Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: July 09 2011 at 00:46
Indeed, it's not f**ked up and certainly not in a prog perspective and on the other hand, it was pretty boring. More or less with HP on this one (except that I have no issues with growls at all) : just a freeform section appended to death-doom. As to why these metal guys are so loath to let go of metal's trademark wall of distortion and get more adventurous is an entirely different topic. But, back on topic, I don't find anything particularly 'commercial' about TFK or PT. Let's get some perspective here: 90s was the decade of Celine Dion. You can't benchmark a modern band with what was commercial in the 60s or 70s and say people have too commercial tastes. I'd say people are in general much more forgiving of precious, overemotive vocal tendencies or extremely cheesy arrangements and that again is probably a result of MTV's penetration with such stuff in the 80s and onwards, so we have to look at these things in the context of the respective era and its music and not against an unrealistic benchmark.
Joined: October 12 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2779
Posted: July 09 2011 at 02:32
Triceratopsoil wrote:
King Crimson776 wrote:
This idea that "f**ked up-sounding = progressive" has to be the single most pseudo-intellectual line of thinking among "prog" listeners.
it's not f**ked up sounding, you're just a mainstreamy
The point was, he posted that track as a response to someone who said metal was hardly ever progressive, as though something with such dissonance and non-traditional structure = automatic "progressive" (putting aside the fact that I don't use that term this way).
I have no problem with actual 12-tone music, that in itself eliminates the possibility of me having "mainstreamy" taste. That stuff just came off as a gimmicky compromise between death doom and 12-tone though.
Joined: June 01 2010
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 10185
Posted: July 09 2011 at 12:45
King Crimson776 wrote:
Triceratopsoil wrote:
King Crimson776 wrote:
This idea that "f**ked up-sounding = progressive" has to be the single most pseudo-intellectual line of thinking among "prog" listeners.
it's not f**ked up sounding, you're just a mainstreamy
The point was, he posted that track as a response to someone who said metal was hardly ever progressive, as though something with such dissonance and non-traditional structure = automatic "progressive" (putting aside the fact that I don't use that term this way).
I have no problem with actual 12-tone music, that in itself eliminates the possibility of me having "mainstreamy" taste. That stuff just came off as a gimmicky compromise between death doom and 12-tone though.
Here's what I'm getting from your posts: you think every progressive (avant-garde, forward thinking, whatever you name it) music (in this case adventurous metal) that you don't like cannot be progressive because you do not like it.
Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
Posted: July 09 2011 at 13:20
Polo wrote:
King Crimson776 wrote:
Triceratopsoil wrote:
King Crimson776 wrote:
This idea that "f**ked up-sounding = progressive" has to be the single most pseudo-intellectual line of thinking among "prog" listeners.
it's not f**ked up sounding, you're just a mainstreamy
The point was, he posted that track as a response to someone who said metal was hardly ever progressive, as though something with such dissonance and non-traditional structure = automatic "progressive" (putting aside the fact that I don't use that term this way).
I have no problem with actual 12-tone music, that in itself eliminates the possibility of me having "mainstreamy" taste. That stuff just came off as a gimmicky compromise between death doom and 12-tone though.
Here's what I'm getting from your posts: you think every progressive (avant-garde, forward thinking, whatever you name it) music (in this case adventurous metal) that you don't like cannot be progressive because you do not like it.
Now I get what is "f**ked up" here.
I am pretty sure that he is saying that dissonant music is not necessarily progressive, which is true. I did not find that track particularly progressive or interesting either, and I would agree that f**ked up is an ok (if not very eloquent) way to describe the second half of the song. I think you two are just getting pissy because he doesn't like metal or that song and he doesn't have enough avant-cred to diss it.
Going back to the OP, I think a lot of the younger guys (and erm...dudettes) on PA listen to far more challenging music than I do (I'm 49) I don't think Polo is correct in surmising that King Crimson 776 considers all music he doesn't like as 'not progressive' as the latter has provided particular justification for his reservations restricted to specific examples.
One of the questions that might arise from the OP is can music that is genuinely progressive ever achieve the sort of commercial success as that enjoyed by say, ELP and Yes in the early 70's? (I think it was the borrowed classical sophistication, rock grunt and conventional melodic hooks that went a long way towards this)
Similarly, why should we dismiss music purely on account of it having features common to more accessible genres? (This smacks of 'hipper than thou' evangelism)
Joined: March 12 2005
Location: Neurotica
Status: Offline
Points: 166183
Posted: July 09 2011 at 14:18
ExittheLemming wrote:
Going back to the OP, I think a lot of the younger guys (and erm...dudettes) on PA listen to far more challenging music than I do (I'm 49) I don't think Polo is correct in surmising that King Crimson 776 considers all music he doesn't like as 'not progressive' as the latter has provided particular justification for his reservations restricted to specific examples.
