Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17838
|
Posted: October 02 2010 at 16:45 |
Mushroom Sword wrote:
Progressive Rock requires so much intelligence to produce if it's made right, And from what you said it requires even more to go beyond it. I guess this is just my attempt to follow after that amazing "speech?" but you really have made me think way more then what I asked, and that was really amazing.
|
Don't worry about the intelligence ... concentrate on the vibe of the music and your feelings while you are playing it and how you want to accent and expand that ... and don't try to use "lyrics" to convey your meanings to shorten the stick so you can play something else that others want ... stick to the inner self all the way ... is the only secret I have ever seen. The rest would be how much I can hide or not tell you --- which is selfish.
But you have to be a writer, poet, and lover of the arts to know stuff like this ... and sometimes, many of our friends here are just fans of "prog" or "progressive" and I can never be sure that they like, see, or can understand anything else ... I imagine when they are 50 or 60 and are wanting to kinda make sense of themselves and their life ... that some of these words will come around for them ...
In the end, to be a "fan" is not what the music is about ... never was, except for the many commercial sounding bands and music out there using the surname "prog" ...
Edited by moshkito - October 02 2010 at 17:04
|
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
|
|
Triceratopsoil
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18016
|
Posted: October 02 2010 at 16:48 |
I think the point of rock being progressive is that it CAN'T be made "right." There isn't a formula to it.
There is an awful lot of prog that is just arbitrary stoned noodling, too; I don't think, say, The Cosmic Jokers required an excess of cognitive capabilities to make their music
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: October 02 2010 at 16:55 |
Triceratopsoil wrote:
Haha, I was joking. We all love you
|
Not true.
|
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17838
|
Posted: October 02 2010 at 17:20 |
Triceratopsoil wrote:
I think the point of rock being progressive is that it CAN'T be made "right." There isn't a formula to it.
There is an awful lot of prog that is just arbitrary stoned noodling, too; I don't think, say, The Cosmic Jokers required an excess of cognitive capabilities to make their music
|
Agreed. As mentioned in the article, Tim's gift (never discussed in the biography, btw, or by ANY of the musicians we know -- that I have seen) was to help add some focus ... I really think that the line in 7UP about "get into the vibe" of the music, is important and things like the Cosmic Jokers (what an album that is ... and still one of my favorites) is almost all -- exclusively -- about the "feel" and the "flow" and anything else is not as important ... and specially pretty is when the bass does the long stretches in it ... so simple, and yet ... so strong ... and yet so vivid ...
Both Helmut Hattler and Mani Neumaier have not been the conventional "hippies" hiding their experiences in those days ... I really liked Helmut's comment ... that they were so stoned, and looking at each other not knowing what to do and ... he did something ... which I'm sure happened at the Fillmore a thousand times, but the ability to take that very "moment" and expand it, and make it live with the music ... is one of the most special learnings and teachings that any music master will ever give you ... one lives for those moments, and when they come to just plop a scale or three notes ... might not even be what that moment is/was about ... and that is something that the ... and this is one of the most fundamental acting/theater/film exercises for actors by the way in advanced acting exercises ... learning to expand and make it work, not break it or change it. It is the very pinacle and the point with Hindu and Eastern ragas ... to reach that "point" and extend it, so others can see it. And KC did this on their first album as well -- with similar exercises and rehearsal.
All of a sudden CAN working with an actor, as was Amon Duul in the communes and then whole thing tied to film and theater (via Peter Handke, Wim Wenders, Peter Weiss and Werner Herzog), the whole thing takes a different dimention, does it not?
Now you know why so much of this stuff is so dear and special to me.
|
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
|
|
Paravion
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 01 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 470
|
Posted: October 02 2010 at 17:41 |
..there's no reasonable reason as to why it's called progressive rock..
|
|
Mushroom Sword
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 28 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 426
|
Posted: October 02 2010 at 17:57 |
Paravion wrote:
..there's no reasonable reason as to why it's called progressive rock..
|
You win the award for replying to a thread title and not reading any comments. Congratulations.
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: October 02 2010 at 18:03 |
Triceratopsoil wrote:
...did anyone actually manage to make it through that?
|
I haven't actually read a post by moshkito in several years. It's not worth the effort.
|
|
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Penal Colony
Status: Offline
Points: 11420
|
Posted: October 02 2010 at 19:21 |
Mushroom Sword wrote:
Paravion wrote:
..there's no reasonable reason as to why it's called progressive rock..
|
You win the award for replying to a thread title and not reading any comments. Congratulations.
|
You might think the response glib but it's probably one of the few honest ones to date. He's right, there is no credible consensus as to why certain types of music are labelled in the way they are. At best it's just an arbitrary demarcation to avoid confusing the Osmonds with Gentle Giant, and if we need a label to achieve that we clearly have eyes but no ears alas.
|
|
The Monodrone
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 21 2010
Location: Indiana, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4489
|
Posted: October 02 2010 at 20:18 |
thellama73 wrote:
Triceratopsoil wrote:
...did anyone actually manage to make it through that?
