| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
DisgruntledPorcupine 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 16 2010
Location: Thunder Bay CAN
Status: Offline
Points: 4395
|
 Posted: September 01 2010 at 16:14 |
 moshkito wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
Do you live in a fantasy world where everything you say is truth? |
You obviously do, since you can't do/say anything except think that no one is right and you are the boss and a turkey!
Go ahead ... ban me ... I'm not the problem! And you're troll'ing! At least I am adding information material if anyone wants to check it out. And yes, I was in America and I lived through that time and had the albums ... and it may not be important to you to help LA bands fight for their rights, but it was to me, and many other smaller bands that never get a chance!
What would you care? You think "prog" is not music that means anything anyway except what? |
lulz
|
 |
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: September 01 2010 at 16:16 |
DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:
moshkito wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
Do you live in a fantasy world where everything you say is truth? |
You obviously do, since you can't do/say anything except think that no one is right and you are the boss and a turkey!
Go ahead ... ban me ... I'm not the problem! And you're troll'ing! At least I am adding information material if anyone wants to check it out. And yes, I was in America and I lived through that time and had the albums ... and it may not be important to you to help LA bands fight for their rights, but it was to me, and many other smaller bands that never get a chance!
What would you care? You think "prog" is not music that means anything anyway except what? |
lulz
|
That should have been my response.
|
|
|
|
Henry Plainview
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
|
Posted: September 01 2010 at 16:23 |
moshkito is my favorite poster of all time.
On topic, I think it's not a coincidence that, with the exception of Radiohead, the most popular bands that are seen as reviving prog are mainly from the US (TMV, Coheed and Cambria, Tool, Dream Theater, The Decemberists, etc.)
|
|
if you own a sodastream i hate you
|
|
Prog_Traveller
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 29 2005
Location: Bucks county PA
Status: Offline
Points: 1474
|
Posted: September 02 2010 at 00:44 |
|
I would say in the hey day of prog which was approximately between 1970 and 1977 prog was probably bigger in the US than Britain. However, these days it's probably bigger in the UK than it is in the US. Part of the reason is that it never really went away over there. You had the neo prog bands in the 80's carrying the torch where as in the US it got really quiet in the prog world and it wasn't until Dream Theater came bursting on the scene with images and words in 1992 when people started to realize prog was back. Even then there weren't any prog bands even nearly as popular as DT. The thing is I'd say these days prog is still bubbling under in the US. It might not be as underground or as obscure as it was ten to fifteen years ago. But there aren't any festivals in the US like the High Voltage festival in the UK with a prog stage or the PROG magazine which is also out of England. IMO prog still has a ways to go in the US before it gets noticed in a major way and gets the respect it deserves.
|
|
fuxi
Prog Reviewer
Joined: March 08 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2459
|
Posted: September 02 2010 at 11:51 |
Prog_Traveller wrote:
I would say in the hey day of prog which was approximately between 1970 and 1977 prog was probably bigger in the US than Britain. However, these days it's probably bigger in the UK than it is in the US. |
I doubt that very much. Go to any summer festival in the U.K. and there's hardly any prog on the programme. (The only exceptions I can think of are Radiohead and Porcupine Tree - if indeed they are prog.) Bands that DESERVE to be big (like Big Big Train) are not - just like in the U.S.
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17777
|
Posted: September 03 2010 at 14:32 |
Prog_Traveller wrote:
I would say in the hey day of prog which was approximately between 1970 and 1977 prog was probably bigger in the US than Britain. |
I agree. And there was a lot of "prog" in SF, LA, Chicago, NY that has never been discussed or accepted because it doesn't sound like the prototype progressive definitions that someone decided London had and no one else could have! The same also goes for other places across the world, even if the inspiration was different ... ie ... classical music!
| ... However, these days it's probably bigger in the UK than it is in the US. Part of the reason is that it never really went away over there. |
Possibly not.
America in the 4 spots mentioned above, is like 4 completely different countries and I think that tends to dilute the content and quality of it all, and prevent us from calling it "American" because the consistencies between those 4 places are so different that they have their own "progressive" nature. One could be more older music inspired and another appears to have been more drug inspired and the other more "art" or "artist" inspired ... and that makes it very difficult to have a concensus as strong as that which came from London.
