Prog Polls - Developments which changed course of prog history

Print Page | Close Window

Developments which changed course of prog history

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=48408
Printed Date: February 15 2025 at 07:36
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: Developments which changed course of prog history

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Subject: Developments which changed course of prog history
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 14:48

I have always been fascinated by some of the choices/moves made during the heyday of 70s prog. Bruford leaving Yes at the peak of their popularity and not even touring on the CTTE album he made with the band; Gabriel 'walking out of the machinery' on the verge of superstardom; Fripp deciding to fold KC in the mid 70s so they wouldn't become a "dinosaur".....etc. So which of these events most affected the course of prog history, for better or worse in your view?

Replies:

Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 14:52

Wow, this is a good list! I narrowed it down to the first option, the second, the third, and the last. In the end, however, I had to vote the last option. What King Crimson has done with music, IMO, especially over all the years has been extremely important in prog's history.

-------------

Posted By: horsewithteeth11
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 14:58

I choose option #2. Anderson felt that when both Howe and Bruford joined separately, they added something new to his perspective on music. Then add on the other couple dozen chain reactions that occured (and that I wouldn't have time to cover in this post) and Bruford's move is easily for me one of the most influential moments in progressive rock

-------------

Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 15:56

The biggest event is the arrival of the CD . The Golden Years of prog were left for dead in 1978 by which time too many bands were going commercial (Hi there Genee!) . There wouldn't be a PA without the advent of the compact disc (Old proggies getting CD reeditions) , as well as the success of Marillion.

That being said , the main musical move is #2 because it affected both Yes and KC immensely. Waters leaving only affected Waters. Fripp frming and reforming KC is nothing new , after all KC always was a project.

-------------
I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth.

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 16:02

Even though I was still a project in the early 70's, I can (from what I know) say that

- Lake's move didn't kill Crimson.. though it enhanced ELP

- Brufford's move didn't kill Yes, though it enhanced KC

- Barret's departure from Pink Floyd, in my view, actually helped the band which released their greatest albums without him and with new true master Gilmour

- Fripp killed KC but has resurrected it so many times that his 74's move is hardly dramatic.

- Fripp resurrecting KC in the 80's is important though the band (in my opinion) kind of.. sucked. But it was important for prog.

- Anderson/Wakeman leaving Yes - though important, both eventually returned, and the Andersonless album (Drama) is not bad at all.... the band remained the same...

The most dramatic for me:

- Waters leaving PF.. the end of one of the greatest bands ever... it would never be the same without him

- Peter Gabriel - now this was hard.. the great singer and writer and showman leaving prog's greatest band.. it changed history mostly because it was the start of the end of an era, which arrived with..

- Hackett leaving Genesis - the final nail in the coffin for Symphonic Genesis, and the beginning of the band's pop career. I love a few Hackett-less albums (ATTTWT, duke) but one can't deny that, for prog history, this move really changed things.

-------------

Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 16:03

Option #1, in the sense that ELP was so enormously important to prog, and I think Lake was an integral piece of that puzzle (though I think the most replacable member, if you could call any of them such).

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 16:08

Yes releasing Tales from Topographic Oceans. That was the point where prog finally proved the critics right in their complaints, and from there prog ended any real chance at redemption. Punk coming along and striking the final blow didn't matter; prog had already dealt itself a fatal wound.

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 16:11

Pnoom! wrote:

Yes releasing Tales from Topographic Oceans. That was the point where prog finally proved the critics right in their complaints, and from there prog ended any real chance at redemption. Punk coming along and striking the final blow didn't matter; prog had already dealt itself a fatal wound.

I would agree partially.. but from the list, which one would you choose?

-------------

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 16:26

The T wrote:

I would agree partially.. but from the list, which one would you choose?

From the list, Fripp ending KC. KC was the one band that had always been the one prog band (well, along with the debatably prog Pink Floyd) that showed restraint and rationality throughout their music. With KC done then, prog was really done (symph prog at least), and that KC reemerged as a non-prog (though still art rock) band in the 80s only compounds this.

Second from this list would be Peter Gabriel going solo, since I would say that marked the point where prog really morphed into proggy pop into pure pop.

A brief discussion of all the options:

Greg Lake leaving King Crimson to join ELP

ELP were always the epitome of prog excess, so this helped define the genre's negative image, and it influenced a lot of bands, but I don't see prog being too different without ELP. King Crimson I don't think was terribly affected by this. I think their sound would've shifted to where it had gone anyway, since Fripp was the key factor.

Bill Bruford leaving Yes to join King Crimson

It made Crimson a better band, didn't really affect Yes. Either way, Bruford would've been one of the key elements in prog, so I don't think this is a terribly important development, though it's nice that he moved to the better band

Steve Hackett leaving Genesis for solo career

Genesis was going pop anyway, I would imagine SH leaving was more a consequence of their change in sound than a catalyst of said change. I think this is more symbolic than truly important, especially prog was already pretty irrelevant at this point.

Syd Barrett's departure from P Floyd and Gilmour's arrival

I don't think PF was ever enough of a prog band for this to be worth noting. It shaped the history of PF, but PF shaped prog far less than the triumvirate of Yes, Genesis, and King Crimson.

Roger Waters acrimonious departure from Floyd

See my above point with the added point that prog was already pretty irrelevant by the 1980s.

Anderson/Wakeman walking away from Yes at end of 70s

This was after the downfall of prog, as I've said. I would say this is more a function of the downfall (and representative of it) than a cause of it.

Fripp resurrecting KC in the early 80s

This is more symbolic in that the most relevant prog band came back as a non-prog band, pretty much definitively stating that the golden era of prog was done. It may have quenched any chance of a golden era resurrection, and it cleared the way for the neo revival, but I don't think KC coming back as a prog band could've saved prog. It was already dead, and their reappearance as a non-prog band represents that.

Posted By: Rocktopus
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 17:02

Soon after John Lydon failed to impress Henry Cow at the audition, everything changed.

(I'm sure I've read about this somewhere, but I can't find any info about it on google. Am I just making this up?)

-------------
Over land and under ashes
In the sunlight, see - it flashes
Find a fly and eat his eye
But don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
Don't believe in me

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 17:11

tszirmay wrote:

The biggest event is the arrival of the CD . The Golden Years of prog were left for dead in 1978 by which time too many bands were going commercial (Hi there Genee!) . There wouldn't be a PA without the advent of the compact disc (Old proggies getting CD reeditions) , as well as the success of Marillion.

This poll is restricted to personnel moves among the top prog trailblazer bands of the 70s. Other developments such as the CD, internet etc may be appropriate for another poll (be my guest) but not this one. Having said that, those of us who made prog in the 70s by buying record albums might dispute that, but that is for another thread. All music benefitted from the advent of the CD, so its kind of a moot point. Check out Frank Sinatra's CD sales sometime and you will see what I mean.

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 17:15

As I said, this particular poll is about personnel moves among the top prog bands, otherwise it would turn into a which album is more important thread, which has already been done. BTW, punk didn't kill prog, disco did. Common misperception foisted upon us by Rolling Stone and Mojo magazine critics who hated prog because they sucked at playing musical instruments with any kind of ability. Don't believe everything you read.

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 17:17

Pnoom! wrote:

The T wrote:

I would agree partially.. but from the list, which one would you choose?

Second from this list would be Peter Gabriel going solo, since I would say that marked the point where prog really morphed into proggy pop into pure pop.

A brief discussion of all the options:

Greg Lake leaving King Crimson to join ELP

Bill Bruford leaving Yes to join King Crimson

Steve Hackett leaving Genesis for solo career

Syd Barrett's departure from P Floyd and Gilmour's arrival

I don't think PF was ever enough of a prog band for this to be worth noting. It shaped the history of PF, but PF shaped prog far less than the triumvirate of Yes, Genesis, and King Crimson.

Roger Waters acrimonious departure from Floyd

See my above point with the added point that prog was already pretty irrelevant by the 1980s.

Anderson/Wakeman walking away from Yes at end of 70s

This was after the downfall of prog, as I've said. I would say this is more a function of the downfall (and representative of it) than a cause of it.

Fripp resurrecting KC in the early 80s

this whole thing is an interesting read because much of it is so wacky. I am not sure where you are pulling much of this music history from, but your "prog was irrelevant" kick borders on manic. That is some wild weird stuff. You need to put down the Rolling Stone issues for a bit dude........

Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 17:26

Personal change: John Rutsey decides playing drums in a touring band isn't for him and is replaced by Neil Peart.

2nd: Peter Banks and Tony Kaye replaced by Steve Howe and Rick Wakeman.

From List: All are interesting and had different positive and negative results. I think that Peter Gabriel's leaving Genesis had the most significant impact on the direction of a prog band. The vocalist/frontman is kind of the band's identity and the changing of this identity was quite huge.

For me though these are all in retrospect since they all occurred prior to my becoming an invested listener of any of these bands. The various impacts would probably have been more significant if I were a fan prior to these occurrences.

-------------

Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 17:26

Rocktopus wrote:

Soon after John Lydon failed to impress Henry Cow at the audition, everything changed.

(I'm sure I've read about this somewhere, but I can't find any info about it on google. Am I just making this up?)

This rings bells with me too. However, I might just be as deluded as you.. LOL

Anyone? I'm intrigued now.

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 17:27

As I said, this particular poll is about personnel moves among the top prog bands

And once I realized this, I made a relevant post.

BTW, punk didn't kill prog, disco did.

I never said punk killed prog, I said prog did.

Common misperception foisted upon us by Rolling Stone and Mojo magazine critics who hated prog because they sucked at playing musical instruments with any kind of ability. Don't believe everything you read.

I have never read an issue of Rolling Stone or Mojo in my life.

this whole thing is an interesting read because much of it is so wacky.

Do you need to insult every post I make?

I am not sure where you are pulling much of this music history from, but your "prog was irrelevant" kick borders on manic.

In terms of it's relevance to the music scene, prog started going downhill around 1974-ish. What's so wacky about that?

That is some wild weird stuff. You need to put down the Rolling Stone issues for a bit dude........

I have never read an issue of Rolling Stone or Mojo in my life.

EDIT: mind actually explaining how it's wacky without insults?

Posted By: JROCHA
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 17:41

When Peter Left Genesis.....enough said.

-------------
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights...

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 17:46

Pnoom! wrote:

As I said, this particular poll is about personnel moves among the top prog bands

And once I realized this, I made a relevant post.

BTW, punk didn't kill prog, disco did.

I never said punk killed prog, I said prog did.

I have never read an issue of Rolling Stone or Mojo in my life.

this whole thing is an interesting read because much of it is so wacky.

Do you need to insult every post I make?

I am not sure where you are pulling much of this music history from, but your "prog was irrelevant" kick borders on manic.

In terms of it's relevance to the music scene, prog started going downhill around 1974-ish. What's so wacky about that?

That is some wild weird stuff. You need to put down the Rolling Stone issues for a bit dude........

I have never read an issue of Rolling Stone or Mojo in my life.

EDIT: mind actually explaining how it's wacky without insults?

I was going to actually take the time to respond point by point, but when I got to the part about Pink Floyd not really being a progressive rock band, I just decided I don't want to expend the kind of energy it would take for what would have to be an educational history lesson that would be better left for more in depth reading of some music literature and possibly some more in depth listening........like I said, it was an interesting read.

Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 17:54

Which band sang:

it's not what you say it's the way that you say it!
it's not what you write it's the way that you write it!

Whoever it was they were bang on the mark.

Let's not descend into surly post territory please.

Stern%20Smile

Next ad hominem post in this thread gets deleted.

Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 18:59

None of the above.

1. Hammill ending VdGG in 1977 for me, on a personal basis. Hammill soldiered on though and made some excellent solo albums throughout the 1980s.
2. Hammill sacking David Jackson in 2007.

The above are tongue-in-cheek answers by the way.

I don't think Punk or Disco ended prog, I agree with Folly. Prog just became stale on its own accord. Once Punk had come round, it actually breathed new life into prog (of a different kind though) and such bands like Massacre, This Heat and yes, even Marillion, were formed and a new resurgence of prog emerged in the 1980s. It just wasn't referred to as prog at the time.

-------------

Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 20:41

Here's and interesting question:
What does it really matter which of these developments most affected the course of prog history?

Interesting selection of options though. A few more slots that could have been filled in the poll as others have pointed out. I'm not surprised that the number one option is the most picked. Early events often tend to have effects on the course of things that tend to spread out farther although they can be diluted in the spreading out.

I'm going to have to abstain. LOL

-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 20:49

Slartibartfast wrote:

Here's and interesting question:
What does it really matter which of these developments most affected the course of prog history?

it matters because I am interested in hearing people's views on the matter. Is that good enough? Why does anyone put any poll up?

For instance, I am surprised that people right now are picking Lake joining ELP, and not more people picking Gilmour joining Floyd.

So I guess chalk it up to curiousity. Its part of my human nature.

Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 20:57

Surely Greg's..
How about Hackett's arrival to Genesis?
Wakeman's arrival to Yes? Or Howe's?
Maybe Gilmour is another good chance, but adding Syd on the note, really don't think that'll work.
Rabin joining Yes?
..

Posted By: laplace
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 20:59

Damo Suzuki joining Can. huge repercussions.

-------------
FREEDOM OF SPEECH GO TO HELL

Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 22:04

Dr. Prog wrote:

Slartibartfast wrote:

Here's and interesting question:
What does it really matter which of these developments most affected the course of prog history?

it matters because I am interested in hearing people's views on the matter. Is that good enough? Why does anyone put any poll up?

For instance, I am surprised that people right now are picking Lake joining ELP, and not more people picking Gilmour joining Floyd.

So I guess chalk it up to curiousity. Its part of my human nature.

Well, of course, curiosity isn't allowed. To be technically correct Lake didn't join ELP, the three coagulated together. And of course we all know, Gilmore rose through the ranks by assassination. Oh, wait, he didn't kill Syd? Nevermind. Back to the original question, it just really doesn't seem to be something quantifiable. Always fun to try though, eh?

Perhaps a better question for you, is there a common thread to all these events?

-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 22:15

Definitely Gabriel leaving Genesis. Phil Collins went on as front man to make 4-6 excellent additional studio albums with Genesis ( or at least up until end of Duke) So thanks PG for leaving!!!!!!

Not detracting from PG solo work or the classics he did with Genesis either

-------------
<font color=Brown>Music - The Sound Librarian

...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR]

Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 22:26

The BBC's insistence on not playing american rock n roll, and instead relying on classical music, english music hall, and trad jazz.

-------------
"Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case.

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 22:35

Slartibartfast wrote:

Dr. Prog wrote:

Slartibartfast wrote:

Here's and interesting question:
What does it really matter which of these developments most affected the course of prog history?

it matters because I am interested in hearing people's views on the matter. Is that good enough? Why does anyone put any poll up?

For instance, I am surprised that people right now are picking Lake joining ELP, and not more people picking Gilmour joining Floyd.

So I guess chalk it up to curiousity. Its part of my human nature.

it isn't quantifiable. If it was, somebody would have already measured it, and there would be no reason to do a poll or discuss it.

A common thread? I don't know, but I was struck by how many of these particular events occurred at the height or close to the peak of the group's success, ie Bruford, Gabriel, Fripp folding KC in 74 etc. Walking out when things are going bad is easy, its a lot tougher to do it when things are going relatively well.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 22:37

I'd go with different options, includimng one by Cacho:

Hackett joining Genesis: The IMO best keyboard - guitar ensemble was born
Mike Oldfield releasing Tubular Bells: A 19 years old kid taking that risk is amazing.
Jethro Tull switching from Blues to some sort opf Folk/Symphonic Prog
Moraz replacing Wakeman for Relayer: A one in a kind album was released and proved a band can change, still I like CTTE more, but Relayer is outstandibng
Wetton replacing Lake: Proved that anybody can be replaced.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 23:29

Just will reply to the musical issues, the rest can be ignored.

1.- The question published is "Events which changed course of Prog History", and I gave my options to that question, as I did in 100 previous ocasions with no problem, threads are free to evolve, nobody owns a thread, just starts it..

2.- I consider more essential the creation of Hackett - Banks sound than other events.

3.- Replacing is taking the place, Moraz took the place of Wakeman for one album that was different to all previous releases in style and sound, I believe it was trascendental and it's a replacement.

4.- Even when Haskell and Boz Burell occupied the vocalist place in King Crimson, the band was searching for a replacement as strong as Greg , because nobody really was able to match him (I wrote this exact phrase a long time ago in this forum).

5.- I believe Tull switching of genres and Mike Oldfield Tubular bells, changed the history of Prog as the question is posted.

BTW: There was not one album between Lake and Wetton, there were 3 albums (Lizard, Earthbound and Islands) and not one but two vocalists in between.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 23:47

I think you mean 2 albums, Iván.

Lizard with Gordon Haskell
Islands with Boz Burrell

After that came Larks' Tongues in Aspic with John Wetton.

Unless you're including the live album Earthbound, which in this situation, I presume you are. Wink

Edit: I didn't see your edit. LOL

-------------

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 06 2008 at 23:56

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Just will reply to the musical issues, the rest can be ignored.

2.- I consider more essential the creation of Hackett - Banks sound than other events.

5.- I believe Tull switching of genres and Mike Oldfield Tubular bells, changed the history of Prog as the question is posted.

BTW: There was not one album between Lake and Wetton, there were 3 albums (Lizard, Earthbound and Islands) and not one but two vocalists in between.

Iván

No, the poll question very clearly states which of these developments most affected prog history, and specifically lists those developments. As you know, all that does not fit into the subject heading, which is why the question and specific choices are then typed out. And no, replacing someone is not the same as succeeding someone.

For instance, Tony Kaye was replaced by Steve Howe---they asked Kaye to move on. Wakeman quit, and then Moraz came in as his successor, but not his replacement. Its a subtle, but crucial distinction.

All the other stuff is your opinion, that's all well and good, its just irrelevant to this poll. And you are right, there were multiple albums between Lake and Wetton, making your last poll suggestion even more irrelevant and false.

And as I said, since my polls are obviously so deficient and so not up to your lofty and superior standards, my suggestion would be to create your own poll instead of seeing the need to constantly nitpick and completely try to change my poll options, which seems to be a pattern here. You obviously have such superior knowledge here, that I find it fascinating you would even bother with my silly little polls.

(by the way, how did the Fripp disbanding KC go from 9 votes to 37 so quickly? Is someone monkeying with the vote totals here?

)

Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 00:09

Deleted

-------------

Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 00:36

I voted for Fripp ending KC, but what about:

Greg Lake leaving KC, Keith Emerson ending the Nice, and Carl Palmer leaving Atomic Rooster to form ELP?

Posted By: Rocktopus
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 06:15

Dr. Prog wrote:

(by the way, how did the Fripp disbanding KC go from 9 votes to 37 so quickly? Is someone monkeying with the vote totals here?

)

Because you allow multiple votes, and by that making the poll results pretty useless. The suggestion with the biggest nerdclick fanbase (who'll bother to vote again and again to see their heroes take the lead) always wins.

I usually disagree with whatever Ivan writes, but suggesting relevant stuff not included in a poll is half the fun and not irrelevant. It starts discussions and keeps threads alive for a couple of pages more. Sometimes its even a slightly interesting read.

-------------
Over land and under ashes
In the sunlight, see - it flashes
Find a fly and eat his eye
But don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
Don't believe in me

Posted By: iguana
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 07:54

EXCELLENT thread, doctor!

i cannot possibly voice an opinion as it will be just that (an opinion) but, as in regards
to your options, i'd choose steve hackett's departure from genesis. but, then, it may
of course always be a matter of choosing a change in prog for the better and/or
a change for the worse.

if the latter is applicable, i'd also go for the release of TFTO by YES, which proved to
be the joint nexus, peak, turning point and fateful seal for progressive rock.
plus the birth of the scapegoat and the laughing stock.

-------------
progressive rock and rural tranquility don't match. true or false?

Posted By: sleeper
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 09:13

I dont think any of these developments had much affect on the development of prog as awhole. I went with the folding of KC in '74 because it was more of a portent of things to come, Fripp trying to prevent KC becoming an ineffectual dinosaure which to greater and lesser degrees started to happen to all the other major prog bands shortly afterwards (some notables held off for a few years though). The only real effect that I can see that the chopping and changing of band members had on the prog scene was the small changes made to the indavidual bands, because normally it wasnt the creative leader of the band that was moving on.

Its been mentioned in here already but the forming of certain bands and the release of certain albums and the change in some peoples attitudes were infinitely bigger effects on the course of prog.

-------------
Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 10:22

Once Punk had come round, it actually breathed new life into prog (of a different kind though) and such bands like Massacre, This Heat and yes, even Marillion, were formed and a new resurgence of prog emerged in the 1980s. It just wasn't referred to as prog at the time.

Oh certainly prog on the whole never died, as soon as it started fading out avant-prog peaked, and as soon as avant-prog started going down there was neo, but certainly symphonic prog took itself down.

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 10:23

iguana wrote:

if the latter is applicable, i'd also go for the release of TFTO by YES, which proved to
be the joint nexus, peak, turning point and fateful seal for progressive rock.
plus the birth of the scapegoat and the laughing stock.

That's what I said, minus the "peak" part.

Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 10:33

Pnoom! wrote:

Avant-prog has never started going down, in my opinion. Neo-prog and avant-prog also have no correlation (in terms of listeners). Infact, I'd go so far and say avant-prog never really peaked, well, not in the 1980s. Sure, you had The Residents, Miriodor, Cartoon, PFS and many others but only really The Residents were popular. I'd say avant-prog is more popular now (Zorn, Patton projects) than it ever has been. Neo came from Symphonic but there was a gap from about 1976/77 to when the early 1980s where you have mostly New Wave, post-punk and No Wave and the Yes and Genesis pop (including Asia. Japan and others).

