the importance of analog sound in prog

Dean wrote: Catcher10 wrote: ^ That is good info for him Dean.......Spot on. In normal listening levels my amp probably only gives me 20-30W, and when I crank it maybe 40-50W......but I doubt I would ever get to the 80wpc my amp is specd at. I could not imagine doing that level for a whole LP side It's even worse than that José.     The volume control on your amp is logarithmic - this means when it is set to maximum you get full voltage which equates to full power of 80W. Turn that down to the mid position (halfway) and the voltage is now reduced by a factor of 10, which means the power is reduced by a factor of 100 (P=V²/R) - or 0.8W. Turn the control down by ½ again (to ¼) and the power is down to ¼W.   While we all own powerful amps, we seldom use much more than 1/100th of their power output.

Dean wrote: ...  Even though we rarely use more than 1 W of any amp an underpowered one will also clip these transients and some audiophilists and hifi enthusiasts say this damages speakers, it doesn't, it just sounds bad.

Aquiring the Taste wrote: Dean wrote: ^ You've got to be careful when quoting "total output power". The power out of a system can never exceed the (mains) input power, which for the Bose is quoted at 220W. Given that solid-state amps only convert 50-60% of the input power into output power (the rest is wasted as heat) then the maximum available output power could be as low as 100W. Your 1280 W is peak music power output (PMPO) - this is a marketing term that has no fixed rules or definition - typically this figure is 6 times the continuous power output, but in this case it appears to be 6 times the average input power. The Crown DC300 (for example) gives 1000 W of continuous power out (which as PMPO marketing speak could be misrepresented as 6000 W)  Can you explain how you came up  with 1000w continuous power output from a DC300.

I read it from Greg Lake's equipment page where he describes the power out of his two specially built DC300A's (yes, I know that unmodified they were 300W stereo amps that were capable of 610W in mono bridge-tied load) as producing 2000W. If I recall Pink Floyd also used modified bridge-tied DC300s rated at 1000W for their PA amps.

Aquiring the Taste wrote: Dean wrote: Aquiring the Taste wrote: Dean wrote: ^ You've got to be careful when quoting "total output power". The power out of a system can never exceed the (mains) input power, which for the Bose is quoted at 220W. Given that solid-state amps only convert 50-60% of the input power into output power (the rest is wasted as heat) then the maximum available output power could be as low as 100W. Your 1280 W is peak music power output (PMPO) - this is a marketing term that has no fixed rules or definition - typically this figure is 6 times the continuous power output, but in this case it appears to be 6 times the average input power. The Crown DC300 (for example) gives 1000 W of continuous power out (which as PMPO marketing speak could be misrepresented as 6000 W)  Can you explain how you came up  with 1000w continuous power output from a DC300. I read it from Greg Lake's equipment page where he describes the power out of his two specially built DC300A's (yes, I know that unmodified they were 300W stereo amps that were capable of 610W in mono bridge-tied load) as producing 2000W. If I recall Pink Floyd also used modified bridge-tied DC300s rated at 1000W for their PA amps. No, they are 155wpc RMS into 8 ohms.

Curious... 155W doesn't appear anywhere in the Crown manual:

Progressive Rock has been in decline since the mid-70s. Production has got nothing to do with it. If you don't like modern Prog then fine, you don't like modern Prog. If you don't like modern production then fine, you don't like modern production. The Prog Metal connection is completely irrelevant since that is a merely a sub-set of modern Prog, there is plenty of modern prog out there thart has no Metal connection, and there is metal out there that has a jazz connection - none of these in themselves can be used to explain your distain. Good modern drummers aren't that hard to find, for example Gavin Harrison can knock-out complex polyrhythms and polymeters and (more importantly) knows the difference between them, all you need is articulated ears to hear them.

Surrealist wrote: Prog has shifted in general toward Metal Prog which really is a separate genre of music completely.  Metal must be heavy for it to be metal.. and heavy drumming is not prog drumming just because it is in odd metering.  The great prog drummers used the entire spectrum, and ALL of them had good jazz chops also.  They could play in the pocket.. they could articulate jazz coloring, and of course drive it home in a heavy way when needed.. but with a certain amount of restraint as far as the overall content of an album.

I could not agree with you more, it was & is, a significant factor.
Some weeks ago I bought a copy of Gentle Giant - In a Glass House on 180gm vinyl & it sounds nothing like my original U K. copy. Gone are  the spacial qualities, seperation & dynamic range of the original, it is a louder  & puchier, with the rythm section pushed so far forward in the mix & the rest of instuments so crouded, that I couldn't listen to it.. On examination, in small print on the back cover, I found the reason ''Re-Mastered from the Original1/4 inch tapes 2010".

To me it's so obvious what has been going on.. and just reading most of the responses here from other posters just shows how they have all swallowed the digital hype and then try to justify it with incomplete science.  It's like trying to talk to the zombies in "Night of the Living Dead"  Everyone is dead.. their ears are dead, their gear is dead, the medium they listen to is dead.  The bands are dead, and their fans are dead.

I always laugh at the endless arguments about "What is progressive rock?"  The typical silly argument is that it has to be "progressing"  WRONG.  It's a genre with it's own bricks and mortar and rules.  If it had to be progressing then it would HAVE to be moving into "electronica" to keep up with the times.

Classical music has a bricks and mortar protocol as does jazz, reggae, country, techno, etc. 

While progressive rock has the least amount of rules... it still has rules..

What classic prog band didn't use analog synths? Both acoustic and electric guitars, experiment in odd meter performed by top shelf musicians who usually had some formal training at least somewhere in the band?
The great bands had members who could actually sing, and none of the great bands ever digitally manipulated their music before the first pressing of the album...

Every great prog guitarist knew who Wes Montgomery was.  Every prog drummer knew Buddy Rich was God.  Anyone ever taking a prog solo had a copy of "Bitches Brew" in their album collection.  Every great prog band knew that prog didn't start with St Pepper.

"The Musical Box" is drawing better than Genesis did doing "Lamb"  today.  What does that tell you.  A LOT!
Pretty much says it all.

I agree Ian, it's one mouth-foaming rant too many. When argument fails then insulting anyone who disagrees is a not the way to put across any points that people will be willing to take notice of.Time to move on.

 I never made such a claim....

Dean wrote:  I never made such a clam....