What is prog? (really)
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24447
Printed Date: March 31 2025 at 15:47
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: What is prog? (really)
Posted By: beowulf
Subject: What is prog? (really)
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 10:39
|
I new here, and as this is a widely debated topic, I'm pretty sure there's already a thread on it, but I'm wondering what you think constitutes prog (or progressive) rock. I am stuck between defining it as a genre (an idea that repels me) and defining it as an attemp/mindset (to maker new, experimental, fresh music, to break traditional rules of music, to make more complex music, to draw from a variety of diverse influences w/o being emulative etc. etc.)
If defined as a genre, then it is not truly "progressive" at all as shown by the neo (retro) prog (note: I have not widely listenned to neo-prog, therefore I may be entirely wrong, but what I have heard bores me to death, I find it way to derivative and not at all fresh, Frank Zappa's phrase "death by nostalgia" comes to mind), this regressive nature seems completely against the mindset of the prog rock from the seventies. Also I think the bands that have been most progressive in the last fifteen years are the ones that sound least like the sympho-prog of the seventies. These bands include Radiohead, Sigur Ros, Hella, Phish (yes, Phish), and TriPod.
However, if it is simply a mindset/attempt, then not only is neo prog is not prog, but niether is other less experimental (but still very good) bands from the seventies, such as Rush (though you may argue that Rush was experimental, as I have not listenned to much of them I am hardly an expert)
I believe a better classifiacation system would be to define certain genre that arrose out of the prog movement (which I do not believe died in the seventies), for example, I see much of neo-prog to be better classified simply as sympho rock, rather that calling it prog (though as I said I haven't heard much neo-prog)
I understand that this is badly researched and badly written (i.e. not comprehensive, or cohesive) but I would appreciatete comments or criticisms
|
Replies:
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 10:46
|
Progressive Rock is a fusion of genres to create an original sound. |
Posted By: Masque
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 10:55
Music for the mind  |
Posted By: Teaflax
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 11:02
|
I like what I read once: it's music that progresses. Not that it's
necessarily so that each act or artist or album must progress from what
has come before, but music that progresses throughout the course of
each song. You can potentially do that within a three minute Pop song
structure, or over 25 minutes of lots of new themes. It means being unpredictable or at least developing over time. That gives some room for nostalgia as well, because that can be done in new ways. -------------  
|
Posted By: NeoProg
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 11:19
Well Said Xenoxen. I am new to this sight but xenoxen statement really pulled me in to reply.
|
Xenoxen wrote:Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 11:21
Thank You NeoProg and welcome to PA.
|
Posted By: CrazyDiamond
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 11:54
|
No, there is not another topic like this.
there are 10000000000 topic like this!!!!!!!!     ------------- 
|
Posted By: CrazyDiamond
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 11:55
|
Anyway,
prog is  -------------
|
Posted By: laplace
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 12:04
| it's a particularly vile and demeaning form of fetish porn |
Posted By: oracus
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 12:06
|
Prog is like an icecream with a lot of different flavours (you know ice cream balls) :-) ------------- 
|
Posted By: aspinosa
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 12:15
| Is rock with classical music. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 12:20
|
Prog is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get.
------------- "Questions are a burden to others; answers a prison for oneself" (The Prisoner, 1967). |
Posted By: Güdron
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 12:23
|
It is like a person trying to get out of a straight jacket. ------------- resistance is futile |
Posted By: Notch
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 12:53
|
On the great tree that is music, prog is... http://imageshack.us">  |
Posted By: crucify_the_ego
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 13:50
|
I just see it as anything that tries to defy the norm, break new boundaries, resculpt the landscape of music. Some would say that's pretentious, though  |
Posted By: Abstrakt
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 13:53
| Read the "Prog?" page on the startsite |
Posted By: johnobvious
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 14:22
|
A refuge from the neverending tripe that is constantly shoved down our throats by the record companies and complicit media outlets that cater to sheep. I AM NOT A SHEEP. I do not care if you had a bad day or if she is beautiful. Enough!  ------------- Biggles was in rehab last Saturday |
Posted By: Firepuck
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 14:29
------------- Kryten : "'Pub'? Ah yes, A meeting place where humans attempt to achieve advanced states of mental incompetence by the repeated consumption of fermented vegetable drinks." |
Posted By: mystic fred
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 14:35
|
What is prog? ladies and gentlemen, are you sitting comfortably? then i will begin...