-------------

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 10:51

I think you misunderstood me.

James wrote:

Avant-prog has never started going down, in my opinion.

It's always been around, but it was somewhat quieter after the RIO movement bands slowed down/disbanded.

Neo-prog and avant-prog also have no correlation (in terms of listeners).

Infact, I'd go so far and say avant-prog never really peaked, well, not in the 1980s.

The RIO fest and it's aftermath was a definite peak, especially given that you had the Residents and This Heat in addition.

Sure, you had The Residents, Miriodor, Cartoon, PFS and many others but only really The Residents were popular.

Again, the RIO movement.

I'd say avant-prog is more popular now (Zorn, Patton projects) than it ever has been.

Agreed, but that just means that avant-prog is re-peaking.

Neo came from Symphonic but there was a gap from about 1976/77 to when the early 1980s where you have mostly New Wave, post-punk and No Wave and the Yes and Genesis pop (including Asia. Japan and others).

This is what I was initially referring to when talking about symphonic prog dying. If it had just bled into Neo, it wouldn't have ever died, it would've changed.

Posted By: el böthy
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 11:15

hehehe pretty much all had to do with Crimson.

I will say Lake leaving Crimson, but not so much for the fact that he left a band, but that without that he couldn´t have formed ELP

-------------
"You want me to play what, Robert?"

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 12:17

Pnoom! wrote[quote]

Originally posted by James

Avant-prog has never started going down, in my opinion.

It's always been around, but it was somewhat quieter after the RIO movement bands slowed down/disbanded.

I agree with James, Avant has not gone down yet, first they have to reach the peak, something hard in a so elaborate and ever changing sub-genre.

Symphonic could most likely reach the peak, because the formula was exhausted and the changes were too slow (Except in determined moments like the change between SEBTP and The Lamb or TFTO to Relayer, in which the style of a major band dramatically advanced), but if you keep changing as in Avant, there will always be something new to offer.

Neo-prog and avant-prog also have no correlation (in terms of listeners).

Agreed, there are moments like in 1992 to 1994 in which Symphonic gave a great advance and Avant kept advancing, even today, in which we have a small Symphonic boom, Avant keeps avamcing.

Infact, I'd go so far and say avant-prog never really peaked, well, not in the 1980s.

The RIO fest and it's aftermath was a definite peak, especially given that you had the Residents and This Heat in addition.

Here also with James, Rio fest wasn’t a peak, at least not a definitive peak, genres don’t have a linear advance, they have small up and downs, but the real peak, is yet to come.

Sure, you had The Residents, Miriodor, Cartoon, PFS and many others but only really The Residents were popular.

Again, the RIO movement.

Agreed, but lets be honest in something, genres like Symphonic had a slow change of icons, Yes is still on stage, Genesis was in the Prog Peak for a very long period, ELP, well had their up and downs but until a few years they were active, while Avant is in constant change of bands, new ones replace old ones in shoprt periods of time.

I'd say avant-prog is more popular now (Zorn, Patton projects) than it ever has been.

Agreed, but that just means that avant-prog is re-peaking.

Couldn’t we say ut’s reaching an up, and not yet the definitive peak?

This is what I was initially referring to when talking about symphonic prog dying. If it had just bled into Neo, it wouldn't have ever died, it would've changed.

That’s a wrong conception, there was an ongoing process of change.

In 1976 more or less, the sound of the bands started to change towards Neo Prog, some people even believe ATOTT and W&W are the first examples of Neo Prog, with what I don’t agree, it was just part of the process.

Bands like ASIA or Japan where a conservative evolution of Symphonic that couldn’t prosper, because it was too complex for the vast majority and seen as “C” class Prog or Prog wannabes by Progheads.

I believe that when you try to blend a cult or semi underground genre as Prog or Punk with general mainstream, you get a hybrid that most surely doesn’t have future.

The AOR bands as a hybrid genre vanished like New Age as a hybrid genre of Punk also vanished soon.

So Symphonic evolved to Neo Prog through a period of 4 or 5 years, period in which you had different attempts to replace Symph that didn’t prospered.

Iván

[quote]

-------------

Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 12:20

Pnoom! wrote:

I think you misunderstood me.

James wrote:

Avant-prog has never started going down, in my opinion.

It's always been around, but it was somewhat quieter after the RIO movement bands slowed down/disbanded.

Yes it was quieter, however see my comments below

Neo-prog and avant-prog also have no correlation (in terms of listeners).

Agreed. My argument was that if we define prog to include everything, some sort of prog has been peaking at any given time. They may not be correlated (Symph peaks, then avant-peaks, then neo peaks), but some sort of prog is always on the rise. In my initial argument, I was referring specifically to symph prog, which definitely did die out.

Yes, "pure" symphonic prog did die, in about 1976 or thereabouts. Then you had a renaissance period in the early 1990s with Anglagard and Par Lindh Project, naming just two.

Infact, I'd go so far and say avant-prog never really peaked, well, not in the 1980s.

The RIO fest and it's aftermath was a definite peak, especially given that you had the Residents and This Heat in addition.

The RIO movement practically ended in 1979. There was somewhat of an aftermath though, with the forming of Massacre in around 1980 but there was a bit a of gap until bands like Miriodor and 5uus came along. RIO was a peak yes but it ended in 1979, so the 1980s was not a peak for avant-prog although yes, there were The Residents, Massacre, This Heat, The Camberwell Now and if you include them, Tuxedo Moon, Nurse With Wound, Throbbing Gristle, Renaldo and the Loaf and others (although many don't count them as prog but just experimental anti-music, in a way). You also had the poppier and non-prog side, such as The Honeymoon Killers, The Pale Nudes and Tone Dog. None of these bands were mainstream, although The Honeymoon Killers charted and of course, The Residents were around at the time MTV started, so they got somewhat known by that.

An important note to make is: bands like Massacre, This Heat and The Camberwell Now all embraced the punk/post-punk movement and took to a different place. This is distinct from the RIO movement of a few years before. I would therefore say this was a new movement that was molded that way due to the times (Thatcherism and Reaganism, strikes and all sorts of other political and non-political stuff) which should be classed not as avant-prog but something else (no wave, post-punk, something else entirely).

Sure, you had The Residents, Miriodor, Cartoon, PFS and many others but only really The Residents were popular.

Again, the RIO movement.

The RIO movement died in 1979. There was an aftermath, see above. The Residents were not part of that movement really, although you could say they were related to it due to Cutler and Frith. Miriodor yes, they were, they definitely had an influence from Univers Zero, Present and Art Zoyd. Cartoon also influences from RIO. However, these were RIO-orientated (a term I have adopted after seeing it as a tag on last.fm - I used to use RIO-related but feel Orientated is a much better word) bands that were influenced by - rather than were a part of - the RIO movement. Again, only The Residents, due MTV, really got popular out of the above bands.

I'd say avant-prog is more popular now (Zorn, Patton projects) than it ever has been.

Agreed, but that just means that avant-prog is re-peaking.

Re-peaking yes but I feel it's never peaked as much as it has currently and that is due to many things. I give credit to The Internet, CDs and of course, Downloading, for he upsurge in popularity of all forms of experimental music. People have been able to discover many old bands and also many new bands have come on the scene. You also have bands breaking to mold, like Battles and the Math Rock of Don Caballero, Ahleuchatistas and Upsilon Acrux. They are taking music and experimentation to newer places and are molding other genres together. There's even a resurgence of symphonic prog, thanks to bands like William Grey.

This is what I was initially referring to when talking about symphonic prog dying. If it had just bled into Neo, it wouldn't have ever died, it would've changed.

I agree with this. I am not sure exactly when Marillion started but it must have been pre-1985. You also had IQ as well, another early neo-prog band.

-------------

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 12:23

Here also with James, Rio fest wasn’t a peak, at least not a definitive peak, genres don’t have a linear advance, they have small up and downs, but the real peak, is yet to come.

On the contrary, I would say that the RIO fest was a definite peak; it involved the bringing together of many of the best bands in the genre. I'm not saying it can never be topped, but it was certainly a peak relative to the years immediately before and after.

Obviously, I hope that it will reach even higher heights (and I am confident it will).

That’s a wrong conception, there was an ongoing process of change.

I don't deny this, but I do think that because it was so low key on the national radar that it's possible to point to where symph "died" and neo was "born" as definite points. The shift between the two was part of that general period of experimentation with new avenues after the first wave went down.

Couldn’t we say ut’s reaching an up, and not yet the definitive peak?

At the moment, it is at a peak. If it continues to rise, as I expect it shall, then we can redefine this time as "reaching up" and move what is the definitive peak. Right now, avant-prog is the highest it has ever been, and it remains to be seen whether the mountain it's climbing continues or comes back down.

Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 12:27

el böthy wrote:

I will say Lake leaving Crimson, but not so much for the fact that he left a band, but that without that he couldn´t have formed ELP

Interesting point - Lake leaving Crimson not only led to the creation of ELP, but also facilitated Crimson moving on to the next stage...

Good one

-------------

Jon Lord 1941 - 2012

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 12:27

The RIO movement practically ended in 1979. There was somewhat of an aftermath though, with the forming of Massacre in around 1980 but there was a bit a of gap until bands like Miriodor and 5uus came along. RIO was a peak yes but it ended in 1979, so the 1980s was not a peak for avant-prog although yes, there were The Residents, Massacre, This Heat, The Camberwell Now and if you include them, Tuxedo Moon, Nurse With Wound, Throbbing Gristle, Renaldo and the Loaf and others (although many don't count them as prog but just experimental anti-music, in a way). You also had the poppier and non-prog side, such as The Honeymoon Killers, The Pale Nudes and Tone Dog. None of these bands were mainstream, although The Honeymoon Killers charted and of course, The Residents were around at the time MTV started, so they got somewhat known by that.

An important this is: bands like Massacre, This Heat and The Camberwell Now all embraced the punk/post-punk movement and took to a different place. This is distinct from the RIO movement of a few years before. I would therefore say this was a new movement that was molded that way due to the times (Thatcherism and Reaganism, strikes and all sorts of other political and non-political stuff) which should be classed not as avant-prog but something else (yes I realise I am inventing something new here).

Ah, but in the immediate aftermath of RIO there emerged the no wave movement. They were two seperate peaks, but within the same general genre and immediately following one another, so avant-garde on the whole was peaking.

Then, in the late eighties, you have the fusing of metal with avant-garde courtesy of John Zorn (who released his best works then) and Mr. Bungle, among others.

The problem with avant-prog is that it isn't nearly as easily defined as symphonic because there's so much more variety. The avant-garde of today is vastly different from the avant-garde of then (whereas the symph prog isn't).

I never disagreed that avant-garde is higher now than it ever was.

Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 12:37

I changed my post slightly before I read the above.

Where I said "(yes I realise I am inventing something new here)." I have now changed it to read (no wave, post-punk, something else entirely)." as I realised afterwards that Massacre and such bands were not classed as avant-prog back then and were classed as something else (I wasn't around then, so I have no idea what they were lumped-in as).

That's if you class no wave as avant-prog. Some would not. It also depends on the individual band. Pere Ubu and Tuxedo Moon were quite popular at the time and of course, you had the emergence of the noise movement with Sonic Youth a little later as well. Then you also had PiL and Low/Heroes David Bowie, Lou Reed and The Psychedelic Furs.

Yes, you did have the metal avant-garde sound too. I don't know Zorn's output, so I cannot comment on that but there are slightly later 1990s bands like Taal and 4/3 de Trio who fuse metal and all sorts of other genres into one. I'd say Pocket Orchestra were an early pioneer of this future sound too.

-------------

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 12:44

Zorn's Naked City album would be the first avant-garde album with metal, I believe, back in 1989.

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 13:01

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

How was Tales from Topographic Oceans to Relayer a major change? Relayer was mostly a continuation of the ideas primarily of Howe and Anderson for long form pieces of music, which is why Wakeman decided to leave----he thought there was too much formless noodling and not enough melody, ie too much padding. Gates of Delerium easily could have fit on Tales. There was no major dramatic change. Yes just became more guitar oriented, as Howe dominated those albums, and the keyboards receded in sonic importance. And Wakeman was right----there was too much formless padding, and they refocused doing what they did best on GFTO.

For that matter, I don't see a "dramatic advancement" btw Selling and Lamb either. It was a different style of album, being one cohesive concept album, but a continuation of the overall style of the band. If anything, since the Lamb was a retreat away from long extended instrumental music and more song focused, some would argue that it was a step backwards from Selling England.

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 13:05

James wrote:

Yes, "pure" symphonic prog did die, in about 1976 or thereabouts.

It did? I guess I was practicing necrophilia in 1977 and thereafter

Wind and Wuthering--1977

Going for the One--1977 (the most symphonic and baroque of this style ever done, and I would argue the peak of symphonic rock)

Works Vol 1--1977

Novella--Renaissance 1977

Song for All Seasons--Renaissance 1978

Moonmadness-Camel 1976

Spectral Mornings---Hackett 1979

UK and Danger Money---1978 and 1979

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 13:06

Nah, Gates of Delerium is far too good to be on an album as meh as Tales.

How is that a step back?

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 13:06

Dr. Prog wrote:

James wrote:

Yes, "pure" symphonic prog did die, in about 1976 or thereabouts.

It did? I guess I was practicing necrophilia in 1977

Wind and Wuthering--1977

Going for the One--1977 (the most symphonic and baroque of this style ever done, and I would argue the peak of symphonic rock)

Works Vol 1--1977

Novella--Renaissance 1977

Song for All Seasons--Renaissance 1978

Just becuase there were still releases doesn't mean prog was alive as a part of the national consciousness at the time.

Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 13:15

Dr. Prog wrote:

James wrote:

Yes, "pure" symphonic prog did die, in about 1976 or thereabouts.

It did? I guess I was practicing necrophilia in 1977

Wind and Wuthering--1977

Going for the One--1977 (the most symphonic and baroque of this style ever done, and I would argue the peak of symphonic rock)

Works Vol 1--1977

Novella--Renaissance 1977

Song for All Seasons--Renaissance 1978

Note the "about" and "thereabouts" (a poorly written sentence in retrospect) which in this case means it's not an exact date but a general date that can be +1 or -1 either side; so 1975-1977 was the general decline of symphonic prog and the death of it cannot be specified accurately to a date, let alone a specific year. If I said ""pure" symphonic prog did die, in 1976", then you'd be correct in questioning it.

