How about with Pink Floyd though? Imo, I would say it was from 1970- 1977 (Atom Heart Mother to Animals). I don't consider the Wall to be full blown prog and the ones after it are basically rock with prog elements and moments(although if someone wanted to call AMLOR or even TDB prog I wouldn't argue). I'm not sure about the very last one since I only heard it once but it sounded more like ambient or something(I would have to play it again though). As for the early stuff it's mostly either psychedelic, experimental, space rock or proto prog. I'm ok with Ummagumma being called prog but imo AHM is their first true prog album even if it still has strong psych elements on it. 

I might also add that, while 2112 through MP is definitely Rush's golden period, FBN and Caress Of Steel have too many prog elements not to be part of their prog years. The Fountain Of Lamneth? By-Tor And The Snow Dog? That's prog.

But if you look at their other traits, they fit with all the other prog bands of the 70s:

-Long epic pieces with multiple parts? Check.

-Complex albums filled with social critiques and high-art concepts? Check.

-Not adhering to standard pop conventions and drawing more from jazz and classical elements? Check, and even the songs that did adhere to pop did so in a left-of-field way (such as the 7/4 time signature on Money)

-Heavy sonic and compositional experimentation? Massive check; Echoes alone should be proof of that.

I know I'm going on a bit of a rant here; it just always annoyed me that Floyd were occasionally cast out for not being "prog enough" when clearly they were. Don't get me wrong, obviously the common consensus is still that they're a prog band. I've just met so many outliers to that opinion over the years that I felt compelled to touch on it  

I didn't really want to get into the what is the first prog album discussion on here because it's not really relevant to the discussion at hand. However, since you brought it up I think it's very debatable that "court" was the first. You also had Days of future passed and several others. Frank Zappa probably wouldn't not disagree because I doubt he would consider himself prog. I'm not sure how else I would label Uncle Meat though. I'm also not sure what else I would call the More soundtrack or ummagumma but to be a bit more strict about definitions I chose AHM as the starting point for PF. Anyway, we can argue until the cows come home(no pun intended ;)) about what is or what isn't prog. For me The Wall is more art rock than prog. If art rock is part of prog then ok. I admit prog can be a wide umbrella.

Growing in the seventies , it was clear that Prog was mainly ELP, Yes and Genesis. Floyd were in a category of their own possibly because they were so big. For that matter Rush were not really considered 'prog' either.

In my view progressive rock music was very wide and included the likes of Sabbath , Zep and Deep Purple as well as Roxy Music and Floyd.

As for Floyd's prog phase I would go 1973-1977 only. They streamlined it very cleverly and then gained the benefit with those massive selling releases.

well put! 

I see the first two albums as psych with hints of prog. As for Ummagumma it's more experimental. The live album could maybe be considered prog but the solo pieces are just too weird to be prog. I'm not even sure I would call them psych.

Hi,

I think a bit differently ... but yeah, all the way to THE WALL, however I do not think of this stuff as "progressive", as much as I do the continuing evolving ability of the band to show their IMAGES, that in the early days AFTER Syd, were done with sound effects, and were a big part of their QUADRAPHONIC sound experience, in that the vignettes moving around in various ways, made you feel like you were in the middle of it all ... something that later RW's version of THE WALL completely ignored and went for the cheap version, which took the "reality" out of the real thing and into the "imagine" atmosphere of the concept piece.

All in all, sometimes I think that the use of the word "progressive" or "prog" is over stated and over done, and not as meaningful to the music itself as one might think. For me, PF is a wonderful band, but I don't know that I ever considered them "progressive" specially when compared to many other bands in Europe that were doing far more adventurous things MUSICALLY, while PF stuck to making sure their idea of "visuals" could be seen to the audiences, which became a massive show starting with DSOTM.

Exactly what I think.

their debut, although never a favorite of mine, was pretty groundbreaking and unique when it came out. 

Saucerful to Final Cut.

As a self confessed Floyd nutter I classify The Wall & Final Cut albums as rock operas - as they have elements in common with works such as Tommy and Quadrophenia.  The DG led era is more AOR. Whereas Piper is pure psychedelia. 

Everything else is pretty much prog. [Just my opinion.]

I can see that I suppose. My art rock meter tends to go off on stuff like Peter Gabriel's Melt, David Bowie's Berlin Trilogy and Scary Monsters, and even King Crimson's 80s stuff. So I could see an argument for The Wall as a move into art rock, though I think theft that it's a massive double concept album with an intense narrative story is a pretty prog move on its face.

Yeah there are definitely arguments to be made for ITCOTCK not being the first prog album, but it's like arguing Black Sabbath isn't the first metal album. There's probably enough evidence to make a good argument, but it really goes against the popular interpretation of the history of rock and roll, and kind of downplays the massive importance of those two records. ITCOTCK may not actually be the first prog album, but it sure feels like it.

progaardvark wrote: Their whole discography. Prog is a wide umbrella. Where there may be debate is when they transitioned from one subgenre to the next.

You are a wise Aardvark indeed.

Yes, everyone has their own opinion. I'm basing mine on just the things I have seen on prog websites and maybe the rush forum. FBN and COS had some very proggish moments on it (By tor and the snow dog is actually the only real prog track on FBN) and so did 2112 but the 2112 suite was the most prog sounding thing they have done up to that point. On the other end, Signals seems to be the beginning of the new wave period. Still, very proggish but different.