The main issue in the US is pop charts for everything including your own tool! ... and thus the perception is that a lot of this different stuff is not important, or valid for a very large portion of the country -- thus NY artists tend to not make a splash in SF and vice versa. There are other issues, like it will be a cold day in hell that USA Today will even mention the word "progressive" in relation to music, unless they are trashing it! And magazines like Rolling Stone do not care about the music and never did ... they were always about the "star" ... and the gossip around it ... excuse me ... and sometimes naked picture of an artist to make the point that they are more important because they can Playboy foldout themselves! And women on the verge of nudity always sell, don't they?
In the end, it hurts the perception about the music ... there is not enough intelligent discussion and review and Jan Ar$eh0ll is not going to hire someone to not kiss the star image in his magazine and neither is anyone else! It's about the money ... and until those magazines are dead, and people like us take over and start something else, valid, important and help the discussions go beyong trolling and people making fun of the comments ... stuff like this will never get better.
I just think that ProgArchives is as good as anyone else ... but we have to set a higher standard ... in order to make this all better and more visible. But I'm not sure it can happen when we're doing the exact samething as anyone else out there ... ignoring it and trashing it as some folks would rather do than understand it. Not liking it is one thing, but trashing it is not necessary ... review something else and just be man enough to say ... I don't care for it and stop dropping turds on the threads!
Edited by moshkito - September 16 2010 at 12:59
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
CCVP
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 15 2007
Location: Vitória, Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 7971
|
Posted: September 03 2010 at 23:27 |
Blacksword wrote:
On the BBC's Prog Rock Britania program, Rick Wakemen makes a comment about how US audiences took to British prog when it came to their shores. He says there was a more broad acceptance of prog rock in the US music mainstream, because (and I paraphrase..) Americans are 'less embarassed and more impressed by by displays of skill' than the Brits.
In the UK, alhtough the big prog bands of the day were shifting thousands of records and doing very well, their audiences were just spotty six form and college boys, and prog was never really part of the mainstream.
Does anyone agree/disagree with Wakemans comments?
|
I agree completely. Not only the brits, but the scandinavians have something like that.. In Britain it is called the Tall Poppy Syndrome, I think, and in Scandinavia is domething like Jante Law. It is a cultural feature that came to the western culture from the northern barbarians living in Germania Magna (northern Germany and southern Scandinavia), when they invaded the Roman Empire at the 5th century.
|
|
|
|
lazland
Prog Reviewer
Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 13719
|
Posted: September 04 2010 at 13:55 |
I just LOVE that Jeremy Kyle part of your signature - funniest thing I've seen in ages 
|
|
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org
Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!
|
|
thehallway
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 13 2010
Location: Dorset, England
Status: Offline
Points: 1433
|
Posted: September 06 2010 at 13:47 |
I agree with the tread starter.
But please, will everybody stop referring to the college boys who like prog as spotty!
I'm in the sixth form and I have no spots! 
There is no correlation... 
|
|
Renfield
Forum Newbie
Joined: August 23 2010
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 15
|
Posted: September 06 2010 at 19:53 |
During Prog's early 70s heyday I was still soiling my diaper, so I can't comment on what was or wasn't popular.
But as an American, I can say that the European bands had a certain "mystique" for me, simply because they WERE European, and seemed to be devoid of American influences like blues. A band like Focus, who were from Holland (and yodeled) seemed very exotic as compared to the Skynyrds and Aerosmiths, etc, or even British bands like the Stones, who spent the early 70s pretending to be from Alabama. So when a band like ELP came on the radio (I can remember hearing the full version of Karn Evil 9), it had a certain fascination for me. I liked the US bands also, but when I listened to prog from Europe I felt like I was really going "out there" if you know what I mean.
If others felt like me, maybe that was a factor?
|
|
Stevo
Forum Groupie
Joined: January 26 2010
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 75
|
Posted: September 07 2010 at 12:32 |
moshkito wrote:
Blacksword wrote:
On the BBC's Prog Rock Britania program, Rick Wakemen makes a comment about how US audiences took to British prog when it came to their shores. He says there was a more broad acceptance of prog rock in the US music mainstream, because (and I paraphrase..) Americans are 'less embarassed and more impressed by by displays of skill' than the Brits.
In the UK, alhtough the big prog bands of the day were shifting thousands of records and doing very well, their audiences were just spotty six form and college boys, and prog was never really part of the mainstream.
Does anyone agree/disagree with Wakemans comments?
|
I don't know ... I think that what Rick fails to see is that America had 200 Billion people at that time and the potential for sales was too big ... |
200 MILLION (not Billion)
Prog classics are even today part of mainstream America. If you listen to a classic rock station, it seems that every other song is either by Tull, ELP, Yes, Kansas, Rush, Genesis, the Who...with the occasional KC tune thrown in.