Far away in a place called "En-ger-land" the mighty Prog Dinosaur, successor of a long line of wild warrior kings from far away such as Blues, Rock'n'Roll, Beat, Pop and Psyche, ruled happily and peacefully for many years. Prog Dinosaur held court with the Great Emperor Heavy Rock and they feasted and made merry together and eventually became very fat, and after the great Prog/Punk war of 1976, in which the mighty Prog Dinosaur was mortally wounded, the New Wave Punk Gremlins held sway for a very short time and were in turn defeated by the NWOBHM Army, who were in turn destroyed by the Britpop Trolls, but meanwhile the son of Prog Dinosaur "Neo Prog" and his many followers came out from exile and settled in En-ger-land, where they preached the new Prog and soon found many new followers from all over the world. They formed an alliance with the Fiery Metal Dragon, the Krautrock King, the Jazz Giant and many others. They spread their peaceful message across the world and still continue to gain great influence with many young warriors and elders alike. Nowadays the elders sit by the fire and remember many gigs and battles fought during the great days of the Prog Dinosaur - may we remember him and may his new family of descendants prosper - and all hail to that i say!!!! ALL HAIL!!! -------------  Prog Archives Tour Van 
|
Posted By: cuncuna
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 15:38
|
I think there's not a steady meaning. Everyday, I know less about that. All I know is that a large percentage of the music I'm interested in is classified under that label. I know for myself that any kind of music that follows a patern can not be called progressive. Hence, my lack of interest in clone bands, or like "brand" bands. Must come from an internal need to explore sounds. Most of the times, I think that the actual exploration has move from the prog bands to another stage. ------------- ¡Beware of the Bee! |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 15:41
I agree with this. Its what I used to think before I got confused here.  ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Angelo
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 15:53
I can't get it from your profile, but could it be that your real name is Eric Adams or Joey DeMaio?  Nice description, and pretty accurate as far as I can tell, but the ending is a bit too Manowar...------------- http://www.iskcrocks.com" rel="nofollow - ISKC Rock Radio I stopped blogging and reviewing - so won't be handling requests. Promo's for ariplay can be sent to [email protected] |
Posted By: earlyprog
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 16:03
| I think the majority of popular music that you cannot dance to, is prog. Prog is for listening, while other popular music is for dancing. The first music i realised I couldn't dance to was The Beatles, therefore Beatles is prog...well, need more work on that theory... |
Posted By: bhikkhu
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 16:04
|
When I first discovered it, it was rock done with a classical sensibility. Bands like Yes and Genesis were basically doing symphonies in rock. As it has evolved, more styles have been integrated. The definition has also gotten more broad. I still tend to look at it in the same way. Not everyone is doing the symphinic style, but I think they approach it with the same kind of creativity. ------------- a.k.a. H.T. http://riekels.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow - http://riekels.wordpress.com |
Posted By: Hierophant
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 16:14
|
It's a higher level of complexity - in one form or another. ------------- 
|
Posted By: el böthy
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 16:34
Me Tarzan, you Jane  ------------- "You want me to play what, Robert?" 
