Emulating Classic Prog Is Not Prog

Dean wrote: Mathematically, if you stick to all the notes in the chord being in the same octave there are 479,001,600 possible note permutaions that can be played together, obviously extend that to include notes from other octaves and it gets even sillier. (and you may need to grow extra fingers to play them). How useful these chords are depends on what you are trying to achieve by using them and how harmonious or discordant you want them to be either in isolation or as part of a progression, in the main, the 60 or so "established" chords are the ones most frequently used because they are the most useful ... but this is Prog so there are no rules.

479001444.

If you don't even know what is prog, please go away. 

Logan wrote: I'm not well-versed in music theory.  Here's an interesting article, though, on the issue: http://ezinearticles.com/?How-Many-Chords-Are-There,-Anyway?&id=59841

Oh this people that can just sit and enjoy their damn music... No matter what chords are in...

aginor wrote: @ Textbook     so what doo you actualy think of the trancition of the aucustic and more folksy, dark and serching Genesis (Tresspass - Nurcery Cryme - Foxtrot) classic prog - including some pop, but still use of twelve stringguitar  and mellotron (Selling England by the Poumd - the Lamb Lies Down on Broadway) the trancition albums, more heavy guitar useage, influences form more oriental sounds/chord sequnces, more melodic/melancholic (A Tirck to Tail - Wind and Wuthering - And Then They Were Three) start to use Polysynth, pushing newer drum loop technology, lee to no at aucustic instruments, zero mellotron, more minimalistic (Duke -  Abacab - Genesis - invicible Touch).     is it becous the last four albums lack aucustic folk passages and dark passages, makes them less classic prog,  but to me Genesis were still progressive in style, by daring to use newer more futuristic instruments and recording technics (like Headless guitars, samplers, synthesisers/ARP)  80s gensis is very futuristic and minimalistic (Mama - Home by the Sea/second Home by the sea, almoust industrial)

bump

^^^ But that necessarily supposes that anything with a prog rock sense of structure would throw up new ways of looking at old things, at the very least. What is progressive (adj) about Delicate Flame of Desire?  It is Floyd-tribute filtered through adult contemporary pop and has been done before too.  The only thing at all that may be novel about it is the presence of a female singer but that would be like saying the fact that Karen Carpenter could play drums made Carpenters progressive. If we adopt such a broad outlook of progressive (adj) that any remotely different aspect to the music makes it progressive, then even putting the chorus before the verse or writing a hard rock song without the obligatory face melting solo must be prog.  We have to draw the line somewhere.  I agree that Trick of the tail represents little more than expansion of Genesis's sound, but it's THEIR sound.  It was not some other band's sound they were tributing and in the process making some slightly different choices.  Sure, Trespass would not have happened without ITCOTCK,but Genesis, regardless, had their own sound, as distinct from any of KC's work.  I have no objection to calling some 70s albums derivative by the way. I mean, Bacamarte has some very obvious KC quotes for instance and is very modestly prog, at best.    

I don't care much for progressiveness per se, making innovative music does not necessarily result in good music, and actually in most cases it does not.

It's quite simple, every time a song is recorded and released, the pool of musical possibilities has been drained slightly. Whether the style can be defined as "symphonic prog" or "RIO/avantgarde" or whatever else is irrelevant. People get caught up in these often arbitrary genre names too much.

Windhawk wrote: The Beatles were imitators. God knows Elvis was. The number of artists that has not been imitating something and have been true innovators can probably be counted on two hands. That's the reality of that particular case, if you want to get real. Many artists have added their own small touches and nuances, which in return have been picked up by others, with a miniscule development gradually ongoing until someone manage to get a commercial break and will be hailed as innovators when incorporating many such features, their less known influences gradually discovered in retrospect at best. Same goes for your much heralded examples of Kayo Dot and Opeth. With the difference that their main sources of inspiration are less well known than the ones of The Watch etc. and of a more recent date.

Edited by himtroy - April 25 2011 at 12:03

King Crimson776 wrote: It's quite simple, every time a song is recorded and released, the pool of musical possibilities has been drained slightly. Whether the style can be defined as "symphonic prog" or "RIO/avantgarde" or whatever else is irrelevant. People get caught up in these often arbitrary genre names too much. The term "progressive" can be misleading because it doesn't necessarily mean "moving forward". Was Bob Dylan "progressive rock" when he was innovating in the folk rock field? Of course not. Prog is simply the term that has come to define an integration of popular and art music values. That's the best and most concise definition I can think of on short notice anyway.