Golden Brown by The Stranglers : Progressive?

The Stranglers occupy that weird territory (much like Ultravox or XTC) where all the progressive intentions in the world won't sway the obdurate heart. Great band though!!!

dr wu23 wrote: Some of the Stranglers songs were brilliant imho but I wouldn't call that track prog, but this lp is surely out there and parts are proggier than many bands on PA. Weird and bizarre  to say the least....and it's one of my favorite strange lp's. 2 tracks.....

Logan wrote: Blacksword wrote: chopper wrote: BaldFriede wrote: Jean and I consider The Stranglers to be prog, simply because they often use real polyphony which is rare in prog even (Gentle Giant are a band that often use it). Any band that uses this highly advanced compositional technique should be considered as prog.   You've mentioned this before and I think you said it was in a track on Black And White. Could you remind me which track(s) as my thicky musician mind isn't sure what you mean by polyphony? My understanding of polyphony is different melodies, played simultaneously and harmonizing in a piece of music. If that's the case, I would have thought it's quite common. BaldFriede refers to 'real polyphony' Not sure if that's something different.. Two or more independent melodic lines played simultaneously and harmonising with each other (often employing consonance and dissonance), and in what's called true polyphony, each independent melody has its own rhythm to my understanding, which gives each melody more of a unique quality, and often different metres play with each other adding contrast in the interplay of the lines. Really enjoying those The Stranglers clips above, by the way.

Yeah, that's kind of how I understand it, but all the definitions I've seen, there's no mention of metre, but whatever The Stranglers clearly have progressive elements in their music.

Awesoreno wrote: chopper wrote: Logan wrote: Two or more independent melodic lines played simultaneously and harmonising with each other (often employing consonance and dissonance), and in what's called true polyphony, each independent melody has its own rhythm to my understanding, which gives each melody more of a unique quality, and often different metres play with each other adding contrast in the interplay of the lines.   So an example of that would be the middle section of Yes' Perpetual Change where there is a fast "riff" in 7/7  beats and a repeated organ bit in 6/8 beats, so both playing different tunes but matching up as they're both on 14 beats (which I didn't notice for quite a while)? That's a better example for "polyrhythm." Though I suppose that also works as an example of polyphony as well. Really classic examples of true polyphony would be evident on many of Gentle Giant's works. They often have so many layered parts played by each tonal instrument. Take a tune like Cogs in Cogs or The Boys in the Band, for instance. Or Knots, for a vocal example.

Thanks for writing that, I was thinking about what to say. I'm not that familiar with the Yes composition, nor have I studied much music theory, but had a listen and heard "it". I think it also works as polyphony, even if the melodic lines don't seem strong (kind of a mess to my ears) on their own or maybe work well in coordination from a formal music standpoint. It was cool to listen to and hear that. I don't know what true polyphony means in the sense that it was being used. It is supposed to be very hard to pull off well (formal composition), especially the more complex forms of polyphony.