Definition of Progressive Rock |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |
xhamasaki
Forum Senior Member Joined: June 13 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 128 |
Topic: Definition of Progressive Rock Posted: July 13 2005 at 09:19 |
Definition of the word Progressive
By the definition of the word progressive, wouldn't that imply that progressive rock is basically any rock that strives to deviate from the musical norms of the day: i.e. stuff like Britney Spears, Green Day, generic nu-metal bands, and pop/corporate bands of the old-times. Progressive rock could be defined as truly influential music that is far ahead of its time, that defines the future of music for other bands... a sort of pioneer in experimenting. I do not understand why so many people in this forum are so incredibly narrow minded in what they consider "prog". I see people who consider music that they don't like to not be "progressive" simply because they don't like it. I think that there are several people in these forums who have a fundamentally wrong notion of what "progressive" music is and should be. To use an example I would take the modern band System of a Down. I personally do not like them very much, but I do feel that they are a progressive band. From the times I've listened to some of their albums, I feel that they do not really attempt to sound like a... pop band? I don't really know how to say it, but they do not sound like any other band today. Wouldn't that make them "progressive"? If they are attempting to create their own sound that is progressing from album to album? So what if it's popular? Since when does being "popular" make something not "progressive". It wouldn't really be "progressive" if it wasn't popular, as progressive implies that it brings about change. Look at Pink Floyd, there are several people here who are so close-minded they consider DSotM to be a "pop" album. It is perhaps the MOST influential album ever created, certainly PROGRESSIVE in any sense. Edited by xhamasaki |
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21381 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 09:31 |
Sorry, you're wrong. There must be 100 threads that deal with the definition of prog. |
|
fractalman
Forum Groupie Joined: July 01 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 64 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 09:32 |
Concisely (for the more general term of progressive arts): Artists who are striving for something unique by exploring beyond the horizons. |
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21381 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 09:37 |
I think that's a good definition for "Progressive Music", but unfortunately not for "Progressive Rock". |
|
GoldenSpiral
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: May 27 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3839 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 09:39 |
However, by your definition, punk music would be prog because it strives to deviate from what is normal and popular. A glaring paradox indeed. It's really ok to like music that isn't prog. A lot of people here seem to think that because an album or band doesnt fit specifically into a prog category that they must be bad. Another folly is to desperately try to categorize non-prog bands that you like as prog. It's really quite ok for a band to not be prog. you're allowed to like them. |
|
xhamasaki
Forum Senior Member Joined: June 13 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 128 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 09:43 |
so then whats the definition for "progressive rock"? So by the definition of alot of people in this forum, I could get together a group of 4 or 5 session musicians, write an album of 5 15 minute songs with solos, virtuoso playing and that would be considered prog? It seems to me that most people here consider prog to just be the music from the 70's classic prog bands. I'm saying that there are alot more bands that are truly "progressive" than what is listed on this site. Just because someone can write a 20 minute song doesn't make it any more or less progressive than several songs on Dark Side of the Moon, which was a highly influential album. Progressive implies that it brings about change. I don't see many influences in popular culture from bands such as Yes and Genesis in today's music, but I do see influence from bands like Pink Floyd. So which one was truly... progressive?
Edited by xhamasaki |
|
xhamasaki
Forum Senior Member Joined: June 13 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 128 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 09:45 |
but GoldenSpiral, most punk bands use the same style/sound. If there was a punk band that tried another approach at the genre, of course I would consider them to be progressive.
|
|
fractalman
Forum Groupie Joined: July 01 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 64 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 09:50 |
Progressive rock: Rock that uses elements from other genres such as (but certainly not limited to) jazz and classical and/or plays their instruments in a very innovative style producing a sonic tapestry that transcends a single musical genre. |
|
xhamasaki
Forum Senior Member Joined: June 13 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 128 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 09:54 |
so then by that definition wouldnt that make a band like system of a down progressive?
