... god I hope I posted this in the right part of the forum

Interesting. When I see the Big Six mentioned I have no doubt about what people mean. ELP, KC, PF, Yes, Genesis, Jethro Tull, in no particular order. I'm not saying that's my choice (although I'm by and large fine with it, even if there's only one overlap with my personal Big Five), and neither am I saying it should be like this, but I'm pretty sure that's the one and only Big Six for those in the know. (If you don't want it to be these by the way, there is no reason to make it six, or to fix any number at all.) 

Genesis

Pink Floyd

King Crimson

ELP

Gentle Giant

To my understanding these are the big six. I didn't include Jethro Tull because then it would be unfair to the Moody Blues. GG were more firmly a prog band so they get my vote instead. I was tempted to add Rush but they didn't really make their mark until a bit later so they are not really part of the first wave. Also, this is not a list of personal favorites for me and I hope no one treats it that way.

No order:

Yes

ELP

King Crimson

Genesis

Jethro Tull

Pink Floyd

Yes - 52 points

King Crimson - 48 points

Genesis - 31 points

ELP - 27 points

Pink Floyd - 22 points

Jethro Tull - 21 points

As of now the rankings seem pretty predictable, but who knows if PFM will come back from 2 points so save the day!!! Yes and King Crimson are the clear top picks right out of the gate with Floyd a little farther back than I would have expected this early on. 

This is how I understand the Big Six, no matter how the numbers add up. Clearly there are other excellent bands of influence, and everybody seems to have a personal favorite whether on this list or not, but these are the ones that stand out.

this type of thing has been talked about a lot here.....

2 Pink Floyd

3 Genesis

4 King Crimson

5 Gentle Giant

6 Jethro Tull

Yes

Jethro Tull

ELP

Genesis 

King Crimson 

Pink Floyd

Genesis

Yes

King Crimson

ELP

Rush

1. Pink Floyd

2. Genesis

3. Yes

4. ELP

5. Jethro Tull

6. King Crimson

So for the purpose of trying to define what they are, I'll say this is the order of both importance and commercial success:

1. Yes

2. Pink Floyd

3. King Crimson

4. Jethro Tull

5. Genesis

6. Emerson, Lake, & Palmer

and here is a list of six which would probably make my personal big six:

1. Rush

2. Genesis

3. Pink Floyd

4. Yes

5. King Crimson

6. Premiata Forneria Marconi

Pink Floyd

Genesis

Supertramp

Rush

Jethro Tull

King Crimson

If you want to rank bands by their influence and importance - fine. Most will be inevitably be 70s bands due to that being the heyday of prog.

There's a group that were undeniably the most influential and commercially successful:

Pink Floyd, Genesis, Yes, Jethro Tull and possibly ELP and Rush, 

There's a small group that were extremely influential but somewhat less commercially successful, probably epitomised mainly by King Crimson.

There's a group which were below the top tier in terms of influence and sales, but still had a large fanbase and had albums in the UK and US charts, like Manfred Mann's Earthband, Camel, Strawbs, Renaissance, Uriah Heep, Barclay James Harvest and Focus.

Then there's the cult bands who never really achieved major sales or chart success like Gryphon, Gentle Giant, Caravan and VDGG, though the latter seem much more popular now than in the 70s, where they were a fairly minor band. (Despite being at university right through the 70s and being heavily into prog, I never met anyone who, to my knowledge, owned a VDGG album and they were never discussed as being particularly significant, having never had a top 40 UK album. Now they seem to have many more fans than then).

Each can have his/her own "Big Six" if they wish. I'm simply not bothered. I have my own favourites and which bands others think are the "biggest" is of no consequence to me.

Why does Pink Floyd always worm it's way into this discussion.

They were a Psychedelic and then a Pop rock or maybe a Symphonic rock band, not a progressive band.

I guess I equate Prog Rock more with the Classical and Jazz influenced stuff than just the freaky stuff.

Don't get me wrong, I love Floyd, but never considered then a prog rock band.

Like the Nice, maybe they did things differently in their approach than most bands at the time which might be argued that made them progressive. I find that a bit of a stretch.

I look at these band lists as the one's that influenced more than anything, and continue to influence today. A definitive list is tough because you get everyone's favs that are usually obscure, cult type bands that really were never global. I really like Hercules post BTW! .

2. Rush

3. Pink Floyd

4. Yes

5. King Crimson

6. ELP

These are the bands I used in these threads on the most famous/most successful bands threads I posted a while ago, which you might be interested in. 

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=123405

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=123705

in no specific order:

Van der Graaf Generator

Magma

Gong

Amon Düül II

Embryo

Can

That's my understanding too. When I hear the Big Six, those are the six I assume people mean. Again, not a matter of personal preferences, I've just assumed those are the six we mean.

Yes, it was.

You could make a fairly convincing argument on the influence VDGG had on a pile of artists, some pretty successful. As for the rest, they strike me as being your favourites, which is not the question being asked. The remaining 5 were influential in their own, pretty small, circle. As far as the outside world was concerned, they were as influential as my wiping my arse of a morning.

If you might consider that Progressive Rock started from Psychedelia in the UK, then you could perhaps name the following as amongst the most influential:

For early Progressive Rock, hence most influential in the creation of this genre, you then might have the following 6:

Member of the big 10 might be more appropriate as there are for sure several other names that could be added.

Same, and I can't imagine a "Big" anything without Tangerine Dream.

I do think it would be interesting to poll actual musicians in prog to list their top [insert whatever number] bands or artists that have influenced their music. I suspect that "big six" might be a better clue on which bands have been the most influential.

and Embryo were more or less the inventors of World Music

 

But even so, those groups do not compare to Pink Floyd, Genesis, Yes, ELP, Jethro Tull, King Crimson as far as THE Big Six are concerned.

 

 

 

So, my answer to the OP's question of who THE Big Six are, without regard to my own personal preferences, is:

 

1. Pink Floyd

2. Genesis

3. Yes

4. ELP

5. Jethro Tull

6. King Crimson

 

 

 

it depends on what criteria you use for the definition of "Big Six". my criteria happen to be different from the criteria of most others

> Pink Floyd: Brought many many people to prog including me (together with Manfred Mann's Earth Band) and many of my friends. More progressive most of the time than 95% of what people who don't want to see PF in the list call "real prog".

> Can: Well done Jose mentioning them! @lazland: You apparently have no idea how many 80s and later musicians name them as major influence. I'd say you find clearly more than for Yes, Jethro Tull, or ELP.  

BTW, if you ask rateyourmusic for the top progressive rock albums according to user ratings, the top 10 are 4 Pink Floyd, 3 Can, 2 King Crimson, and 1 Yes.

 

There is only one "THE Big Six" (with uppercase definite article to emphasise uniqueness). And the criteria of most others is the correct criteria for that.

 

 

Fixed. 

Kanye West 

Snoop Dog 

Janet Jackson 

Lady Gaga 

Insane Clown Posse 

....I teach middle school, and the kids have no idea what we are talking about, nor me about their choice most of the time.  It makes for interesting conversations!  I turned a few kids onto Yes, they dug it. 

Think this list makes a lot of sense.

Other than people on this site, which is not many anymore, virtually nobody could describe anything about it...More influential from a world perspective in Space Rock would be Hawkwind.

I don't think anyone is discounting them I just think some people don't consider them prog or prog enough maybe. 

As for ELP they were big but aside from King Crimson they were the only major prog band who didn't have any platinum albums(all of their 70's albums went gold but that's it). 

That doesn't mean much. They were still very much part of the first wave of prog. Also, you could argue that things started to go downhill after 1974 anyway.

Nice list but I personally would have hard time having a list of 8 bands from the first wave that didn't include Gentle Giant. I'm not sure why so many people on here neglect them. Could it be an age thing?

And thus 'prog'.

Oh fantastic 

I'll take Discipline through The Power To Believe 100 times out of 100 ahead of:-

Going For The One onward

And Then There Were 3 onward

Works Vol 1 onward

Animals onward

Exactly how many times have Yes broken up and reformed?

