Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Do you hate certain prog because of popularity?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedDo you hate certain prog because of popularity?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 11>
Author
Message
Revan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 02 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 540
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 15:21
I don't really see the point in hating any kind of music... Unless it's badness and frequency you are exposed to it interferes with you mood or way of life in some way. I don't think any particular prog act can do that to anyone, as it's surely not played in your local pub or nightclub. I also can't  understand why you are troubled with such behaviours in third parties... specially over the internet. This thread has no point at all.

Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 29285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 17:01
Originally posted by AllP0werToSlaves AllP0werToSlaves wrote:

Originally posted by Tapfret Tapfret wrote:

The more popular prog, at least the classics, owed more to distribution than quality. The most popular bands (Pink Floyd, Yes, Genesis, ELP, Jethro Tull) all had major record label contracts. Before the internet, you pretty much got what the local record store had or maybe mail order something you were lucky enough to know about. With what I have discovered of the classic era due to the internet, many of those popular bands would not have made it to my collection.

Worth ridiculing someone over? Of course not. But I likewise will not listen to any assertion that popularity has any basis on quality.

I agree 100%.
 
I certainly don't. These bands got major record contracts because they were the best of their time. Try and disprove otherwise.Big smile
All prog bands were a hard sell because they couldn't get played on the radio unless they got lucky with a 'hit' like Tull perhaps.Therefore to achieve popularity did mean something.Of course we all have our own tastes and will take what we want but the principle of 'inverted snobbery' dictates that less popular bands must be 'better' because the more popular bands must have pandered to a commercial approach in some way to achieve popularity and that somehow makes their music inferior.The less popular bands were not infected by this and so their music is 'purer' and superior.Ouch
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 18005
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 17:38
Hi,
 
Not really ... but sometimes the amount of fan abuse and demands and comments are really annoying ... you can easily use the Jay Cutler example recently ... there is no loyalty, care, understanding, and sometimes the publication and institution that publishes that kind of stuff needs to be taken down a peg. However, doing so, would intervene with one of America's most cherished BS's ... which is used and abused!
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
wilmon91 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 15 2009
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 698
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 18:16
Originally posted by Paravion Paravion wrote:


Others might claim that music can be said to be objectively good, that there are such things as good music and bad music - independent of what you happen to think and like. 
 
I would claim that. But absolute objective taste is an abstract idea, and an impossible thing to possess, unless you have entered a higher form of consciousness and become one with the Absolute. Personal taste is a mixture of subjective experience and objective reason.
 
Originally posted by Paravion Paravion wrote:


discussions where the participants assume that music actually has (value-laden) properties. Can you do that while maintaining that taste is completely subjective?   
 
No. But I'm gonna take food as an example , as Equality did. Everyone has their own tastes. But still there is good and bad cooking. A fine restaurant makes better food than the average lunch restaurant. It's no question about it. To make the best cooking you have to master the art. And that requires knowledge, passion, inspiration etc. Just as with music. Can you really make great music if you have no passion for it? Well, some might like it. Some might like overcooked broccoli. Maybe becasue they haven't tried perfectly cooked broccoli.
 
It's more complicated with music, but you can still make objective distinctions, at least in regard to individual aspects of the music.
 
Among the worst music of all kinds I think is the typical rock cover band. Not only do they lack any material of their own, but they play well known "rock hits" , designing the set list to please the audience as much as they can. Usually they stay as close to the original as possible. It serves a function - many people like to hear music they recognize. But the quality can't go beyond the ambition of serving the intended function. It's not about art and creativity.It's like the difference between a wine glass and a plastic wine glass (or a good wine and a bad wine - whatever). I would say, from a standpoint I would claim to have a lot of objective weight to it, that the quality of such concerts generally sucks.
 
But you can argue that if it is what it's meant to be - then it is perfect in it's own sphere, because the artist have achieved the goals of their ambition. But, as with the case with overcooked broccoli, lack of knowledge, vision, passion etc, sets a limit for the quality, which can't be exceeded unless the artist is willing to raise the ambition and strive for higher artistic levels.


Edited by wilmon91 - January 27 2011 at 18:41
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 18:27
It's funny, seems that some people has double standards

A few days ago I said:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

 


It seems that Progheads don't forgive success, bands like Pink Floyd or Kansas, who did outstanding Prog music are criticized by people because they were popular

Iván

And a guy called Hobocamp made a scandal as if I had insulted him and Junges supported him.

Now both are on this thread about the same issue, giving their opinions in a civil way.

Iván


            
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 18005
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 19:12
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

It's funny, seems that some people has double standards

A few days ago I said:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

 


It seems that Progheads don't forgive success, bands like Pink Floyd or Kansas, who did outstanding Prog music are criticized by people because they were popular

Iván

And a guy called Hobocamp made a scandal as if I had insulted him and Junges supported him.

Now both are on this thread about the same issue, giving their opinions in a civil way.

Iván


 
Did you spank them, or something? Confused
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 19:38
No, I was spanked Wink

Iván
            
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 19:45
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

It's funny, seems that some people has double standards

A few days ago I said:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

 


It seems that Progheads don't forgive success, bands like Pink Floyd or Kansas, who did outstanding Prog music are criticized by people because they were popular

Iván

And a guy called Hobocamp made a scandal as if I had insulted him and Junges supported him.