|
I haven't actually read a post by moshkito in several years. It's not worth the effort.
|
|
|
|
Ruby900
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 03 2009
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 739
|
Posted: October 02 2010 at 22:17 |
|
"I always say that it’s about breaking the rules. But the secret of breaking rules in a way that works is understanding what the rules are in the first place". Rick Wakeman
|
|
Paravion
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 01 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 470
|
Posted: October 03 2010 at 06:07 |
ExittheLemming wrote:
Mushroom Sword wrote:
Paravion wrote:
..there's no reasonable reason as to why it's called progressive rock..
|
You win the award for replying to a thread title and not reading any comments. Congratulations.
|
You might think the response glib but it's probably one of the few honest ones to date. He's right, there is no credible consensus as to why certain types of music are labelled in the way they are.
At best it's just an arbitrary demarcation to avoid confusing the Osmonds with Gentle Giant, and if we need a label to achieve that we clearly have eyes but no ears alas.
|
That's actually a quite reasonable (meta-) reason.
And I DID read all the comments, even those posted by moskhito. Though admittedly not thoroughly. Occasionally I'm able to jump on his train of thoughts, but he doesn't seem to write in any effective communicative manner, but more 'on top of his head' rambling, and it's very difficult to read. My comment expresses disagreement with most of the above attempts to pin down a reason as to why it's called progressive rock. Whether there in fact and for sure isn't any reason is hard to tell, but it's a more sound assumption to assume that there isn't rather than coming up with a wide range of more or less idiosyncratic, possible or impossible, reasons. Whys are generally extremely difficult to answer in a sound and adequate way. I hate whys.
|
|
Jörgemeister
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 10 2008
Location: Nauticus
Status: Offline
Points: 2296
|
Posted: October 03 2010 at 11:02 |
I've always like to think that the reason progressive rock is called like that is because it never stays the same, it changes, progress, prog evolves. And I'm not saying one riff in one song, generally, comparing Yes / Genesis / Crimson with today's bands like DT / TFK / The Tangent, you can hear similarities and you know is still prog, but it doesn't sound exactly the same over the years, as other "stationary" genres do.
|
I Could have bought a Third World country with the riches that I've spent
|
|
elder08
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 25 2010
Location: Russia
Status: Offline
Points: 236
|
Posted: October 03 2010 at 15:35 |
I say that it's called "Progressive" for two reasons. Number One: Classic prog at its birth point was trying to move forward with music and make something original. Number Two: Modern Prog is trying to also move forward with music in the same way BUT not exactly sticking with the same formula as classic prog.
|
"There are people who say we [Pink Floyd] should make room for younger bands. That's not the way it works. They can make their own room."- David Gilmour
|
|
prog4evr
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 22 2005
Location: Wuhan, China
Status: Offline
Points: 1455
|
Posted: October 03 2010 at 18:55 |
NecronCommander wrote:
90125 was a pop rock album. |
Not sure what this has to do with the question, but you are right. Yes was only progressive in the 1970s (before Tormato).
|
|
Gerinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154
|
Posted: October 04 2010 at 11:12 |
I've said this before but I will say it again, to those who describe the spirit of the original 70's prog as "those guys who wanted to progress beyond the boundaries of the existing music, and discover new uncharted territories" and therefore ascribe this interpretation to the term progressive rock.
Many tend to forget that the origin of prog was in big part coming from competent musicians who were fed up with the disappointing musical simplicity of the Elvis rock & roll and in Europe the beatlemania 3-minutes-long songs fever with lyrics like "baby I love you, yeah-yeah".
Rock music (included psychedelia) did not allow them to develop and fullfill their competences as serious musicians, and they wanted to recover some of the approach and mentality from classical music and jazz, but with the attitude and the new musical resources of rock.
One of the most archetypal descriptions of prog in its first years was that of "that music which attempts to blend rock with classical music and jazz elements".
They wanted to recover musical values from the past which had been lost with the advent of rock.
From this viewpoint, the motivation of prog was regressive rather than "progressive in the sense of seeking completely new territory beyond the boundaries of the existing music".
What they wanted was not so much to experiment into completely uncharted musical territory (if they did, the results would have been even much more weird) but rather to make rock which still retained classical music values in terms of competent composition and musicianship. For the most and best known part, the original 70's prog was not excessively experimental, that came later.
But because such an approach was totally new within the scope of rock, the end result happened to be called "progressive", which is somehow ironic.
Edited by Gerinski - October 04 2010 at 12:53
|
|
Trademark
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 21 2006
Location: oHIo
Status: Offline
Points: 1009
|
Posted: October 04 2010 at 11:43 |
ExittheLemming wrote:
Mushroom Sword wrote:
Paravion wrote:
..there's no reasonable reason as to why it's called progressive rock..
|
You win the award for replying to a thread title and not reading any comments. Congratulations.
|
You might think the response glib but it's probably one of the few honest ones to date. He's right, there is no credible consensus as to why certain types of music are labelled in the way they are.