 

No, what you stated was '"Prog" was the most popular in 1975-1977'. Your words. It was not. Throwing in asinine qualifiers like "symphonic rock" does not mean a thing, because we are talking prog as a an overall qualification, not parsing. In fact, from a popularity of prog standpoint, the height was 1973, when three different prog albums went to #1: The Moody Blues' Seventh Sojourn, Jethro Tull's A Passion Play, and Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon. No other year had that many prog albums reach the top. 

The Dark Elf wrote: Actually, no, prog was not the most popular in 1975-1977. I don't know what turnip truck you fell off of, but you are unequivocally wrong.  Thick as a Brick and A Passion Play went to #1 in the US in 1972 and 1973 (a year prior, in 1971, Aqualung was top ten in both the U.S. and the UK, Living in the Past was also top ten in '72, and in '74 War Child went to #2 in the States). Fragile, Close to the Edge, Tales from Topographic Oceans and Relayer were all top ten albums in 71, 72, 73 and 74. Tarkus and Trilogy were top ten in both the U.S. and the UK in 1971 and '72 (with Brain Salad Surgery falling just outside the top ten at #11 in '73).  Both Dark Side of the Moon (1973) and Wish You Were Here (1975) were #1 albums -- and neither were "psychedelic".  They were prog.  So, four of the alleged "Top Six" had their greatest selling albums between 1971 and 1975, not thereafter. Hilariously, Genesis did not have a top ten album in the states until ABACAB.

 

The Dark Elf wrote: No, what you stated was '"Prog" was the most popular in 1975-1977'. Your words. It was not. Throwing in asinine qualifiers like "symphonic rock" does not mean a thing, because we are talking prog as a an overall qualification, not parsing. In fact, from a popularity of prog standpoint, the height was 1973, when three different prog albums went to #1: The Moody Blues' Seventh Sojourn, Jethro Tull's A Passion Play, and Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon. No other year had that many prog albums reach the top.

 

Boboulo wrote: I'm afraid that your presentation of figures didn't impress me. The popularity of a genre always was something more than just numbers of records sold. So I repeat once again: in its history, "Symphonic rock" was the most popular when two generations of its fans met, i.e. in the mid-Seventies.

The word "popularity" must mean something different in Serbia. A genre reaches its height in "popularity" when it sells the most albums, hence it is "popular". For instance, Psychedelia was most popular from 1966 to 1969, and albums that were psychedelic tended to end up in the top ten in sales, and every band was on the bandwagon, from The Beatles to the Stones to the Doors and Hendrix; that was no longer the case by 1970, and the genre petered out. The same can be said of punk when it quickly died out and was sanitized into New Wave.

Prog's greatest popularity was from 1971 to 1975, when more prog albums were purchased by more people than at any other time in music history. It is a fact, and numbers can back it up.

Again, your diversion into Symphonic Rock babble doesn't mean a hill of beans.

Eloy

Yes

King Crimson

PFM

Kansas

I like the way you think. I'd be willing to go with that sextet, only I'd add Tangerine Dream (they spawned countless knockoffs, along with former member Klaus Schulze) in lieu of PFM.

Dark Side of the Moon, WYWH and Animals are not psychedelic albums, Svetonio. We didn't refer to them as psychedelic when they were released, and neither did reviewers. 

Psychedelia was passe by then and no one referred to music as such by the mid-70s (not if you wanted to sell albums). In fact, none of those albums bore any of the traits The Pink Floyd had when they released psychedelic albums like Piper at the Gates of Dawn, Saucerful of Secrets, More or Ummagumma.

But just to show you that you have no idea what you are talking about, here is the first paragraph of the review from Rolling Stone in October, 1973 found here...

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-album-reviews/dark-side-of-the-moon-255381/

One of Britain’s most successful and long lived avant-garde rock bands,  https://www.rollingstone.com/t/pink-floyd/" rel="nofollow - Pink Floyd  emerged relatively unsullied from the mire of mid-Sixties British psychedelic music as early experimenters with outer space concepts. Although that phase of the band’s development was of short duration, Pink Floyd have from that time been the pop scene’s preeminent techno-rockers: four musicians with a command of electronic instruments who wield an arsenal of sound effects with authority and finesse. 

Please note the condescending nature the author of the piece had for psychedelia. Note also that the author infers that Pink Floyd had progressed beyond that juvenile stage of their development. 

