Was prog actually popular in the 70s??

 

Cactus Choir wrote: Dorsalia wrote: ... I would argue that Bob Fripp invented snobbery in progressive music.  His King Crimson was wailing about "walls on which the prophets wrote" whilst Yes was covering Beatles tunes.   ... But then again, some people think that reading is pretentious, or any kind of art for that matter. And for me, that sums it up in terms of progressive rock. These young guys back then thought that rock music could be art, and they were right.

Edited by moshkito - February 12 2014 at 23:36

TODDLER wrote: ... The story that Frank Zappa told ...regarding the cigar choppin guys (record executives), hiring a hippie to make important decisions was a obvious reality to virtually unknown musicians. That was the moment in time when the decision to no longer invest in Prog began. A great many people were let down by the realization that the hippie culture had somehow gave society more freedom in the arts and here they were forcing musicians to write 3 minute songs. Also the freedom to record a 20 minute epic was forbidden.

moshkito wrote: TODDLER wrote: ... The story that Frank Zappa told ...regarding the cigar choppin guys (record executives), hiring a hippie to make important decisions was a obvious reality to virtually unknown musicians. That was the moment in time when the decision to no longer invest in Prog began. A great many people were let down by the realization that the hippie culture had somehow gave society more freedom in the arts and here they were forcing musicians to write 3 minute songs. Also the freedom to record a 20 minute epic was forbidden. ... became somewhat forbidden ... is how I would say it, but other bands in other parts of the world didn't care about the Anglo-American business rules and continued. No one was going to tell them how to play it, and what to play.   I didn't express myself very clearly and was not specific enough. It eventually became forbidden to record the 20 minute epic for Columbia, Warner Brothers, and Atlantic records. I would go on to say that maybe by 1981 this was the real deal. Frank Zappa having issues with record companies eventually formed his own label ...which was an exception to the rule during that time. Most other bands were told up front by huge labels to drop the progressive idea and it was promoted to do so. Some European Prog bands from the mid to late 70's were perhaps signed to Sony/Columbia in 74', 75' ..but by late 70's were dropped. Ange had a huge following on European shores and the scene of Prog was still evident to all who lived there. All the original Prog profiting bands had to take a different direction musicially. One that was more Pop structured...for example "Love Beach" was perfect to listen to if you were on a love boat or some yummy, yummy, chewy, chewy, Quick Joey Small thing like that. Yes had 90125 and  at first listen...it was obvious that the singer songwriter aspect over-ruled the original concept of the band which was constantly moving in a progressive direction. Although the music when sampled features many progressive styles of playing...the formula is 80's POP structured.    Of course Genesis wrote fine Pop songs ..but overall....there is a great misunderstanding in society that artists move up to gain popularity and it is 100 percent excepted by them that since the artist had only 2 songs getting airplay...that the artist must have failed. This is moronic because it has nothing to do with having natural talent, nor does it hold a candle to the knowledge that a musician can write something beautiful ..that perhaps he/she is not allowed to record. This concept influences all branches/levels of society to believe that everything in music is simple and logical. The only few courses of action expected from the crowd is from the stupied representaion given to the band by the record company. It's always been that way . decades before Frankie Avalon. Everybody wants a piece of the action. It is possible, and likely, that Frank Zappa was a large influence, however, I think it was more about the freedom of the music than anything else. It was different and many times totally off the rocker, and still it rocked on and took you away with it, despite any lyrics. He might have not exactly been an influence in his words, but his actions and very obvious European enjoyment of his music, was for a long time quite far ahead and valuable than the American scene, which was still too commercial for him, and he wasted no opportunity to trash it. Not many folks, in the music business had that great an inner constitution to stand up and be counted and just do it. And I think that many Europeans took to this directly, and forgot about anything else. BUT, don't forget, the Europeans have a massive musical history, so ignoring ideas and thoughts and this and that, and just doing what they want and how they want is usually the result. This is something that the Anglo-American audiences have a hard time with, as they have become so media controlled that attention span has diminished because of it. We won't see that here, but you can see the reviews of people commenting about meandering and wasting time with filler in the longer pieces, and no musician thinks of their piece in that way for the most part. It means something to them, even if it is disguised by the solo, or the part that we think is over done.  I call it a "soundtrack", not a song! KC I like a lot, but, for example, compared to Djam Karet's first 5 albums, it is not as free form as we think, although it is very obviously exceedingly well rehearsed and played like it. It does not diminish the importance of their work, when its time was so important, but it gives you an idea that not many bands learned to stick to the music and forget all the outside influences and forces, and this is something that a lot of progressive bands went on to do, and still do, though they might not be as much appreciated as they should. Dream Theater comes to mind as a good example of this. When you look back, that's one heck of a massive catalog of work, and they continued doing their own ideas, and not fall into the mainstream that went metal, or this or that. I think, you have to have a very strong inner character and desire. Almost nothing else can describe it so strongly and well. Another band that also fits here is Marillion. Might not be the very best, but by the time you look at their catalog, it's really hard to say that is not major or very good, though I would prefer a few less small "songs", but those don't bother me as much anymore.