At best it's just an arbitrary demarcation to avoid confusing the Osmonds with Gentle Giant, and if we need a label to achieve that we clearly have eyes but no ears alas.
|
I love Donny And Marie Schulman. I always watched their show. Had no idea it was prog.
|
|
Catcher10
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17909
|
Posted: October 04 2010 at 11:46 |
Any Colour You Like wrote:
Jesus. |
He was progressive
|
|
|
Catcher10
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17909
|
Posted: October 04 2010 at 12:12 |
ExittheLemming wrote:
Mushroom Sword wrote:
Paravion wrote:
..there's no reasonable reason as to why it's called progressive rock.. |
You win the award for replying to a thread title and not reading any comments. Congratulations.
|
You might think the response glib but it's probably one of the few honest ones to date. He's right, there is no credible consensus as to why certain types of music are labelled in the way they are.
At best it's just an arbitrary demarcation to avoid confusing the Osmonds with Gentle Giant, and if we need a label to achieve that we clearly have eyes but no ears alas.
|
That's what I stated before....don't get stuck on a "label".....which is what sooo many people do that can cause horridly long threads about the word progressive.
If this site was not called Prog Archives but featured the same artists we see now.....we would still be here discussing Yes, Genesis, PF, Rush, KC.....so on...
|
|
|
Pelata
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2010
Location: NC-USA
Status: Offline
Points: 364
|
Posted: October 04 2010 at 12:19 |
I'll throw in my two pennies...
Like many genre tags before it, "Progressive" began as a descriptive term and became a genre with it's own expectations and baggage.
Just because Yes and Genesis were labeled as "progresive" doesn't mean that all progressive bands need to sound like Yes and Genesis. But we all knew that already.
Now, thanks to the media, we all have a preconcieved notion in our head of what "Grunge" or "Rock And Roll" or "Prog" or "Metal" is supposed to sound like.
For me, "Prog" carries with it a two-fold consequence. Either it sounds like Yes and Genesis, in which case the tag instantly makes sense (in which case it's simply a genre tag). Or it sounds like something we/I did not expect at all, which also makes sense (in which case, it's a literal description).
I remember in high school in the late 80s bands like The Cure and R.E.M. were called "progressive" because they did not sound like what was popular...it was new, it was unexpected, therefore it was "progressive"...now The Cure is "goth" and R.E.M. is "Classic Rock"...LOL!
Edited by Pelata - October 04 2010 at 12:21
|
|
sealchan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 12 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 179
|
Posted: October 04 2010 at 14:17 |
Now that I am hoping to finally resume some album reviewing (I had stopped midway through reviewing "Fragile"), I hope to take up an idea that may provide a way to identify a progressive rock song by its own content rather than in the context of its time and the artist's influences. As a result, however, I now realize that what I am doing is not defining "progressive rock" so much as I am trying to find elements of music that tend to draw more of my personal attention and appreciation to the song. This approach assumes that there is a static genre one can call "progressive rock" and that songs that can be identified as progressive rock songs can be identified based on their intrinsic characteristics. This approach abandons the equally worthwhile view that progressive rock refers to any rock that "progresses" the form of rock music which can only be understood if you consider the song in many contexts beyond itself. I am attempting to define a quality or set of qualities that a song can have that may be most common in progressive rock songs.
The core of my thought is that there are ways in which a song can be composed so as to suggest a scope beyond the simple verse-chorus form that is usually sufficient for most pop and rock songs. Specifically, this would include the use of the instrument in a way that equals or surpasses the significance of the vocals and where the song contains a linear progression of story in lyrics or of musical themes in instrumentation. Perhaps this is just a naive way of saying that songs which contain these elements are those that were created by musicians who decided to look to the broader realm of music forms and apply it to the simplest form that is rock. But my aim is to play the definers game (not for everyone) and see if I can't make a good approximation of how to identify many progressive rock songs from the "bottom up" of just looking at the individual song, so I intentionally focus on the first view and ignore the source of this style of composition for the sake of the style itself.
This approach can also be applied at the album level to identify those albums which are, more or less, those that have a defining concept. So whereas most songs have a core idea, most albums do not and the extent to which an album is crafted into a core idea also could qualify it as a progressive rock album. The extent to which the album's songs are connected in small groups or all together as a whole is relevant. This approach might better validate the signifcance many people attach to those albums which seem, on some level, to be concept albums, but in looking at the lyrical content alone might not be.
The central theme, I feel, between the song based and album based means for identifying a progressive rock album is that something beyond the verse-chorus form is intentionally used to enhance the song. The more this is done, the more the song qualifies as progressive rock. When parts of a song begin to enhance or reflect each other or various songs in an album do the same then there is a expansion in the realm of the possibilities for rock music as art and it is this idea that is, perhaps, behind what has always been meant by labeling a song or an album or a band as "progressive".
I will need to set up some arbitrary rating system to establish the "progressiveness" of the song or album based on the critieria above and apply it systematically. I've actually sketched out a rating system and if I can find where I put that "sketch" will probably start using it in my album reviews going forward.
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.