|
Posted By: Bastille Dude
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 17:03
Brilliant Mystic Fred, absolutely brilliant... ------------- DEATH TO FALSE PROG! |
Posted By: TG da JF
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 17:05
I'm on styledancing with my sister. There are poppy stuff we dance to, but most just are like... normal non-commercial-but-for-the-genre-and-dance songs. I thought that, maybe later, I could prog those genres. Anyway, your theory might be true UNTIL I will have done my job on that ;). Anyways, Just read that "Prog?" part on the main site and make it whatever you want afterwards. Try different sub-"genres"(tricky word) before saying its all boring. I just see Prog as enhanced music. Music that has evoluted. Just like Xsjado's: www.xsjado.com. They're skates wich people have thought about: what can there be improved on the skates. People see them as lame, ugly, and some see the usage as cheating but they're just superior and that makes them jealous. Just compare this lil story with prog and just replace the fact of people seeing it as lame with the fact no-one listens to it. But I actually prefer it that way. It really feels like being unique and if the masses would listen to it I would have to look for something else to be unique. Stay yourself, TG. ------------- Skating saves lives. |
Posted By: Zweck
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 17:35
After being here a while you'll come to find that there are in fact sub-genres set off for innovation, but it doesn't count as prog, or at least not as such. (This page's policy is to consider it a genre, so that the more regressive stuff that sort of sounds like "the classic bands" can also find it's place here) |
Posted By: Viajero Astral
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 18:18
This maybe can help to, its from "The School of Rock" movie You can see "Prog Rock" in the right ------------- 
|
Posted By: GPFR
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 18:28
If only it listen some more then 70s prog, coz theres a lot more then that. ------------- www.myspace.com/hail_peter 
|
Posted By: The Lost Chord
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 19:03
|
prog is LIFE -------------  "Only the sun knew why"
|
Posted By: imoeng
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 19:12
|
LIFE is prog ------------- http://img360.imageshack.us/my.php?image=spmiw7.jpg"> 
|
Posted By: KazimirMajorinc
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 19:48
|
Progressive rock is misnomen, it should be called "sophisticated rock" or "complex rock" instead. It was hardly progressive even back in time of 1970's because as we already commented mainstream persons like Lennon and Harrison hade gone much deeper into avantguarde in their experiments in late 60's than progressive bands of the time. Progressive rock is strongly limited with its rock component. You cannot go really far and insist to stay in the rock genre. |
Posted By: Hierophant
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 21:58
|
Prog has nothing to do with rock really - if bands like tangerine dream
are prog then obviously it can't have anything to do with rock or
genres/styles. It's complexity - the simplest way I can put it. That's why bands like Meshuggah are in the archives. What do they have in common with Yes & Genesis? - complexity. It comes in sorts of shapes and sizes. -------------
|
Posted By: imoeng
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 22:02
|
^ somewhat i agree, but why its called progressive rock?? ------------- http://img360.imageshack.us/my.php?image=spmiw7.jpg">
|
Posted By: video vertigo
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 23:08
I like how Zappa, Captain Beefheart and Can are in the ? section ------------- "The rock and roll business is pretty absurd, but the world of serious music is much worse." - Zappa |
Posted By: video vertigo
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 23:14
|
http://www.netkushi.com/movie-stills/albums/h-movie-stills/The-School-of-Rock-movie-stills/normal_The-School-of-Rock-movie-wallpaper-8.jpg - http://www.netkushi.com/movie-stills/albums/h-movie-stills/The-School-of-Rock-movie-stills/normal_The-School-of-Rock-movie-wallpaper-8.jpg theres another view of it. http://www.netkushi.com/movie-stills/albums/h-movie-stills/The-School-of-Rock-movie-stills/normal_The-School-of-Rock-movie-wallpaper-8.jpg - ------------- "The rock and roll business is pretty absurd, but the world of serious music is much worse." - Zappa |
Posted By: coffeeintheface
Date Posted: June 08 2006 at 23:23
you nailed it ------------- OBQM: www.soundcloud.com/onebigquestionmark (solo project) nQuixote: www.soundcloud.com/n-quixote (ambient + various musical ideas) |
Posted By: Speakerfish
Date Posted: June 09 2006 at 00:29
|
Progressive Rock: The Other White Beat ------------- Dissonance; subtle harmonic dissonance Contemplating and completing the negative space Romantic symphonies left on the floodplains |
Posted By: imoeng
Date Posted: June 09 2006 at 00:32
dont really understand,, what is the other white beat?  ------------- http://img360.imageshack.us/my.php?image=spmiw7.jpg">
|
Posted By: Rust
Date Posted: June 09 2006 at 00:55
|
It is music that rambles.
