How is this Prog?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: Just for Fun
Forum Description: Participate in trivia and knowledge games, share jokes, etc.
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=103645
Printed Date: November 28 2024 at 02:18
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: How is this Prog?
Posted By: SteveG
Subject: How is this Prog?
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 14:58
|
The standard question is: Why is this not Prog? The opposite, but less used is: How is this Prog? What are some Prog bands or albums that you question to be Prog?
|
Replies:
Posted By: Horizons
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 15:06
|
oooooooooooooooooo this will be fun. ------------- Crushed like a rose in the riverflow. |
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 15:07
|
Two types come to mind: 1) Anything that is minimalist or ambient. 2) Artists that are just guitar, bass, and drums. No keyboards or synths included; no winds or brass instruments either. ------------- 
|
Posted By: TheGazzardian
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 15:11
| I don't really understand how Miley Cyrus is prog |
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 15:12
|
It is all in the way that she twerks in multiple time signatures. -------------
|
Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 15:40
|
Answer 1: I couldn't care less. If it's good music, it's good music, it doesn't need a label. (I don't even like the term "prog" - "progressive" for a genre that had its best times in the 70s, with fans that were getting all upset when bands actually *progressed* to doing something else in the 80s?) Answer 2 (which actually contradicts answer 1): I always thought that I'd have to stretch things to find even 10% prog (in a "good proggy music" sense  ) in David Bowie's huge discography, and I have a hard time understanding why all his albums get hundreds of mostly good ratings here. (I understand somewhat better how some people like his non-prog stuff in a non-prog way, but still...) |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 15:51
| ^You are correct. Answer 2 does contradict answer 1. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 15:52
| Enough of the chicken s**t answers. How is BOC prog? (micky?) |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 16:06
Specifically them, I would never label them prog. Straight up hard rock/heavy metal.....Although putting the two dots over the ö was progressive  -------------   
|
SteveG wrote:Posted By: aapatsos
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 16:08
|
Should be moved to "Just for Fun" (BOC are under prog-related) |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 16:16
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 16:19
|
Ok, but are you sure you want to put Miley Cyrus under Just For Fun? |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 16:25
Madonna is more prog than BOC...and probably most on this site  . Everyone is prog-related or crossover-prog...-------------
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 16:29
|
But is Madonna more prog than Miley? That's the important question.
|
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 16:47
|
Yes. Miley is more of a Madonna clone. -------------
|
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 16:48
-------------
|
Posted By: DDPascalDD
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 16:49
|
I thought we had enough of the chicken sh*t answers? Not that I have a real meaningful answer really... ------------- |
Posted By: DDPascalDD
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 16:50
|
Didn't read previous post, sry ------------- |
Posted By: GKR
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:05
Oh, boy, who is BOC?  ------------- - From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. |
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:09
|
BOC = Blue Oyster Cult. And as has been previously mentioned are listed under prog related and not a prog category. I suppose the explanation is that although not entirely prog themselves, they were influential to heavy prog and prog metal bands. Also, from their PA page biography: Why this artist must be listed in www.progarchives.com : BLUE ÖYSTER CULT have always had many things in common with prog, from the lyrics and subject matter of their songs to their extensive use of keyboards - not to mention the complex structure of many of their best tracks. -------------
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:11
|
Posted By: GKR
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:11
|
OOOOOooooooooohhhh!!!!!! So obvious! Uh, shall I throw the first stone? There are several Jazz artists that to me its just jazz and have nothing to do with progressive rock. Miles Davies, for example. But we can add even Hermeto Pascoal. They have absolutely no conection with rock nor what was conected with Progressive Rock. Unless this is also a Jazz archive, I never understand their adition. ------------- - From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:17
|
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:19
|
According to the PA Prog hierarchy, Jazz Rock/Fusion is a separate genre of prog and thus as a founding artist of jazz rock/fusion Miles Davis is included. The catch is that even though he is included for that middle career batch of albums, his entire discography gets to come along for the ride. -------------
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:24
|
BOC were included because of their music, not because of the Moorcock connection to Hawkwind. As I have all of their albums, I believe I am in a position to judge. I don't think anyone in their right mind would claim that "Don't Fear the Reaper" is prog-related - but songs such as "7 Screamin' Dizbuster", "The Subhuman", "Monsters" and "Veteran of the Psychic Wars" certainly are. |
Posted By: GKR
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:24
Got it. But is still strange to see his 1959 album in the top 100 of PA...  ------------- - From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:25
|
...and of course the two doo-hickeys above the O cement them as prog-related -------------
|
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:27
-------------
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:30
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:33
Yes, I did, and then some. Things got ugly, with personal insults thrown around - something that fortunately doesn't happen any longer. Personally, I believe that additions one disagrees with should be ignored, but then I seem to be in a minority. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:36
|
But the two dots over the O was a nice prog touch, agree?