|
|
Bob Greece
Prog Reviewer Joined: July 04 2005 Location: Greece Status: Offline Points: 1823 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 10:03 |
I know what progressive music is: "music that I like but that most people I know don't like". |
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21381 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 10:04 |
Here's the definition: http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive-rock.asp I think that this describes it very well. Some excerpts: Some common, though not universal, elements of progressive rock include:
I think that the the main element that is missing in this list is the artistic approach. A band like System Of A Down is not trying to establish a new style of music, they are just using elements of many styles in unusual ways. Their main goal is to inform people about political and social problems, while having a good time on stage. Listen to an album like Selling England by the Pound, and you'll see what I mean by artistic approach.
|
|
xhamasaki
Forum Senior Member Joined: June 13 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 128 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 10:08 |
well that is true about the artistic approach. I guess that the term progressive implies that it will actually bring about change.
|
|
cmidkiff
Forum Senior Member Joined: March 08 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 208 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 10:17 |
The term progressive in the genre "Progressive Rock" uses the micro implication as in changes and complexity within the music. If a macro implication was used the music would always be "new and changing" and the sound of the genre would never be the same, making it useless as an identifing genre of music.
|
|
cmidkiff
|
|
fractalman
Forum Groupie Joined: July 01 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 64 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 10:23 |
I still like my definition over the novel at http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive-rock.asp. It cuts to the chase without being over analytical.
|
|
xhamasaki
Forum Senior Member Joined: June 13 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 128 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 10:28 |
yeah but by your definition alot of bands would be considered progressive- not that I have a problem with that, but others would..
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21381 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 10:34 |
It does ... in the early years of prog the progressive bands all were innovative. But as soon as the term "Progressive Rock" had become a label for the prog bands of that time (Yes, Genesis, KC, ...), innovation was no longer a prerquisite for prog. I think we have to distinguish between a discussion about what is and what isn't "Progressive", and what is and what isn't "Progressive Rock". The latter determines if a band should be listed here. I think that you can't just include all bands that arr innovative. |
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21381 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 10:35 |
IMO your definition is not precise enough. It includes a lot of bands that aren't Prog. |
|
fractalman
Forum Groupie Joined: July 01 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 64 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 10:38 |
Right, I don't have a problem with it either. Many prog fans seem to get too analytical. For example, one person suggested that Simple Minds is not progressive because there's no acoustic guitar on any of their albums. While this *may* be true, the reasoning is pure hogwash! I have a great question: Other than the musicians that comprise the band, what in the heck makes Asia progressive? Here's a list of bands in order of progressiveness: Asia, Simple Minds, Saga, Yes, New Trolls, King Crimson, Magma
Edited by fractalman |
|
xhamasaki
Forum Senior Member Joined: June 13 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 128 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 10:42 |
why couldn't you include all bands that are innovative, thats basically what progressive means! There really aren't that many innovative modern bands now adays anyway hehe
|
|
Citanul
Forum Senior Member Joined: June 14 2005 Location: South Africa Status: Offline Points: 430 |
Posted: July 13 2005 at 10:46 |
So would Green Day putting out a concept album with multiple-part songs running close to 10 minutes in length make them progressive? I don't think you can use a dictionary definition of the word "progressive" to try and define progressive rock. After all if you look at it that way, what is "heavy" or "metal" about heavy metal? The problem with trying to define prog is that it's not a genre like blues or reggae that has certain defining characteristics. You have a death metal band like Opeth and a Celtic band like Iona that are both considered prog, but have virtually nothing else in common. I also think that everyone has their own definition of prog, which may be difficult to state explicitly. My vague definition of prog is that prog rock is music that goes beyond the standard rock song. But if I were to strictly use this definition, then I would have to regard System Of A Down as prog, which I don't. So clearly my definition needs some work, but I've got far better things to do than try and come up with a definition of a genre of music that covers only a portion (albeit a very large portion) of the music that I like. |
|
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |