Fellow forum users, what are in your opinion the most accessible prog albums (doesn't matter which decade)?

These may be albums by very well-known bands or more underground acts that you believe (or they have proved so) to appeal to a wider audience.

I am curious to see what the recommendations will be.

The thing with "accessible" is that different things are accessible to different people, and there is no "general wider audience" taste. For example, there is a big number of music lovers around who are not generally prog fans but appreciate Tool a lot, and I surely wouldn't think of their music as "most accessible", but in fact they are (maybe not "most" but quite), if the citerion is appreciation outside the "prog world".

That said, I tend to think that the timeless and global appeal of Dark Side of the Moon and maybe also WYWH is unmatched in the prog world.

Honestly, and without meaning anything bad, if you have to concentrate on some silly detail about it all, then you are not into "music" ... just into your favorites.

There is a lot of music out there, and some fits and some doesn't into your request, but sadly, your request seems to be trying hard to simplify your ability to find these bands, and not get the proper feel about anyone's music, which is what all this is about.

It's not about you and I, the listener, and we have to stop that illusion (because we all have different ideas and requests!) ... it's about the art in it, and nothing else. And why would you want to remove a color from a painting? You're not the painter! 

Music is the same in a different medium.

Dark Side Of The Moon

Wish You Were Here

The Whirlwind (Transatlantic)

Mirage (Camel)

Snow Goose (Camel)

On a side note, I am curious why brought up the 'It's not about the listener' argument; And if we have to be realistic, it is often about the listener, and it has been like that for centuries, if I may say. After all, if all the music we are listening to daily (I guess this is the listening frequency of most forum users here) was not about the listener (to an extent), why would the artists that recorded it release it and not keep it all for themselves? It is an argument that could go on forever, because there are different aspects and points of view to this, but unfortunately this is not the point of the thread at all. Besides, I appreciate your reply, despite the fact that I find it redundant.

Hi,

Without the "media", for years the art, or any music was pretty much about who heard what. There might be some likes and dislikes, sort of like in a bar or a theater when the song is blah, or the play is getting too mushy and not interesting.

In general, and I don't mean that this is its "history", from the artist's point of view, the majority of the music has LESS to do with the audience, than it does with the ARTIST who has come up with an idea/vision, that allowed the piece of music to come alive, or the play, or the novel. In that "inner" world, there is a lot less about the audience than there is about your ability and mine to get an "approval" from someone else, although many usually would use their close friends whose thoughts they tended to trust, but rarely would they interfere with the actual work. (Check out the Philip Roth special! )

The 20th century is a perfect example of this "inner" thing that is not about the public or the "fan" as is better said today. The "individuality" of the work, has been the staple of the majority of the great arts ... and that has a lot less to do with the fan, or audience. Remember FZ? Getting upset and putting down the guitar and conducting the rest of the show!

The request from the OP is a problem FROM MY SEEING EYE. He is asking for an "external" view of the pieces of music, which is NOT the actual intent of the majority of the arts ... and this IN THE END will be far more confusing to the understanding and studies of the artist than any other ideas.

It's not about Pedro being different. It's about the difference between the inner artist, and what the outer fans want from an artist ... which to me (and I'm biased in favor of the artist ALWAYS) ... is just a thing for the 20th century fans, and not what will be remembered. Look ... how many songs do you remember and can quote a line from 450/500 years ago? Or 100 years ago for that matter so you can decide what to go listen to! To me, that's a sign of an inner dichotomy of what the arts/artist is all about!

 

We have a sub-genre devoted to that sort of music... crossover. With that in mind, I don't think there is prog much more accessible than Supertramp, or perhaps The Alan Parsons Project, or for more modern listeners, Radiohead.

 

Genesis - A Trick of the Tail, Nursery Cryme

The Flower Kings - Space Revolver

Yes - Drama, Close to the Edge, 90125 (if it can be called prog), The Yes Album

Jethro Tull - Aqualung 

IQ - Ever

Marillion - Mispaced Childhood

So certainly the answer would seem to be Dark Side Of The Moon.

You mean Grammy winning, multi platinum selling Radiohead aren't accessible?

I played songs from Ashes Are Burning to friends and acquaintances at parties, get-togethers (in the past) and all I got were weird looks  

So, no IMO, not accessible enough. 

richardh wrote: Renaissance. Very 'friendly' easy listening melodic symph band and a fairly big UK hit with Northern Lights. How more accessible can you get? Make The Carpenters a prog band and you basically have Renaissance.

The thing is, young people tend to look for some edge in the music they listen to, and many from their fourties  to whom "easy listening" is most accessible are basically already lost to music and don't get very passionate about anything. There is an "adult contemporary" market for sure, but Renaissance may be lost on those as well as far as I know what these people listen to (the Carpenters should do better there). The baseline is that although few people will complain when they hear Renaissance randomly (certainly fewer than about Tool or Yes) I think the group for which Renaissance has a real potential these days is rather small and the best part of it will still be proper listeners who don't look for "easy" in the first place. Without appreciating the sophistication it is hard to get into them properly. (But then I may be too focused on the cultures I know well, maybe the coordinate system is differnt in some other countries.)

