've grouped together most of the new stuff I don't like and given it a name. Now I've got something to bash.

That's awesome!

StyLaZyn wrote: Proletariat wrote: StyLaZyn wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ unfortunately none of these bands sound like or are influenced by Nu Metal, which makes it even worse. And it makes it worse how?   well, nu metal was esentually metal + alternative + rap nu prog is (according to the article) prog + alternative and i hope not + Rap OK...like a prog Linkin Park? Sounds decent to me.

^^^

Ok that last site scared the flying F*** out of me, what does Panic! at the disco have to do with prog. Shoot me now.

Proletariat wrote: do you have any idea of how hard it would be to rap over anything not in 4/4, didn't think so.

All the more reason for it to be Prog! Takes serious talent, not just inflective recital, yes?

Actually, I am not a big fan of rap, but Prog rap could change that.

Proletariat wrote: I know, it kills me. MCR has the balls to compare themselves to Pink Floyd.   and yes prog rap might be better, the turntables never reached thier full potental as an actual instrument, There are some more prog-ish rappers out there, but they would never call themselves prog.

The sheer audacity for one to formally compare themselves....it speaks volumes about what they don't know.

I won't give myself any acknowledge of the turntable reference, merely because I don't know. Percussively...it COULD be a challenge. But it has limits.

And I agree. Any rapper self-fulling would never consider himself/herself prog.  But that shows where the artist dies.




edited for selfish font reasons.........


Edited by StyLaZyn - April 07 2007 at 23:37

MikeEnRegalia wrote: Tony R wrote: Nu-Prog's a reasonable title. Just because you dont agree with the bands named doesnt mean its a bad idea. NU-Prog....Muse,Radiohead et al...why the heck not? Because neither Muse nor Radiohead sound anything like Limp Bizkuit or Linkin Park.