Prog - integral part of rock/metal?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics related to progressive music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=23093
Printed Date: February 21 2025 at 20:25
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Prog - integral part of rock/metal?
Posted By: aapatsos
Subject: Prog - integral part of rock/metal?
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 14:12
|
this poll may seem silly... but
I always had this question: Do you consider prog to be an integral part of rock/metal or you treat it as a separate music genre?
How do you treat it?
For me prog is a piece/part of rock music and I'm interested in your opinion.
Did prog evolved through classic rock or is a separate genre?
For example: prog metal for me is a part of heavy metal music, as death, thrash etc. metal is
hope you got the point...
|
Replies:
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 14:17
| The name says it all: progressive ROCK. |
Posted By: Trickster F.
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 14:25
|
It depends on the group! Some move away from rock so far that the -rock part doesn't make any sense anymore.
-- Ivan
|
Posted By: aapatsos
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 14:53
well sth like this I had in mind when making the poll...
seems that some agree with your opinion
|
ivansfr0st wrote:Posted By: Rorro
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 15:25
| I think it's separate genre, as it includes bands that are not rock or metal, like magma or shakti. |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 16:33
|
Prog is Prog - and Prog is where you find it.
It's more of an attitude and a means of expression than a genre, which is why no-one can satisfactorily define what it is. Some metal bands may incorporate Prog elements - indeed, through the history of metal, the genre can be seen as Prog's little brother. The thing is, that other genres can come close to Prog as well - so it's not just metal. Ambient and electronic are the best examples of this - and neither sounds anything like metal - and often nothing like Rock either! ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 16:42
"Little Brother" ... well, at least in terms of a possible age difference of 10 years I would agree. But I'd rather see Prog Metal as a nephew of Prog Rock. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to: 
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 16:49
|
I like Metal Music but its genre has no relation to Prog.
Metal is Metal - Hell
Prog is Prog - Heaven
Hell is Heaven?
|
Posted By: Royalist
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 17:25
|
Listen to Awaken. How much rock can you hear? Names are only names. Rock is a part of progressive, not the opposite.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 17:27
|
I think prog is a different genre, take for example Univers Zero it doesn't even resemble rock anymore, it therefore IMHO is a different and still developing style of music, kind of a neo classical jazz psychodelic thing. ------------- |
Posted By: crucify_the_ego
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 17:32
| Progressive rock isn't entirely distinct from rock, it's more an evolution of it, or an attempt to be such, incorporating elements from non-rock music as well. But it is still a part of rock music, a part that has grown beyond the confines of simple rock. There are exceptions, but this is the case for the majority of prog - you don't get much that has nothing of rock music in it at all. |
Posted By: Rorro
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 17:43
| I think there are a considerable number of bands that has no rock or metal elements. |
Posted By: aapatsos
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 18:04
|
well... can you provide me with some famous ( so I can get a clue) bands that are not rock, but progressive? is, for example, Sigur Ros one of them? |
Posted By: Rorro
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 18:16
|
Some Indio-Prog has nothing to do with rock (or at least i haven't seen any relaton with rock), and some bands listed as fusion has many non rock albums, for example the album from shakti& mc laughlin is not rock, Comus - First Utterance is not rock, Absolute Zero albums are not rock., something of Pat Metheny that is just jazz,.. .
John Mc Laughlin Extrapolation, Azigza,... .
Sigur Rós, i don't knw, i only own Takk but i haven't really listened to it with much atention. But people compares them with God Speed You! Black Emperor, and i have more material from this band and it has a lot of rock in their releases.
If you think The bands i've mentioned are rock, please tell me, so i listen to them with more detail and try to find some rock or metal influences.
|
Posted By: aapatsos
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 18:21
|
I was not implying that there aren't non-rock bands that are prog
thanks for the info
 |
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 19:16
 -------------  
|
Posted By: AtLossForWords
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 19:34
|
I think Progressive Music whether Metal, Rock, or Jazz is a different kind of genre.
The composing style and structure of prog is quite different. From a musical standpoint, I think I can safely say that many metal bands would never attempt to make progressive elements important in their music. Some bands have progressive inlfuences, but if you take that away, much of their matierial would be quite the same. -------------  
"Mastodon sucks giant monkey balls." |
Posted By: GoldenSpiral
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 21:05
|
progressive elements are an integral part of any style of music. without it, the music stagnates and can never evolve.