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:36
|
The thing is, one either trusts the people around you to make an educated and carefully considered decision, or one does not. That trust must be there or things don't work. ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:38
| ^In a perfect world perhaps, but this is not a perfect world David. |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:40
|
It isn't the world at all-- it's the internet ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 17:43
Ok, why are the Moody Blues listed as crossover with Swilson? They don't have a doo hickey over their OO's. They did have very prog album covers though.
------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: GKR
Date Posted: August 11 2015 at 18:36
Oh yeah. ------------- - From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. |
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 11:13
But as one of the esteemed members here said recently...they are 'prog related'...whatever that means. Discuss amongst yourselves. ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 12:10
 |
Posted By: Gully Foyle
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 12:24
you mean like Rush for much of the time?
|
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 12:29
I was referring to some of the more modern metal bands with one or two albums under their belts, but yes, I suppose that Rush would fall under this category to a certain extent.-------------
|
Posted By: Ancient_Mariner
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 12:36
One of my 10 desert island albums but I don't see how QR is progressive, even this wonderful album. One long song and some interludes in a concept album. But the songs are mostly standard structures, verse/chorus stuff, and while the musicianship is excellent I don't think its a technical mindblower. If this is prog why isn't King Diamond? |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 12:38
|
^I feel bad by not saying that it's a favorite of mine also, but it does cause me to scratch my head. ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 12:43
-------------
|
Posted By: Ancient_Mariner
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 13:04
|
Black Sabbath and solo Dio were using keys in the early 80's. Though they did keep the keyboardist off stage for the longest time. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 13:19
|
^And Ozzy had a back up singer sing live behind a curtain so he couldn't be seen. I'm not sure if that makes him prog though.
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 13:39
|
Özz˙ = Prog
-------------
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 13:40
|
^ ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: twalsh
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 13:44
The interludes (Electric Requiem, My Empty Room) add an interesting atmosphere and could be considered atypical song structures. It has a story. It has chanting and some interesting sound effects. Suite Sister Mary is probably the only other structurally progressive song but I think it makes the cut by a hair. Of course, i am biased, since this is likely the first recording to make me go, "Where can I find more adventurous metal?" ------------- More heavy prog, please! |
Posted By: Ancient_Mariner
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 13:50
|
The case for King Diamond becomes stronger. |
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 15:52
|
I've mentioned before that I don't consider The Who or Zeppelin as prog and of course I was reminded by an esteemed forum member that they are prog related and not technically prog....yet they are on PA. Thoughts on these two bands....? ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: LearsFool
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 16:19
|
The Who have a good and unique case for being here in prog-related. Ultimately, they often didn't lean on prog-esque writing - probably the biggest reason for them being here is their pioneering of rock operas with Tommy and Quadrophenia - but they did dabble in that kind of composition to a small degree on A Quick One, Who's Next, and especially Quadrophenia. Considering the band's main style and who they influenced, the latter could be considered the first pronk album. -------------  
|
Posted By: terramystic
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 16:30
Yeah. Kind of Blue is kind of strange here. Questionable is a also ambient music in progressive electronic cathegory but I'm not against this kind of additions as long as there is at least one album in the artist's discog. connected with rock or any kind of beat underlying in the music. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 16:48
|
Posted By: terramystic
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 17:15
This instrumentation is tipical for prog but is it necessary? A good example is Automatic Fine Tuning (prog metal before prog metal). |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 17:42
|
OK lets switch gears: Steely Dan: Aja. An album that I've listened to so much that I've warn out the grooves. It's wonderfully jazzy and the title track has a long fantatic drums and sax break down, but is it prog? It's not exactly jazz fusion.