Edited by TODDLER - February 14 2014 at 12:33

My local FM station in West Michigan played prog all the time and well into the 80s. That's how I got hooked on Genesis. It's also why Genesis and Peter Gabriel always played Kalamazoo when on tour.

Slartibartfast wrote: One of my local FMs played Hocus Pocus back in '72 if memory serves me right.   Admittedly not their most progressive offering, but hey.

KWST, KLOS, and KMET were the holders of the "prog" keys in the 1970s in Los Angeles and the Southwest basin. KWST was the most "prog" oriented and died first (in the early 1980s sometime).  KMET was next when Metromedia, Inc. (which owned KMET and a TV station) sold out and faded away.  KMET 94.7 FM became a New Age / Jazz station in the mid-1980s and has been ever since.  Only KLOS 95.5 FM (LA) keeps the "prog" candle flickering every now and again (since it is a historic rock station now).  I don't know why there hasn't been a rabid prog station in southern CA like there has been in the Chicago area for all of these years...

In the mid-90's, KLOS had a Sunday morning program entitled "Stone Tracks" that played nothing but prog for two hours, mostly symphonic, crossover, and fusion.

bhikkhu wrote: ... Unfortunately that ship sailed a long time ago. That is why popular music has been stagnant for decades now. It is also why the established music industry is having problems. They blame illegal downloading on dwindling sales without ever addressing the real issue. If you keep repackaging the same product people will eventually lose interest. That is also why record stores are disappearing. People buy from the internet because they can get what they actually want. This in turn creates more fragmentation of the market which makes it more difficult for an individual artist to stand out. ...

Edited by moshkito - February 18 2014 at 08:27

In the 70's..the publications industry made some decent profit from Progressive Rock. For a few years it was very "Hollywood" ...I mean...placing a photo of Keith Emerson on the front of "Hit Parader" or "Circus" magazines was very promotionally "British Invasion" commercialized and contrived with photos, interviews, and above all...an image to rub off in the youth. A concept revolving around ..getting the attention of teenagers so they will in return ...get a job and buy the album. The industry helped create an image for individual prog band members..like Chris Squire where they constantly released pictures of him dressed in capes. When a kid walked into a record store ..there were posters of these musicians dressed in capes or turning an organ upside down. Kids would ask at the counter..."Who is that guy wearing the cape?" In the end ..the kid would buy the album because he saw the poster. That's very "Hollywood". Very Brian Epstein, very Johnny Carson..where the word "practices" applies to the huge profit someone can gross. It's studied and it's based on a psychological affect it has on a majority of people in the world. These are "practices" of high society's con artistry. It's studied throughly and applied into the impact of it's representation in the product. The way to advertise a Prog artist back then..was to set up steps forming into a procedure and then  promoting it as much as you could. What the industry did to straight up Rock music was disgraceful and this may very well be off topic...but rips my heart out to think that long ago..decent "Rock" bands,,who played Blues/R&B/Jazz/Rock n' Roll were forced  into playing 'Stadium Rock"

[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]

Was prog popular in the '70s....

