Old Prog Beats New Prog in Song Sample Plays
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=54934
Printed Date: November 21 2024 at 18:54
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Old Prog Beats New Prog in Song Sample Plays
Posted By: 88melter
Subject: Old Prog Beats New Prog in Song Sample Plays
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 10:39
|
Notice, the posts for all sorts of categories relate to new prog bands, whose music has some following somewhere, I am sure. Then look at the most played song samples list. It is almost exclusively titles from 25 or more years ago. I think the definition of what makes a band's music PROG is wide enough so the relative art-lessness of most new stuff can duck under the bar.
Symphonic prog is the standard by which all genres now considered PROG ought to be judged. The other styles are good rock music, but it is the symphonic-ness of these vintage trax that makes people want to hear them repeatedly.
Yes, I am 53 yrs. old, as of today, Jan 21, as a matter of fact. I grew up listening to the music I am championing, and I am sure the young people of today will root for their generations efforts.
What say ye, current young people?
88melter ------------- 88melter |
Replies:
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 11:22
|
You'll have to explain to me what the purpose of this thread is because I have no idea at the moment. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 11:24
|
^The purpose of this thread is to show us a new style of posting, with large fonts and in italics. It's going to be revolutionary, groundbreaking, everything that current prog is not, according to the OP
Other than that I don't see much purpose. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 11:32
|
I hate to show my ignorance, and lack of search skills, but I don't remember seeing a most played song samples list. Is it on the progarchives homepage (I do have blocked scripts). I will look for it, or perhaps someone could direct me? Some elaboration on the opening "thesis" would help, but I don't readily equate "popularity" with artistic worth. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 11:56
It's in the weekly emails from Max that seem to be impossible to opt out of.
Psh, RIO already did that in the seventies.
 Check out that large text!
 And italics! I win this round, modern imitators! ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Logan wrote:Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 12:30
|
^ Thanks. I don't get the emails as the email address I gave has been defunct since not long after I joined. The email addy may still exist in some fashion, but I haven't been able to access it in years. "Symphonic prog is the standard by which all genres now considered PROG ought to be judged." I'd love to read more elaboration on this concept. I have some thoughts, but perhaps due to lack of sleep, they haven't fully coalesced. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 12:38
I'm pretty sure you can change your email, although you probably shouldn't bother. They aren't very useful if you're an active visitor, since you can scan over the active threads, new reviews, and new albums yourself. But for those who don't read the emails, for the sake of discussion here is the list from last week.
"Time" by PINK FLOYD from Dark Side Of The Moon | 3669 plays
"Papillon" by REFUGEE from Refugee | 3020 plays "Take The Long Way Home" by SUPERTRAMP from Breakfast in America | 2964 plays "The Musical Box" by GENESIS from Nursery Cryme | 2953 plays "The Knife" by GENESIS from Trespass | 2192 plays "The Cinema Show" by GENESIS from Selling England By The Pound | 2156 plays "Fading Lights" by GENESIS from We Can't Dance | 1769 plays "Dogs" by PINK FLOYD from Animals | 1681 plays "Welcome to the Machine" by PINK FLOYD from Wish You Were Here | 1652 plays "Hispanola" by VANGELIS from 1492 - Conquest Of Paradise | 1566 plays "Downstream" by SUPERTRAMP from Even in the Quietest Moments.... | 1500 plays "Solsbury Hill" by GABRIEL, PETER from Peter Gabriel (1 - "Car") | 1414 plays "In the Cage" by GENESIS from The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway | 1369 plays "Los Endos" by GENESIS from A Trick Of The Tail | 1303 plays "Set The Controls For The Heart Of The Sun " by PINK FLOYD from Live At Pompeii | 1090 plays "Steel Monkey" by JETHRO TULL from Crest Of A Knave | 1042 plays "Heart Of The Sunrise" by YES from Yessongs | 1018 plays "Watcher of the Skies" by GENESIS from Foxtrot | 983 plays "Crime Of The Century" by SUPERTRAMP from Crime of the Century | 945 plays "Growing Up" by GABRIEL, PETER from Up | 898 plays I would posit that they are more played because they more famous and have more samples available. And the samples are more substantial, since the only modern one I can think of that is comparable to Dogs is My Father, My King, which is an out of print EP, so that's hardly fair. But what do I know. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 12:41
