Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: [QUOTE=keiser willhelm]   Sometimes I feel most people take the term Neo Prog as an insult.

BaldFriede wrote: I have honestly tried to get into neo prog and listened to Arena, Clepsydra, Pendragon and Marillion. Of Marillion I only liked the first two, the second more than the first; the rest of Marillion was not interesting at all. Clepsydra, Pendragon and Arena were as boring as hell, repeating formulas that were outdated in the late 70s already. If this is the spear tip of neo prog I don't bother to hear the rest.

I'm sure many others feel the way you do, BaldFriede. Interestingly, though, when others have replied negatively about their initial experiences of music you champion, you've rightly encouraged them to explore further. Would you be open to further exploration of the wonderful world of neo-prog?

I should add that disliking a genre does not affect what it is. Even if we were to reach a consensus that neo-prog was boring as hell, repeating formulas that were outdated in the late 70s, that in no way lessens its status as a progressive sub-genre.

Well personally, I think that doing Neo in 80's requiered much more courage than doing Sympho during 70s... I think, when listening to Neo one should look for beauty, and not count how many signature changes are in a song. Every subgenre here has different things to offer, as well es some things they lack. In the case of Neo - it is compexity (only relatively though), in case of RIO - melodicity, in case of Prog Electronic - tight composition. So we can see, every subgenre could have it's pretty big army of bashers. So why dislike any subgenre for what they don't have and not to like any for what they do have? As for me I think I have pretty flexible taste, enjoying almost every Prog band here more or less, from Neo to RIO.        

RaphaelT wrote:   Of course it is natural that when you discover Magma you start to consider Pink Floyd, Yes or King Crimson as "mediocre pop bands".

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - September 29 2008 at 15:22

kibble_alex wrote: I think we should respect Neo Prog for what it is: MUSIC. Just that. Sometimes good, sometimes bad, sometimes glorious, sometimes atrocious. It's nothing else. I don't agree with giving value to music only because "it kept the flame alive" or any other non-musical reason.  it kept the flame alight after punk almost near destroyed it. That was important but that doesn't say anything about the quality of the music. If it kept the flame "alive" as you say it was because Marillion or IQ are GREAT. Think where we'd be without the neo-prog scene. I concur. I don't we'd have half as many fans, there probably wouldn't be a modern prog era near as big as today's and plus it also broadened the whole prog genre to new limits. Now there's even more to explore! All of these I agree with, but I would say let's not value music for it's historical importance but as MUSIC.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: RaphaelT wrote:   Of course it is natural that when you discover Magma you start to consider Pink Floyd, Yes or King Crimson as "mediocre pop bands".   No, it's not natural, YOU ARE CREATING A NEW PREJUDICE , I found Magma a lot of time ago and I hate their music, I don't like a  single note of what they did, I find it as horrendous cacophony.   But I wouldn't dare to say it's inferior Prog or is just weird music with no trace of progressiveness, because it would be absurd, I can simply say I don't like them.   Magma is just different than Pink Floyd, Yes or King Crimson, all of them part of the Progressive Rock genre with equal merits, it's only better or worst depending on the SUBJECTIVE taste of the listener.   Bald Friedre will like Magma, I will like Yes and Pink Floyd, none of US will be wrong, we are only different persons with different perception of beauty.   Iván

Well, not really a new prejudice for what I've read this isn't new. Mmm too bad.

I must say this wasn't my experience. I've started listening Yes, Pink Floyd and Genesis. After a while I was listening RIO and Eclectic prog, but, when I listen to my firsts albums of Floyd (Animals, I love it ) and Genesis, I feel like coming back home. I can't stop loving the albums that bring me into prog.

No.

RaphaelT wrote:   prefix neo- in musicology means "following" which is translated as "secondary", like neoclassics or neoromanticism. Sad things is that people who possess such great open-minded, that it suffices to love RIO or Zeuhl tend to base on first impressions like name of style or similarities to the giants of 70s.   .

 

Honestly Raphael, I studied music in the university and took piano and music lessons for five years, and Neo has never been referred toi secondary.

 

As a fact, my mother is an antique dealer and a concertist, and after asking her, the term Neo has never been used as secondary.

 

Neo means NEW, just that, and in musical terminology is more identified with revival, for example Neo Classicism means Classic Revival, not Secondary or less that Classical.