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17777
|
Posted: September 07 2010 at 15:23 |
Stevo wrote:
200 MILLION (not Billion)
Prog classics are even today part of mainstream America. If you listen to a classic rock station, it seems that every other song is either by Tull, ELP, Yes, Kansas, Rush, Genesis, the Who...with the occasional KC tune thrown in.
|
Hehe ... it was an intentional mistype to get the idea out ... many bands in Europe think that the "big time" is if they can sell and make it in America ....
YES had its moments and did well ... but I'm not sure that YES would have been that great or that good if it had not sold so well in America. So much so that one of their EP's was a famous Simon and Garfunkel song ... you already know its name!
I think Rick's statements are ok. I'm just not sure that they are complete or as clear as they should be. I'm not sure that most bands can live on sales on English soil alone ... it's not enough ... and we can go to check out many bands that tried ... and died!
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: September 07 2010 at 16:07 |
moshkito wrote:
[
I think Rick's statements are ok. I'm just not sure that they are complete or as clear as they should be. I'm not sure that most bands can live on sales on English soil alone ... it's not enough ... and we can go to check out many bands that tried ... and died! |
I would say you are wrong here, I don't know where you get your info from. Probably most UK bands survive on UK sales.
UK means England, Scotland, Wales and Norhtern Ireland btw.
|
|
|
|
thehallway
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 13 2010
Location: Dorset, England
Status: Offline
Points: 1433
|
Posted: September 07 2010 at 16:15 |
Snow Dog wrote:
moshkito wrote:
[
I think Rick's statements are ok. I'm just not sure that they are complete or as clear as they should be. I'm not sure that most bands can live on sales on English soil alone ... it's not enough ... and we can go to check out many bands that tried ... and died! |
I would say you are wrong here, I don't know where you get your info from. Probably most UK bands survive on UK sales.
UK means England, Scotland, Wales and Norhtern Ireland btw.
|
The difference is phenomenally important.
|
|
CCVP
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 15 2007
Location: Vitória, Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 7971
|
Posted: September 07 2010 at 19:34 |
Shouldn't they survive more on English sales? I mean, the UK have something like 70million people, and England alone has somethong like 65 million people. . . . If you disconsider the chavs there are only 1 million people though. 
|
|
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17777
|
Posted: September 08 2010 at 13:53 |
thehallway wrote:
The difference is phenomenally important. |
Snow Dog doesn't know economics ... between selling 100 thousand and 5 million! He would understand why so many bands want to come to America so quickly!
Pot of Gold at the end of the rainbow!
Edited by moshkito - September 08 2010 at 13:56
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
Garion81
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 22 2004
Location: So Cal, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4338
|
Posted: September 09 2010 at 17:09 |
moshkito wrote:
richardh wrote:
The UK did have a proper appreciation of the music amongst music papers/critics and those who had a clue but the problem with this country has been the grip that radio has on deciding what is good or not in commercial terms. |
Thank you.
It's the same in America, with the difference that college radio was already out and the late 60's and early 70's coincided with the rise of FM radio, that for 10 years was adamant about being against the top ten thing in the AM radio.
As such, a lot of things got played that were longer and more interesting, and at KTYD in Santa Barbara you could hear Willie Nelson, Pink Floyd, Beatles, Outfield, Allman Brothers Band, Grateful Dead, Jefferson Airplane, Eagles .... non stop ... long cuts ... totally opposite any of the "top bullsh*t" mentality! And this helped bands like Golden Earring, Supertramp, Average White Band, and so many others get an ear ... where otherwise they would NOT have!
And by the time you were hearing these get played at KMET, or KLOS in Los Angeles or a couple of the biggies in San Francisco, you KNEW that there was new music somewhere ... and ... with one interesting point ... that became a major lawsuit a few years later ... as local bands could not get airplay ... and those bands won that lawsuit and these biggies had to play them ... and eventually they didn't because it didn't suit their "business interests" (their own distribution network) ... and one day one station went "new age" and another went "oldies" ... rather than give in and appease a handful of local bands ... in the end, it only showed the corruption of the whole thing -- and one station was a major part of a media conglomerate as well, and they did not want to be out in left field and "lose TV viewers" if their radio station got trashed or known to ... whatever!
