How accurate is this prog family tree? - Progressive Rock Music Forum

It seems to cover Crossover, Metal, and Symphonic. It seems to lack Jazz and Avant.

Edited by I prophesy disaster - April 19 2021 at 08:28

No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.

Originally posted by I prophesy disaster

I prophesy disaster wrote:

It seems to cover Crossover, Metal, and Symphonic. It seems to lack Jazz and Avant.

That's what I felt when I saw it. It's nice though, and by all means, it's almost impossible to come up with a tree like this and not to miss something.

It’s an attempt to gain some kind of overview/perspective on music history via tags and genres that a) did not exist at the time and b) weren’t important.
Today we have a tendency to identify with the tags. We’re symph prog/prog folk/Krautrock/Neo prog/avant fans and oftentimes even mock X band for not being X enough or conversely spend hours upon hours discussing what tag fits the best.
If we were to make a prog rock tree in a convincing way, we need to approach this with a far bigger net..that encompasses more of the globe and more of the stuff that doesn’t align perfectly with what most folks think of as being the classic prog rock sound. A tree like that would also be able to embrace The Soft Machine, Frank Zappa, Procul Harum, Samla Mammas Manna, Amon Düül ll, Magma, The Moody Blues, Colosseum and Santana....fx. There are so many more that belong on there, because prog rock, like so many other music genres, didn’t somehow magically appear at the fripp of the switch ‘The Court of the Crimson King has been released and we now have prog rock Ladies and gentlemen!’

Nahh it was a lust for experimentation that snuck into all facets of the arts and you could hear it in pop, jazz, folk and rock music alike. Music got psychedelic and weird - grew strange off-kilter beats and started mixing styles together that hadn’t been tried before.
A prog rock tree, for my money at least, somehow needs to fathom all of this so as it inevitably ends up EPIC, longwinded and imaginative...just like the very music it tries to illustrate.

Edith: Hah! I think I lost the plot mid-post and just went with it

In short? The tree is lacking. It leaves out several important branches and overlooks a fair few acts that were instrumental in the creation of pork rawk.

Edited by Guldbamsen - April 19 2021 at 09:18

“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams

I also find it half-complete. As you have noticed, jazz is left out somewhere, prog folk also, progressive electronic and Canterbury seem not to exist in this tree, but generally they have covered some of the most obvious acts.

The Dark Elf wrote:

Yes had nothing to do with the development of Jethro Tull. So that's plainly inane. And starting a "Progressive Rock Family Tree" at 1970 is even dumber and misinformed. Overall, the tree is a clusterf*ck.

Agreed it probably needs to start somewhere in the mid 60's, and the chart generally does seem to gloss over the 1970's, arguably the most important decade in the genre's history & development.

"We're going to need a bigger swear jar."

Chloë Grace Moretz as Mindy McCready aka 'Hit Girl' in Kick-Ass 2

No krautrock, zeuhl or progressive electronic?

The Anders wrote:

No krautrock, zeuhl or progressive electronic?

well at leas they avoidedthe bogus Ecclectic and Crossover

let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword

it seems to come from a German music magazine. Yet, there's no mention of krautrock.

This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.

My guess is that it was written by someone who was born after 1990.

For those of you who don't read German, the subtitle has the word "Auszug" meaning that it's just a part of a whole thing that we don't see. It may have been published as the most essential part (we don't know that I guess), but anyway, it isn't just not claiming that it's complete, it acknowledges explicitly that it's incomplete and that there's more to it elsewhere. So much for criticising that it doesn't have XXX.

Edited by Lewian - April 19 2021 at 13:21

Post Reply	Page 12 3 >