What you think?

Logan wrote: Easy Livin wrote: Logan wrote: Slartibartfast wrote: Easy Livin wrote: Do we even argee with the "Big four" as suggested? If I were to pick four off the top of my head, that's not a bad set. If I were to choose a big four, those are the ones I would say.   Personally, I'd place Pink Floyd before ELP in any "big four". I much prefer Pink Floyd to ELP, but I don't think of it as nearly quintessentially Prog as genre. I don't think it's nearly as representative on the whole with what most of the public who know of Prog would think of as Prog. To me, ELP is a prime example of the excesses associated with. Pink Floyd I don't consider as Prog.

Bob how the hell are you?Hope you are well as always one day we will grab that next pint together.

However,I cannot place Pink Floyd ahead of ELP when it comes to Prog,for me ELP's first 3 albums were Prog at
its best.

As for any who followed being anywhere near these original pioneers that's a no no.We all have our favourites and it becomes very subjective but no bands then and now come near Yes,Genesis,King Crimson and ELP I think that can go down in the Prog book of facts.!! Off to see Alice at the Armadillo on Halloween will be a great night.

A strange post, originality is only good if the originator is good and Genesis were very definately original.

silverpot wrote: Pink Floyd not prog? How can A Saucerful of Secrets and Ummagumma not be considered to be prog?  Or were they just too early, and thus have to suffer the Cross Over label?

Not to mention Atom Heart Mother which I have used to demonstrate the band's Prog value when people have said that Pink Floyd is not Prog.

I meant as Prog as ELP. To me ELP is, generally, more representative of Prog as a genre than Pink Floyd, as I said earlier. -- the qualities that I traditionally associate with Prog.  I think it more likely if you talked with a classic rock knowledgable audience about them that they would be more likely to call ELP Prog than Pink Floyd.  I think ELP is generally more associated with the Prog movement, and I do consider it overall more quintessentially Prog.  That I much prefer Pink Floyd, especially the early period albums (the Ron Geesin/ Pink Floyd collborative Atom Heart Mother suite being my fave piece they worked on) doesn't change that perception of mine (perhaps I'm mistaken about the general public perception?) -- that ELP is more stereotypically associated with the Prog movement, and as  a Prog genre band than Pink Floyd.  It's kind of like, Pink Floyd made Prog, but ELP IS Prog (warts and all), if you understand me.


Edited by Logan - October 28 2011 at 18:37

I think the best prog bands were from the 1970's. 

Many post 70's bands are better, but they wouldn't be what they are if it weren't for the 'classics'.

Fragile wrote: A strange post, originality is only good if the originator is good and Genesis were very definately original.

I think its always been considered a Big 6 of prog with Tull and Floyd added to the four mentioned in the OP. For me personally, I dont care for Yes and ELP at all and Tull can be great but often were just good. Of the other three they all released several excellent albums but a few duffers along the way as well. The thing about 70's prog is that there was great trength in depth from around the world. Beyond those big 6 you had excellent work from Van der Graaf Generator, PFM, Le Orme, Banco..., Quella Vecchia Locanda, Novalis, Amon Duul (in all its versions), Ange, Mahavishnu Orchestra, Return to Forever, Bubu, Bacamarte, Art Zoyd, Area, East of Eden, Focus, Gnidrolog, Goblin, Hatfield... National Helath, Quiet Sun, Soft Machine, Khan etc, plus bands like Camel, Weather Report, Magma, Gentle Giant who though I'm not a fan of have all left a very strong impression on many people.

Since then though, there has been a quite a few bands that can produce albums that can match many of those 70's greats and in some cases even exceed them, but for me its only in the last 10 years or so that we've begun to regain that strength in depth that the origional scene had. 

rogerthat wrote: These big four do not represent all 70s prog, much less all prog. And it is debatable whether they represent the best of 70s prog either. I would certainly take either of Floyd, Tull or Gentle Giant over ELP. And in terms of sophistication, rank Gentle Giant second only to KC.  And even then, Gentle Giant were very unique...they were daring enough to write complex 4-minuters right at the height of prog.  If we really cover all facets of 70s prog and include Can, Henry Cow, Magma, Gong, Kraftwerk, then in totality it is simply formidable and tough to surpass.  But there may be and have been bands from the 80s or later that did better than any one of these bands individually, of course.

True.

richardh wrote: [QUOTE=Alitare]I think the best prog bands were from the 1970's.  When you see Keith Emerson in a fancy suit playing his flying pianos, you can tell he was doing it sincerely from the heart. It was true art.  When David Bowie and Peter Gabriel were dressing up like women and foxes singing about starmen and harold barrels and silly english farts, you could tell it was sincere and emotionally devastating. When Rush were playing 20 minute long songs about galactic space wars and going bald, you just knew it was important and tear-jerking. When Uriah Heep wrote every goddamn beautiful, crippling note in 'Easy Livin'', you could tell it was like they stole aural manna from the heavens. When Tangerine Dream released a trillion albums containing only a few keyboard notes and a fat guy blowing into a megaphone while high on PCP, you could tell it was music for the ages. When Kansas gave us Dust in the Wind, intelligent, moving art was then born. But those Radiohead jackasses? They're just soulless fakers, every one.

Edited by yanch - October 29 2011 at 06:33

I can think of only two bands, outside of those early bands, who have been genre defining and have the quality and depth of catalog to measure up.

Univers Zero and Magma.