Next up is the proto-prog band... The Beatles, if there is one group I can't stand its the Beatles, I just dislike their music and I don't care for their personalities either, especially John Lennon. 

Pink Floyd, not exactly the music but the group, I don't really care for all the drama within them.

David Bowie, for his remarks about fascism and the fact his music just is boring. sorry

Zappa, I don't know what the hype is about him, mostly just annoys me if I'm being honest.

And those are my top groups, I'd love to hear opinions and lists of your own.

http://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=35270

-I do think most of the reasonings in the opening post are kind of lazy and unfair. There's hardly a mention of what these bands/artists actually created. Mainly just tabloid non-music related stuff. An approach I find sort of irrelevant. But then again we're all different. Still: you may think Bowies music is boring, but his art and Bowie as a human being does not deserve to be judged by a few drugged out missteps (imo). Also the 1970's was a different era. Around the same time punks wore the swastika just to provoke and be offensive - not because they were nazis.

Yes, during that exact era Bowie's band comprised mostly of Black and Puerto Rican New Yorkers. I see no reason not to believe his explaination and regret, and forgive his confused stupidity.

-Now personally there's many hundreds of progbands I dislike (or maybe I'm just indifferent), and I don't know where to start. But it's all about their music. Nothing else.

I love a good beat down....

Nobody likes the drama in bands. But it's not a reason enough not to listen to the music. if that was the case, i would never be listening to King Crimson, Pink Floyd, Black Sabbath, Uriah Heep, Deep Purple, Rainbow, Yes, Genesis and many others. 

I don't care for the Beatles personalities, especially Lennon either, still like their music. 

Very good post indeed... 

For me, it always about the Art, almost never the artist. Whenever we talk about Roger and Dave, for me, it's always encased in a terrible sadness and deep regret that they were simply unable to work together, to delight the world with wonderful albums... maybe it's just me, but I've never been a fan of Roger's solo work while Dave's always seems to be missing something; to me, it really is one of the great tragedies.

If I was to write a list of bands I really don't 'get', it tends to bemuse people who think 'why do you like A and not B? Surely they are quite similar? Maybe, but it's never worked like that for me, and in the past I have almost beat my head against a wall, trying to understand what others see in a band's art, but I don't do that any more. I think I've become more conservative and am happy to listen to what I'm happy with...

Wot Drama?? 

You should look at Yes for that

http://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=1833" rel="nofollow - YES Drama reviews (progarchives.com)

Nope, maybe that band is a Soap Opera

Hi,

Welcome to the jungle!

In all reality, you were definitely born in the wrong time and place. Almost everyone you mention was a major factor in the history of rock music, and it doesn't matter if you like them or not ... Picasso, Stravinsky, Burroughs ... they can all flip a finger to the naysayers ... but their names and work is recognized!

I wouldn't be listening to MUSIC if I had "dislikes" ... the whole idea is shameful to the art form, in my book! One either respects the art form, or one doesn't ... and take the favorites out of a kid-sized equation.

Reality ... now you can select all your metal bands!

Hi,

The personalities, is inevitable, when one gets so famous ... were they not so much the darlings and the "sell" for the media, no one would have paid attention to their words, or likely the music.

But, I do think that what the history of rock music has shown that them, along with others, the likes of The Rolling Stones, The Kinks, for example, set a new course that didn't exist is music at the time, and as such, are the main reason why we can hear so much and appreciate so much music today ... not to say that someone else could have done this, but if you had an AM radio (in America) and were listening to it, you know that the Beatles were a breadth of fresh air, something that almost all the "dislikers" do not see ... it's bubblegum music, versus music with more content ... how can anyone compare any of the Beatles early stuff to just about anything in the Billboard's top lists at the time.

And just to be fair, in Madison, WI there was a DJ on the radio that was trashing Janis, Jim, and others for being pretentious and stupid, and trying to be "original" ... he called both just stoned out ash-holes that did not know music from their farts. No kidding on this!

