Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=124024 Printed Date: January 15 2025 at 10:06 Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: How about progressive pop as another sub-genre?Posted By: A Crimson Mellotron
Subject: How about progressive pop as another sub-genre?
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 05:57
Quite a lot of the 80s rock and pop output could fit into this (Peter Gabriel, Phil Collins, Genesis, Yes, Kate Bush), and even more recent albums could (To the Bone, The Future Bites)?
Replies: Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 05:58
A Crimson Mellotron wrote:
Quite a lot of the 80s rock and pop output could fit into this (Peter Gabriel, Phil Collins, Genesis, Yes, Kate Bush), and even more recent albums could (To the Bone, The Future Bites)?
what's wrong with the subgenre they are in right now?
why change?
Posted By: A Crimson Mellotron
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 06:06
Nothing wrong at all. It's just that, for example, Wilson's music has changed, also Opeth have changed, and yet they are put in some category that does not really reveal much about what is actually going on.
As for progressive pop, I guess it could be interesting to see what bands do other forum members think would fit in?
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 06:09
A Crimson Mellotron wrote:
Nothing wrong at all. It's just that, for example, Wilson's music has changed, also Opeth have changed, and yet they are put in some category that does not really reveal much about what is actually going on.
As for progressive pop, I guess it could be interesting to see what bands do other forum members think would fit in?
yeah, bands are tagged on PA and not albums. We can't change that.
Funny thing, a lot of times what people call progressive pop is not pop at all. Most of that music was not even present in the mainstream.
Also not everything that is catchy is pop music.
Posted By: FatherChristmas
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 06:51
Cristi wrote:
A Crimson Mellotron wrote:
Nothing wrong at all. It's just that, for example, Wilson's music has changed, also Opeth have changed, and yet they are put in some category that does not really reveal much about what is actually going on.
As for progressive pop, I guess it could be interesting to see what bands do other forum members think would fit in?
yeah, bands are tagged on PA and not albums. We can't change that.
Funny thing, a lot of times what people call progressive pop is not pop at all. Most of that music was not even present in the mainstream.
Also not everything that is catchy is pop music.
Yes - pop is just what is popular at the time.
------------- "Music is the wine that fills the cup of silence" - Robert Fripp "I am an anti-Christ" - Johnny Rotten
Posted By: Nogbad_The_Bad
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 07:03
I don't think Led Zeppelin were ever 'pop'
------------- Ian
Host of the Post-Avant Jazzcore Happy Hour on Progrock.com
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 07:08
Nogbad_The_Bad wrote:
I don't think Led Zeppelin were ever 'pop'
what is pop music anymore?
No matter how I try to define it, it makes less and less sense.
Does pop music include whatever music is popular? Then Led Zep is pop, and so is Slayer.
Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ?
Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 07:18
We already have a sub-genre that is synonymous with "progressive pop"... it's called "Crossover Prog".
------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
Posted By: FatherChristmas
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 07:23
Cristi wrote:
Nogbad_The_Bad wrote:
I don't think Led Zeppelin were ever 'pop'
what is pop music anymore?
No matter how I try to define it, it makes less and less sense.
Does pop music include whatever music is popular? Then Led Zep is pop, and so is Slayer.
Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ?
Led Zeppelin were popular, so yes, they made pop music. It just isn't very popular these days.
"Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ? "
Yep, pretty much.
------------- "Music is the wine that fills the cup of silence" - Robert Fripp "I am an anti-Christ" - Johnny Rotten
Posted By: Nogbad_The_Bad
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 07:25
I prophesy disaster wrote:
We already have a sub-genre that is synonymous with "progressive pop"... it's called "Crossover Prog".
This correct.
------------- Ian
Host of the Post-Avant Jazzcore Happy Hour on Progrock.com
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 07:42
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
Nogbad_The_Bad wrote:
I don't think Led Zeppelin were ever 'pop'
what is pop music anymore?
No matter how I try to define it, it makes less and less sense.
Does pop music include whatever music is popular? Then Led Zep is pop, and so is Slayer.
Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ?
Led Zeppelin were popular, so yes, they made pop music. It just isn't very popular these days.
"Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ? "
Yep, pretty much.
No, Led Zep never were a "pop" band in the sense of making singles for the top 30 market. They were popular yes, but pop, no way.
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 07:46
chopper wrote:
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
Nogbad_The_Bad wrote:
I don't think Led Zeppelin were ever 'pop'
what is pop music anymore?
No matter how I try to define it, it makes less and less sense.
Does pop music include whatever music is popular? Then Led Zep is pop, and so is Slayer.
Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ?