BIG 6 WAVES

Wave 1 = Big 6 Forefathers: Beatles, The Who, Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix, Cream and Pink Floyd

Wave 2 - 1st Proggers (1969/1970): Moody Blues, Family, Pink Floyd, Jethro Tull, The Nice, King Crimson

Wave 3 - Established Proggers (1971 -1973): Yes, ELP, Pink Floyd, Focus, Mike Oldfield, Roxy Music

I would throw Genesis into a Wave 4 all be it for a short time before they changed to Pop Music.  Also Hawkwind would be a strong consideration for Wave 3.

It does seem that the big era for Progressive rock was between 1969 and 1973.  In 1974 it was already declining in the UK.  But it was around this time that it started to really take hold around the world as people were listening to the Albums created between 1969 and 1973.

Anyway that is all just my opinion.

Best regards

You do realize that Alex Young, who founded Consequence of Sound in 2007, was not even born when Dark Side of the Moon was released. 

Svetonio, this is what happens you bring Ramen noodles to an intellectual gunfight. I offered an actual, contemporary review of the album from THE major rock magazine in 1973 (and Rolling Stone was, at the time), you offered a title of an article written by a guy who wasn't even born yet.

https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/nirvana-smells-like-teen-spirit-weird-cover-paul-anka/" rel="nofollow - It’s the kind of determination and wit that has seen Gilmour not only become an icon with his https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/author/far-out-staff/" rel="nofollow - Far Out Staff ·August 22, 2020

The Dark Elf wrote: I offered an actual, contemporary review of the album from THE major rock magazine in 1973 (and Rolling Stone was, at the time),

https://www.rollingstone.com/feature/pink-floyds-dark-side-of-the-moon-10-things-you-didnt-know-201743/" rel="nofollow - - Pink Floyd’s ‘Dark Side of the Moon’: 10 Things You Didn’t Know - - Paul McCartney’s scrapped cameo, a Silver Surfer cover concept and other factors that played into the band’s 1973

Your link brings up a Paul Anka article. Paul Anka was neither psychedelic or prog. Although the song "Having My Baby" was definitely weird. Needless to say, your article (once I found it) is from 2020, and the characterization that Gilmour is a psychedelic guitarist is incorrect on the part of whatever 12 year old wrote the piece.

Nearly every music site I looked at makes a clear delineation from THE Pink Floyd the psychedelic band, and Pink Floyd the progressive rock band. This is particularly true when reviewing albums from DSotM and onward, where the music is denoted as prog and not psychedelic....

ProgArchives

RateYourMusic (Prog Rock is the main header for DSotM and WYWH, and on Animals any mention of psych disappears altogether)

Prog Ears

All Music

Rolling Stone (50 Greatest Prog Albums lists Animals #13, Wish You Were Here #4 and DSotM #1)... 

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-lists/50-greatest-prog-rock-albums-of-all-time-78793/" rel="nofollow - https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-lists/50-greatest-prog-rock-albums-of-all-time-78793/

loudersound

popmatters

discogs

digitaldreamdoor

vinylworld

Scaruffi

Even Wikipedia. Yes, even Wikipedia.

In fact, look up every "Greatest Albums of Prog" list and Pink Floyd albums are there. Now, look up the "Greatest Psychedelic Albums of All Time" and every list has Piper at the Gates of Dawn or Ummagumma, but not Dark Side of the Moon, WYWH or Animals. EVERY LIST. NME, Rolling Stone, Pitchfork, DigitalDreamDoor --even a site called PSYCHEDELIC SIGHT only mentions pre-DSotM albums on its list. 

Here is an article that describes the transformation (and that is not about Paul Anka):

https://www.popmatters.com/171044-pink-floyd-the-prog-rock-archetype-2495760169.html" rel="nofollow - https://www.popmatters.com/171044-pink-floyd-the-prog-rock-archetype-2495760169.html

@The Dark Elf

OMG!

https://societyofrock.com/the-7-psychedelic-songs-from-pink-floyd/" rel="nofollow -

Do you even read the articles you post, Svetonio? Or are you back to just posting nonsense over and over again like the last time you were banned? The article lists 7 songs. All of these songs predate Dark Side of the Moon. The 7 songs are all from Floyd's psychedelic period, although one could say that "Echoes" was leaning toward prog.

