Have new prog fans too commercial tastes?

Reading many discussions about prog and watching the results of various polls on the topic „album of the year“ leads me to the opinion, that most of new, young prog fans prefers rather easy- listening, highly accessible forms of prog.

E.g. have a look at the results of annual polls on DPRP.net, quite representative, because these polls have nearly 1000 participants. Look at the names which occupy the forefront :

Porcupine Tree, Transatlantic, Spock’s Beard, Dream Theater, Marillion, Pendragon, IQ, Anathema, Neal Morse, Ayreon

I don’t want to say none of albums of these bands deserves to be at the forefront, they all are probably good, sometimes maybe excellent in kind of music they play. But that’s the right question : which kind of music they actually play?

 

Despite many differencies among highly succesful progbands they have one common attribute : catchiness.

But unfortunatelly, at the same time music of these bands is often lacking, at least in my ears, some essential qualities of great prog music :  challenging, intriguing, artistic, adventurous, highly sophisticated, infused with generous portions of artistic genres - classical music and jazz.

 

The cathiness and accessibility is probably the key attribute to be succesful in new, young prog circles. But despite these preferencies of today’s prog audience, every year I’ve found many graet albums by bands, which want to produce something more then radio-ready melodies with longer instrumental sections (compared to straight rock or metal) and with progressive arrangments. And that’s what I regret most : these bands are living on the fringe of average progfans’ interest. I’m talking about bands like Kayo Dot, Areknames, Gargamel, Magma, Present, Miriodor etc. Probably the only one more challenging and adventurous band gaining success among new, young prog fans is The Mars Volta.

 

I know, here at PA the situation is much brighter, many of PA members prefer even bands like Magma or Univers Zero to the accessible mainstream of prog, but look somewhere else.

 

I don’t want to say I dislike all succesfull progbands. E.g. Porcupine Tree I consider so talented, enough talented to produce really great modern prog, but unfortunatelly they stay to deliver catchy, easy-listening songs with very few departures from the rule.

Or Gazpacho – for me the most interesting succesfull progband, I like their latest two albums, but again : I wish they somewhat change their direction to the more challenging music.

 

I will be glad to hear your opinions!

Are you honestly suggesting that some people don't like the same music as you?

For me younger prog fans are too much into metal. 

So remind me again what the OP is trying to state? I got lost after the first sentence...I think.

There is often a disparagement expressed on this site of one of the fundamental characteristics of musi: melody.  This topic represents that view, and it is one I can never agree with.  A simple, catchy melody will always be more memorable and more popular.  Pop artists use them, rock artists use them, jazz artists use them, classical composers use them.  What sets prog artists apart from many others is their ability to modify those melodies in the progression of their music.  But then again, this also also applies to jazz and classical.  I do not agree that catchy equates with easy listening.  This is tantamount to saying that we should eat bad tasting food instead of good tasting because good tasting food is too good tasting.  This is saying that song writers or composers are better than others because they do not have the capacity to compose a strong melody.  Sure, it is a good thing to experiment with melody (and harmony, tonality, rhythm, and pitch), but that can only go so far until we eliminate it altogether.

EHHHGHH, KIDS THESE DAYS

The T wrote: For me younger prog fans are too much into saying stupid things...

But that's what the internet is for!
 

Progosopher wrote: I do not agree that catchy equates with easy listening.

Catchy, as the term is used, just about always equals pop music. If you find more abstract music as inescapably memorable, that's fine, but that's not what people mean when they say it. 

This is tantamount to saying that we should eat bad tasting food instead of good tasting because good tasting food is too good tasting.

 No, it's tantamount to saying that I don't like chicken so I am going to eat steak.

Sure, it is a good thing to experiment with melody (and harmony, tonality, rhythm, and pitch), but that can only go so far until we eliminate it altogether.

I honestly do not care about any of those things, although it's physically impossibly to eliminate pitch. 

Henry Plainview wrote:   But that's what the internet is for!

 

The T corrected wrote: For me prog fans in general are too much into saying stupid things

But I like saying stupid things. :(  

madmike wrote: Was telling somebody that I was a prog fan the other day, and they said, I kid you not, "oh, you mean like TesseracT and Andromeda?" *facepalm* Yes, because that's what all prog sounds like.  (Nothing against those bands, but they're not what immediately comes to mind when I think of "prog".  Kids...

At least he didn't say Dream Theater...

The T wrote: For me younger prog fans are too much into saying stupid things...

Agree. Or at the least don't know how to filter what they say. I blame recent advancements in technology; but that's for another thread.