| ^ Umm.... I guess I have to explain mysef.... I'm responsible for a large share of the plays of these. You see, I suffer from heavy insomnia, and... |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 13:34
|
Thanks, Henry. Yep, I'd think most of it has to do with those being well-known, and that doesn't make those better. As for using symphonic prog as the yardstick for all prog, one cannot deny the importance and impact of classic symph bands to Prog music, and while some might say that Symph Prog as a genre best epitomises Prog, bands such as Genesis and Yes do not, for me, represent a Prog pinnacle, and I see a problem with too mnay bands trying to imitate or are too heavily influenced by, the sound. For me, Prog is, in part, about drawing on a wide range of music influences outside rock, and expanding the parameters of rock. It's also about experimentation for me. When Prog limits itself, and looks too much to one subset, it becomes less innovative/ rock genre expansive. I actually have a problem with too many bands trying to sound/ be Prog rather than having a progressive attitude. For me the Rock in Opposition movement best laid out as principles what Prog should and can aspire to. I think we need to continue to expand our ideas of what Prog is, what it should be, and what it can be.... And I hope that many more artists will push the boundaries of what rock can be, and expand on the rock lexicon. By judging Prog by the symph style ones, we limit and hinder ourselves too much, and hinder the progression of music, and risk too much emphasis on revisionism rather than inventiveness and expansion. Popularity breeds popularity, and many look to retro-bands, as well as those that they modelled themselves on or are indebted to, because it's comfortable in its knownness. It's more accessible. Classic symph had significant commercial appeal. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Trademark
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 14:01
I thought it was a thread with hip lingo (prog beats) about sampling in rap "tunes".  My bad.  That said, what we each use as a yardstick for comparison or reference does (and IMO certainly should) vary from one listener to another. Unless prog is the very first music you've ever heard, we all bring a set of personal biases into any new style of music we encounter. Leaving those biases at the door and listening with an open mind is a good idea, but not a requirement. If we choose to let them color our experience that's pur choice. If we are unable to prevent it, that's fine too. It's just music, if you put some effort in your can find some cool new things to enjoy. If you are unable or unwilling to do this as the Op seems to be, it OK too. I'll sleep like a baby tonight either way. I personally have always loved the symphonic sound and that, for me, is a big part of what prog is, should be, and always will be. I tried pretty hard to get into the major modern prog bands who don't use the classics as a jumping off point, (Opeth, DT and PM in general, Porcupine Tree TMV, etc). and couldn't make any connection with it, it just left me either bored to tears or laughing out loud and neither of those was the reaction I was hoping for. Lately I've been trying some new things in the RIO/Avant area and I've found a few things that really appeal to me that have little or nothing to do with classic symphonic prog. * sits back and waits for Mike to tie thread to progfreak.com*
 |
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 14:12
Eh? 
------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 14:15
|
¿¿¿????? -------------  |
Posted By: TheMaz
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 14:50
|
We don't understant what he meant, probably because it's his birthday today, he got drunk while partying, got home, wrote this post and then crashed ! loll ------------- TheMaz www.johnnymaz.ca |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 15:35
 ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 16:03
|
Let's keep the thread on track. If you don't get the point the original poster is making, simply ask politely for him to expand upon it.
There is a discussion to be had.