OMG, what a maroon.

https://www.rollingstone.com/feature/pink-floyds-dark-side-of-the-moon-10-things-you-didnt-know-201743/" rel="nofollow - Pink Floyd’s - the band’s 1973 psychedelic masterpiece

true...

@ The Dark Elf

Glad you picked up on who this is........I just started reading these posts and thought...."hmm I smell something familiar, reminiscent of large patties in a cow field". 

Best to leave him to his ramblings, I've warned people over at Steve Hoffman Forums about his odor too....

1 Pink Floyd

2 Brian Eno

3 Can

4 Radiohead

5 The Mothers of Invention

6 Faust

Also somebody had mentioned that all of KC albums went gold...not in the US.  Only in the Court did.  I remember when it happened too.  1977, I heard it on the radio.  The announcers noted that it took 8 years to go gold, which is longer than most albums stayed in print even back then!  Apparently it eventually went platinum

https://www.riaa.com/?s=king+crimson

@The Dark Elf

gosh!

https://pfco.neptunepinkfloyd.co.uk/band/interviews/djg/djgcash.html" rel="nofollow - - Q: Who did you hate most out of Genesis, E.L.P., Yes or King Crimson?
(C.T.-Stevenage)

Wow, I guess I did not know it took 8yrs to go Gold, I would have guessed by '73.

Frank Zappa isn't a band. I have nothing against him but he's a solo artist. If you included him you would also have to include Mike Oldfield, Rick Wakeman, Peter Gabriel and maybe a few others. Otherwise it's just a list of your personal favorites. Nothing wrong with that but I don't think that was the task requested.

As for GG they are one of the most important bands whether you think so or not. They are usually ranked just after King Crimson as far as importance goes(ie number one of the "second tier" bands). A lot of people on this site don't seem to agree(maybe it's an age thing)so you aren't the only one but that doesn't change their place in the history of prog. 

I'm typically the only one(that I know of)who talks about gold and platinum albums(and sales in general)on here but this time it wasn't me. Anyway, "court" was released in 69 but didn't go gold until 77 so yeah 8 years. So far it's the only album of theirs to be certified gold. No other albums of theirs have. However, I'd be willing to bet the "court" has gone platinum by now(over 40 years after it has been certified gold)or at the very least is very close to it(maybe 900,000 albums sold) especially with all the attention it has received in prog circles and even beyond in the past ten years or so. The RIAA, however, doesn't always keep close tabs on album sales and from what I understand they usually won't check an albums sales figures unless the label requests it.

I'm not home this week, but I'd like to look thru my Prog Magazine issue that was the Top 100 Progressive Bands survey, maybe its online. I think the issue came out 2 yrs ago??

I'd like to see where GG placed.....I have tried to listen to them, that baroque chamber style music is not my cup of tea. So I really have no opinion of them....

My main reason for having GG as part of the big six is because when I used to go on the progressive ears website and they did those big five or big six lists at least 80 percent of the members on there had GG in their top six if not top five. While I don't care for their over all community and snobbery they definitely know their prog and if they place GG that high up that consistently then you know there's a good reason for it. Also, GG used to regularly fill large theaters of at least two thousand seats and at one point(according to one of the GG members) were about as big as Genesis before Genesis became more popular and "sold out." Also, over time they have become at least as respected in prog circles as ELP if not more so.

Ohh Bro, believe I know.....Early days here I talked RIAA sales figures but really nobody cares here when your talking about lists of "best bands" that always turns out to be lists of "favorite bands", sales means doo-doo squat here LOL! Especially when people stream so much now they forgot how to buy a CD, Record and now Cassette tapes that are gaining huge popularity.

One thing for sure is you cannot argue against record sales, I mean the Fab Four suck, but they sold a boat load of records .

I don't doubt it.....I don't do PE, never did really. But its common that a magazine should reach a much larger audience, so it might...might be a bit more definitive, as well subjective. I think DT were in the top 12, I hope I remember to look when I get home Friday. But remember I am sure there are tons that don't think Pink Floyd should be on any prog list ....so

Every band thinks they are bigger than the other band..... But if GG makes it then CAN should be there too