One of the questions that might arise from the OP is can music that is genuinely progressive ever achieve the sort of commercial success as that enjoyed by say, ELP and Yes in the early 70's? (I think it was the borrowed classical sophistication, rock grunt and conventional melodic hooks that went a long way towards this)
Similarly, why should we dismiss music purely on account of it having features common to more accessible genres? (This smacks of 'hipper than thou' evangelism)
I agree completely with the first sentence. Not to overly generalize the older population (especially here on PA) but it does seem like alot of the older legion of prog rock fans like the more normal/streamlined/etc rock that was around in the 70s and 80s as opposed to the more challenging music that was around in that time. (Prog-rock not included.) Perhaps these people are just louder about their tastes than people who like both or the far end of the spectrum, but from what I see... (Again, not talking about anyone specific from PA just talking generally.)
However, I do think there is a problem with people calling music they like prog-rock and not music they don't. (Not calling out KC776 here, again speaking in a larger capacity than this thread.) Not sure why, perhaps it's just easier to like one (sub)genre of music instead of listing four or five. Or they are just in denial. Not to derail this thread more than it has been but there are plenty of examples of this with some of the suggestions made to add to this site. But thats another whole bag of canadian hook spiders. To answer your question ETL...I don't think so. That era of experimentation within music being accepted on a whole has passed on. Now commercial music is much more limited/boxed in/constricted that something like Larks' Tongues...or Fragile or Selling England By The Pound wouldn't fly for "the charts". Perhaps popular in more "underground" channels, but that's not really being a commercial success. And making truly progressive gets harder and harder as more music is made, so limits to music certainly aren't going to produce something that pushes the boundaries of rock, or music in general.
And I guess I'll answer that last question too...but for me it's much more of a subjective situation. I don't like alot of the pop sound. It doesn't mesh with my musical tastes, which emphasize variation and experimentation above anything else. Certainly there are plenty of people who like the lot of it (prog, pop, classic rock, etc), but if I want something with a more commercial edge, I'll listen to neo prog nine times out of ten. (And that's nothing against neo prog.)
Dig me...But don't...Bury me I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.
Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
Posted: July 09 2011 at 14:29
ExittheLemming wrote:
One of the questions that might arise from the OP is can music that is genuinely progressive ever achieve the sort of commercial success as that enjoyed by say, ELP and Yes in the early 70's?
I don't think so.
Similarly, why should we dismiss music purely on account of it having features common to more accessible genres? (This smacks of 'hipper than thou' evangelism)
Because some people find those features very annoying?
One of the questions that might arise from the OP is can music that is genuinely progressive ever achieve the sort of commercial success as that enjoyed by say, ELP and Yes in the early 70's?
I don't think so.
Similarly, why should we dismiss music purely on account of it having features common to more accessible genres? (This smacks of 'hipper than thou' evangelism)
Because some people find those features very annoying?
OK fair comment (I meant to say 'dismiss music as 'non-progressive' on account of it having features common to more accessible genres') Just as an aside, do you find the melodies or stylistic accompaniment in say Mozart or the Beatles annoying?
You should care a little bit, if you want to hear in next years something else than progmetal + neoprog + crossoverprog.
aaaaaahhhhhhhh! There it is! I was wondering when I would find something of use in here.
That be it...OP is one of those people that only like "traditional" prog rock and anything else is terrible?
Sadly, that's a very common mindset on this forum. So much for open minded music fans! Most metal heads I know are at least more accepting than some of these classic proggers
Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
Posted: July 09 2011 at 16:00
ExittheLemming wrote:
Just as an aside, do you find the melodies or stylistic accompaniment in say Mozart or the Beatles annoying?
Yes, I find some Mozart and Beatles pieces annoying, although to be fair to them some of that is overexposure. As for progressiveness, I do think that commercial appeal is to a certain extent mutually exclusive with progressive music, but we both know that "progressive" does not really hold much meaning and arguing about it is pointless.
Joined: September 15 2007
Location: Vitória, Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 7971
Posted: July 09 2011 at 16:24
madmike wrote:
Slartibartfast wrote:
For me younger prog fans are too much into metal.
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...