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 16:17
|
Sorry if this post delves into matters at cross-purposes to 88melter's intent, but.... We do bring our own yardsticks and expectations, but for PA, and all the genre teams to accept that "Symphonic prog is the standard by which all genres now considered PROG ought to be judged" would present major problems. In the Eclectic category, for instance, symph is but one style to look for. If I hear a "Prog" band (accepting all the categories we have here as Prog), I will be most likely to judge it according to the standards set by the bands that it most similar too/ relates too. If I want Zeuhl, I don't look to the standards set by Genesis, I'm more likely to look for the standards set by Magma. If I want Canterbury Scene, I don't look to symph, I look to other Canterbury Scene bands -- I'm more likely to look to The Soft Machine than Camel (Camel having a Canterbury relation). My yardsticks differ depending upon which Prog category the music would best fall in, and depending upon the influences, while at the same time recognising that Prog bands commonly cross styles. For me, one of the wonderful things about music put under the Prog umbrella is the diversity -- that keeps me interested because if I laregly tire of one category/ Prog "genre" I can move to another. And within the individual categories there's commonly real diversity/ eclecticism of musical expression, and within Prog bands -- strength in diversity. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 16:27
|
I suggest that the quality of symphonic prog be measured according to the criteria of XIX c. and XX c. symphonic classical music. |
Posted By: 88melter
Date Posted: January 22 2009 at 06:52
|
88melter here. What is the Rock in Opposition movement? I would like to know more about it. Where can I read their manifesto or set of principles?
I use a larger, bolder font because my vision is not the best, and I don't like using glasses at the computer.
So far, we have an assertion that older prog has a certain aesthetic, and newer prog has a different one. Tell me more about this newer aesthetic. Info about what makes some newer bands different is better than just a list of these groups.
thanks,
88melter ------------- 88melter |
Posted By: tamijo
Date Posted: January 22 2009 at 07:21
Not trying to be rude, i wouldent be able to read anything without my glasses on myself.
But i cant help wonder, how do you read the reply's then ? ------------- Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: January 22 2009 at 07:23
|
Still not sure what the point of the thread is, to be honest. Are you merely suggesting that older prog is better than new prog? Well, if thats the case, I do agree (and I'm 13 years younger than you), but we are merely expressing opinions. You can surely understand why a 16 year old from New Jersey (or wherever) MAY prefer Dream Theater or Tool to Gentle Giant or Yes. Crisp digital production and a bit of metal attitude is inevitiably going to go down better with a predominantly younger audience. Note, I am not generalising, before anybody wastes their own time claiming I am!!
Of course, older prog does have a different 'aesthetic' than more modern prog. The song writers grew up in different times, with some difference influences, and a different social and political back drop (if that should have any bearing on anything) I would disagree that symphonic prog should be the standard by which all modern prog is judged. Why would this be? Symphonic is one sub genre within a huge progressive musical movement. There is pleasure to be had by exploring Canterbury, Prog Metal, RIO etc etc... Give it a go.. 
|
Posted By: 88melter
Date Posted: January 22 2009 at 10:04
|
I read the replies with some difficulty. I type more accurately when I can see what I am writing.
Yes, I am indeed saying that old PROG is better than new PROG. I would go so far as to say that old PROG IS PROG and new PROG is something else.
So, I am asking for info on the Rock in Opposition movement so I can get more info on newer music.
As for opinions, we all have them, but the more informed an opinion is, the more weight it carries. I am asking those whose opinions differ from mine to give me more infomation, so I may broaden my base of knowledge, and make my informed opinions more so.
I appreciate a good wisecrack as much as the next person, just give me your thoughts as well as the jokes.