 Very interesting debate and accurate assessment of the related implications music and business-wise by the contributors.

Yes it was. So much so the '70s have been reinvented. How? Why? A band promotes an image to appeal - or has a company do that for them (they like to feel "involved"). Marketing. It was and is very difficult for marketeers to promote progressive rock. It didn't really have an image or more particularly, a pop-sociocultural identity (unlike punk, reggae, metal). It was annoyingly, all about music. Execs go into panic. WTF has music got to do with contolling "our" business. And it is business first, music is just the label. It could have been lawn mowers. but you get better drugs and parties and more glamour in the music world...

So along came the capes and stuff because those who try and control our perceptions and cash flow know a visual image works easier on people than an audio one.

Yet if the audio is not really up to scratch then record sales won't happen. e.g. Kiss who had the most visual image of all at the time - and probably since - but had average sounding records that were not selling, quick get Ezrin to show them how to play. Prog rock had shed loads of great albums, good concert attendances and everything trucking along nicely  ...Camel...  no image, all music (record company thinks of their OWN position. What happens if a band is in control of the market and not us? OMFG. We'll only be needed for distribution, we're going to be... delivery boys not wheeler dealers.

The old idea of new teen pop fads was useful. Turn over generates cash flow. Kids don't want to know about pop stars over the age of.. what? 25? 30? Age-ism is something that can be used, manipulating prejudices is part of marketing - or may be all of it... So get ELP and Black Sabbath on the road, put out records enough to enable "best of" releases (a company favourite) and burn them out.

Then get new ones, hell, there are enough musos out there. This is how popular it was, burn 'em out and play to the lowest common denominator. Make millions from ELP they're just product, turn it over quick.

They must have got used to having Yes and Deep Purple around. ore or less reliable money spinners. Then Punk turned up. With all that image and pop culture impact they also helped knock down the money spinners. Oh dear, and the record companies paid the Pistols shed loads to help put them put of their own business by attacking the business' real asset, the music makers. Interestingly the Floyd disliked the music companies as did the Pistols who purportedly held the Floyd up (not respectfully) as part of the establishemnt. People will believe perceptions, their own and the socially imposed. Malcolm Mclaren knew this and it may have been him that singlehandedly, ruined the music industry in 1977 - 1978. And then he had the almighty gall to be a music maker himself (Buffalo Girls). God that was horrible...

AOR was a fairly safe type of music business approach so in order for record companies to survive and prosper (on their own terms at least) they needed reiable product. So Asia was invented, Yes re-invented (now Atlantic figured out what to do with the erstwhile directionless but talented Trevor Rabin), Genesis streamlined a harder sound and sighs of corporate relief were heard to the ka-ching of ticket and album sales.

Instead of having a contempt for their own product generators, they respected their abilities and left the punk  and indie bands to off-shoot or smaller labels to see what may happen (REM) and get rid of real threats (Dead Kennedys). To an extent they may have turned many a prog rock muso into a musical version of a record company exec but the business could flourish so long as the marketing can be controlled.

I suppose the business too much for granted in the huge '70s era. Even now 40 or so years later the '70s are still pushed (Classic Rock format).  The corporate failures since have not generated a rock youth phenomenon except recycling metal.. grunge... make poverty cool.... There was house music, hip hop, rap, garage and jungle, drum and bass all of which wisely kept a vast distance from rock and pop musically and culturally.

So far as prog rock goes there has been new bands and sub movements turning up. People still want to play and hear interesting music despite music business still wanting to sell Lady Gaga to Riverside fans (manipulate perceptions). They cannot do the reverse.

Oh, and one thing about the record companies. The Old Boss is still there, the New Boss is also about and the New Boss is just as corrupt and in it for a quick million as much as the Old Bosses want to keep turning over those quick millions.