Prog albums that didn't age well

Emerson, Lake and Palmer has to be the token example of this for me. I dunno, parts of Genesis' and King Crimson's stuff sound a little dated too, as does all non-instumental Zappa, but dated isn't necicerly a bad thing. Sometimes being of a certan time makes it more special and novel to young ears turing to prog, like my own.

Edited by Morakthesage - June 07 2009 at 15:51

crimhead wrote: On another note....a local radio station played "Visions of Angels" today. I was blown away. Talk about something totally unexpected. It was good to hear some good old Genesis on the radio for a change instead of the Philesis crap.

moshkito wrote: Hi,   I've come to the conclusion that the only prog albums that didn't age well ... were not the albums ... it was the years of many people that never even heard enough music to know and understand what something like prog would mean ... so they would stop naming their favorite bands and instead be fair enough to appreciate the musicianship that it takes to create something that is NOT a pop song!   But you all know that, right?   So you all think that Vivaldi has not aged well and sounds bad ... last I heard Gryphon made him sound wonderful!

Once again, I am forced to ask: What the hell are you talking about?

I fail to see how you can address us all in the same post. Clearly in this thread there have been all sorts of disagreements. All sorts of people with different opinions. So how exactly do you plan to logically defend lumping us all together in one category? I don't know if I fully understand your first paragraph but if I do, it's things that people have been saying in this thread since page 1. Like, do you read the topics you post in?

And what the hell has Vivaldi got to do with any of this? No one's even mentioned Vivaldi, let alone said that he hasn't aged well and sounds bad. Why did you bring him up? Why did you attribute that opinion to all of us? I'm not convinced that you're anything more than just someone who enjoys banging on self-righteously.

I'm sorry to be so harsh, but honestly it seems to me that nearly every single time you post, you construct a whole bunch of straw-man arguments that "we all" supposedly believe, and then use them as evidence as to how you are right and the rest of Prog Archives is wrong. The worst part is that these arguments that you invent for us typically have little more than a vague connection to what everyone else is talking about.

All prog music doesn't age well (especially prog rock/metal). The cheesiness and pretentiousness keeps the music from aging well.

IMO, most of Classic Prog has aged "better" then the Neo Prog of the 80s. That is of course mostly due to production, cheesy synthesizers and plastic drum sounds...

On the other hand, ELP sound incredibly dated to me and songs like "Cans And Brahms" from Yes' Fragile make me cringe.

Snow Dog wrote: KingCrimson250 wrote: moshkito wrote: Hi,   I've come to the conclusion that the only prog albums that didn't age well ... were not the albums ... it was the years of many people that never even heard enough music to know and understand what something like prog would mean ... so they would stop naming their favorite bands and instead be fair enough to appreciate the musicianship that it takes to create something that is NOT a pop song!   But you all know that, right?   So you all think that Vivaldi has not aged well and sounds bad ... last I heard Gryphon made him sound wonderful! Once again, I am forced to ask: What the hell are you talking about? I fail to see how you can address us all in the same post. Clearly in this thread there have been all sorts of disagreements. All sorts of people with different opinions. So how exactly do you plan to logically defend lumping us all together in one category? I don't know if I fully understand your first paragraph but if I do, it's things that people have been saying in this thread since page 1. Like, do you read the topics you post in? And what the hell has Vivaldi got to do with any of this? No one's even mentioned Vivaldi, let alone said that he hasn't aged well and sounds bad. Why did you bring him up? Why did you attribute that opinion to all of us? I'm not convinced that you're anything more than just someone who enjoys banging on self-righteously. I'm sorry to be so harsh, but honestly it seems to me that nearly every single time you post, you construct a whole bunch of straw-man arguments that "we all" supposedly believe, and then use them as evidence as to how you are right and the rest of Prog Archives is wrong. The worst part is that these arguments that you invent for us typically have little more than a vague connection to what everyone else is talking about. Had to be said.

Tubular Bells, Trilogy, 2112, This Was