Besides, there's always going to be exceptions. Wink

-------------

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 13:17

Exactly. Symphonic prog began dying with Tales, and it flamed out fully with Yes/Genesis both going pop. The final proof that it was really, truly dead was King Crimson remerging as a non-prog band with Discipline.

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 13:19

Pnoom! wrote:

Dr. Prog wrote:

James wrote:

Yes, "pure" symphonic prog did die, in about 1976 or thereabouts.

It did? I guess I was practicing necrophilia in 1977

Wind and Wuthering--1977

Going for the One--1977 (the most symphonic and baroque of this style ever done, and I would argue the peak of symphonic rock)

Works Vol 1--1977

Novella--Renaissance 1977

Song for All Seasons--Renaissance 1978

Just becuase there were still releases doesn't mean prog was alive as a part of the national consciousness at the time.

Going for the One, Wind And Wuthering and Works were all huge sellers for those bands, and I think GFTO hit #1. The resulting tours for all those albums were huge sellouts everywhere, and those bands were at the peak of popularity in 77/78, more than ever before. I was there. I was at those concerts. They were tough tickets.

Plus you had Animals in 1977 from Floyd.

Renaissance's biggest tours were in 77 and 78.

and the cited examples are just the more obvious ones.

So if symphonic prog died in 1976, no one told me or the millions of people buying those albums and going to those concerts. Sometimes having lived through the times means more than some hindsight cold intellectual analysis done 30 years later by those who were not there, and really have no clue. I would say the peak of the style actually was in 1977, and from there it did start falling out of favor as the disco crap started really taking hold.

So to say that stuff wasn't in the public consciousness is simply flat out wrong.

Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 13:20

Try arguing against my next post which is a far better argument.

And Pink Floyd wasn't a symph prog band, so they are irrelevant.

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 13:22

Pnoom! wrote:

Exactly. Symphonic prog began dying with Tales, and it flamed out fully with Yes/Genesis both going pop. The final proof that it was really, truly dead was King Crimson remerging as a non-prog band with Discipline.

how was Crimson in the 80s a non prog band?

Yes and Genesis didn't go primarily "pop" (and Genesis never went fully pop) until well into the 80s, Abacab in 81 and 90125 in 83. That is well after 1976-77.

I don't know where you are pulling your musical history from. Its as if you are just making stuff up as you go along.

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 13:27

oh, and that reminds me, I forgot the most proggy of Rush's albums, although not specifically symphonic, were released in 77 and 78, the ones where they borrowed most from the symphonic stylings of Genesis and Yes.

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 13:39

Yep, disco did major damage to not only progressive rock, but rock in general when you saw groups like the Rolling Stones succumbing. Other biggies started tumbling around that time too---Zeppelin, Sabbath, and major down periods for people like Dylan and Neil Young thereafter.

Posted By: Norbert
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 14:03

Jim Garten wrote:

el böthy wrote:

I will say Lake leaving Crimson, but not so much for the fact that he left a band, but that without that he couldn´t have formed ELP

Interesting point - Lake leaving Crimson not only led to the creation of ELP, but also facilitated Crimson moving on to the next stage...

Good one

This option was my thought when I saw this thread, a bit surprised, that it hasn't got more votes.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 14:22

Dr. Prog wrote:

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Well, it's a way of seing it, but I believe there was a great jump between TFTO and Relayer.

Tales is purely Symphonic as the predecesors, it flowed gently (despite the changes) from start to end as a piece in which the changes could be anticipated, any fan of Classic music would probably like it.

Relayer on the other hand has a different structure, faster, more radical, with many Jazz leanings, nothing can be predicted, hardly can be considered a 100% Symphonic it has too many sounds and influences going on, I would had expected soemthing like Relayer probably in King Crimson, but was not the usual work of Yes

To understand why the change was sop radical, yopu have to go a couple of steps before.

Trespass, Nursery Cryme and Foxtrot were datk, comple albums, highly atmospheric and dense, that's why many people has problems getting into them (of course there are songs as "For Absent Friend", but that's the eception).

Selling England by the Pound is a much more friendlier album, you can get it even from the cover, it's bucolic, calmed, easy to get into it.

So the logical next logical step in the evolution of the band was a simpler album, but Genesis went back towards something unique in their story, a cohesive and ultra complex conceptual album, with Kafka influences in the story, shorter songs, less atmospheres, but totally unexpected, you could jump from a soft track to a frantic one, it's simply something totally different to what Genesis ever did before.

Even when the song were shorter, it's focused towards the whole concept of Rael and his underground misadventures.

By no mean a concept album is song focussed, because each song is like a chapter from a book named The Lamb Lies Fown on Broadway.

It's so clear that Relayer and The Lamb, are probably the harder albums to get into, becaise of it's complexity.

My 2 cents.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 14:43

I think you are vastly overstating the importance of Relayer, because you have some mancrush for Moraz and for some reason you don't care for Wakeman. We've already established that Gates was mostly all written and composed before Moraz got there, so his contribution to the piece is overstated. There is a middle section 'drum-keyboard battle' that I understand Moraz may have thrown some ideas in, and that is the weakest section of the song. Gates of Delerium is a gem because of the closing Soon song section, which is traditional epic symphonic prog Yes all the way, and again, something which Anderson had already written. Soon returns the song to traditional Yes symphonic prog, and is a natural progression from Tales, not a radical departure. Sound Chaser is very weak, and is an example of why Wakeman left---too much formless noodling without much structure--- a weakness of large parts of Tales he felt.

So no radical departure, but a culmination of the same Howe-Anderson ideas they had started on CTTE and then went further with on Tales. Wakeman was able to refocus their efforts and produce an epic Yes album in the tradition of Fragile and CTTE with GFTO, thus rendering Moraz' contribution to almost footnote status.

We'll have to disagree on Lamb, as it was basically a story song album with some instrumental pieces thrown in when Gabriel couldn't come up with all the lyrics. Since it was mostly the vision of one man, and not a true group effort the way Selling England and Trick were, its a flawed masterpiece, which is why some see Gabriel's departure as such a significant event, for better or worse.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 07 2008 at 14:56

Dr. Prog wrote:

Now we're having an interesting debate:

I have nothing against Wakeman, I love his music, read my reviews of his solo albums and you will see at least 4 of them with 5 stars. I have no mancrush on Moraz, I recognize his solid technique but I stay with Wakeman compositions.

On the other hand, I talk about Relayer as music, not as band members, Gates of Delerium is a radical change and so Sound Chaser, did it who did it, it's different, I'm not taking the Moraz side, just talking about a determined album.

I don't believe Moraz determined the history of Prog, Wakeman is much more trascendental, but stuill insist that technically I believe Moraz is ahead.

There we must AGREE TO DISAGREE, I believe Relayer is radically different to anything Yes did before or after, the Jazz influences alone make the difference and I find some Avant sounds, maybe I'm wrong here, but I don't believe.

The lyrics are one man product, the music is a team effort, but that it's fifferent to anything previous, it's totally ifferent.

But again we acn disagree, that's no problem.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: cesar polo
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 03:18

Genesis were at the second half of the seventies much more popular that the other prog bands (except for Pink Floyd and E.L.P.). So, the changes in that band were more influential than the same developments in King Crimson, for example.