I concur with In Absentia, great suggestion, and surely more edgy.

Any of those bands remotely close to Radiohead when it comes to sales these days? (By which of course I mean last 20 years. )

Interesting. I always thought of Selling England being more acessible than Close to the Edge. But maybe that's because I'm not a big fan of Yes.

 

I think that is the problem with the notion of "accessibility"... it is radically different for different groups of people. For example, when I was a young teenager, I absolutely loved the heavy metal guitar of Black Sabbath. It was the easiest thing for me get into. Thus, I found Black Sabbath to be very accessible. Conversely, if at that time, someone had played me "easy listening" music such as Renaissance's "Trip To The Fair", I would've accused them of playing my grandmother's music.

 

The Yes Album is the most accessible album by Yes IMO.

the Swedish group Hallas seems very accessible to me.

The Wall is very accesible, more accesible than Dark Side that isn't as accesible as sometimes considered, Money aside. Although some would argue The Wall isn't prog. 

The Yes Album and Fragile are pretty accesible. Trilogy (ELP) is pretty accesible. Selling England by the Pound is also pretty accesible. Aqualung too. ITCOTCK and Red are accesible if you leave out Moonchild and Providence. Logically there's a high correlation between accesiblity and commercial success . 

And yeah, neo-prog is pretty accesible alghough it wasn't very commercially succesfull aside from Marillion. 

The Wall has more hits singles, sure, but I think Dark Side Of The Moon is a much easier full listen for a couple major reasons: A. it's half as long, and B. it doesn't have nearly the same capacity to cause an existential, psychological crisis upon first hearing it.

Well after reading the comments on the thread I might be inclined to go with Fragile. It has 'edge' (South Side Of The Sky is about as 'metal' as Yes got) while Roundabout has that brilliant hook. Going For The One would also be a good soft introduction to prog as well. Yes shifted serious quantities of albums in the seventies partly because they had a pop side to their music. Apparently they wanted to emulate the Beach Boys when they started out!

No, it just means I've always considered Radiohead to be an Alternative Rock band and not a Prog Rock band, but I still like them, all the same, apart from the inaccessible "Kid A" & "Amnesiac" albums, obviously. 

He did?

I agree with him. 

^Thanks, here's the quote:

"He added: "I know Radiohead say they aren't prog but, sorry chaps, you are, and it's brilliant."

Funny, because Radio Head always sounded like a 90's alt rock band vs prog to me.

I wouldn't classify something like Creep as progressive rock.

I certainly don't hear Yes or KC in their music, nor it's influence.

I also admittedly don't listen to much OF them; what I've heard, sounds like 90's rock to me.

If you are talking about The Bends then I agree but they took a massive leap with OK Computer. The KC influence in Paranoid Android is obvious to me. Airbag as well. There is a touch of Floyd in Karma Police to me as well.

Funny how it has turned into a Radiohead thread.

I don't really know if they classify as prog or not, but who cares? A lot of people apparently...

If I had to use a label myself, I would probably choose art rock as the first one, and since I am a big art rock fan first of all, I of course dig Radiohead. I love how they combine relatively melodic music with sonic experimentation and avant-garde.

There is also clear inspiration from bands like Can, f.e. on an album like Kid A.

I'd say Supertramp, Floyd and maybe Camel & Eloy.

Renaissance & Marillion as well

However, going for Alan Parsons, Moody Blues, ELO, i wouldn't use them as a first approach if you want to introduce them to "prog" (cos they aren't really)... But for preparing the grounds to an introduction, to see if they might find something into that proggy direction... yes, they might be indicated

Got it! I'll have to take some time and delve a tad deeper.

Wow!  I'm a huge fan, but Ever is accessible?!  Surely Are You Sitting Comfortably? would be more suitable as a nomination here?.....

Season's End and Holidays In Eden by Marillion maybe

I always thought that Duke by Genesis was the perfect balance between prog and pop. For me, that is the probably the most accessible prog rock album. The album that preceded Duke, ...And Then There Were Three..., is also very accessible.

The two IQ albums with Paul Menel on vocals, Nomzamo and Are You Sitting Comfortably?, are accessible while still retaining IQ's progressive disposition. While I prefer everything that the band has done before and after those albums, they're still great.

Hounds of Love by Kate Bush, like Duke, is another album that encapsulates prog and pop all in one beautiful album.

Almost any album from Marillion could be included in this, as I've always seen them as having a pop element to their sound, from as early as the Fish days till now. The album that I chose for this discussion is Holidays In Eden, because I truly find it to be their most accessible album while still having progressive qualities. It's far from my favorite album from the band, but that doesn't diminish from its undeniable accessibility.

Almost any album from Peter Gabriel could also be included in this. It makes the most sense for me to go with his most critically acclaimed album, So.

Ever is super accessible as far as prog goes. In the very same genre you've got stuff like, I dunno, Eskaton - 4 Visions or Sax Ruins - Yawiquo.