It was at that time that "progressive" music slowed down ... compared to anything from 1972, 1973 and 1974 or 1975 ... this freedom died, as FM became more and more commercial and hit oriented and today FM is the same crap as AM ...
|
|
The other point is the availabilty of large stadiums. America in those days had wonderfull venues for such bands as ELP to put on a show. Here you had... errmm... The Hammersmith Appollo (nee Odeon).
|
That's because some of those "football" owners are not smart enough to use their venues for 6 months out of the year ... I guess we can't have anyone but Wayne Rooney ruin their pitch! I don't feel sorry for that venues thing at all !!!! [/QUOTE]
Okay I get what you are saying to a degree but I also grew up in those times and listened to a lot of Southern California radio stations that were not in SB that were doing some amazing things. There was a station in Garden Grove KTBT, yes I said Garden Grove, that played all request. They had no play list until someone would call them. It is where I heard In-a-gada-da-vida for the first time and Quicksilver Messenger Service Who do you Love. Lee Michael's Hello (remember him?) Electric Flag, Spirit, Fraternity of Man, King Crimson, Arthur Brown, The Nice and whole lot of other things I can no longer remember. For the LA stations one you leave off your list is KNAC which all the way to the late 70's played all sorts of things including every Monday playing 4 hours of one artist and they did not stop at commercial releases. Here is a great March 1972 article about them in Billboard Magazine (starts on page 23 if this doesn't take you directly there. Article is called Staff Makes Free Form KNAC-FM)
Other stations like this included KMET (early days format), KPPC and KYMS and 91X in San Diego (on a clear day lol). The shift happened about 1973-75 and when the corporate people at KABC changed it to KLOS, the format police started to take over. Record labels also were also caught up in this forcing artists to pigeon hole themselves into one format or the other to get airplay on these rigid stations.
The late 60's and early 70's were a haven for progressive rock in the mainstream not to be seen again.
Edited by Garion81 - September 09 2010 at 17:10
|
"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?"
|
|
Blacksword
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130
|
Posted: September 11 2010 at 07:48 |
thehallway wrote:
I agree with the tread starter.
But please, will everybody stop referring to the college boys who like prog as spotty!
I'm in the sixth form and I have no spots!
There is no correlation... |
I tried so hard to get spots when I was in the sixth form. I thought it came with being a progger, but no matter how much Genesis I listened to the blackheads just wouldn't come 
|
|
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
|
|
GY!BE
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 27 2010
Location: Montreal
Status: Offline
Points: 538
|
Posted: September 12 2010 at 20:34 |
|
UK is a great example that the audience doesn't make the bands.
|
|
Pelata
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2010
Location: NC-USA
Status: Offline
Points: 364
|
Posted: September 16 2010 at 07:18 |
Stevo wrote:
moshkito wrote:
Blacksword wrote:
On the BBC's Prog Rock Britania program, Rick Wakemen makes a comment about how US audiences took to British prog when it came to their shores. He says there was a more broad acceptance of prog rock in the US music mainstream, because (and I paraphrase..) Americans are 'less embarassed and more impressed by by displays of skill' than the Brits.
In the UK, alhtough the big prog bands of the day were shifting thousands of records and doing very well, their audiences were just spotty six form and college boys, and prog was never really part of the mainstream.
Does anyone agree/disagree with Wakemans comments?
|
I don't know ... I think that what Rick fails to see is that America had 200 Billion people at that time and the potential for sales was too big ... |
200 MILLION (not Billion)
Prog classics are even today part of mainstream America. If you listen to a classic rock station, it seems that every other song is either by Tull, ELP, Yes, Kansas, Rush, Genesis, the Who...with the occasional KC tune thrown in.
|
The flipside to all that exposure is that Americans tend to not classify those bands as Prog, they don't own the albums or "know" the bands, they simply see them as "this band I remember that had one or two good songs". The bands are considered "Classic Rock" and are played alongside the Skynyrd's & Nugent's.
Case in point, Kansas. Aside from "COWS" and "DITW", 95% of Americans couldn't name another Kansas song...they're pretty much considered a flash in the pan, despite the fact that their first 5 records (at least) are Prog Rock gems! Rush = "Tom Sawyer" and "Limelight"...Yes = "OOALH" and "Roundabout"...Tull = "Aqualung"...ELP = "Lucky Man". These bands may be part of the Mainstream concious, but that same concious holds them captive to the "they only have 2 songs" mindset.
Edited by Pelata - September 16 2010 at 07:20
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
America's love of prog rock