88melter ------------- 88melter |
Posted By: darksideof
Date Posted: January 22 2009 at 10:12
 Prog fan for the past 24 years and I am only 38.....................................  ------------- http://darksideofcollages.blogspot.com/ http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/ https://www.facebook.com/pages/Darksideof-Collages/ |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 22 2009 at 11:54
|
I have ulcerated, and dry eyes (due to allergies) and poor vision even with glasses, so I have difficulty reading sometimes (without glasses I could not read here even with the font size preferences made big in my browser, so I sympathise. What screen resolution settings do you use? My eyes have affected my work since I help students with their theses, and spend a lot of time proofreading and editing -- particularly in the summer). Conversely to you, italics makes it harder for me to read. What really can present a problem to me is lengthy sections of block-text. Here are some useful links about RIO (hopefully skimming over them won't put too much strain on the eyes): http://www.ccutler.com/ccutler/bands/group03.shtml#rio - http://www.ccutler.com/ccutler/bands/group03.shtml#rio http://www.squidco.com/rer/RIO.html - http://www.squidco.com/rer/RIO.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_in_Opposition - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_in_Opposition http://progressive.homestead.com/RIO.html - http://progressive.homestead.com/RIO.html And of course PA's RIO/ Avant page: --> ../subgenre.asp?style=36 - RIO/Avant-Prog Obviously it had a socialist element, and was in opposition to the constraints of commercial rock and rock genre expectations. While the movement was short-lived with few core bands, many other later bands have been strongly influenced by it, and by the music of RIO bands -- see modern bands such as Volapuk, 5UU's, Thinking Plague, Rational Diet, Ahvak, Yugen, U Totem, Guapo.... I tend to prefer chamber rock to symphonic rock. Even in academic music I'm commonly drawn more to chamber music -- though Beethoven's 9th can't be beat for me. Aranis is a minorly rock chamber band that I've been really into. For some RIO has become synonymous with avant prog (and chamber prog is important to look into). I might recommend U Totem (not that new, the debut came out in 1990) since it has symph elements, and many find Thinking Plague's In Extremis accessible -- I prefer A History of Madness. Chamber rock is well-worth researching (if your eyes will allow it) and checking out. For a core band's album that may appeal to those into symphonic, and should be accessible, try Samla Mammas Manna's Maltid (note that the album pre-dates the movement by years). And like it or not, I feel that any progger should be somewhat familiar with Henry Cow. Sorry if that this wasn't a very helpful response, but I'm multi-tasking and dealing with the kids which equals lack of focus. EDIT: There aren't a great many modern symph bands that I really like, but some that made a strong impression on me, and spring readily to mind, are ../artist.asp?id=1476 - MALDOROR , which is very good methinks, ../artist.asp?id=397 - KOTEBEL , particularly for Omphalos (check out the http://www.kotebel.com/ - Official website CLICK ), my complaint is that it's too busy at times and feels less than organic; rather articifical in construction. I also like ../artist.asp?id=470 - KARDA ESTRA considerably, and ../artist.asp?id=2706 - DELUGE GRANDER.I think there is a lot of great modern "progressive" rock, and every Prog decade has many "masterpieces" from many different styles under the Prog umbrella. Incidentally, two bands that really got my interest as a kid in the 70's were Focus and Gryphon.... Followed by Yes and others. Many of my musical interests have waned over the years, but I still love Gryphon and Focus. And not many years ago it was King Crimson and Gentle Giant that got me back into Prog in a big way, then Magma, Robert Wyatt and others really solidified my interest....------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: 88melter
Date Posted: January 22 2009 at 21:15
|
thanks for the info on Rock in Opposition. I will take a look at those links.
