![]() |
|
Post Reply ![]() |
Page <123 |
Author | ||
Ivan_Melgar_M ![]() Special Collaborator ![]() Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 27 2004 Location: Peru Status: Offline Points: 19557 |
![]() |
|
I agree partially with you.
Progressive is only and adjective that qualkifies the approach of the bands to music, there vxcan be progressive )with low case p) in every genre, for example I believe REM was ahead of most bands ion their genre, so they were some kind of progressive Alternative.
No Prog (with capital P) is an acrionym for "Progressive Rock", in this case saying Pop prog or Prog Pop is clearly an oxymoron, because both genres are uncopatible to coexist.
Of course there are usually prog bands that played some Pop material and Pop bands that played a couple of tracks, but two opposite genres coexisting together is a natural contradiction.
Even the bands that made some Prog with Pop influences, were creating a different thing, it was not Pop anymore, because the structure, timing and characteristics are not the traditional characteristics of Prog.
My two cents.
Iván Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - September 15 2007 at 15:35 |
||
![]() |
||
![]() |
||
Dean ![]() Special Collaborator ![]() ![]() Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
![]() |
|
I think the exception to that is Talk Talk. Their first two albums (The Party's Over & It's My Life) were unashamedly Pop while they last two (Spirit of Eden & Laughing Stock) are completely progressive, leaving their middle album (The Colour of Spring) as a wonderful blend of the two, ergo: Prog-Pop. Edited by darqdean - September 15 2007 at 14:51 |
||
What?
|
||
![]() |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page <123 |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |