Moody Blues

All the others I considered variations on Rock or Jazz.

Miles Davis

Frank Zappa

Herbie Hancock

I thought of 14 of these artists as prog before ever finding PA. The remaining artists I’d either not heard of and/or not heard, so simply were not on my radar. There are no surprising names here. And it’s nice to see that a band like Queen, who are routinely called out for being “not prog” in the forum, obviously still have a lot of recognition for being prog.

[EDIT] Now there are no zero votes, my post has become rather meaningless! 🤪

(Some would say, no change there! 😜)

none of the above

I thought it was just   Yes, Genesis, ELP  etc etc

Found some great music through PA.... that's for sure

Deep Purple (Rod Evans era)

Procol Harum

Death

Moody Blues

I also voted Kate Bush, Frank Zappa, Moody Blues, and (surprisingly) David Sylvian.  There was just something about his music when I discovered it that screamed Prog to me.

The one Artist here who I love that I cannot really put a Prog label on is Todd Rundgren.  I think of his career, and all he has done.  It is so varied, yet I always think of him first as a writer of incredible "songs."  His early period definitely considered by most to be Prog, especially those early years with Utopia.  Still, when I think of one of my favorite artists; I think of Hermit of Mink Hollow before A Wizard, a True Star.

I voted only for:

- Frank Zappa

- Jean-Luc Ponty

- David Sylvian

But then, what do I know?

I remember from the 1980s that Miles Davis was highly appreciated in prog circles.

One other band I'd like to mention is Steely Dan; I know they're already included on the site as a jazz fusion/rock band, but I think people underestimate how progressive and forward-thinking albums like Aja, Countdown to Ecstasy, and Royal Scam really are. Out of all the bands that actually retained commercial pop hooks, they're easily one of the most complex out there

They are kind of on the fence for me. Maybe proto prog. Frank Zappa said "no" about them being prog so I'll agree with him there. Start at 6:50.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eln3J6BxWN0&t=610s" rel="nofollow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eln3J6BxWN0&t=610s  I do disagree with him saying Traffic weren't progressive rock though but they aren't on this poll anyway (otherwise I would have mentioned them too). 

As for fruits vs. veggies, there are plenty of fruits that no one ever wants to really admit are fruits. But they are. Get over it. If it has seeds, it's a fruit. Cucumbers? Fruit. Peppers? Fruit again. Pumpkins and squash? Well, those are gourds, but gourds are a kind of fruit.

...before joining PA I was already into much of the RIO-scene (I think maybe by stumbling over new strange bands through my Residents fanboyism) and had recently discovered that jazz rock fusion, much lik RIO reminded me of prog I had heard, only without the vocals. I have an extremely low tolerance for sh*tty vocalists anyway which there's A LOT of in prog, so that suited me just fine.

-Bitches Brew sounded way different than The Magnificent Moodies, but so did Henry Cow, Universe Zero, Soft Machine and Samla Mammas Manna before. I was always on the inclusive side of things as always broadening my musical horizons and expanding my tastes, felt like the natural... even logic approach to prog - or whatever one wants to name it. So when I've came across earopeners such as Herbie Hancocks Mwandishi albums, I've always been ready to reconsider what I though I knew.

Unsurprisingly, Zappa has the most votes. But after that, it does, for me at least, become quite interesting.

Queen would appear to be the next most prog band/artist, which I personally have no problem with as I have always considered them a prog band - but, though I know there is a lot of appreciation for them in these fora, they are not usually considered prog by most. Rather, people will argue they had a prog period, before going pop. (Which is no different really, to what Split Enz and Genesis also did, and the division where prog turned to pop is blurry in all three cases. And, again personally, I find that even in their pop period, all three of these bands still maintain prog to some degree in their composition and playing.)

The Moodies and Procol Harum are next, and like Queen, they have many fans in these fora, but few who are willing to call them prog. No real surprise that they are high up in this poll. The only surprise to me, is that Queen is ahead of them.

Next is Black Sabbath, who caused an absolute uproar when it was suggested they be added to PA. Prog they were not, proclaimed the gatekeepers. Again, I’m happy, as Sabbath are prog to me. Much of the argument against Sabbath came from the metal element of their music, rather than their prog. Prog metal was not prog for many people at PA - and even now there are a good few members who simply won’t acknowledge prog metal as being prog. I like to think that Sabbath attaining so many votes shows the wind is changing. (As is a recent poll featuring a Sabbath album against an ELP, I think it was, album.)

Keeping with the prog metal, it is interesting to note that Metallica and Iron Maiden both have more votes than Queensryche. I’m not a Metallica fan at all (the only album I own from them is Lulu, with Lou Reed), but I would definitely agree that they are prog, from what I’ve heard. And Iron Maiden and Queensryche for me have always been two sides of the same coin - instead of heads and tails, it was UK and US. It has always seemed strange to me that one might be considered prog, and the other not, so I quite enjoy seeing Maiden hold more votes than the ‘Ryche.

I expected Miles Davis to attain a few votes, but am pleasantly surprised by how many, as again there is quite a bit of resistance in these fora to call much jazz fusion prog. Even more pleasantly surprising is to see Herbie Hancock is not too far behind. Just surprising, is that despite the clear love for Pat Metheny that exists in these fora, he doesn’t have many votes.