Now both are on this thread about the same issue, giving their opinions in a civil way.

Iván



Kansas are criticized because they're terrible, not because they're popular.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 19:54
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

 
Kansas are criticized because they're terrible, not because they're popular.

Terrible for you

Iván
            
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 19:57
They're the equivalent of ear cancer.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 20:59
Originally posted by harmonium.ro harmonium.ro wrote:

Originally posted by progkidjoel progkidjoel wrote:

Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:

Anyone who hates highly rated stuff just for that reason is a hipster and we should shun them.


Originally posted by Xanatos Xanatos wrote:

Only hipsters will tend to hate a band just because of his popularity


Originally posted by zravkapt zravkapt wrote:

And hipsters will like a band for no other reason than they are *not* popular.


Is this the defintion of the hipster? Because by this logic a vast number of proggers are pure hipsters. Just hear them talking about mainstream music and tastes.

I thought the hipster is the person who thinks that certain slightly unconventional mainstream music he likes is the best, most exquisite and avantgarde music ever. Like indie-rock, which is just a subsection of pop culture. Whenever I mention an indie and highly popular band that I like, I get called a hipster LOL So one of these two definitions must be wrong, they pretty much contradict each other.


There's a literal modern definition of a hipster (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hipster&defid=2705928) and that's the one used most often. But I've seen hipster used as someone who really gets off on jumping bandwagons that one wouldn't expect them to jump on, like being a basement-dweller who blogs about the new Kanye West album or a crunkcore band. Because it's the incessant need to prove that you're unique that drives the heart of hipsterdom, and you can see how that relates to the "I'm so unique, King Crimson sucks" kind of prog fan, which as Henners pointed out, is largely a straw man. I've seen a few posts like that over the years, though. More on /mu/ because 90% of the people who post there are socially retarded high schoolers.
Back to Top
Luna View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 28 2010
Location: Funky Town
Status: Offline
Points: 12794
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 21:08
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

They're the equivalent of ear cancer.

Are you sure you're not talking about Nu-Metal?
Back to Top
harmonium.ro View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 18 2008
Location: Anna Calvi
Status: Offline
Points: 22989
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 21:10
Wow that first definition on Urban Dictionary is long and surprisingly positive. And it pretty much confirms my intuition (but brings a lot more content). What you further say also makes sense in continuation to that definition. Thanks. 
Back to Top
Proletariat View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 30 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1882
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 21:19
I hate certain prog.... but not because of popularityLOL
who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob
Back to Top
Proletariat View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 30 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1882
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 21:23
Hipsterism tends to be about glorifying things that most people dislike or that have been stygmatized which is why you see lots of hipster prog fans. This has alot to do with being intentionally ironic, which is a major compliment in hipsterdom.
 
personally I love the aspect of hipster culture that brings attention to neglected stuff (for lack of a better word) but I can not stand the hipsters who place the irony and underground status above actual enjoyment.
who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 21:37
Sounds tautological, but I like what I like.

Or..I don't care if it's popular or not, my only parameter is my taste.

Iván
            
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 21:55
Originally posted by SolarLuna96 SolarLuna96 wrote:


Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

They're the equivalent of ear cancer.
Are you sure you're not talking about Nu-Metal?
Josh Groban? Reggaeton?
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 22:04
Crunkcore
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Tapfret View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 12 2007
Location: Bryant, Wa
Status: Offline
Points: 8602
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2011 at 22:20
Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by AllP0werToSlaves AllP0werToSlaves wrote:

Originally posted by Tapfret Tapfret wrote:

The more popular prog, at least the classics, owed more to distribution than quality. The most popular bands (Pink Floyd, Yes, Genesis, ELP, Jethro Tull) all had major record label contracts. Before the internet, you pretty much got what the local record store had or maybe mail order something you were lucky enough to know about. With what I have discovered of the classic era due to the internet, many of those popular bands would not have made it to my collection.

Worth ridiculing someone over? Of course not. But I likewise will not listen to any assertion that popularity has any basis on quality.

I agree 100%.
 
I certainly don't. These bands got major record contracts because they were the best of their time. Try and disprove otherwise.Big smile
All prog bands were a hard sell because they couldn't get played on the radio unless they got lucky with a 'hit' like Tull perhaps.Therefore to achieve popularity did mean something.Of course we all have our own tastes and will take what we want but the principle of 'inverted snobbery' dictates that less popular bands must be 'better' because the more popular bands must have pandered to a commercial approach in some way to achieve popularity and that somehow makes their music inferior.The less popular bands were not infected by this and so their music is 'purer' and superior.Ouch


"These bands got major record contracts because they were the best of their time."

Might be the most absurdly untestable statement of the entire thread. Nothing about "who you know" plays into who gets record contracts, I'm sure.


Back to Top
fuxi View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: March 08 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2461
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2011 at 04:22
[Referring back to the original message]

Watcher! What nonsense! Just let the idiots rave! If I make speak for myself, I've loved SELLING ENGLAND (just about the most popular prog album hereabouts) ever sinds I first heard it 35 yrs ago. I still love it and I don't care what anybody says! (I love most of the Progarchives All-Time Top Twenty, and thank jebus I do!) It is ridiculous and childish to believe that you just HAVE to prefer more obscure and "difficult" bands.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 11>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.261 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.