------------- http://www.myspace.com/altaic" rel="nofollow - http://www.myspace.com/altaic ALTAIC "Oceans Down You'll Lie" coming soon |
Posted By: Rorro
Date Posted: May 09 2006 at 23:01
|
I agree that the structure of the progressive rock is different than the structure of rock and metal, that's another reason to say that prog is a different genre. If you look to some prog band's structure you'll see structures that are more similar to Classical music or jazz structures than rock structures. |
Posted By: reality
Date Posted: May 10 2006 at 12:26
| Progressive rock was a movement from 1967 to about 1975 just like grunge was in the ninteys, it had its run and then died out only to be followed by retro bands and 70's sympathisers. The fact that a band is on this site does not make them prog, but if you strictly conformed to the rules there would be 500 bands instead of 2000 something. Not all bands that are complex, use poly rythoms, use pseudo-classical structures or have 20 minute songs are prog, just like not all new bands that combine punk\alternative\metal riffs are considerd Grunge (except on a grunge web site). Sigur Ros is not prog nor did they ever intend to be, the outside world calls them Postrock or whatever term they will come up with for the new movement. They do not deserve the baggage of being labeled "dinasauor music" or a saviour of a long dead movement. They are most influnced by technology and current culture just like "prog" was in the seventys; when that technology and culture changes so does the music and it does not maintain the same points of referance. Stop retro labeling bands! The term prog is claiming bands that it does not have the right to claim! There is no historical precedent to justify this practice of genre oreintated name dropping. |
Posted By: aapatsos
Date Posted: May 10 2006 at 12:52
So you mean, that a band cannot be called prog nowadays?
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: May 10 2006 at 13:07
I am in complete agreement
. BTW, I think we should also define what rock really is... If rock is, say, The Rolling Stones or Bruce Springsteen, then prog has little to do with it. Anyway, I always call it "progressive ROCK" when I talk about it in my mother tongue, as it is the way it was originally defined in the '70s, when I started listening to it. As to metal, I think it is NOT distinct from rock: like prog, it is another evolution (or just the opposite - it depends on points of view).
|
Posted By: reality
Date Posted: May 10 2006 at 14:53
| The cannon of what is considerd "prog" was closed with the change of culture and technology in the mid to late seventys just like the cannon of grunge was closed in about nintey three. Anything original and innovative (non retro) past that point is something else and not prog. To be prog (or grunge, girl group, psycadelic, big band, punk etc) it has to fall with in the exclusive precepts of the cannon that was established. Green day is not punk just like Destinys child is not a 60's girl group but they are closer to those labels than Sigur Ros is to prog. The retro band The Flower Kings although from the ninteys is prog because they fall into the statutorial cannon of prog and copy the formula of a seventys band even to the outdated technology. New Prog bands are easy to spot because they fly their seventys flag high and have very little social and cultural relevence or impact (just like the go tee, flanel wearing grungers dont matter anymore). Notice that is why the term "dinasaur" is applied to prog because the culture that inspires it is over thirty years old. Just like a son should not live under the shadow of his father, new music should not be condemed to the pathways of the old, especaily if it has very little relation to it. Prog as a fresh music is dead, but that does not mean you cannot still enjoy it, but do not make it what it is not. No one can exclusivly claim complexity or lenghth of songs as a form of music, many other forms of music have these but are not "prog", nor should they be. Its arrogance, denile and ignorance that make people claim new music (non retro) as prog. It is not just new music, Ive seen people on this site claim all Jazz is prog, classical music is prog, African rythmic drumming as prog are these the people you want to get your info from? Prog is exclusive and specific and that is where it recieves its glory. Enjoy the past (prog) but live in the futer (new and exciting catagories, genres and cultural movements). |
Posted By: Rorro
Date Posted: May 10 2006 at 19:56
Sigur Rós is not prog?
|
Posted By: reality
Date Posted: May 10 2006 at 21:31
| No they are not. Sigur ros is Post Rock which is a genre that comes from the indie scene, and has very little relation to prog. Some will mention the tie with Krautrock but that is slight rather post rock has much more of a tie with dream pop\shoegazer of the early ninties. Originally applied to the band Tortoise The Post Rock term is slowly becoming as unusable as prog, but for now it is an apt term to describe Sigur Ros (as well as GSYBE!, Mogwai etc.) Bottomline they are Post Rock and not prog. But who cares anyway, if you like them listen to them. I would hate to meet the person who was so shallow that they would stop listining to them because they are not prog! Enjoy and keep listening to glorious Post Rock. |