Today's listeners, for the most part, have no idea how much "fighting" and "standing up" for their work they had to do and be, so they could be what they wanted to be.

I find it weird that someone criticizes DB for using black and PR musicians and such, when the idea was to NOT SOUND like everyone else ... and we're criticizing his choices ... pretty soon everyone here will be criticizing me for using a PC, and not an HP, or an Apple (you won't catch me dead with anything Apple!) ... and at the end of the day, their originality is not understood COMPARATIVELY to the time and place ... these folks are comparing it to what they like ... or don't like, so "different" music means ... it's bad!

Hi,

Welcome to the jungle!

In all reality, you were definitely born in the wrong time and place. Almost everyone you mention was a major factor in the history of rock music, and it doesn't matter if you like them or not ... Picasso, Stravinsky, Burroughs ... they can all flip a finger to the naysayers ... but their names and work is recognized!

I wouldn't be listening to MUSIC if I had "dislikes" ... the whole idea is shameful to the art form, in my book! One either respects the art form, or one doesn't ... and take the favorites out of a kid-sized equation.

Reality ... now you can select all your metal bands!

I'd always assumed it's The Kinks who were a Soap Opera. 

There're surely some bands, or more exactly speaking their music, I don't like, but I try now not to dig it too much for the sake

of those who like them.

But I can still laugh of some funny remarks.

I believe you have reached cringe level with your Beatles hatred.

Art Zoyd

Cardiacs

Henry Cow

Current 93

News from Babel

Present

The Residents

Swans

Thinking Plague

Univers Zero

Robert Wyatt

Frank Zappa

Five of my all time favorites here:

Art Zoyd

The Residents

Swans

Univers Zero

Robert Wyatt

Love selected:

Henry Cow and

Frank Zappa too &

kind of like the rest as well, except I've never warmed up to

Cardiacs or Current 93

Clearly you are new to PA, I reached that pinnacle eons ago..... 

at least you admit it, there's still hope for you... 😎

I can't stop laughing of this one either, even I like albums of some of the artists mentioned.

I could probably pick another 12 avant bands you'd hate more than those 

I don't doubt it. 

Now, I could get tempted to tell about some of my dislikes, but I better not. 

You just picked five of my favourites. 

Opeth

Ayreon

The Mars Volta

I reckon  

This is a dislike thread, and Catcher is telling his opinion.

Now for prog bands, maybe Pallas, I never really felt compelled to listen to them further after listening to The Sentinel.

For many years, this site had an Admin who maintained that 'The Sentinel' was the worst prog album ever made.. 

Who was it, I don't remember...

The Pallas follow up album is much worse than the debut. 

Btw, I agree at least about the vinyl part. 

are you serious or just baiting? 

Hi,

Not you Saper!

think he's being serious mate... I know it's hard to believe, but there are a few individuals out there who have never taken to Rush (arguably still my favourite band after all these years)... I think he'd get on well with the Baldies.. 

Jim Garten... 

maybe not quite so few 

Hi,

I don't know I would say "immature" as much as I might suggest that "historically", it is lacking, but that is my usual perspective since I have been at this for almost 60 years, and without the history, half the music is a bit of fluff when shown somewhere else, or compared to something else with a large time span in between them.

But we have to be careful, since the 20th century was about debunking a lot of musical theories and PA should add Stravinsky for his efforts ... I guess we'll have to call it symphonic prog ...

DB was very much influenced by the style of the Brecht/Weill scene, and he even went out and did BAAL, which everyone disliked, and is actually one of the best versions of it you will ever hear, but it's not rock music, and this drives folks in rock boards, crazy! Why is he wasting his time on such crap, kind of thing. It's not crap ... or it would not have survived and be remembered many years later, and I think that we should acknowledge that point a bit more, instead of simply thinking of preferences --- although I will say that it is my experience to feel that coming from a very strong artistic background!