Also, it gives us that feeling you get when you are atop hills of yesterday, vewing the silence of the valley.
 ------------- We got to pump the stuff to make us tough from the heart Its astart What we need is awareness we cant get careless Mental self defensive fitness Make everybody see in order to fight the powers that be |
Posted By: hamham
Date Posted: June 09 2006 at 00:58
|
prog to me is something other than verse 1-5 chorus verse 6-10 guitar solo chorus ending you know, something that's a bit more complicated and interesting :D |
Posted By: Epitath
Date Posted: June 09 2006 at 04:04
I like that definition
I allways see Prog as an Electric Translation of Classical Music! ------------- 
|
Posted By: Frasse
Date Posted: June 09 2006 at 09:58
|
Who coined the phrase "progressive rock"? You should ask him. (I guess it was a male.) |
Posted By: The Lost Chord
Date Posted: June 09 2006 at 11:30
|
lol this is ridiculous, you people really dont know why this music is called progressive rock?
In the late 60's the type of music you see here under "proto-prog" and some of the bigs like YES, Genesis, King Crimson and such were all given the name "progressive music" because it worked in describing the style. Music was life back then, and these guys were playing music that would appear "progressive" or more advanced then, say, a beatles record from the early 60's.
Its really quite simple, the name for this music stuck back then and has stayed ever since...even with all of its ridiculous changes ( neo prog). But the name works, King Crimson, Moody Blues, YES< Genesis, BJH, ELP...all of these bands were bouncing off of eachother in the world of prog rock...it was a style, get yourself a mellotron and your INSTANTLY prog, just because your using an electric keyboard mixed with electric guitar, drums and maybe some abstract instrument like a Sitar (rarely used outside of prog in that time) or even the flute! mixed with rock music the flute was seen as progressive....moving forward toward something, perhaps, may seem now like "what did they mean!?!? what exactly were they moving forward to??"...but in the late 60's there was no question, this was clearly moving SOMEWHERE it was different, so whats so hard about "Progressive Rock".
It may not work today for some of the stuff that has tried to fit into it, but that names existence is there for a pretty simple reason, its not that hard to comprehend. ------------- "Only the sun knew why"
|
Posted By: The Hemulen
Date Posted: June 09 2006 at 11:35
Do I spy "Residents" in amongst the prog list, eh? Nice one. |
Posted By: The Hemulen
Date Posted: June 09 2006 at 11:37
Errrrm... depends which country you live in, mate.
|
Posted By: spacecraft
Date Posted: June 09 2006 at 20:22
|
I have heard all the arguments about prog, what is/isn't, but i can't get my head around Ruish being prog. i've got a few of their albums (alleged prog) but i just don't see it. They are not a bad band, but are, in fact, a very good rock band. How they are prog, depends on where you stand on music. There are so many bands on here that never ever aspire to prog rock, but are assimillated into this genre just to please the current audience.
Peolpe want the Beatles in here and other ridiculous bands. I say no.
I noted that NME readers voted Oasis (loud laugh) best ever UK album, followed buy the appalling Sargeants Pepper album next, Dark side of the moon wasn't in the top 5. Each to their own, but SP was the first, but one of the worst concept albums ever.
------------- To Him as the Supreme King and Judge we commit our cause, casting our cares upon Him and firmly trusting that He will inspire us with courage and bring our enemies to nought. |
Posted By: The Lost Chord
Date Posted: June 09 2006 at 20:24
My point is that in the mid 60's, early 60's there was not much music with flutes and sitars merging rock music...hence it being abstract in the late 60's and 70's, and termed progressive rock, along with synths and even more abstract sounds and styles.i think that is a fact, prove me wrong. ------------- "Only the sun knew why"
|
Posted By: Spectra
Date Posted: June 10 2006 at 09:13
Totally agree!
