What is your Definition of Progressive Ro

Syzygy wrote: Xanadu wrote:  .   Anywho, it was about here I came in touch with the "progressive rock" genre (From now on I just say "PR") and at first I was amazed at the diversity. Now for a question: Does for example Magma counts as rock? If not I should erase the rock to be politcal correct, but screw that.  (I know this seems irrelevant, and infact it is. Good music is actually good music and vice vers) If you ever see Magma live you'll know for certain that they are rock. Cool avatar btw.

Thank you...

Im not a huge fan of magma, just simply love MDK, so I dont know if they´re still aorund. And if they are sweden doesn´t seem like a place for them to do concerts. Doesn´t their music counts as Zeuhl? If Im not mistaken Art Zoyd and Ruins (Koenji Hyakkei?) counts as Zeuhl aswell...

Anyway I believe you, rock i such a big field of different music...

Experimentatation , experimentation, experimentation...

Summary: Key word is 'progressive.' I'm afraid I'm more old school than other people though, and even dictionaries are rewritten all the time.

Zero the hero wrote: Um Seems the first thing you ought to do is listern to some progressive rock! SX Dream theatre

Look at his avatar though! Come on, kudos for that!

Um

Something that starts as something,goes into something else while doing something else but can go back to the first something while keeping up the 2nd & 3rd something.Yeh.Very intricate.

Um

Seems the first thing you ought to do is listern to some progressive rock! SX Dream theatre

Okay seriously now...you should never take me seriously.

Anywho I always have been thinking about the meaning of progressive rock. But first a Prologue.

 My way into "progressive" music started with Symphony X and their "The Odyssey", yes im only been into this for about 2,5 years now, and I thought: "Oh my, what a great metal band". At the time I would put them as a mix between Metallica and Iron Maiden, isnt that funny?..Or is it?  .  

So... I wanted more and the internet is such a good tool for information, and so I was suddenly glanzig at a review comparing SX and Dream Theater. Always interesting with new influence I thought! Imagine my surprise when I bought SFAM:M2 two weeks later! Indeed I could see the similarities, both were concepts album with an epic touch, but DT were/was (grammaticals!) way different in other aspects. (You must admit DT makes music with close bonds to Genesis wich I for some reasons define as the essence of Progressive Rock) BTW, I will not use the word Prog as it, in swedish, represent a more focused kind of music and kultur, nor does it have any similarities to Progressive Rock. 

Anywho, it was about here I came in touch with the "progressive rock" genre (From now on I just say "PR") and at first I was amazed at the diversity. Now for a question: Does for example Magma counts as rock? If not I should erase the rock to be politcal correct, but screw that. 

So with this brief history lecture of mine, I should be to able to express myself with clarity: At the beginning my opinion of "PR" were that each song should be atleast ten minutes long, infact it is merely a norm and not a necessity. Another opinion at same time were the build-ups, its progression therefore the name i thought, emerging in klimax (GYBE and sometimes DT does this among many others), also a norm and not a necessity. And so lately my finally thought, THE QUEST for originality, The PROGRESSION of music. I know there is many bands in here that from time to time are being accused as  "copy-cats" . And yet in the end it is still a question of definition. (smaken är som baken)

What is yours?

(I know this seems irrelevant, and infact it is. Good music is actually good music and vice vers)