I’m also happy to see Roy Harper, David Sylvian and Ryuchi Sakamoto doing so well.

I don’t know every band/artist in this poll, but based on those who I do, I suspect that every single one of them, I would probably consider prog. But I suspect that is because I am willing to accept prog as occurring in any genre, where for a lot of people if something veers away too much from the classic symphonic and neo sound, they are unwilling to call it prog. Definitely, for those who consider prog to be a genre in itself, it must be hard to understand how some of these can be prog.

I think that's mainly because Metallica and Iron Maiden are household names and two of the biggest selling bands ever (but outside of having checked out a couple of albums that didn't sound particularely prog or progressive to me, I really don't know Queensryche) 

nick_h_nz wrote: I expected Miles Davis to attain a few votes, but am pleasantly surprised by how many, as again there is quite a bit of resistance in these fora to call much jazz fusion prog. Even more pleasantly surprising is to see Herbie Hancock is not too far behind. Just surprising, is that despite the clear love for Pat Metheny that exists in these fora, he doesn’t have many votes.

Same issue here really. Miles Davis and Herbie Hancock are two of the biggest names in music of the 20th century and the history of jazz. Compared to them Pat Metheny is just a relatively well known ECM type jazz guitarist... (I'm still yet to have heard any of his "prog")

-the poll question is which ones you/I thought of as prog "before PA", so the ones I couldn't vote for are pretty much the ones I was largely unaware of - or only knew the "wrong albums" by. I haven't actually voted for any though.

Well, to attempt to answer both your quotes in one go, I think pretty much every name here is a household name. Even if I am not entirely familiar with the music of them all, I’m familiar with every name. The term household name usually applies regardless of familiarity or knowledge of the the content behind the name. Would my wife or mother, for example, recognise all or most of these names, despite the fact that neither of them have any particular interest in music? I honestly think that between the two of them they would recognise every name, even if they’ve heard the music of very few.

With that in mind, I was aware of these names, long before I discovered PA. And every single one of these names that I gave a vote for, I thought was prog long before I discovered PA. PA definitely didn’t widen my idea of what is or is not prog (because, of anything, PA’s idea of what is prog is narrower than my own), so what it thinks about any of the above has no bearing on what I thought, and continue to think, about these names. PA has introduced me to bands and artists I was not aware of beforehand, but it has not changed how I think of prog. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Ok nick. We have differnt experiences and think differently.

-But there's simply no way Pat Metheny, Ryuichi Sakamoto, Jean Luc-Ponty, Al Stewart, Ryuichi Sakamoto etc... are household names. Go into a bar or whatever and ask around... maybe one or two vagely remembers Al Stewart and perhaps someone caught Pat Metheny's name. But I bet they couldn't name any songs or albums. But everyone in the bar would know both the names and music of Iron Maiden and Metallica.

Ca. every poll result is in many ways (also) just the result of a "popularity contest".

In retrospect, you’re probably right that Metheny, Sakamoto, Luc-Ponty and Stewart are not household names. But household names is not the same as knowing the names and music, nor of knowing songs and albums. It is just knowing the name. The whole point of a household name is that it is one people know without knowing much (or anything) more. 

I definitely knew all these names before PA, and I still know only the names of Luc-Ponty and Stewart. I don’t know any of their music, nor the names of any song or album from them. I couldn’t tell you how or why I know their names. I just do. Sakamoto I know from his soundtrack work, and though I can’t be sure as it is lost in the mists of time, I am fairly sure I already knew the name somehow (in the same manner as Stewart and Luc-Ponty). Metheny is the only name I know I was not familiar with, prior to being introduced to it via David Bowie, a falcon, and a snowman.

And, while o agree to a certain extent that most polls in PA end up ignoring the initial premise of the original question and opening post, and becoming a popularity contest - even by that, I find the results no less surprising than as described in my previous post. The results don’t really tally with a lot of what is expressed in the PA fora - though, of course, with any poll there are always far more votes than there are posts, so we can never know entirely how people feel.

The thing with this question is that for me "prog rock" is (and was before I discovered PA) a genre label invented by others. To me personally genre labels are not that relevant. So whatever I considered prog before hitting upon PA was what I thought would be considered prog by those who came up with the label, not by myself. As I hadn't encountered a systematic list, the only two here I was sure about are Procul Harum and Zappa; about some others I wasn't sure and really curious (maybe Ponty would have been third on my list, then probably Hancock, Bush, Deep Purple, Sakamoto, Moody Blues). But this doesn't imply any personal evaluation, rather it was a guessing game of what I thought others (who care more) would think. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

My personal list of whom I considered really progressive would have had Zappa, Hendrix, Bush, Sakamoto, Sylvian, probably also Ponty and Hancock, and Miles on top of them all. But I was well aware that progressive rock doesn't necessarily mean the same thing. 

Sure I know. I just added the and they would know the music - because they would. In addition to knowing the names. Also I'm mostly generalizing, while I think your perspective is primarely from a personal point of view.

I always used to hold the view that if bands like Black Sabbath were included, then fringe prog listeners could visit the site and then be introduced to more proggy bands as a consequence.

It's all good!   

Oh, I think a few of them are beyond any sort of community help, Gary!