Prog_Traveller wrote: Sorry folks but I don't get it. On this website Porcupine Tree are listed as "heavy prog." They started out as a psychedelic/ space rock kind of band so I think if anything they should be under that category. Do we list Yes or Genesis as crossover bands or prog related? No they are listed as symphonic prog. OK you might argue and say that PT are most well known as a heavy prog band. Maybe maybe not. I think most of the hardcore fans of the band knew them when they were more in the Pink Floyd direction and that is when they really became accepted in the prog community. Their later heavier albums are less prog and shouldn't be considered the essence of what the band was or even is. Sure, they have heavy moments but they always have. Feel free to debate me. I don't expect the category to be changed but I just wanted to make my point. I think it's one of the reasons why the categories don't work so well on here. Many bands can easily fit under more than one category so maybe that's something to look into.

Maybe they oughta have subcategories for bands like Porcupine Tree. 

At any rate,  I'm not sure it's helpful to categorize a band like them, who change directions routinely, by what they started out as.  They aren't that now.  To stick them under "space rock" would make no sense to a newbie like me, who first heard Fear of a Blank Planet--I would be forced to conclude that the folks on Prog Archives don't know what the heck they are doing because they clearly don't know what "space rock" is. 

And really, for a fan, it is irrelevant when they became "accepted"; it comes down to whether you like them or not.  I was astonished that they'd been around so long without my having a clue, but for me the "essence" of the band is not what style you can lump them under at what point in time, but what made you sit up and take notice in the first place.  If it speaks to whatever internal musical cues that drive your preferences, it doesn't really matter what label is stuck on it.  I mean, I'm a prog fan not because I think prog is the "best" music, but because if you add up all the kinds of music I like and have liked the best, most fall under that particular label.  Porcupine Tree included. 

But no, I don't think calling them 'space/psychedelic' would be useful now.




Edited by ergaster - September 22 2010 at 17:59

We can't say crossover anymore?  We have to say Xover?  What is this, text messaging?

Dean wrote:  Eh?

 

I personally believe it's pretty difficult to pigeonhole just about any progressive artist into just one genre, sub-genre, etc.

Even in their later albums (aka present day), PT still show an affinity for ambiance, psychedelia, and the occasional Krautrock (see: "Anesthetize"). Sure, they have a heavier style, but they're a very eclectic bunch.


That being said, for organization/categorization purposes, I feel that heavy-prog fits them pretty well.

 Eh?

How about "U" and "No U"

Their music is a mixture of (not equal parts of) prog, ambient, psych/space, electronic, hard rock, krautrock, alternative, pop rock and extreme metal (e.g. heavy sections of Bonnie the Cat, Anesthetize and Way Out of Here).

timothy leary wrote: all you need is 5 genre king crimson derived yes derived genesis derived pink floyd derived crossover

They should be in  Stoke Newington.

They should be in indo-raga