Led Zeppelin were popular, so yes, they made pop music. It just isn't very popular these days.
"Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ? "
Yep, pretty much.
No, Led Zep never were a "pop" band in the sense of making singles for the top 30 market. They were popular yes, but pop, no way.
like I said, what is pop music anymore?
even worse, what is progressive pop?
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 07:59
I personally wouldn't add any more subgenres. There's still too many ATM IMHO.
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 09:46
No. We don't need reviews of Phil Collins' solo albums.
------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Posted By: FatherChristmas
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 10:24
SteveG wrote:
No. We don't need reviews of Phil Collins' solo albums.
True - and I personally think that there is no such thing as prog pop. It's just artists/bands who started out as prog rock going in a more pop direction, and bands who say they started out as prog pop are really art pop bands - art pop and prog pop effectively have the same definitions.
Prog pop was originally what prog rock bands were called in the 60s, probably because rock was pop back then - they were synonyms. Note the "probably", I know it's highly debatable.
------------- "Music is the wine that fills the cup of silence" - Robert Fripp "I am an anti-Christ" - Johnny Rotten
Posted By: Psychedelic Paul
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 10:31
On the presumption that Progressive Pop is another name for Art Pop, I think Kate Bush is one of the best-known artists in that particular genre, although I agree with Cristi for once and don't feel there's any need to create more work by adding yet another genre to the already extensive list of PA prog genres.
Posted By: FatherChristmas
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 10:31
Cristi wrote:
chopper wrote:
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
[QUOTE=Nogbad_The_Bad]I don't think Led Zeppelin were ever 'pop'
what is pop music anymore?
No matter how I try to define it, it makes less and less sense.
Does pop music include whatever music is popular? Then Led Zep is pop, and so is Slayer.
Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ?
Led Zeppelin were popular, so yes, they made pop music. It just isn't very popular these days.
"Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ? "
Yep, pretty much.
No, Led Zep never were a "pop" band in the sense of making singles for the top 30 market. They were popular yes, but pop, no way.
Ok, they didn't neccesarily make hugely successful singles, but does that really mean they weren't pop? I feel pop is far too much of a discredit round here. After all, Pink Floyd was really popular, but why are they not considered pop? Because prog fans don't like pop music and think it's the most disgusting thing on Earth?
------------- "Music is the wine that fills the cup of silence" - Robert Fripp "I am an anti-Christ" - Johnny Rotten
Posted By: FatherChristmas
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 10:34
Psychedelic Paul wrote:
On the presumption that Progressive Pop is another name for Art Pop, I think Kate Bush is one of the best-known artists in that particular genre, although I agree with Cristi for once and don't feel there's any need to create more work by adding yet another genre to the already extensive list of PA prog genres.
Yes, on the whole, no need. Kate Bush is here already anyway.
------------- "Music is the wine that fills the cup of silence" - Robert Fripp "I am an anti-Christ" - Johnny Rotten
Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 10:34
Progressive pop would be more or less the same thing as crossover prog.
Posted By: FatherChristmas
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 10:39
^I suppose so. Duke should be categorised as crossover here (I think) for the combination of prog, pop, jazz and symphonic rock, so you could argue there's prog pop in that album. I still don't think it's a proper sub-genre though.
------------- "Music is the wine that fills the cup of silence" - Robert Fripp "I am an anti-Christ" - Johnny Rotten
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 10:43
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
chopper wrote:
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
[QUOTE=Nogbad_The_Bad]I don't think Led Zeppelin were ever 'pop'
what is pop music anymore?
No matter how I try to define it, it makes less and less sense.
Does pop music include whatever music is popular? Then Led Zep is pop, and so is Slayer.
Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ?
Led Zeppelin were popular, so yes, they made pop music. It just isn't very popular these days.
"Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ? "
Yep, pretty much.
No, Led Zep never were a "pop" band in the sense of making singles for the top 30 market. They were popular yes, but pop, no way.
Ok, they didn't neccesarily make hugely successful singles, but does that really mean they weren't pop? I feel pop is far too much of a discredit round here. After all, Pink Floyd was really popular, but why are they not considered pop? Because prog fans don't like pop music and think it's the most disgusting thing on Earth?
Some years ago, there was another term circulating for "pop" music in some parts of Europe, whose translation to English would be " light" or "easy" music.Easy as in easy to comprehend, for everyone (no offense there).
If pop is short for popular, then there are popular jazz artists, prog, blues, rock, hard rock, all sort of metal, etc.
And then there is the mainstream world...
so wtf is pop music? I for one am clueless.
Posted By: FatherChristmas
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 10:48
Cristi wrote:
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
chopper wrote:
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
[QUOTE=Nogbad_The_Bad]I don't think Led Zeppelin were ever 'pop'
what is pop music anymore?
No matter how I try to define it, it makes less and less sense.
Does pop music include whatever music is popular? Then Led Zep is pop, and so is Slayer.
Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ?
Led Zeppelin were popular, so yes, they made pop music. It just isn't very popular these days.
"Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ? "
Yep, pretty much.
No, Led Zep never were a "pop" band in the sense of making singles for the top 30 market. They were popular yes, but pop, no way.
Ok, they didn't neccesarily make hugely successful singles, but does that really mean they weren't pop? I feel pop is far too much of a discredit round here. After all, Pink Floyd was really popular, but why are they not considered pop? Because prog fans don't like pop music and think it's the most disgusting thing on Earth?
Some years ago, there was another term circulating for "pop" music in some parts of Europe, whose translation to English would be " light" or "easy" music.Easy as in easy to comprehend, for everyone (no offense there).
If pop is short for popular, then there are popular jazz artists, prog, blues, rock, hard rock, all sort of metal, etc.
And then there is the mainstream world...
so wtf is pop music? I for one am clueless.
All right, Cristi, you've got me there! I'm not sure what I mean myself anymore!
Was the "easy" music in Europe by any chance "easy listening"?
------------- "Music is the wine that fills the cup of silence" - Robert Fripp "I am an anti-Christ" - Johnny Rotten
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 10:50
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
chopper wrote:
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
[QUOTE=Nogbad_The_Bad]I don't think Led Zeppelin were ever 'pop'
what is pop music anymore?
No matter how I try to define it, it makes less and less sense.
Does pop music include whatever music is popular? Then Led Zep is pop, and so is Slayer.
Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ?
Led Zeppelin were popular, so yes, they made pop music. It just isn't very popular these days.
"Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ? "
Yep, pretty much.
No, Led Zep never were a "pop" band in the sense of making singles for the top 30 market. They were popular yes, but pop, no way.
Ok, they didn't neccesarily make hugely successful singles, but does that really mean they weren't pop? I feel pop is far too much of a discredit round here. After all, Pink Floyd was really popular, but why are they not considered pop? Because prog fans don't like pop music and think it's the most disgusting thing on Earth?
Some years ago, there was another term circulating for "pop" music in some parts of Europe, whose translation to English would be " light" or "easy" music.Easy as in easy to comprehend, for everyone (no offense there).
If pop is short for popular, then there are popular jazz artists, prog, blues, rock, hard rock, all sort of metal, etc.
And then there is the mainstream world...
so wtf is pop music? I for one am clueless.
All right, Cristi, you've got me there! I'm not sure what I mean myself anymore!
Was the "easy" music in Europe by any chance "easy listening"?
no, it was not "easy listening".
Posted By: FatherChristmas
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 10:57
Cristi wrote:
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
chopper wrote:
FatherChristmas wrote:
Cristi wrote:
[QUOTE=Nogbad_The_Bad]I don't think Led Zeppelin were ever 'pop'
what is pop music anymore?
No matter how I try to define it, it makes less and less sense.
Does pop music include whatever music is popular? Then Led Zep is pop, and so is Slayer.
Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ?
Led Zeppelin were popular, so yes, they made pop music. It just isn't very popular these days.
"Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ? "
Yep, pretty much.
No, Led Zep never were a "pop" band in the sense of making singles for the top 30 market. They were popular yes, but pop, no way.
Ok, they didn't neccesarily make hugely successful singles, but does that really mean they weren't pop? I feel pop is far too much of a discredit round here. After all, Pink Floyd was really popular, but why are they not considered pop? Because prog fans don't like pop music and think it's the most disgusting thing on Earth?
Some years ago, there was another term circulating for "pop" music in some parts of Europe, whose translation to English would be " light" or "easy" music.Easy as in easy to comprehend, for everyone (no offense there).
If pop is short for popular, then there are popular jazz artists, prog, blues, rock, hard rock, all sort of metal, etc.
And then there is the mainstream world...
so wtf is pop music? I for one am clueless.
All right, Cristi, you've got me there! I'm not sure what I mean myself anymore!
Was the "easy" music in Europe by any chance "easy listening"?
no, it was not "easy listening".
Ah, ok then. I'd rather listen to easy listening than so-called prog pop myself, though.
------------- "Music is the wine that fills the cup of silence" - Robert Fripp "I am an anti-Christ" - Johnny Rotten
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 10:59
FatherChristmas wrote:
Ah, ok then. I'd rather listen to easy listening than so-called prog pop myself, though.
if prog-pop is what we (already) call crossover prog or prog-related, there's plenty of interesting music.