Peter Gabriel's departure from Genesis didn't change the symphonic-rock orientation of the band. Steve Hackett did. He was the last prog bastion remaining within the prog bands and at that moment all we prog fans felt that our loved musical style had lost its last battle of the decade

Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 03:45

Of the poll options, the two that got the most votes were obviously the two that had the greatest effect overall. A third event comparable to those two in importance would be Yes sacking Peter Banks.

Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 04:14

I received a private message on this and I'd like to share part of my response with everyone.

PG leaving Genesis changed the character of the band, paved the way for Hackett to leave, and launched one of the most important solo careers in prog. That's huge.

The death of Crimson is a bit more subjective, as it depends on what you think KC would have gone on to do next. But there are all sorts of other ramifications such as Fripp's studio musician career, Frippertronics, and even such things as the launch of DGM.

I suggest the sacking of Peter Banks because it has ramifications very similar and nearly as important as PG leaving Genesis. For one example, I doubt Wakeman would have been in Yes if Banks hadn't been sacked, let alone Howe.

Next I'd probably put Lake joining ELP. Lake in ELP is obviously important (his leaving KC less so, although he was sorely missed for two albums.)

Finally, I'd throw in the KC resurrection. It had some influence on the rebirth of prog, but KC wasn't nearly as relevant to the second wave as it was to the first.

The others, while definitely momentous events in the histories of the people involved, didn't really have much of an effect beyond that. As much as we Yes fans mourned the loss of Rick and Jon (although there is a strong effort to rehabillitate Drama nowadays) it didn't really effect progdom as a whole, just to give you one example.

Posted By: zicIy
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 04:18

JROCHA wrote:

When Peter Left Genesis.....enough said.

i agree. it was like a bomb to Prog fans in that time...but, the band were continued (a second bomb to their fans!!!something as The Who without Pete Townshend, nothing less!) and than they issued one of the most beautiful Prog albums ever!!!; Gabriel´s "Wet Car" is great album too - i like so much that one...

... also, that amazing intro of "Tubular Bells" in the first scenes of "The Exorcist" movie was great stuff too, imho.

Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 04:39

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Well, it's a way of seing it, but I believe there was a great jump between TFTO and Relayer.

Oh boy, an Ivan quotefest!!! Let me jump in.

Ivan is generally correct here, if you disregard his comment about "changes." There are as many dramatic changes in the works on Tales as on the works on Relayer. But except for the "Soon" section, Gates is indeed a very different work with almost no similarities musically to anything in the Yes catalog except for a few echoes of some of the complexities of CTTE.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

To understand why the change was sop radical, yopu have to go a couple of steps before.

Selling England by the Pound is a much more friendlier album, you can get it even from the cover, it's bucolic, calmed, easy to get into it.

I don't think this is a good characterization of Trespass, and I don't like the argument in general. Cinema Show is very much in the vein of The Musical Box. Firth of Fifth goes over ground earlier covered by things like Stagnation and Can-Utility and the Coastliners. The Battle of Epping Forest is a humorous track along the lines of Get Them Out By Friday. Selling England by the Pound is the culmination of what Genesis had achieved over the years, not a revolution from that. Dancing with the Moonlight Knight, I will concede, does explore new ground.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Even when the song were shorter, it's focused towards the whole concept of Rael and his underground misadventures.

By no mean a concept album is song focussed, because each song is like a chapter from a book named The Lamb Lies Fown on Broadway.

It's so clear that Relayer and The Lamb, are probably the harder albums to get into, becaise of it's complexity.

My 2 cents.

Iván

On the other hand, The Lamb is revolutionary. And it's just not the concept that makes it so. Much of this music is unlike anything that Genesis had done in the past and would do in the future. And there is where the similarity with Relayer lies.

And of course it is incumbent upon anybody who ever replies to any of Ivan's posts to add the following:

BOSTON FOR PROG-RELATED!!!

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 13:43

ghost_of_morphy wrote:

BOSTON FOR PROG-RELATED!!!

sidebar

If Boston isn't already listed in prog related, that is an absurd oversight. Their first two albums are clearly prog related, in fact just as proggy as any Wishbone Ash, Styx or Uriah Heep album. And more so than any Triumph

album.

That first album is still one of the all time great debut albums in rock history.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 14:25

ghost_of_morphy wrote:

And of course it is incumbent upon anybody who ever replies to any of Ivan's posts to add the following:

BOSTON FOR PROG-RELATED!!!

GOM, as y0ou know, I don't decide this, it was discussed in the featured bands and rejected by a vat majority of the members.

From the three bands proposed (Boston, Journey and Toto) only one was accepted by the Administrator's team (from which I'm not part) and I don't even agree with Journey, but I have nothing to say, where there is a captain, the sailor has no voice.

But Boston, no matter how much influenced by Prog may it be, is an AOR band exclusively, and IMO shoiuld not be added.

The rest of your post is full of opinions with which I can agree or not, but I absolutely respect.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 14:46

ghost_of_morphy wrote:

Well GOM, you know I can't stay away of a good debate.

Oh boy, an Ivan quotefest!!! Let me jump in.

Of course there are changes in Tales, that's a characteristic of Prog (generally), but all the changes are limited to Symphonic, in Relayer, they jumped from Symphonic, to some form of harder Prog, to Jazz and to some Avant, with controlled cacophonies, it's very unpredictable.

I agree about the Sooin section.

I do believe that Trespass, despite the bucolic and Pastoral mood, is a very dark album which peak is The Knife (dramatic and violent song), it's IMO also a very atmospheric album in the vein of the two posterior albums, the style of Anthony Phillips is very similar to Steve's.

I also believe that even though it's a fantastoic album, SEBTP is much miore friendlier than any previous album, just start with I Know What I like and the boring More Fool Me, two very commercial tracks, one better than the other, but still a different approach to what they did before.

Cinema Show is my opinion much lighter and less aggressive than Musical Box, starting with the song concept. Battle is a strange song, it may be humorous but is a gateway towards a more radio friendly approach, I love the track, but I wouldn't compare it with the dramatism of Giant Hogweed, which combines criticism to the status quo and greed with a good amount of Sci Fi.

Both Firth of Fifth is also new ground, Steve leaves forr a moment his place as part of a well oiled machine to assume the leadership with his outstanding solo and Dancing with the Moonlit Knight is an amazing song, but different to any previous work.

You misunderstood me, I believe SEBTP is not a revolution, is just a softening of their style, while the real revolution comes in The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway.

There we agree 1000% (that's whaty I mean in my previous posts), I believe that as in Relayer, The Lamb enters in new ground, more radical and revolutionary, unlike anything both bands did before and would do later.

Cheers

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 15:31

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

ghost_of_morphy wrote:

And of course it is incumbent upon anybody who ever replies to any of Ivan's posts to add the following:

BOSTON FOR PROG-RELATED!!!

GOM, as y0ou know, I don't decide this, it was discussed in the featured bands and rejected by a vat majority of the members.

But Boston, no matter how much influenced by Prog may it be, is an AOR band exclusively, and IMO shoiuld not be added.

The rest of your post is full of opinions with which I can agree or not, but I absolutely respect.