 

If you want more information, you can use the dictionary:

 

neo- Definition neo- (nē′ō, -ə) 1.      new, recent, latest Neolithic, Neozoic 2.      in a new, different, or modified way neologism 3.      the New World Neotropical http://www.yourdictionary.com/neo-prefix

 

If you want a musical description, you can also check:_

 

Neo-classicism The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Music | Date: 1996 Neo-classicism. Term applied to 20th-cent. mus. trend which developed in the 1920s, when several composers wrote works in 17th- and 18th-cent. forms and styles as a reaction against the excessive orchestration of the late 19th-cent. romantics. Prokofiev's Classical Symphony (1916–17) and R. Strauss's Ariadne auf Naxos (1912) can be claimed as neo-classical, but the movt. began in earnest with Stravinsky (Capriccio for pf. and wind, pf. conc., Pulcinella, vn. conc., Oedipus Rex, etc.) and Hindemith. In Eng. Vaughan Williams's vn. conc. (orig. Concerto Accademico) of 1925 was neo-classical in style, though, because for most composers the model was Bach, neo-baroque might be a more accurate description. ( Prokofiev's Classical Symphony, being a pastiche of Haydn, is truly named.) http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O76-Neoclassicism.html

As far as I see, there's no relation with secondary, and I don't believe Prokoviev or Stravinsky are secondary to anybody.

 

Better check out what the terms mean before using them.

 

Iván

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - September 29 2008 at 23:09

Well, as a newcomer in the collab zone - I have my thoughts on these subjects.

Personally I enjoy music from all over the musical spectrum; I have artists listed in RIO/Avant as well as in Neo as some of my favorites; and also enjoy music that - although progressive - would never have a place on this site due to not fitting with the criterias listed here.

As I see it, music coined as prog or progressive is music more complex when measured against mainstream music. It can be the minimalistic tendencies we can find in some krautrock, the emphasis on certain moods mixed with multiple melody layers or complex structured songs as in space, neo and symphonic, or the more far out experimentations in what is dubbed RIO/Avant in here. And lots more - I'm not going into the finder details here...

It's music that under normal circumstances won't appeal to the average music consumer; music which takes some kind of effort to comprehend, understand and enjoy. At minimum concentrated listening.

Some people, perhaps more in prog circles than in other places, see their favorite genres as holy grails; precious to them and held forth as the greatest invention since the wheel and superior to everything else. A human trait I guess, and some RIO-fans are more human than the rest of us in that respect ;-)

Neo is a genre that have always been bashed. This started with the music critics in the early 80's; who despised progressive music out of principle. They established a tradition that bashing progressive music in general and neo in particular was a ok; and the people bashing neo in here follows their lead - further making it an acceptable practice to bash progressive music in general.

It's completely acceptable to not like neo (or symphonic, fusion or whatever) because the music doesn't appeal or because you can't grasp it. We're humans, and few of us have a musical taste covering everything. But when one tries to argue that one or more specific styles of music is less worthy than others you're treading deep waters indeed. For anyone trying to deride neo - since that is the topic here - my challenge is: Make something better in that genre yourself. Try to compose, play and produce a song in this genre that surpasses or equals what is out there. I don't think too many could take the challenge on, and those who do (any takers?) might learn a lesson or two while doing so.

Personally I find much of the so-called RIO movment boring, and I think that when it comes to copying other artists fans of this genre might take a look in their own glasshouse before throwing stones at others. The sounds produced may be different, but the approach taken by many of these artists seems to be highly similar. Nothing wrong with that of course, but this genre may not be as innovative and groundbreaking as it's most diehard fanboys and -girls seems to think ;-)

And the more recent innovators stay as unrecognized in this genre as in others. How many of the RIO/Avant fans in here have checked out artists like Robin Taylor or Scared Bunny for instance?

As for Neo bands, I'm still quite unsure as to what constitutes a band being Neo compares to symphonic and vice versa. And the dividing line between Neo and Crossover is another twilight zone in many respects too. As for under the radar releases in the Neo genre, I'd point towards now defunct Swiss band Shakary, and their release Shakary 2006, as a good, recent and enjoyable release in this genre. It's not original, but it's certainly enjoyable - and the music has been made with quite a lot of skill. If it sounds too simplistic - try replicating it. You might get a surprise when trying to do just that ;-)

stonebeard wrote: Avant-prog and zeuhl are the only genres that progress anything. You're all living delusions.