That's all for now, tyep at ch'all later,
88melter ------------- 88melter |
Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: January 22 2009 at 22:48
|
I keep trying to come up with a reply 88melter, since I have a couple of years on you, but I still don't get the point. Yes, all "progressive" bands will be judged by that which came before. That is why certain works (TAAB, CTTE, etc. etc.) frequently end up as the most appreciated albums on this site. That however does not diminish whatever is going on currently, which I'll admit I am not only remotely in touch with, save for Tool and Mars Volta and others who are carrying on the tradition. |
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: January 24 2009 at 17:12
I can pretty much agree with this. What 'new' prog has been coming out is, yes, influenced highly by prog bands of the 70s (and 80s) but with about 2 generations difference, it is going to sound different. Bands like Umphrey's McGee, The Mars Volta, Opeth, Porcupine Tree, Garaj Mahal, Planet X, etc are no doubt progressive. They clearly bring influence from the classic bands, however, they all bring influences from other sources as well (metal, hardcore, acid jazz, electronic, jazz-rock (post 1990), funk, indie(?), etc. All genres that didnt exist or were still being developed during the classic prog era.) not to mention the evolution rock has taken, as well as other genres. hell, there's prog musicians that (at least) appreciate rap and hip-hop now all those bands are technically prog, but i know what 88melter means. 'Prog rock' in a post-Scenes From A Memory world is very different musically. there's more virtuoisty (not that there wasnt any before) people listen to so much different music than they did in 1969. and with the internet and P2P and itunes etc more people are exposed to more types of music. This in turn makes me wonder where music will go in the next 10 years but i digress... IMO many musicians today have no soul, or they do, but do not utilize it in their music. and im 21 maybe prog rock post-1999 should be called Nu-Prog ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm 
|
Posted By: Moatilliatta
Date Posted: January 24 2009 at 20:59
I think you're just not looking in all of the right places. So much music from the 90s and 00s is dripping in passion and soul. Surely there are many bands in any genre that are uninspired, but just as surely there are many bands who are extremely inspired. But of course, we all interpret things differently. ------------- www.last.fm/user/ThisCenotaph  
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: January 24 2009 at 22:24
Everything is dying. Except when it's not.
I hate that name so much. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: January 25 2009 at 00:05
no plenty of musicians out there have soul, but there's many many with little or none ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm
|
Posted By: Moatilliatta
Date Posted: January 25 2009 at 00:13
|
^I'm sure the same was true in the 60s and 70s and 80s, but thanks to technological advances, the masses today can get their stuff out there much easier, so we're more exposed to it. ------------- www.last.fm/user/ThisCenotaph
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: January 25 2009 at 03:16
Even when downsizing the font, leaving it in Italics still makes that post horrible to read. For some reason Firefox doesn't let me un-italic it. One thing I never understood, you get all these 'progheads' that listen to stuff because it's 'different' and not pop music, but yet, if it's not melodic/melodic enough, they give a miss. If people want to actually listen to the most far removed music from pop music, why would you go to Symphonic prog, which is full of melody and sometimes pop music like hooks? I don't want to sound like an ass, but the whole "needs to be melodic and symphonic music otherwise it's just noise and horrible to listen to' line of thinking seriously gets up my nerves. If all I listened to was Power metal and Yes all day long, I would go insane because I can't stand listening to that much melodic music, it just gets boring. Haven't people heard of balance? Like umm, mixing up atonality/dissonance with melody to give a broader range of emotions and musical colors? Why limit yourself to purely melodic music when you get a wider range of emotions from a broader harmonic palette of adding in atonality and dissonance and mixing it up with melody as well? Why limit yourself to something that has hooks and catchy moments in it? There is extreme emotion outside melody and (what is typically though of as) melodic hooks and catchy bits. If people don't choose to look beyond that, the only thing that can happen is that you lose and the rest of us that don't mind listening to less melodic music and music that doesn't rely on what we typically think of hooks, well quite frankly we win because we get a wider choice of music to listen to. |
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: January 25 2009 at 10:28
i think more people are able to pick up an instrument than 40 years ago (and especially 100+ years ago) unfortunately, it always seems to be guitar. i think some people are not meant to play/write music, but they do anyway... and yes, the internet allows everyone to be exposed to anyone's music.... ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm
|
Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: January 25 2009 at 15:06
It's still better than "a post-Scenes From A Memory world". |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: January 26 2009 at 03:17
Care to explain who these people that shouldn't play/write music are? |
Posted By: prog4evr
Date Posted: January 26 2009 at 06:41
| Well, 88melter, you've definitely sparked a lively discussion. While I am an old guy like you (I will be 50 in April), I have appreciated some of the newer prog for some of the "dynamic" that they are putting into the genre. After all, "progressive music" should reflect a progression of dynamic. Certainly, some of it seems like plain rock, but others (like "Eritarka" from TMV) definitely reflects an interesting - and melodic - progression in the music dynamic. I still prefer early- to mid-70s prog as my favorite, but some of the new stuff is definitely worth a listen before tossing it aside... |
Posted By: Trademark
Date Posted: January 26 2009 at 07:01
|
"Care to explain who these people that shouldn't play/write music are?" Dream Theater. Somebody had to say say it. |
Posted By: 88melter
Date Posted: January 26 2009 at 08:20
|
Glad to see people are interested in the topic. No italics for the FireFox users.