Iván

AOR can be progressive also. All Album Oriented Rock means is album cuts that were played on FM radio stations (ie not pop hits). AOR was cool to listen to in the 70s. It just got b*****dized and overplayed in the 80s and 90s.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 16:05

Dr. Prog wrote:

Thanks for the input Dr, Prog, we know that AOR started as a radio format Album Oriented Radio and later changed to Album Oriented Rock,

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Again lets make some precisions that people don't want to understand:

1.- AOR means Album Oriented Rock

2.- Prog is album oriented by nature, they base their output in albums instead of singles.

3.- Prog is an AOR GENRE.

This is as clear as water.

AOR started in the late 60's early 70's when FM stations were allowed to play full albums instead of the 3 minute single format. Foxtrot, CTTE or Pictures at an Exhibition would never had a chance to recieve airplay if it wasn't for ALBUM ORIENTED RADIOS.

Prog had a decline in the late 70's and for that exact reason AOR also. Punk tried to resurrect the 3 minute format of individual songs not connected between them in an album, they saw long tracks and concept albums as a treason against Rock.

If you read any Punk page, they blame The Who and specially Pete Townsend for destroying the old 3 minute song format and considered it as a pompous not important style,in the page our members irrupted Pete Townsend is called a traitor.

But still in the 80's some bands preferred using the full album format instead of the hit single, they were not Prog but neither believed in the top 40's system of singles, so people identify AOR with this bands, when as a fact AOR was the vehicle with which Prog became even remotely popular.

The problem is that because this bands were mostly from USA (Melodic Rock and Glam Metal) some progheads, specially from Europe tend to identify every USA band as an inferior form of AOR or what some British like more…….Pomp Rock.

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/new_reply_form.asp?M=Q&PID=2049718&PN=3&TR=44 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/new_reply_form.asp?M=Q&PID=2049718&PN=3&TR=44

but in this case, the Adm team (not me, even when I agree with them), decided that Boston was a case of what was known as AOR in the late 70's (bloded in previous quote), even when the term is not correct.

Boston was debated endless times and didn't reached the Archives.

Poll Question: Should Boston be given a spot in prog related?
Poll Choice	Votes	Poll Statistics
Yes	12	[29.27%]
No	29	[70.73%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=43401&KW=Boston - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=43401&KW=Boston

Poll Question: Boston are they prog related and should they be added ?
Poll Choice	Votes	Poll Statistics
Yes	11	[26.83%]
No	30	[73.17%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=35474&KW=Boston - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=35474&KW=Boston

Thanks for the input again.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Dr. Prog
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 16:11

if it was all that clear, Boston would be in the prog related category. Obviously, there are a number of people here who apparantly are not too clear on all this, especially ones who think Triumph is prog related and Boston is not.

Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 16:22

of the choices, Lake joining Keith and Carl.. though I'd say it was more likely Dave O'List leaving the Nice, allowing Keith to fulfill his vision and develop the ELP prototype

another notable moment was Fripp and friends throwing off their pop/psych chains (GG&F) and making a real album thanks to Ian McDonald's uncle financing what would become the first KC record in 69

Posted By: Philip
Date Posted: May 09 2008 at 17:21

I have chosen the departure of Greg Lake from the Crimson's to form ELP. This is the most important and influencing event from the list, because it had consequences that were the formation of a new band, one of the best ones from the Prog Rock movement, which is by far more important than any of the other ones. It can have more impact, but I still think that a formation of a new band is more important and changed the history more, because of their music, and Elp did it, than the fall into an abym of a band, like Genesis for example, (exception for the first albums after PG's era).

Posted By: daSilva
Date Posted: May 10 2008 at 03:55

Gilmour playing with the Pink Floyd has turned out to be the biggest landmark in progressive music.

His sound blended perfectly with Wright's keyboards and his musicality was paramount in helping Waters deliver his message.

Thanks to his arrival the Floyd put the Super in Super Band!

Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: May 10 2008 at 17:13

How many of you are writing from second or third hand points of view, either not being born or too young to be aware of such changes? Syd Barrett departure /DGilmour joining went unnoticed outside Floyd psychedelic fan base - and then Gilmour writes about the process wrt getting Syd riffs. Pete Banks departure from Yes, again wouldn't been greatly noticed since it wasn't until The Yes Album, that Yes started to be included amongst the first rank of prog bands and that because what Steve Howe brought with him from Bodast. Tony Kaye's firing because of his reluctance to play synths and Yes finding somebody was clearly capable in Wakeman - there was a degree of inevitability of Wakeman going from the Strawbs to Yes, because of his reputation as asession player and by word of mouth of what he was doing live in the Strawbs.

But be aware the London based musicians knew each other well met/passed each other in studios and talked in clubs out of hours. There was clearly a case of casually asking whether somebody was free to gig, if the first one won't do it somebody else would - check out the thread recently on the ease by which Terry Reid was asked to front Led Zeppelin, he declined and recommended Plant - because those musicians worked either with same management or were session players for particular studios. Hey Terry Reid played the Isle Of Wight Festival 1970 with David Lindley (later to work with Jackson Browne) and Mike Giles from King Crimson, who John Lennon recommended on behest of Alan White (pre-Yes). There is most definitely "who you know" as well as a "what you can do", aspect to these group changes

Gabriel leaving Genesis was a shock. Robert Wyatt fired from Soft Machine and then breaking his back were shocks - and perhaps had more significance wrt to the way RIO, and avant rock went in the UK. The failure of the first line-up of Renaissance to capitalise on a ground breaking album was a shock, when released to an equal amount of publicity (if not greater) than ITCOCK. Then it is more about what if only: what if only Touch toured and made more records, that might have been significant for US prog? What if T2 had better publicity etc. and so on. What if those rock stars hadn't had a little too much booze or horse......?

-------------
The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS.
CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php - http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php
Host by PA's Dick Heath.

Posted By: alanerc
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:39

One of the musical geniuses I admire most
Patar Gabriel leaving Genesis for their solo career

Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: August 21 2008 at 02:00

maybe the most important developments were The Beatles Rubber Soul, Frank Zappa & The Mothers of Invention's 60s albums, Miles Davis' Bitches Brew, and ITCOTCK

but i voted for Bruford going to KC. what would have happened if he stayed in Yes?

-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm

Posted By: el böthy
Date Posted: August 21 2008 at 13:21

Dr. Prog wrote:

That goes for you too

-------------
"You want me to play what, Robert?"

Posted By: The Whistler
Date Posted: August 21 2008 at 18:23

Hmm...I feel tempted to say Lake leaving Crimso, since that set up the two most important bands of the classic era (Crimso turning from symphonic more towards influences jazz, ELP being created and popularizing the form), but that would be too easy, and prog is never about the easy decisions.

So, of all the voices in the thread, I'm most inclined to agree with Fripp ressurecting Crimso in the 80's. Ten bucks says he did it because no one wanted to buy a Bobby Fripp solo album, but regardless, both keeping classic prog alive in the 80's AND being able to keep up with the times by incorporating new elements kinda sets the scene for everything that follows, eh?

-------------
"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson

Posted By: prog4evr
Date Posted: August 22 2008 at 09:43

rushfan4 wrote:

Certainly said many times before, and it is certainly how I voted....

Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: September 09 2008 at 17:23

The 1973 october oil crisis in Middle East???

Music (and Prog) was never the same after that...

See here :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis

And the fact than 99% of everything that we have is made of oil and his derivades.

-------------