Prog just doesn't give a sh*te about the standard fundament of a "regular" song. Often it is just one long piece of music, that's unlike much other music divided into sections that gets repeated. ------------- "...Soapbox, house of cards, and glass, So don't go tossin' your stones around..." |
Posted By: Zargus
Date Posted: June 10 2006 at 09:18
Hmmmmm... i searched for: what is prog, and this is what i got> http://bridance.ytmnd.com/ - http://bridance.ytmnd.com/  ------------- 
|
Posted By: KazimirMajorinc
Date Posted: June 10 2006 at 09:50
|
No, it is not only complexity, if it is then Iannis Xenakis would be major progressive rock artist. It must have that "rock" part, at least as continuity with rock tradition. As Schulze said, "we [from Berlin school] listened Floyd, not Stockhausen." Also, sophisticated is more accurate word than complex, since some of the progressive rock i.e. Floyd or T.Dream music is really simpler than music of Berry or Presley. Sophistication inside rock tradition, that is best I can figure out this moment ... And there is another moment - the music shouldn't be attributed to the opposed genres already. For example, triple The Clash album Sandinista! is both complicated and sophisticated and of course, rock album, it has elements of classical music and hell lot of influences, very inovative (more than neoprog for sure) but hardly anyone consider it as prog. Only because it came from punk tradition. Although, musically, it has nothing in common with punk as it was understood in that time. If Clash said in some interview that they play prog rock, prog rock fans would accept it ... |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: June 10 2006 at 10:31
|
Prog is whatever you think it is.
 or: it does not exist
or: Prog is an enigma wrapped in a riddle inside a conundrum suppurating in a tender boil on the sweaty armpit of rock.
 Take your pick! ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: June 10 2006 at 10:42
|
Any rock music that strives to be experimental and groundbreaking and infuses many different styles other than rock into their music. -------------  
|
Posted By: leirbagaze
Date Posted: June 10 2006 at 11:21
|
>>>>>>>>Hmmmmm... i searched for: what is prog, and this is what i got> http://bridance.ytmnd.com/ - http://bridance.ytmnd.com/
I really do not get it.
Discusing and searching everywhere for a definition of Prog?.
Why don't just simply try to improve and work on the definition of Prog that IS ALREADY ON THIS SITE:
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive-rock.asp#definition - http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive-rock.asp#definition
Whcih maybe it is not perfect, but it is one of the best aproximation you can find elsewhere.
Gabriel
|
Posted By: KazimirMajorinc
Date Posted: June 10 2006 at 11:31
|
The Ramones did quite original and groundbreaking music. But we are not happy to call them prog band. Why? I think it is lack of sophistication. How about Laibach? Lot of classical music there, and very experimental as well. And sosphisticated. They seem to have more right to be classified as prog than whole neo-prog subgenre. However, they are usually not classified that way. Why? |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 10 2006 at 12:15
It has nothing to do with sophistication either. Much Prog Rock is sophisticated, but much is not - and conversely, not all sophisticated music is Prog. No-one has a right to be classified as Prog unless the Prog community says so. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: KazimirMajorinc
Date Posted: June 10 2006 at 14:40
| Any example of prog music that is not on some way sophisticated? |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 10 2006 at 17:41
|
Depends how you define sophisticated. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: DallasBryan
Date Posted: June 10 2006 at 18:07
| music from the 70's made under the influence of hallucenigenics and narcotics by semi-intellectuals which gave it a surreal sound that was in opposition to mainstream 60's music, influenced by the American psychedelic craze as it spread into europe. |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 10 2006 at 19:41
While I'm sure that a fair bit was influenced by psychedelia, e.g. most Krautrock, Pink Floyd, Hawkwind, etc.,there was also a great deal of Prog where that influence is not particularly prevalent - if at all - e.g. Genesis, ELP, Jethro Tull, Gentle Giant. Prog generally can be seen as the antithesis of psychedelia, in that the long jams are replaced by "proper" compositions. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: KazimirMajorinc
