Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Prog_Traveller
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 29 2005
Location: Bucks county PA
Status: Offline
Points: 1474
|
Topic: Why are Porcupine Tree listed as "heavy prog?" Posted: September 19 2010 at 22:33 |
Sorry folks but I don't get it. On this website Porcupine Tree are listed as "heavy prog." They started out as a psychedelic/ space rock kind of band so I think if anything they should be under that category. Do we list Yes or Genesis as crossover bands or prog related? No they are listed as symphonic prog. OK you might argue and say that PT are most well known as a heavy prog band. Maybe maybe not. I think most of the hardcore fans of the band knew them when they were more in the Pink Floyd direction and that is when they really became accepted in the prog community. Their later heavier albums are less prog and shouldn't be considered the essence of what the band was or even is. Sure, they have heavy moments but they always have. Feel free to debate me. I don't expect the category to be changed but I just wanted to make my point. I think it's one of the reasons why the categories don't work so well on here. Many bands can easily fit under more than one category so maybe that's something to look into.
|
|
Queen By-Tor
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 13 2006
Location: Xanadu
Status: Offline
Points: 16111
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 22:37 |
Because... theyz heavy... and theyz prog...
What would YOU call them? Metal? You'd be a crazy person. Symphonic? Then you deserve the wraiths of hell. Neo-prog? I've seen men eat their own livers over making such a terrible mistake.
|
|
Henry Plainview
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 22:41 |
They were originally in Psych, but whoever is in charge decided that Heavy was more accurate for their current direction. The late period of Yes and Genesis don't count because those albums aren't prog, while modern PT is (I guess), so I agree. Max has been promising genre tagging by album for quite some time now, but I'm pretty sure it's never going to happen. :(
|
if you own a sodastream i hate you
|
|
Queen By-Tor
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 13 2006
Location: Xanadu
Status: Offline
Points: 16111
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 22:44 |
well, I'd say that 3 of PTs albums are psych (Sunday, Downstair and Sky) while the rest are HP (Signify, Lightbulb, Stupid, Absentia, Deadwing, Blank, Incident) - although Lightbulb and Stupid do often border on Xover.
|
|
The Quiet One
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 22:49 |
I agree with the OP, they're either Xover or Psych, depending which period you're taking in account.
Since they're not playing psych prog anymore, I would list them under Xover.
|
|
Queen By-Tor
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 13 2006
Location: Xanadu
Status: Offline
Points: 16111
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 22:52 |
Come on Pablo. That's a gross miscategorization. Based on everything from Absentia until now they're 100% heavy prog. Put them in Xover and the whole website might as well be there. Call it Xoverarchives.
|
|
The Quiet One
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:00 |
King By-Tor wrote:
Come on Pablo. That's a gross miscategorization. Based on everything from Absentia until now they're 100% heavy prog. Put them in Xover and the whole website might as well be there. Call it Xoverarchives. |
Maybe I'm making Heavy Prog as a rather limited sub-genre, since I mainly think it's rather for heavy rock bands that delve through Prog Rock some way or another. And not for Alt. Rock bands or Prog Rock bands that delve through heavy territory, I really can't think of many cases of the latter.
Anyway, we clearly have different conceptions of the genres and of the band. For me Porcupine Tree's 99-10 music is alt. rock inspired music with prog, psych and metal influences. Not saying they're not Prog, but they definitely have a strong inclination towards alt. rock or pop or however you want to call it.
BTW: I wouldn't even consider The Mars Volta Heavy Prog, for me they belong to Eclectic. I'm telling you this so you can know how my mind works.
Edited by The Quiet One - September 19 2010 at 23:02
|
|
Queen By-Tor
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 13 2006
Location: Xanadu
Status: Offline
Points: 16111
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:02 |
And that makes them HP, is what I'm saying. My definition of HP is whatever the current generation considers Heavy rock + prog, which is exactly what their last 4 albums is, Xover would make them to be a more Radiohead kind of output. Whatever, this website doesn't know its own definitions from a piece of rock. Which is half the reason I quit
|
|
The Quiet One
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:06 |
King By-Tor wrote:
And that makes them HP, is what I'm saying. My definition of HP is whatever the current generation considers Heavy rock + prog, which is exactly what their last 4 albums is, Xover would make them to be a more Radiohead kind of output.
Whatever, this website doesn't know its own definitions from a piece of rock. Which is half the reason I quit
|
That's not Porcupine Tree for me. For me their 1999-2009 period is: Alt Rock + Prog + Metal (not in the heaviest way) = Crossover. But I'm no expert on the Xover genre neither that expertise on the Heavy Prog genre.
|
|
Queen By-Tor
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 13 2006
Location: Xanadu
Status: Offline
Points: 16111
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:10 |
but that so clearly = heavy prog! They are the clear leaders of the genre as it exists in the modern age! Xover is for more poppy bands.
Whatever. My definition of prog is not what others is. Otherwise they wouldn't have added Tori Amos and Nine Inch Nails. Big f**king mistakes, IMO. But hey, the category will never change, so this argument is all for naught. And even if it did, all I would do is complain - it wouldn't actually effect my day-to-day life. So whatevs. This website is in the sh*tter enough as it is. Let's add Gaga under related while we're at it for her progressive effect on pop music.
|
|
stonebeard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:12 |
Because we've clearly given up.
|
|
|
The Quiet One
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:27 |
lol.
|
|
Catcher10
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17848
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:55 |
King By-Tor wrote:
This website is in the sh*tter enough as it is. Let's add Gaga under related while we're at it for her progressive effect on pop music.
|
Dude really?? I mean come on, clearly Lady goo-goo Gaga would be Eclectic Prog...or maybe Zeuhl (just cause I dunno what that is...)
IMO Porcupine Tree are disco since all the songs have a catchy beat and are easy to dance to.
|
|
|
Prog_Traveller
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 29 2005
Location: Bucks county PA
Status: Offline
Points: 1474
|
Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:59 |
Lot's of stuff is heavy. Relayer and Drama by Yes are heavy. The knife from the Trespass album is heavy. You can even say some PF and JT stuff is heavy especially JT. Oh well. I give up.
Oh and aren't Rush listed as heavy prog too? Maybe half of their stuff is heavy. The other half is either prog, synth rock, new wave or modern rock. I'll let them slide though since they seem to be back into a heavier direction again. Boy do those guys flip flop. ;)
Edited by Prog_Traveller - September 20 2010 at 00:02
|
|
Triceratopsoil
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18016
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 00:07 |
stonebeard wrote:
Because we've clearly given up.
|
|
|
lazland
Prog Reviewer
Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 13635
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 05:09 |
And this debate exemplifies the eternal madness of endlessly categorising bands into strict sub genres
|
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org
Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!
|
|
Any Colour You Like
Prog Reviewer
Joined: May 15 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 12294
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 05:28 |
The first four PT albums in Psych/Space, SD and LS in Xover and the rest in HP.
But... that won't happen yet... maybe ever.
|
|
Textbook
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 05:30 |
I've always thought tagging should be done by album, not by band, and that multi-tagging should be possible.
However, nobody wants to go through the entire database retagging.
Except maybe Marty.
|
|
progkidjoel
Prog Reviewer
Joined: March 02 2009
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 19643
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 05:58 |
Any Colour You Like wrote:
The first four PT albums in Psych/Space, SD and LS in Xover and the rest in HP.
But... that won't happen yet... maybe ever.
|
My thoughts exactly.
|
|
|
timothy leary
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Offline
Points: 5319
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 13:11 |
all you need is 5 genre king crimson derived yes derived genesis derived pink floyd derived crossover
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.