In the Edgar Froese book, there is a chapter on DB ... and the Producer had a session arranged and everyone set to go, except DB was still plunking on the piano ... and finally the Producer said ... everyone go home. David has not found his voice, yet for this piece. It tells you that what these folks are doing is not just a stupid lyric, and that something else has to be added to it, to make it worth its nature, and folks like DB were sensitive to that right from the start .... in fact, I think he learned that from his early folk days.

The commerciality of it all, makes it very difficult for everyone to know/understand, and find their side on the artistic value of it all, and that is ditched in favor of "favorites" and "likes" and "dislikes" ... and this is the sad side of what you can see on many posts on music boards ... and there are many artists that say basically the same thing, even if they won't in words!

I get it, nevertheless there is a big difference between saying "I dislike or can't stand Rush" and calling Rush "bubble-gum prog".  🤦‍♂️

A bit off topic, but for those who can be fond of both Zappa and The Beatles, I'd like to recommend Steve Harley & Cockney Rebel's 

Love's a Primadonna (1976). An album which has had up and downs in my appreciation of it, but now we're good, or maybe even 

very good, friends again. 

Most of Prog Metal would be in my list, although there are a few bands like Liquid Tension Experiment, Special Providence, Symphony X, and Dream Theater that I can listen to in small doses.

But when it crosses over to Tech/Extreme Prog Metal, I run screaming from the room, hands over my ears. It's like fingernails on a blackboard -- well into the realm of "hatred" for me. But obviously not everyone has the same reaction, and that's OK. Whatever floats your boat.

I'm not terribly fond of Dream Theater, they seem to noodle around in meaningless, overly-long solos just for the heck of it.  Sad, as they are some of the best prog instrumentalists around! 

Otherwise, I'm fine with nearly all prog.  Some is great, some not so good, but honest musical expression is always to be admired.

I'm very much the same.

Even when I listened to a lot more Prog Metal than I do these days, I always struggled with a lot of the Tech/ Extreme stuff.. I could cope with the more accessible end of Zero Hour and actually really liked 'Specs Of Pictures Burnt Beyond' but back when I joined this site, some were raving about the Spiral Architect album, but that was simply too much for me.  Likewise, vocals have always been really important for me and as such, I REALLY had to be into a bands music to be able to put up with growling.

These days, I'm much more mainstream in my tastes... I can't really explain why; I'm just happier listening to Camel, I guess... 

Whatever forum members think of the merits (or otherwise) of Rush, I always think it worth pointing out that if it hadn't have been for them and an older friend who lent me some more accessible Genesis, then I may well have stayed forever in the Zep/Purple/Sabbath camp I was ensconced in... and I really don't think I'd be alone in saying this... 

I'm 55 next month Cristi and I can tell you that Rush enhanced my teenage years immeasurably. Of course Rush aren't 'bubble gum prog', but we all need the lighter end of the spectrum to serve its valuable purpose. I wasn't the sort of kid you could have just thrown Pawn Hearts at and expected to lap it up, without small stepping stones having been laid down first... 

I'll be honest, I was in my late 20's before I even understood the concept of 'Progressive' music; no-one had ever explained it to me until I met a guy at work who was quite literally nuts about the genre. 

After having reading again in Edward Macan's Rocking the Classics, I may have more respect for The Beatles' influence 

on the evolvement of the Progressive Rock style.

where's Jose when you need him?! 

I'd say, quite natural for the Neo-Prog generation. 

A few that come to mind...

Zappa~ Comedic relief music

Wakeman Solo~ boring

Ayreon~ boring

Gong~ boring

I'm a big CAN fan so weird is in my wheelhouse, but I don't like much of other weird stuff.

That's the perfect name for a band!

Focusing on negativity isn't normally my cup of tea, but talking about Amon Düül II (big fan here), the two end 60s/early 70s albums I have heard of Amon Düül (without the number II) were something of a torture to listen to. As far as I know, Amon Düül II was the subgroup of the collective that wanted to focus properly on music, the Amon Düül albums were done by those left behind, and they sound like that.

Other than that, I haven't got anything out of any ELO I've ever heard, but this is already pretty much where outright negativity ends when it comes to artists listed as prog on PA.