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: July 09 2011 at 21:54
I disagree that music that has enjoyed commercial SUCCESS is a)necessarily commercial in the derogatory sense of the word or b)incapable of being progressive though this kind of thinking is highly pervasive and is pretty much what establishes the high art-low art divide. If anything, I find the idea that a piece should be very difficult to assimilate and unmemorable in the extreme tiresome and dull. All it achieves is establish a certain sense of exclusivity for listeners of such music and they can have that if they so please. As far as I am concerned, not many avant/rio bands could have written George Harrison's solo for Something but it takes a special kind of talent to convey so much in little more than 30 seconds. There is genius that goes above and beyond.....most commercial musicians lack brilliance and are content to reproduce pop cliches while serious musicians are unable to condense their brilliance into an appealing, 4 minute format.
Joined: October 12 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2779
Posted: July 10 2011 at 04:13
ExittheLemming wrote:
I don't think Polo is correct in surmising that King Crimson 776 considers all music he doesn't like as 'not progressive'
Indeed, and I don't see how I could have even remotely implied that. I even mentioned that I don't use the term "progressive" in the sense that many here are using it (i.e. "moving forward" etc.), as I find that to be an inane concept. All music is different from that which came before, some music to a greater degree than other music... should the criteria for addition on ProgArchives be based on some mathematical formula that determines "how much a given artist varies from all music which came before"? Quite an undertaking that would be... and where would the cutoff point be?
But no, that would be absurd. "Progressive" only came about with the advent of bands such as King Crimson *fusing art music and popular music*. <-- therefore that should be the definition of this term "progressive" that has stuck. I think if more people adopted this definition firmly we would see a lot less nonsense about music "not being progressive enough" on here as well.
Joined: April 14 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 216
Posted: July 11 2011 at 15:15
This thread should be moved to "just for fun". 'cause I'm almost rofling while reading it. At least while you guys were all dissing the OP. You have made me worry that my tastes are growing too commercial. You see, I don't dislike lady Gaga. Nah, that can't be it. Before the end of 2012 she'll be on the site.
By the way, (and this has been puzzling me for a while now) WHY IS EVERYBODY OBSESSED WITH MY LITTLE PONIES?
My apologies to those who are taking this seriously. Let me try to add something constructive...
I find the beatles annoying too and Mozart makes me sleepy. Really ticked me off when they appeared on the site. Hm. Maybe I have the bug too.
Thanks !! Your topics always so good and informative. I like you talk.
Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154
Posted: July 11 2011 at 17:04
Triceratopsoil wrote:
Obviously you haven't heard Ehnahre. 12-tone death doom metal.
hawt [/QUOTE]
Sorry if I'm being harsh to some people here, but this is nowhere near my concept of prog rock, I'm afraid the term "prog rock" has stretched too far if we are including this music into it.
Joined: June 16 2011
Location: Ohio
Status: Offline
Points: 431
Posted: July 11 2011 at 17:47
Well, How dare someone else likes music that's catchy and doesn't like the same music as you do because if they don't agree with you they are wrong. You just sound like a douche who is just pissed that not everyone likes the same music as you. BTW, I really like Spock's Beard and Neal Morse's solo career.
Joined: July 27 2010
Location: Tel Aviv
Status: Offline
Points: 4160
Posted: July 12 2011 at 05:01
TheClosing wrote:
undercover_man wrote:
Youngins these days ... In my day we had to walk ten miles up a hill and through the snow just to listen to prog. That's how inaccessible it was!
Interesting.
Are you kidding me? Back in the day (2005) you had to walk 25 miles in the snow barefoot and naked in the woods smeared in caramel being chased by angry bears. And then you crawled into the record store begging for a King Crimson and he would say : "nay! We only have Kanye West sampling KC!" and you would need to compensate and have to listen to Kanye West forever... Psh... you think you had it tough...
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.129 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Have new prog fans too commercial tastes?
Topic Options
You can't benchmark a modern band with what was commercial in the 60s or 70s and say people have too commercial tastes. I'd say people are in general much more forgiving of precious, overemotive vocal tendencies or extremely cheesy arrangements and that again is probably a result of MTV's penetration with such stuff in the 80s and onwards, so we have to look at these things in the context of the respective era and its music and not against an unrealistic benchmark. 
Triceratopsoil wrote:
Not to derail this thread more than it has been but there are plenty of examples of this with some of the suggestions made to add to this site. But thats another whole bag of canadian hook spiders. To answer your question ETL...I don't think so. That era of experimentation within music being accepted on a whole has passed on. Now commercial music is much more limited/boxed in/constricted that something like Larks' Tongues...or Fragile or Selling England By The Pound wouldn't fly for "the charts". Perhaps popular in more "underground" channels, but that's not really being a commercial success. And making truly progressive gets harder and harder as more music is made, so limits to music certainly aren't going to produce something that pushes the boundaries of rock, or music in general.
You just sound like a douche who is just pissed that not everyone likes the same music as you. BTW, I really like Spock's Beard and Neal Morse's solo career.
