How to define and classify "Progressive Rock"?

I prophesy disaster wrote: The term "progressive rock" describes a type of music or perhaps an attitude towards music. Therefore, one ought to be able to determine if a given piece of music is or isn't progressive rock simply by listening to it, and thus history is irrelevant to the definition.

I prophesy disaster wrote: I've read the OP, and was going to comment on it earlier but didn't get around to it. I was going to say something along the lines of your definitions relying heavily on hindsight, which may be an easy approach but not necessarily a good approach.   And yes, the whole matter IS very philosophical. And that's the way I like it.

Edited by David_D - December 19 2021 at 02:29

David_D wrote: I prophesy disaster wrote: The term "progressive rock" describes a type of music or perhaps an attitude towards music. Therefore, one ought to be able to determine if a given piece of music is or isn't progressive rock simply by listening to it, and thus history is irrelevant to the definition.  Or we could start with examining your suggested point of view, and if so, there's a question on what basis to decide which "type of music or perhaps an attitude towards music"? ...

Hi,

Edited by moshkito - January 16 2022 at 09:26

Interesting article David_D and it's elicited a lot of thought-provoking opinions that I would think are germane to the essence of this site. The elusiveness of an agreed definition of progressive rock is something I was recently reflecting about when considering the comments in a discussion I created on Procol Harum's contribution to prog-rock. It became increasingly evident to me that peoples' contributions to this discussion reflected their implicitly-held views of the boundaries of prog-rock (and the extent to which PH existed within these boundaries), though no-one articulated any particular definition. If you see that thread, I would be curious to know whether you think PH would fall within your definition of prog-rock. It appears to me that it would, as your definition is relatively inclusive, without being too broad I think. 

Edited by Philchem8 - January 17 2022 at 17:25

Thank you very much for your extensive comment, Philchem, which I'd say concerns some central aspects of my definition.

Edited by David_D - January 18 2022 at 15:58

Thanks David for addressing my points. I understand all you are saying and was just sharing some thoughts. Upon reflection, I agree the lyrics should not be part of a definition per say, but would be one of the elements to consider if we were trying to identify key characteristics of progressive rock. I understand this not your focus. Still, when you suggest that the definition would leave to subjective interpretation what is and what is not prog-rock, I can't help asking myself how useful it is then to have a definition. Not that I think it is not useful or valuable but maybe to a more limited extent than identifying key characteristics and discussing the degree to which they should be present, an admittedly complex exercise.

David_D wrote: Philchem8 wrote: Still, when you suggest that the definition would leave to subjective interpretation what is and what is not prog-rock, I can't help asking myself how useful it is then to have a definition.  No, it's not quite what I meant.  A definition must be a good guideline to what should be considered as Prog, but on the other hand, it's fine with some elements for subjective interpretation which leaves possibility for certain individual choices, concerning where exactly to draw the line between Prog and not-Prog.

Grumpyprogfan wrote: Not sure what your point is, but... Kansas are from (USA). Topeka, Kansas to be specific.

I think that was the premise for the movie "Canadian Bacon". They were trying to steal Kansas!

I appreciate the amount of time that went into putting together this definition of Prog. Unfortunately, it leaves out some of the subgenres on the site, but it is quite good nonetheless. Of course, there will always be prog-music that doesn't quite fit the mold, and the word "progressive" in fact has connotations that there will come about music that does not fit the mold.

I remember asking a friend about their definition of prog, and I was thinking I would get a long-winded explanation about the history of prog, with proto-prog, the Big 6, etc. The answer was simply "It's rock that's got some keyboards in it."

As you can imagine, it made me chuckle. But, it just re-emphasizes that each person has their own definition of prog.

For all my verbal jousting in the past on this site, I came to realize that the folks managing the different subgenres of Progarchives do a very good job at this classification task. The definitions provided on this site approach "as good as you can get" at trying to classify the wibbly wobbly timey wimey thing that is Prog.

If there were no attempts at this, then Progarchives would cease to exist. So, we need a definition of Prog, and we need definitions of the different subgenres of Prog. We may need to add more subgenres in the future, and that's fine. Probably, in terms of the general definition of Prog, broader and more inclusive is better IMHO rather than having endless skirmishes about certain bands that keep getting brought up. I joked about Asia, but if you go to their Wiki site, all their albums are listed as Progressive Rock. And, to me, their sound is quite comparable to the middle period of Genesis. When opinions clash, hairs are split.

For those who are primarily interested in the most well-known and well-accepted bands carrying the Prog mantle (e.g., the Big 6 ... basically, any band that Bill Bruford was in plus a couple of others), and fight for that high bar, there can certainly be one bright spotlight on them. But, you have to be careful with high-pass filters.

There should be other spotlights, too, and the fora (or forums, if you prefer) are good at doing just that. We no longer live in an age where record labels provide artists with funding, studio time, and engineers and allow them to experiment for a couple or few albums to let the artists develop their chops or sound as they tour incessantly. That age is long gone. The folks aimed at making Prog music (of whatever form) in this age face a completely different environment and different headwinds. A lot of them are consummate DIY, and also need support.

These are things I think about when people start bandying about new definitions of Prog.

Edited by Jaketejas - January 20 2022 at 12:26

David_D wrote: Thank you very much for your extensive comment, Philchem, which I'd say concerns some central aspects of my definition. I find it to be good that my definition is not particularly precise, .....

Edited by David_D - January 21 2022 at 08:28