Inspiration, dissonance, melody. Hmmm. these are aspects of all musics, form Bach to Phillip Glass and all rock in between.
YES has some of the most inspired dissonances in their music. The intro to CTTE and side 3 of Tales, Gates, etc. There are a lot of folk-like tunes as well, All Good People, the classical guitar section of side 3 of Tales, etc. Genesis is not as dissonant, but the lyrics have a certain verbal dissonance. The Genesis melodies are very free in their movements.
ELP was certainly a dissonant band, the piano and organ playing especially, yet their melodic writing, with Greg Lake's tunes, was direct and durable.
What makes the original prog proggier is the time and place of its origins. There was no precedent for YES, Genesis, Tull, King Crimson, ELP, Gentle Giant, and the like. They broke new ground, and used whatever instruments, musical materials, and lyric invention were at hand. Also, frankly, they MAY (laugh, but not out loud...)have used recreational drugs to some positive creative effect.
Stone-ed-ness makes for some weird performances, but maybe it was the thing for writing words and music without inhibitions or feeling a need to conform to some preconceived notion of rock n' roll. Weed, hash and psychedelics make for more listenable outputs than coke, heroin and speed. (Don't make a big thing out of this statement, it is just an aside.)
Prog was of a time and place, England in the early 70's. Just as free jazz was of the 60's in the USA, and serialism in classical music was post WWII, the best of each of these genres is from its inception. Free jazz has very little audience today, as does the music of Milton Babbitt and Charles Woerinen, (later serialists).
Inspiration comes with a zeitgeist that reflects its time and place. Yet, relying on it is not a substitute for perspiration, the hard work of discovering what musical possibilities lay ahead. Beethoven was the first art music to really have staying power for the mass audience. He worked really hard at composition, revising all the time and keeping notebooks full of themes, ideas, and variations. He was also an accomplished improvisor.
All this is to say that the first progressive rock music was unfettered by previous music, and this advantage cannot be reproduced, at least in this genre. If a band or songwriter came along that had some entirely new way of making music, we prog fans might not see it right away, because we already have our favorites. It would also be of some other time and place, which would make it seminal and the standard by which other music that followed would be judged, just like early prog-rock.
I rambled, imagine that...