Posted By: A Crimson Mellotron
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 11:38
Cristi wrote:
Nogbad_The_Bad wrote:
I don't think Led Zeppelin were ever 'pop'
what is pop music anymore?
No matter how I try to define it, it makes less and less sense.
Does pop music include whatever music is popular? Then Led Zep is pop, and so is Slayer.
Does pop mean whatever is mainstream? Trendy or trending... ?
You are tremendously right here. I also have some hard time defining it.
Posted By: A Crimson Mellotron
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 11:44
SteveG wrote:
No. We don't need reviews of Phil Collins' solo albums.
LOL
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 11:55
As an easy rule of thumb, Dancing Queen by Abba is a pop song. Just combine prog with that.
------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 12:06
While I'm aware that the "progressive pop" tag seems to be more or less recognized and accepted, this label is rather dubious to me: art pop, art rock, experimental pop, avant pop... It looks like this "sub-genre" is more a vague flair among ambitious pop/rock musicians than a whole genre in se with fully estabished musical characteristics.
By the way, the people of the Rate Your Music Ultimate Box Set project made a list about progressive pop:
Most of the artists of this list are already in the PA database as "Prog Related" or "Proto Prog". So, I'm not sure we need another subgenre tag - unless we're ready to enter the "Ever Expanding Heavy Metal Subgenres Spiral"!
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 14:15
Without quoting a whole load of the Led Zep posts and taking up a whole page of posts, I would point out to you all that Zep did actually make singles for the pop market. It just so happened that they did this primarily in America, not Britain. However, they did release Whole Lotta Love in Britain, and pulled it as a marketing wheeze in order to capture the cool zeitgeist of the time. Ironically, that song went on to become the iconic theme tune to Top of the Pops, the major UK chart singles show of the time.
Led Zep, Yes, ELP, Deep Purple, The Who, and many others did, in fact, have singles success. They were pop acts, in the sense that pop is a short hand for popular music. They sold albums and singles by the truckload. Which is why I have always been a wee bit perplexed by the aversion to commercial success by so called prog purists. At the time, this lot were the most commercially successful acts on planet Earth.
------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org
Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 14:43
As already mentioned, we have Crossover Prog, and progressive pop and pop-rock (as a sort of pop "sound"/ poppy musical qualities rather than just meaning popular) can found across categories. Such a category for this progressive rock site is unneeded imo. Making we wonder if we should add Stereolab and Pram again, though. And Serge Gainsbourg (One I would have pushed if not for the big discography -- Histoire de Melody Nelson and Cannabis rock).
By thw way, I wrote a long post here trying to go into the meanings of the word pop: based on my research and understanding http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=122757" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=122757
For progressive pop I wrote:
Progressive Pop is music that tries to break with the pop genre's standard formula. It can be likened to progressive rock that tried to break free of the constraints of the rock canon. Progressive pop may have extended instrumentation, break from traditional verse/chorus expectations bring in non-pop influences but still have an underlying pop aesthetic, or pop qualities. Unlike much pop, harmony, simple though pop harmonies tend to be, commonly is not its backing structure. It is generally more complex than other forms of pop, long songs are common, and some might call much of it progressive rock lite -- a crossover between the world of progressive rock and certain pop formats.
Posted By: Boboulo
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 15:04
The Zombies - "Hung Up on a Dream" (1968)
Posted By: Manuel
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 20:01
Too many genres/sub-genres for me. I just play the music, and then decide if I like it or not, no matter how it's classified.
Posted By: Frenetic Zetetic
Date Posted: September 13 2020 at 23:48
I totally thought prog pop was already a loose label...?
-------------
"I am so prog, I listen to concept albums on shuffle." -KMac2021
Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: September 14 2020 at 05:16
Bands like Everything Everything are proper progressive pop and excellent at that... except they are not prog by the standards of this site.
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: September 14 2020 at 05:28
Frenetic Zetetic wrote:
I totally thought prog pop was already a loose label...?
I think the same thing, honestly - just as "prog related", as an example.
Posted By: A Crimson Mellotron
Date Posted: September 14 2020 at 06:01
Lewian wrote:
Bands like Everything Everything are proper progressive pop and excellent at that... except they are not prog by the standards of this site.
Never heard of them but I'll check them out. Thank you for the suggestion!
Posted By: Frenetic Zetetic
Date Posted: September 15 2020 at 00:15
CPicard wrote:
Frenetic Zetetic wrote:
I totally thought prog pop was already a loose label...?
