Suggested Sub-Genre: New Prog

Come on guys.

The subject of how experimental Coldplay are wasn't the topic. I agreed that perhaps an alternative name to New Prog might be needed but looking at how so many bands are structured on here, something needs to be done to group a lot of these bands.

People ask how "Opeth and Radiohead" can be in the same group for example. On the other hand, look at Prog Related. It's the exact same problem.

Citizen Erased wrote: Come on guys. The subject of how experimental Coldplay are wasn't the topic. I agreed that perhaps an alternative name to New Prog might be needed but looking at how so many bands are structured on here, something needs to be done to group a lot of these bands. I don't see what's wrong with the active structure.  Like I said before, I think many bands are good where they are now, though there are a few exceptions.  A subgenre for "new prog" or whatever it should be called is not going to solve that. In fact, I think it's actually going to create new problems instead of solving problems.  When I'm looking for a death metal band like Opeth, my first idea where to look is Tech/extreme prog metal, with Radiohead it's crossover and riverside prog metal (or maybe heavy).  Why would you want to throw all these bands with totally different musical styles on one big heap? It would make things a LOT messier in my opinion.  People ask how "Opeth and Radiohead" can be in the same group for example. On the other hand, look at Prog Related. It's the exact same problem.  Opeth and Radiohead are two different kinds of prog bands.  Tech prog metal is very different from crossover prog.  Prog related is not an actual subgenre of prog, but a bunch of bands that are related to prog.  The bands in prog related are related to prog and might show small similarities with actual prog bands, but in the end aren't prog bands.

Desoc wrote: First of all: Mixing Opeth into this was clearly a mistake. The list suggested by the original poster should be taken as just that - a suggestion, not the definite answer. If this should be a reality now or in the future, let's stick to the old formula: Create a genre team of competent people and allow them to make decisions after having had their discussions. The difference between Opeth and Radiohead is not what this is about. I know it's not all about the difference between Opeth and Radiohead, but it's a nice example of showing that many bands here don't have much in common with each other.  I think it's more about the difference between i.e. Rush and Uriah Heep on one side, and The Mars Volta and Porcupine Tree on the other side, who all are lumped into Heavy Prog although clearly belonging to quite different traditions. More names and genres could be mentioned, and many already have. They are lumped into Heavy prog because according to many they belong there.  (Porcupine Tree is tough example though, as they have went through many different musical styles) If you put several bands with quite different musical styles together in a "new prog" subgenre, it's not going to solve anything I think.  Henry Plainview wrote: Citizen Erased wrote: People ask how "Opeth and Radiohead" can be in the same group for example. On the other hand, look at Prog Related. It's the exact same problem. And your solution is to make the problem larger? No, you're using strawmen. It's a question of a different kind of organization, taking into account that the world does in fact evolve.

Citizen Erased wrote: floydispink wrote: Prog related is not an actual subgenre of prog, but a bunch of bands that are related to prog. Exactly, it's something I'm suggesting this sub-genre could solve.

I'm sure people could discuss forever which bands deserve to be in Prog Related and which deserve to be either further in or further out, but just for the reference: "solving the problem of Prog Related" was never my agenda, and I don't think I've read many other people who are calling for a new genre and who argues that loads of Prog Related bands should be "inside". My issue is mainly with bands already "inside" the ordinary prog categories as a whole but "outside" in terms of their place in the category in question.

Citizen Erased wrote: This is sort of heading on a tangent. I didn't say I think that ALL Prog Related bands should be in New Prog. I posted a list in the first post of at least 50 bands that would automatically be considered for this genre though. It's not a bad basis for a start. These are all suggestions guys of course.

Ah, right, um, no. Very few of those 50 bands that were not already here would make it into the PA, regardless of what any new genre was called. If they could not get into an existing PA subgenre then the new genre is not for us -  being nearly Prog Related is not enough.

Desoc wrote: Dean wrote: Ah, right, um, no. Very few of those 50 bands that were not already here would make it into the PA, regardless of what any new genre was called. If they could not get into an existing PA subgenre then the new genre is not for us -  being nearly Prog Related is not enough. Ah, right, um, no. The count is actually Crossover: 12 Eclectic: 1 Experimental/post: 6 Heavy prog: 6 Neo: 1 Post/math: 2 Prog folk: 1 Prog metal: 1 Psych/space: 5 Related: 2 Tech/Extreme: 1 Not in: 16 (Sorry, couldn't resist ) In other words: In 36 - Related 2 - Out 16 The argument about this being a conspirative way of lumping loads of Related and Not Even Related bands inside, seems a bit blown up. Again, have anybody claimed this list to be the definite answer? (Also: I didn't do a search on this, but many of the "Not in" bands were completely new to me, and I usually try to pay attention to what bands are being discussed in the "Suggest new bands/artists" section...)

Thanks for that  - I did the sums in my head - my point is unchanged. "of those 50 bands that were not already here" = 16 ... Very few of those 16 bands would make it into the PA.

This just isn't going to work and it's not needed.

I love Tool. Let's say I just got their first album and loved it, so I decide to check out some other bands in the new prog subgenre. My finger lands on The Decemberists, although they don't even sound slightly similiar. Next up I get The Fall of Troy. Same problem again.
Then The Mars Volta. Then Radiohead.
Do you see what I'm getting at?

Am I getting anywhere whatsoever with my search for similar artists, which, if they existed, should by all logic fall under the same sub-genre if they're considered to be progressive?

But then, Tool magically appear in a genre called Experimental / Post-metal Whilst having a look through, I find a band called The Pax Cecilia, and although they aren't too similar as far as music goes, they're surely a lot more similar to Tool than 90% of the artists who've been pulled out of a carefully selected place and clumped into this new prog.

Also, are we now going to clump all 70's artists into one sub-genre, call it old prog and add a whole lot of 70's bands who wouldn't make the normal criteria for PA into this new genre?