No ELO/Moody Blues for me, either.

Hey, you have to move past Myths and Legends, bud! It gets better. 

I'm very hit or miss when it comes to prog. I prefer the 1970s overwhelmingly, and a woman on vocals, unless it's a band like Pink Floyd, Genesis - bands I loved before ever knowing the term "prog-rock". I felt the same about Rush, except I saw them in concert - alone! But this was over 20 years ago, but I never listen to them anymore, and I think Geddy is a major reason why. Led Zeppelin will probably always be in my Top 5 bands, but his voice (and Terry Reid, etc) must be a little repelling, since I tend to NEXT those songs.

I tried listening to 'Tarkus' twice, but I guess I need melody, which might be another reason I turn to the bands with the ladies on vocals -- Curved Air, Illusion, Carol of Harvest, etc..

Lately, I've been listening to a lot of progressive soul from the 70s.. Psychedelic Soul.. "Any Sub-Genre You Like"

Did you ever try their first album and only one with Roy Wood? Quite unlike any of the others... Personally, I like the first 4 albums, but after that, it's pure pop.

Yes, it's a case of chalk and cheese regarding our dissimilar tastes in prog, but it wouldn't be half as much fun if we all liked the same music. 

At least my dislike of some of your favourite Avant Prog artists provided the inspiration for a poll. 

After second thought, with Geddy Lee vocals, it's not that natural.

Geddy Lee's high-pitched wailing is an acquired taste, just like the similar tight-trousered singers with Budgie and Pavlov's Dog, who both sound like they've inhaled a balloonful of helium before approaching the microphone. 

The first two Soft Machine albums-a load of nonsense; 

( it is when the jazz influence happened later that they really improved immensely)

Neu! -I've tried, but they do nothing for me

       

I know their second and the fourth if I'm not mistaken (and some later pop stuff), so I'm not very optimistic, but it may well be I haven't heard anything from the first album.

Rick Wakeman solo boring?

Definitely not Six Wives in my view, and neither No Earthly Connection. 

I guess that's true... I used to not like Jon Anderson vocals, which was though with all the great albums he was present in.

Hi,

I never thought of AD2 as weird, or strange. Their first album (PD) was a very obvious attack on something at the commune ... you party, you get stoned (things gonna get weird!) and then folks do ... whatever. And PD is sort of a suggestion that the end result of those musical excursions that we heard from the regular AD, was the kind of thing that eventually ended up in drugs, sex and etc, etc ... well, I can say that the excursions of the drum circles in Eugene in the days of the GD, usually ended up in veritable orgies, although not necessarily right out in the open, but in the commune? The women are free and it is a reckless humpty dumpy!

That AD2 wanted to focus on more than just "nothing" and then get stoned, and have sex, is probably the main reason why they came about ... there is nothing strange, or weird, or off putting in that, even if the way it was done, was dictated by circumstances. And they showed in YETI that they meant it right ... and put out a magnanimous album!

Is it progressive? I consider it more experimental than progressive, although the difference between experimental and progressive lies in how the experiments get "used" up in the music itself, but if you listen to YETI, saying that the "improvisations" don't fit, means the music is not for you, and their next album, has even more and better improvisations that really blow out the scale on what an improvisation is!

It's an experience, and as soon as you can put your mind in that space, things kinda light up ... and are more enjoyable than just songs.

The only thing I tend to "dislike", and that's a joke around here, is things like 10CC ... love them dearly, but it's all pop songs done progressively! And fun as heck, although hearing about Mindy is not fun ... but what a song! After that? My biggest dislike is Metalisheepcacadip!

 

Surely anyone who grow up during the '70s with such groups as Led Zeppelin would consider high-pitched vocals as par for the course.

 

Yes, time hasn't stood still for me as I've been a fan of Rush ever since hearing Spirit of Radio on the radio in the eighties. I've bought seven Rush albums since joining ProgArchives as well as three albums by Budgie and I'm salivating at the thought of one day owning an album by Pavlov's Dog too. Woof!