I think the same thing, honestly - just as "prog related", as an example.
For me, it immediately begs the question: what are the qualifiers?
Synth?
Odd meter?
One verse with a weird count in?
Lol.
-------------
"I am so prog, I listen to concept albums on shuffle." -KMac2021
Posted By: siLLy puPPy
Date Posted: September 15 2020 at 00:32
Sure why not and i vote we add.... DEVO!
-------------
https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy
Posted By: Boboulo
Date Posted: September 15 2020 at 03:32
ᗅᗺᗷᗅ - "I'm a Marionette" (1977)
Posted By: miamiscot
Date Posted: September 15 2020 at 07:51
I would be in favor of this if it provided XTC an opportunity to finally be included here!!!
------------- The Prog Corner
Posted By: uduwudu
Date Posted: September 18 2020 at 03:11
lazland wrote:
Without quoting a whole load of the Led Zep posts and taking up a whole page of posts, I would point out to you all that Zep did actually make singles for the pop market. It just so happened that they did this primarily in America, not Britain. However, they did release Whole Lotta Love in Britain, and pulled it as a marketing wheeze in order to capture the cool zeitgeist of the time. Ironically, that song went on to become the iconic theme tune to Top of the Pops, the major UK chart singles show of the time.
Led Zep, Yes, ELP, Deep Purple, The Who, and many others did, in fact, have singles success. They were pop acts, in the sense that pop is a short hand for popular music. They sold albums and singles by the truckload. Which is why I have always been a wee bit perplexed by the aversion to commercial success by so called prog purists. At the time, this lot were the most commercially successful acts on planet Earth.
The US record co pulled singles off albums. There are a whole slew of EPs released in S. America (no new music) just 4 tracks from Fiscal Gravity for example.
WLL was an edit, pulled as soon as it came out in the UK. Saw a copy once going for 550 quid. Now that's commercial.
It did get a CDingle release to help promote a re-titled Tribute To Bert Berns that was found in a rubbish bin. Twenty years later. Bandwagon jumpers they are.
Telling moment - the end of the Earl's Court '75 last concert. Plant's announcing it's time to play their hit. Turns to Jimmy. "Have we got any hits Jimmy?" He says no.
Even when they had hits they weren't singles, the singles weren't hits. Hopeless pop group. How did they get to be so popular? Give the people what they really, really want?
Posted By: Boboulo
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 08:04
The Moody Blues - "The Afternoon" (1967)
Posted By: Boboulo
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 08:48
The Beatles - "Penny Lane" (1967)
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 10:23
^ what's your point here with these videos?
Posted By: Boboulo
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 10:54
Cristi wrote:
^ what's your point here with these videos?
Well, Progressive Pop [I
don't mean Art Rock i.e. artistic Pop-Rock but 'Pop' that is
"progressive"] is rare but can be detected. Maybe Progarchives should have a
list of, let's say, ten albums of Progressive Pop.
The Beach Boys - "Good Vibrations" (1966)
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 11:02
^ please stop posting videos of very famous songs.
Posted By: Boboulo
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 11:36
Indexi - "Pruzam ruke" (1967)
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 12:21
Listen Boboulo/Sventonio, no one is saying that progressive pop doesn't exist. There is more of it than you understand. We just don't want it as another sub gente.
------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 12:38
SteveG wrote:
Listen Boboulo/Sventonio, no one is saying that progressive pop doesn't exist. There is more of it than you understand. We just don't want it as another sub gente.
as it's been previously stated - we have crossover prog and prog-related. No need for new re-classifications.
Posted By: Boboulo
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 15:39
Cristi wrote:
as it's been previously stated - we have crossover prog and prog-related. No need for new re-classifications.
If Crossover Prog and Prog Related sections cover Progressive pop as well, why The Beach Boys aren't there?
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 15:47
Boboulo wrote:
Cristi wrote:
as it's been previously stated - we have crossover prog and prog-related. No need for new re-classifications.
If Crossover Prog and Prog Related sections cover Progressive pop as well, why The Beach Boys aren't there?
Are you asking me?
Maybe because collabs did not find them progressive?
Maybe they were not suggested or discussed for inclusion.
Maybe they were rejected...
TBH I don't know or care. I don't like them that much anyway...
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 18:26
Because if the Beach Boys were to be included anywhere in PA they would be under proto prog. Not progressive pop.
------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Posted By: siLLy puPPy
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 18:28
^ yep. I think our proto-prog and crossover pretty much covers the idea of progressive pop.
-------------
https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy
Posted By: Boboulo
Date Posted: September 19 2020 at 18:44