Date Posted: June 11 2006 at 08:14
Something that is not easily understendable, obvious, naive, something that require some experience or sensitivity to be recognized - relatively to other members of the genus (in this case rock). So, progressive rock <=> sophisticated (rock OR coming from rock tradition) AND (NOT already classified as part of the tradition recognized and accepted as opposite to progressive rock, like punk, new vawe or disco.) Surely, there are theoretical problems with that definition, but I think that is the definition we subconciously use in communication. Are there any good counterexamples around? Any recognized and accepted prog band not satisfying this definition? Any band satisfying this definition but not recognized and accepted as prog? |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 11 2006 at 09:06
Actually, punk isn't the great opposite to Prog that the majority of people seem to tout it as - some punk bands, such as the Stranglers, were virtually Prog Rock bands - and some New Wave bands were way out there. Even some Disco had complex orchestral arrangements that could put some Prog Rock to shame. As far as "not easily understandable" goes - that could apply to any music - especially music that you personally do not like. As far as "obvious" goes, a considerable amount of Prog Rock seems very obvious to my ears - especially when a band deliberately tries to be Prog. For example, what is not obvious about "In The Court of the Crimson King"? It's a rock song with clever arrangements, isn't it? What about Dark Side of the Moon doesn't seem obvious when you listen to it? There are surprises, yes - but it doesn't require any experience or sensitivity to recognise it for what it is - and it's popularity is a testament to that. I'm not saying that it's not a sophisticated work, but it doesn't fit your definition - hence Prog is not necesarily sophisticated, and this is a perfect example. Or are you actually saying what I believe - that Prog could be absolutely anything you wanted it to be, given a reasonable set of boundaries?
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Teaflax
Date Posted: June 11 2006 at 09:34
|
I've always said that one of the greatest achievements in popular music
would be to write a song that is hideously complex yet incredibly
accessible and popular. Which is why I admire smart Pop acts, because they can write tunes that many people will like, but without using all too obvious formulae or overdone methods. -------------
|
Posted By: KazimirMajorinc
Date Posted: June 11 2006 at 13:17
That's what I'm saying, such works are not accepted as prog because they are part of the tradition percieved as opposite to prog rock.
Don't jump to the conclusion. If you think that these two songs are sophisticated, then you have no good counterexample for the claim that progressive rock=sophisticated rock.
I wouldn't go that far. |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 11 2006 at 17:00
OK, got you - the context made it look like you were still defining "sophisticated" to my skim reading...
I didn't actually say that either of the pieces I mentioned are or are not sophisticated - I asked what about them was not obvious. There is no counter to the opposite claim either - which is further justifying the suggestion I'm making, which is that the description you offered seems rather subjective and doesn't really describe Prog Rock. As a very curious person, I'm just trying to make a bit more sense out of it. Quick refresher:
OK, can you be more specific? That could easily apply to many bands in the field of rock music that are not categorised as Prog, and the opposite could eaily apply to bands that are currently labelled as Prog Rock. Ah, and you asked why the Ramones should not be considered Prog while the whole of Neo Prog is. I suggest you find out by listening to Neo-Prog 24-7 for the next year. 
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Zweck
Date Posted: June 11 2006 at 17:04
| Well the Ramones do tend to be more interesting than all Neo-Prog bands I've heard. |
Posted By: KazimirMajorinc
Date Posted: June 11 2006 at 21:19
|
Or are you actually saying what I believe - that Prog could be absolutely anything you wanted it to be, given a reasonable set of boundaries? I wouldn't go that far. OK, can you be more specific? How can I be more specific? It is simply not what I'm saying. |
Posted By: anotherpigfloyd
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 12:18
| I find prog everithyng tha have diferent tempos, moods, atmospheres, electronic instruments, and that is far away from mainstream rock format (verse,chorus, verse solo, chorus) |