|
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 19:20
|
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 19:21
| How is Coheed and Cambria Prog? |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 20:20
the Who.. the better case.. one could say they sort of put the ART in Art Rock. The reason however they are such a legendary band is they were far more than that. a sin that taints other addition here.. like Floyd. One reason some have such a problem seeing them as prog.. they were great.. because they transcended being a mere prog band. Zeppelin.. sh*t.. didn't agree with that and fought hard against it..great band.. but outside of one song.. the barest of related... but once added? Stopped caring the second they were added. More power to those that wanted them added.. variety is the spice of life. Lots of additions I supported that others didn't. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 12 2015 at 20:31
|
hell wasn't Zeppelin added in the midst of the M@X years.. oh those were great times here.. *TORMAN MAXT* when he decided to take an active interest here. Word/Rumor was HE wanted them added.. probably to get more google hits ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 03:46
It's quite funny because we've got all the hard-rock stuff that could *possibly* be connected to prog rock (The Who via the concept albums, Zep by a few longer pieces, Queen, Iron Maiden, Black Sabbath (really? I mean, just f**king really?) etc) but any time I suggested Dire Straits (who, incidentally, fit our super-loose definition of symphonic prog to a tee) everyone started sharpening knives and saying they were obviously not prog and could never be and there are REASONS. |
Posted By: Flight123
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 04:37
|
That's the point - some 'mainstream' rock bands have progressive elements that means they are included on PA. Rush are a moot point, but Opeth, etc... |
Posted By: Tom Ozric
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 04:54
|
Posted By: WeepingElf
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 08:39
|
OK. You asked for it, so don't complain. As you certainly know from some other threads (most notably the Wider and narrower senses thread), there are several things which are often considered prog where I ask, How is this prog? Tool and their ilk (I haven't even found a decent term for that subgenre, everyone just calls it, IMHO utterly inappropriately, "prog metal", as if Dream Theater and Queensr˙che - the latter are IMHO borderline prog, BTW - did the same thing), tech metal (which essentially breaks down the prog formula to mere instrumental acrobatics, leaving the cynic-nihilistic outlook of extreme metal untouched), djent (more of the same) and math rock (idle play with numbers, skilful but say-nothing). Also, the various stripes of psychedelic and stoner rock (drawing out songs under the influence of psychedelic drugs is not the same as prog composition!). ------------- ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf "What does Elvish rock music sound like?" - "Yes." |
Posted By: Ancient_Mariner
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 09:23
|
The first Sabbath album seems fairly progressive. Later Maiden often gets called progressive by some due to the long songs and all that, but they are not that progressive since its a bit formulaic. Soft intro, long heavier middle section with too much repetition, then soft outro. Meh. I LOVE Maiden but nope. We will see this new one with some really long stuff and how it goes. I hope they learned their lessons from the past 3 albums. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 09:32
|
^Sabbath seem to fit to the prog related category just as well as Led Zep does, so it's a mystery to me why they are not included in PA too. Perhaps if they had some dots over the A in their name.
|
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 09:34
|
Sabbath are included in Prog Related. -------------
|
Posted By: twalsh
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 09:35
Cynic Tessaract Anathema Seriously, check out their lyrics. The umpteenth time I've seen your description of 'cynic-nihilistic outlook' in the last month and it's getting irritating. I think you're overstating the point, as there are a lot of exceptions. ------------- More heavy prog, please! |
Posted By: Ancient_Mariner
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 09:38
Maybe, but to me the songwriting on the first Sabbath album is much more prog than anything Zep did. They moved to more standard song structures but that first one is unique in the Sabbath discography. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 09:40
Don't complain, I'm just asking.
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 09:42
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 09:44
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 09:50
|
On another note, it's nice to see that this thread is an actual discussion and not a slug fest, with apologies to Raff, who I didn't know had such a hard and inexcusable time when she proposed BOC for inclusion to the Prog Related category years ago.