88melter ------------- 88melter |
Posted By: Johnny Virgil
Date Posted: January 27 2009 at 02:16
| Why categorise? Why not just like the music? |
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: January 27 2009 at 18:27
|
Could it just be fans of the "new" prog bands just checking out the "old" stuff as they delve into the long history of progressive music ? Could it be that certain genres are under represented because of 1) the wealth of still to listen to treasures in say, Symphonic ? 2) some genres aren't explored in more detail because of certain perceptions or biases of the listener, deserved or not ? 3) Constant references to & raving reviews of certain acts and albums may lead more to give them a listen ? Then of course, the question is, why aren't these songs' albums ALL in the top 10, 20, 50 or 100 ? Heck , you know what, if the technological logistics aren't overwhelming, could PA set up a poll for the top 100 songs ? Oops, wait, who's going to count all the suggestions, then boil them down to a list of choices that the community can vote on ? Then , who's going to care to argue for the next year what songs were unjustly left off due to their obscurity, complexity, esoterism, simplicity, commercial success etc ... ------------- "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: Eerichtho
Date Posted: February 02 2009 at 08:51
In my current ultra-tired state of mind I accidently misread Prog for God here  Not trying to be a wise-ass, t'was just a genuine funny coincidence or something... Enjoy the music, people! and happy valentines day (when was that again...?). all the best |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: February 02 2009 at 10:44
| While I am in agreement to the extent that the "old prog" is what I prefer, I also recognize it for what it is: only an opinion. Prog rock is a music form, not a time specific movement like NWOBHM. What you - 88 meter - are saying is a bit like somebody claiming what is called metal today is not metal, and is just noise, because it doesn't sound like Black Sabbath (not strictly true if one only bothers to explore traditional doom and stoner with a little effort). Black Sabbath was metal in the 70s and metal has moved on since then, drawing very largely from punk, a genre which hadn't come into existence - or so I believe - when Black Sabbath released their first album. As a music form, prog today is as much prog as prog from the 70s, just that the bands are playing different tunes! Also, I am ill qualified to speak on this, but people like Logan will tell you that prog from some of the other sub genres in the 70s like Zeuhl sound as much or more different from symphonic prog as, well, prog metal does from symphonic prog. |
Posted By: Cifrocco
Date Posted: February 02 2009 at 18:21
|
The best music is all behind us folks. The good news is that I haven't discovered it all. |
Posted By: Scratchy
Date Posted: February 03 2009 at 01:35
|
Thank god I'm still young enough to still appreciate contempory progressive music.Another 10 years & I will be stuck in my (listening) ways like the initial poster.I have made a concious effort to try & listen to as much of today's music.Even educate myself on the roots of new developements which has even ment I have had to listen to music that sort of gets close to punk i.e. Fugazi (very influencial group - some of their guitar interplay is exellent).
What I can say is that is my listening experiences have been very rewarding, at least when I hear a group with a progressive attitude to music I will know were their sounds came from.My only wish is that more groups had the same adventurous approach as 70's groups did.The actual sound doesn't matter really.I actually prefer groups to use contemporary sounds than reverting back to older sounds.It is the approach to music that counts.What really annoys me is when groups with obvious musical talent do not try to broaden their approach to the way they play music.I felt this same annouance in the 70's as I do with today's groups ,although more often with today's groups - although it seems to be getting better as it is almost getting fasionable again to have this approach.
|
Posted By: 88melter
Date Posted: February 03 2009 at 08:24
|
Grasshopper, (see old episodes of Kung Fu) you have missed the point. I may very well be stuck in my listening ways,(although, if one examines the posts, one sees no reference to MY actual listening habits.) The point is/was that the users of this site are stuck in their listening habits, and often with good reason.
The OLD PROG gets most of the listening plays, by a wide margin. It is the stuff I like as well, but, then I play that music in our group, called, PROG, (see http://www.prog-music.info - www.prog-music.info ). You have the right idea, after you missed the point, though, which is that opening the concepts up to the vagaries of creativity is, and hopefully always will be, where IT is at. (see Genesis, last track, Lamb Lies Down).
So, let's listen to whatever we want, because we Want what we Want when we Want IT!! and that is always good enough. And, OLD PROG seems to be mostly what we want, which gives me hope that YES, Genesis, Tull, ELP, Greg Lake-era Crimson, Gentle Giant, and even the dread Americans, Kansas, will always have an audience.
Glad to see this thread was interesting.
Until next time,
MBB ------------- 88melter |
Posted By: popeyes motto
Date Posted: February 06 2009 at 19:01
|
As Yoda might say " look not at how many are played, look instead to your heart and tell them just how old we are. Knowing not what has come since is the reason for choosing that which is older" or to paraphrase maybe our members are just OLDER ------------- FRISBEE: WHAT BALLS DREAM DURING FLYTE |