------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 10:05
Then ignore him;) If there's one thing this site has taught me then it's the fact that you can't change how people hear or see things in a music related discussion. Some don't believe metal has anything to do with prog (I'm not saying WE believes that - I seem to remember him thinking that DT were prog) while others feel The Grateful Dead are prog. Well people can believe what they chose - just like our collaborators can. It's just a matter of weeding out the nonsense (to you that is) from the gold....or merely accept that we hear things differently. ------------- The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 10:38
|
The Who belong here more than Zeppelin do......Zeppelin is a blues band with attitude. Zeppelin did nothing like Tommy or Quad. When you watch the bio about Quadrophenia, you get so much sense of what they were trying to do and how Pete describes the music and the lyrics and the inner play...Is that prog? dunno but it's highly interesting. There are more arguments to be made for bands NOT to be here than for bands to be here, we could include almost all bands here on PA. If you stick to the traditional 70's progressive rock recipe, not many bands would have been added after say 1985. Who was that member back in the day.....post 80, 85 music suxs!
-------------
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 10:41
|
^The Who are not included here? Wtf?
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 10:43
|
^Never mind. They are listed in Proto Prog. ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: twalsh
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 11:25
It wouldn't be any fun ignoring everything I don't like. Complaining can be fun. I don't even like most prog metal, finding it a little unrelenting at times and not liking harsh vocals. There's also frequently cheesy lyrics to sift through. But when it works, it REALLY works for me. ------------- More heavy prog, please! |
Posted By: Ancient_Mariner
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 12:26
|
I like my prog with balls, which is why I love 70's Rush and Opeth. Most stuff that is called progressive metal just doesn't do it for me though. Dream Theater puts me to sleep. I do love Tool though they were not very prog at the start. Been checking out Fates Warning and so far so good. |
Posted By: Rednight
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 12:36
|
Klaatu. Too mambily-pambily saccharine for my liking. ------------- "It just has none of the qualities of your work that I find interesting. Abandon [?] it." - Eno |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 15:07
 Klaatu! Nah-nah! Nah-nah! They're listed in PA and you can't do anything about it. So there. |
Posted By: GKR
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 15:37
What was that!? ------------- - From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 13 2015 at 15:53
| ^Just me being a nambie pambie, or whatever expression Rednight used. |
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: August 14 2015 at 09:19
Anything that's not really prog but still well liked by the collabs ends up in either proto prog or prog related. ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 14 2015 at 12:48
|
Yes, it seems that there's prog and everything else that's cool is related. Somehow.
|
Posted By: WeepingElf
Date Posted: August 14 2015 at 14:39
|
I openly admit that my position regarding "misuse" of the word "prog" is a minority one here (it isn't at the progressive rock round table here in this city). But I have realized something. There is another thing that has been bugging me about current prog: its stagnation. There hasn't been much new stuff which went beyond what has been there in the mid-90s. Dream Theater and Marillion, for instance, more or less do the same things now they did 20 years ago. Now, both the "misuse of the word" and the "stagnation" set in at about the same time, namely in the mid-90s! So it looks as if they are two sides of the same coin: it is just that prog has advanced past the point to which I was ready to follow back then. I am thus a similar old fogey as those who are into 70s symph-prog and can't chew neo-prog, only with a much later cut-off point, in a way. Still, I feel that what happened at that cut-off point in the mid-90s was so tremendous that I still have a hard time wrapping my head around it, but well, things change. ------------- ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf "What does Elvish rock music sound like?" - "Yes." |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 15 2015 at 04:46
see here for the various "for and against" arguments: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=55114" rel="nofollow - www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=55114 - their move from PR to Crossover was not a decision that was taken lightly - the Xover team at the time (Micky, Chris S and myself) took note of the posts in that thread, discussed it at length and then proposed the move to the Admin team, who in turn gave their approval. Shortly after that a similar proposal to move Muse from PR to Xover following the release of The Resistance (the album with the "Exogenesis Symphony") was rejected by the Xover team. In retrospect, (6 years later), I believe we made the right decision on both bands. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 15 2015 at 04:50
If this was the case the PR and PP would have more bands than all the "wholly prog" subgenres added together... and we'd have to change the site name to Rate Your Music Archives. ------------- What? |
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: August 15 2015 at 11:47
We might as well change it to that. ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |