Prog's not prog.
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=59864
Printed Date: February 13 2025 at 13:14
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Prog's not prog.
Posted By: Tsevir Leirbag
Subject: Prog's not prog.
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 15:33
|
Sometimes, I think there are prog songs (made by prog bands), that are not prog. Most of the time, I don't like it because it sounds commercial or even really like popular music. What do you think about it?/What are the "non-prog" prog songs that you like/you dislike? ------------- Les mains, les pieds balancés Sur tant de mers, tant de planchers, Un marin mort, Il dormira - Paul Éluard |
Replies:
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 15:37
|
I'm not keen on 'New World Man' by Rush. When I first heard it I hated it and considered anything lighter than Motorhead as pop. These days I think it's ok. Interestingly I love 'Time Stand Still'
The only pop songs by prog bands I dont like is the muck Genesis put in the charts in the 80's, with the exception of Mama and Land of Confusion. |
Posted By: Tsevir Leirbag
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 15:41
I agree, without the exception of Mama and land of confusion. In fact, I can't stant Collins-ere Genesis.  ------------- Les mains, les pieds balancés Sur tant de mers, tant de planchers, Un marin mort, Il dormira - Paul Éluard |
Blacksword wrote:Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 15:43
Ha! I think their best album is 'A Trick of the Tail' 
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 15:51
|
I thought the topic was going to be saying that Progressive Rock does not equal progressive rock. Anyway, I'm less likely to think of "bands" as Prog, or not, as "music" as Prog, or not. Though I'd pretty much like to scrap the Prog term altogether. I think of War by Slapp Happy/ Henry Cow as more avant pop than Prog (in fact I think of Slapp Happy primarily as avant pop), but I like it. Magma's "I Must Return" is poppy, but I like it. |
Posted By: The Sleepwalker
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 15:51
|
The Final Cut by Pink Floyd is one of the best albums ever made, but I don't think it can be called a progressive album, even though it is not a commercial album. I also don't dislike A Momentary Lapse, which is pretty commercial rock, but the 80's style it has makes it annoying at some moments. I like some 80's Rush songs, I don't know much of those though, as the only post Moving pictures album I've got is A Show Of Hands, their live album from the late 80's. ------------- 
|
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 15:52
|
'Prog' by definition is something very few bands here actually live up to, so i think you might just be reading bit too much into it. I dunno . . . when I write music, I write what I feel like writing, and if it comes out Prog, Pop, Jazz, whatever, it still comes from the heart, so I don;t worry about it. If these Prog guys constantly second guessed themselves about whether or not this song or that song is 'prog enough', we'd get nowhere. |
Posted By: Fieldofsorrow
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 15:57
|
Is it impossible for commerical sounding music to be good, though? Popular music has its place, and bands like Genesis and Yes have produced good quality music of such a nature, without compromising their musical integrity, in my opinion. But then again, that's just me.
------------- Groovy teenage rock with mild prog tendencies: http://www.myspace.com/omniabsenceband |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 15:57
| It is counter-productive to being progressive to try to sound/be Prog in a sense. You also have bands who have made their names in the prog arena who deliberately aim to go pop, which can lead to some pretty poor results. Prog by numbers can be as bad as pop by numbers (with pop I guess you can't take the numbers out of the equation). |
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 16:02
|
You know, ladies and germs, how progressive a song is has nothing to do with how good it is. It might have something to do with how ambitious it is... but if you accept that there is a way to go from having high ambitions and living up to them. As for my picks? Lost Johnny's one of my favourite Hawkwind songs despite being a straight-up simple garage rock tune, basically a prototype for Motörhead since it has Lemmy singing. Jethro Tull I find just as adept at straight-up blues rock or folksy stuff as at their genre-busting progressive epics... and, yeah, there is a time and place for their simpler songs. ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: Evan
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 16:04
King Crimson is prog 
|
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 16:12
No, they're not. I hate it when they do those jazz tunes when they're supposed to do prog.  |
Posted By: Tsevir Leirbag
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 16:33
Yeah, I guess this one's "listenable"
It's not bad.
My favourite's Foxtrot. ------------- Les mains, les pieds balancés Sur tant de mers, tant de planchers, Un marin mort, Il dormira - Paul Éluard |
Posted By: Tsevir Leirbag
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 16:46
This is NOT what I meant, I was not alking about bands that tried to be prog and failed. I was talking about prog bands that made commercial songs/or just non-prog songs. I'm sure ELP did'nt want to make prog when In the Hot Seat came out.
I know this too. And I certainly agree! ------------- Les mains, les pieds balancés Sur tant de mers, tant de planchers, Un marin mort, Il dormira - Paul Éluard |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 16:57
|
Music is not Music Unless it is silence. THAT is the purest form of music |
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 16:59
|
Pardon? In the OP it looked like you didn't like it when prog rock bands tried to do other genres because it sounded too much like "ordinary music"...
------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: tdfloyd
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 17:44
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 18:03
In fact they did. But the record label neede a commercial hit to stave of going bust (it didn't work), so they pulled the strings on that album, even drafting co-wrters in. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 20:34
I like or dislike all prog or non prog that I like or don't like you know... I already got one, it's verrrry nice. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 20:40
That's the impression I got fro that as well. Normally, I would ask for the TS to explain himself, but he's now at exactly 111 posts, and that's just too cool to ruin, so I won't push for him to make another post. |
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 20:44
|
YOUR MOM'S NOT YOUR MOM YOU ARE ADOPTED How can we even classify prog in the first place when it's highly subjective when not used to classify the movement of music in the realm of 72-75? Bah to you. |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 20:52
| ^ Exactly my point. Not everyone sees 'Prog' the same way by default. To question whether or not one band or album is 'proggier' than the next seems a little redundant on this basis. |
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 20:54
| Abacab is not not prog, it's just bordering Neo-Xover. |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 20:55
| . . . and 90125 is not 'not prog'; it's just bordering Xover as well. |
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 20:57
| 'xactly. |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 21:51
Easy. If I like it, it's prog. If I don't, well, not so much. |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 22:12
Well said! An obvious one in my book's is Marillion's Kayleigh - More 80's pop than anything else. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Tsevir Leirbag
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 23:44
I didn't know that
And I SWEAR, my mom's definitely my mom! ------------- Les mains, les pieds balancés Sur tant de mers, tant de planchers, Un marin mort, Il dormira - Paul Éluard |
Posted By: Progosopher
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 10:49
 ------------- The world of sound is certainly capable of infinite variety and, were our sense developed, of infinite extensions. -- George Santayana, "The Sense of Beauty" |
Posted By: Fieldofsorrow
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 10:56
Yes, labelling serves me as a listener as nothing more than a point of reference, when searching for music that may be of interest. Where it in fact lies, between popularity or obscurity, matters very little to me. If a great record can sell millions of copies, it's simply an added bonus.  ------------- Groovy teenage rock with mild prog tendencies: http://www.myspace.com/omniabsenceband |
Posted By: A B Negative
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 11:09
It doesn't sound much like Stock, Aitken and Waterman to me (surely the standard against which all 80s pop should be measured?). ------------- "The disgusting stink of a too-loud electric guitar.... Now, that's my idea of a good time." |
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 11:28
And let's not forget that one pop song on an album does not immediately ruin a good prog album completely, people. 
|
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 13:05
|
We seem to have had this debate many times, and it usually ends up being a general sl*gging off of Collins, with a few of us valiantly trying to defend him. Look, if it's good music, it's good music, end of. Why do we get so hung up on bands "selling out" by being commercial? It's a pointless, and factually dubious argument anyway. In their day, Yes, Floyd, Led Zep, The Who, Jethro Tull, and, on the continent with Gabriel, Genesis had massive commercial success. They all sold albums and live show tickets by the truckload. Does this mean they all, in some way, sold out? No, of course, it doesn't, it just meant that the music was very popular and fitted in with the more mass appeal of the time, which has since moved on somewhat. There really is nothing wrong with a good pop song you know.  ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: akin
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 13:39
I not only agree but sometimes I think it is a good thing to throw one or two pop songs in a long prog album. Most of the bands doesn´t have the songwriting skills necessary for doing only 30-minute prog epics and one or two good pop/rock songs placed between the epics give an special feel to the work. Of course it all depends on the level of quality of the pop songs and those pop songs thrown just for the sake of putting something commercial are a bad move.
|
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 13:53
| Personally I felt that Fear Of A Blank Planet really needed a good 4-minute rocker. |
Posted By: Conor Fynes
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 15:36
|
I actually LIKED Invisible Touch, but Genesis' self titled is one of the worst CDs I own. 'Illegal Alien' anyone? |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 15:45
Let's face it; if it weren't for ''Invisible Touch", Genesis would not be as well-known by the masses as they are today. it saved their career, whether we like it or not. Same can be said of Rabin-era Yes stuff. |
Posted By: Any Colour You Like
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 16:02
I have always beleived that prog and pop are not mutually exclusive. Part of this is that there is no such thing as pure prog, just music with varying influences. It is just the scale of prog-influence that differs. |
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 16:03
No song is entirely prog I think. I can't think of one at the moment... OK, maybe Starless  ------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 16:06
And that's also why I think any band that purposely sets out to be a "prog'' band, they end up not sounding all that great, because they miss the point entirely. (Dream Theater clones are among some of the best/worst examples of this, you agree?) You can't write music for the sheer 'progginess' of it; it has to come from the heart. Mkay, that's my little speech for the day. |
Posted By: Any Colour You Like
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 16:12
 |
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:19
Well said. ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
Posted By: friso
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 06:47
|
In the classic '70 progressive period the word Progressive wasn't used concerning music. Now the term is used, a lot of bands don't turn out to be so progressive... this is quite a puzzling problem |
Posted By: tamijo
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 07:17
|
Back on topic, i quite like :
Zappa's POP (Dansing Fool / Baby Snake ....ect.)
Missing P - Gentle Giant's not THAT Prog albums
I dont like Wall/Cut compared to earlier floyd
But i think Momentarely Laps of reason is OK ------------- Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 08:12
|
Avant Pop?????? That sounds like an obvious contradiction to me. Sort of like saying an intelligent idiot?
------------- Jim |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 08:39
|
Pop, a stupid music? Should I remind you that "Pop music" only means "Popular music" in opposition to savant music? Progressive rock is part of Pop music. |
Posted By: American Khatru
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 08:46
-------------  Why must my spell-checker continually underline the word "prog"? |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 08:49
|
Prog isn't very popular though is it?
------------- Jim |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 08:56
I just think that music that is written by a formula in order to match another formula that is used purely for the purpose of making money is stupid. Of course this is just my opinion. When money becomes the prime driving force, real art and creativity goes out the window.  ------------- Jim |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 08:58
|
Actually we did use the term progressive rock back in the 70's when we talked about Gentle Giant and ELP. We also used the terms Art rock, Classical Rock as well. I guess it's hard to use categories to define things nowadays because everyone insists so much on putting stuff in little boxes.
------------- Jim |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 09:42
Doesn't "popular" come from the same roots as "people"? It's like "folk music": the music coming from... Well, folks. If I'm not wrong, the English word "folk" shares roots with the German word "volk". It's the same thing with "popular", "population", "people"... English words coming from the French linguage. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 10:07
If you are going to listen to ANY band ... and all you want to hear is some "prog song/composition" ... I highly recommend that you stop listening to any music ... and go play in a band yourself!
You are placing your expectations on other people and expecting them to play what you want to hear and see. And there is no one out there, man or woman, that will do that, I'm not sure that it is even possible at all !!! ... no one, not even in "prog-land" is doing something just for you, or anyone else ... it is totally IMPOSSIBLE to saitisfy an audience like that ... period.
You must understand this, and see why is it that we have a thread in here where people got upset when Genesis told off some idiot fan, and other examples. You can not, satisfy everyone!
And please, stop expecting people to serve you with grapes and Playboy models ... when you get that rich adn that far, go ahead and make your own band and maybe we will listen to it ... and mandate that you play a "prog-song" ... and then watch the fanzines and everyone else drop you like a hot potato.
You have to take a stand, and it is not a fan department to take that stand ... you are either a musician and an artist, or a fan ...
Now, you must decide if you want to listen to "MUSIC" ... or just some silly idea like pop, rock, prog, metal ... a commercial division that is designed to help you find the stuff that sounds the same ... so you can go spend you dollars on it!
You have to decide if the musicians you want to listen to are morons or intelligent ... which ones are in there for the "hit" to get your attention, and which ones are in there ... for the music and the love of the music ... and it's not about "prog" .. it's about how they can and want to express themselves.
There are times when a song or two will sound less interesting to your ear because it is in one scale and has 16 bars and repeats like a simple song ... so what?
Are you so programmed that you have to listen to only one thing? Not the person behind it?
Sad ... sad ...
(Sorry, the tone is not angry, just trying to be clear so you can see why some musicians get upset when people get angry at them for doing a hit ... !)
|
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 10:28
|
------------- Jim |
So True. I guess that's why I joined the band I belong to now. When writing for our new CD I asked the leader if hethought the old fans will like it or not, he replied...write what you want. You simply cannot please everyone and why should you try to. You should try to please yourself first. Posted By: StyLaZyn
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 10:34
That's pretty much the case with me too. However, there was some Gabriel-era Genesis that was not Prog as well. Examples: Time Table I Know What I Like Harlequin ------------- 
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 11:02
|
The term did not begin to make itself "known" or "used" until the mid-eighties and probably later.
It was not "prog" then and it is not "prog" now ... the only thing that separated these musicians fro pop music, was that they had a lot less of an interest in "pop music" than they did in the scholarly desire to do something better with their instruments than play crap and cheap pop music, most of which takes absolutely no talent to play at all.
Combined with the fact that the majority of those musicians were really educated and knowledgeable about music it is no surprise that they would want to create a "poem", a "symphony", a "lieder" ... and not something that is called "prog" ...
No one, in their right mind sets out to play ... "prog" ... they will be dead before the first album is out! Not to mention trashed senseless in this area since no one even knows what it is ... why would someone create music just because of one "style"? ... that is not even what making music is all about at all!
|
Posted By: akin
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 12:06
|
I think many modern prog bands fail at trying to be "all prog", which means to make songs with the prog clichés just to fit to the genre (and it applies to bands in other genres as well, but to a smaller extent). There were many prog bands with songs no longer than 5 minutes and hardly any time change, but they are prog because they sound alike other prog bands and were lumped in the same genre for commercial purposes. Unfortunately, prog has become synonym of 20-minute epics, multi-part suites and long solos for many, so many bands think that putting together 20-minutes of music with long solos and time changes is to be a great prog composer, when sometimes it is to be a terrible music composer.
After all, music is just an arrangement of sounds that are pleasing to hear. But when it comes to music market, it is not rare to see bands that "sell out" or are obliged to do something just for selling more or fitting to a niche. Then, we have both the musicians that are creative but do something more formulaic and predictable to sell more and musicians who do not have talent to do music of an specific genre but incorporate many elements artificially just to say that his music fits that genre and fit to a niche.
|
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 12:50
|
Everything is formulaic no matter what musical style you are writing in. If a classical composer writes a Sonata, he is using a formula, if he writes a fugue, etc. It's all a "form". Pop music is the same way. Everything has a musical form.
I can only tell you what I think based on my own experiences of growing up as a teen in the seventies and listening to progressive rock back then in Pittsburgh, PA. I don't know what it was like in other parts of the world, or the US for that matter.
First thing is that back then we DID call it PROGRESSIVE ROCK. That was the term, and we definitely said it all the time. What is more "now" is the term "PROG". We did not use that term back in the 70's.
For me, (and I'm sure many people will disagree with me here), you can narrow prog down to a few main characteristics, and I've heard this repeated by others as well.
1. Prog is based, usually, on Western Classical music and not the blues. Not that it cannot have those elements since it grew out of rock, but it has much more in common with Western classical music.
2. The songs are longer than the usual 3 minute wonders you hear on popular radio.
3. The songs have lyrics about more lofty, or not, subjects other than "I love your lips, love your thighs...they make me high" kinda stuff! ;-)
4. People are allowed to show off their individual musical skills.
I don't understand why anyone wouldn't want to follow or at least use those rules for a stepping stone if they were going to write a prog tune? I love 20 minute epics! Yes I agree that it does not make it good, but many who write 3 minute songs cannot write either. I do understand what you are saying, and sure, if you don't have the technique to write and play something of that magnitude you are better off not doing it.
------------- Jim |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 12:54
|
Sorry to differ with you, but at least in my hometown in the 70's we did refer to ELP, Genesis, Yes, Gentle Giant, etc. as "Progressive Rock." It might be different where you are from. I've only in the last 5 years or so heard it referred to as Prog. But I do agree with you!
------------- Jim |
Posted By: Tsevir Leirbag
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 15:05
Maybe... Even if the album's very good the way it is.
Who said that? I did'nt!
And that is a personnal attack, you don't know what I listen to. I'm NOT "programmed", to use your words, and I don't listen to "only one thing".
------------- Les mains, les pieds balancés Sur tant de mers, tant de planchers, Un marin mort, Il dormira - Paul Éluard |
Posted By: lucas
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 15:40
Wasn't prog popular in the seventies ?
------------- "Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood) |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 17:12
Yes, bands like Yes and ELP sold out arenas in the 70's! Imagine thousands of teens listening to Keith Emerson play a combo of jazz and classical music on a grand piano! Something that may never be seen again!
------------- Jim |
Posted By: friso
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 13:25
|
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 13:38
|
King Friso! Well said!
------------- Jim |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 14:57
|
Maybe I"m under the wrong topic, but I've only now heard, over and over again, about this band Opeth. I went and listened to a bunch of their stuff on Youtube. Sorry to say, I don't see it as prog at all. I can hardly stomach it. It's boring as all hell. Just my opinionof course. ------------- Jim |
Posted By: Tsevir Leirbag
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 15:20
Okay, you're probably in the wrong topic, but It's okay anyway
Opeth is DEFINITELY a GREAT band. Listen to the whole Damnation album, or Face of Melinda (on Still Life) if you just heard the growling vocals and that's what you don't like.
 * When I started to listen to Opeth, I had a problem with their growling vocals ('cause I don't really like growling, it's just not my thing) but now I can really enjoy them, you'll know what I mean! ------------- Les mains, les pieds balancés Sur tant de mers, tant de planchers, Un marin mort, Il dormira - Paul Éluard |
Posted By: Fieldofsorrow
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 15:24
Opeth require a lot of patience, I believe. It's progressive, mainly, because they have their own very distinct sound. But yes, I think you are under the wrong topic. ------------- Groovy teenage rock with mild prog tendencies: http://www.myspace.com/omniabsenceband |
Posted By: amjch70
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 20:07
|
I think some people here will hate
me, but I don’t think Porcupine Tree is a progressive band. Don’t get me wrong,
PT is one of my favorite bands but I don’t think it’s a prog band. Just my
opinion. ------------- Twirling round with this familiar parable. Spinning, weaving round each new experience. Recognize this as a holy gift and celebrate this chance to be alive and breathing |
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 20:21
You know, I tend to agree, though I haven't heard PT's earlier work, which I hear is quite psychedelic. Their latest outputs are clearly alternative rock IMO, with a decent amount of leaning towards prog. The thing is, I find recent PT output much like Nine Inch Nails, which as one of my favorite bands ever are also clearly not prog. However, had NIN emerged in the same scene as PT instead of the mainstream alternative rock/grunge one in the early nineties, I believe their credibility as prog would be just as much as Porcupine Tree ------------- 
|
Posted By: Tsevir Leirbag
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 20:35
Fear Of A Blank Planet is definitely prog. Anesthesize, someone? ------------- Les mains, les pieds balancés Sur tant de mers, tant de planchers, Un marin mort, Il dormira - Paul Éluard |
Posted By: amjch70
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 20:41
We’re on the same
page with that. Both are great bands (The first record that I bought with my
own money was Broken by NIN) but they’re not prog. I also have the same issue
with Anathema. I love it but I don’t consider it a prog band. ------------- Twirling round with this familiar parable. Spinning, weaving round each new experience. Recognize this as a holy gift and celebrate this chance to be alive and breathing |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 20:46
|
Yes, well, I went back to that band Opeth, and they are definitely not prog. There is just nothing special about it. I can't even stand waiting for them to start talking. Remind me of that movie by the Kids in the Hall "Brain Candy".....that metal band called "Grievo". LOL So boring. :-(
------------- Jim |
Posted By: amjch70
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 20:48
Anesthetize is definitely
a prog song, but I don’t think the rest of the album is
prog (for example Sleep together or Way out of here). They’re an excellent
band but I can’t say that one band is progressive just for one song.
------------- Twirling round with this familiar parable. Spinning, weaving round each new experience. Recognize this as a holy gift and celebrate this chance to be alive and breathing |
Posted By: Scourge441
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 21:06
Wait. So it's not prog because... you think they're boring? Sorry, that just doesn't pass the smell test. If I like death metal, and I also like Regina Spektor, does that make Regina Spektor death metal? No. So why should it work the other way around? The music itself is what determines the genre. Not the preferences of the listener. |
Posted By: Mr.Gryn
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 21:34
|
Lot's of bands start out proggish then move over to mainstream after a radio hit or two. One example is Genesis. |
Posted By: Nuke
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 21:53
I don't understand why people think genre classifcations are mutually exclusive. Just because porcupine tree have put an "alternative rock" element into their sound does not affect their strong prog influences and techniques. I mean, on Fear of a Blank Planet we have multiple instruments per person, Fripp soundscapes, alex lifeson solos, a thematic and musical concept, a nearly 18 minute long song, what else do you need to call it prog? As for the whole pop thing, I find that when most prog band attempt to write a pop song, they fail miserably. I'm not sure why it is so hard for them, but there is something tricky about writing good pop music, and I think it relies a lot more on instinct than knowledge of songwriting techniques or instrumental skills. However, I don't mind when prog bands stray from prog, I just wish they left pop alone or else learned a bit more about how to write a good pop song. ELP did fine when they did fun songs like benny the bouncer without straying into pop music.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Seabury">  
|
Posted By: Tsevir Leirbag
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 22:16
Agreed! Looks like there's someone who understands  ------------- Les mains, les pieds balancés Sur tant de mers, tant de planchers, Un marin mort, Il dormira - Paul Éluard |
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 22:18
I don't think the two genres are exclusive. The Mars Volta and The Dear Hunter are also quite clearly alternative rock (though not similar sounding) yet they are also quite prog. Porcupine Tree is not so much. While I do see all their progressive elements, I find that their alternative rock elements overshadow them. Not to say they're a bad band. And I would say Anesthetize is definitely a prog song, though I could name quite a few prog songs by NIN. -------------
|
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 06:25
|
No, that's not really what I was trying to say. What I was trying to say is that they are not PROG, period. I don't know what classification you might want to use, but I guess it depends on your definition of PROG. I use this definition of PROG. Prog of course is short for PROGRESSIVE....to PROGRESS right? PROG started in the late 60's and had it's big time in the early 70's. ELP, Genesis, Gentle Giant, PFM, King Crimson, Henry Cow, Yes, to name only a fraction. Does Opeth have anything in common with these bands soundwise, form wise, or otherwise???? I think the answer is a big NO. The only thing they have in common is possibly that they use drums and guitars, that's about it. There is nothing special about their music whatsoever, nothing "different" only tons of metalish distorted slow paced guitar arpeggios of uninteresting chords and growling uninspired vocals. They only thing they do well, it seems, is shake their hair around. So if you lay out your description of what Prog is to you, then I will lay out my requirements. Before you say it, no, I don't believe making something musically complex designates it as Prog, so please don't even go there, even though PROG is a step above most rock music technically speaking.
>>>Wait. So it's not prog because... you think they're boring?<<< Sorry, that just doesn't pass the smell test. If I like death metal, and I also like Regina Spektor, does that make Regina Spektor death metal? No. So why should it work the other way around? The music itself is what determines the genre. Not the preferences of the listener. [/QUOTE] ------------- Jim |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 06:53
|
My God, I've listened to more Opeth than I ever care to again. I just listened to two more tunes. If anything at all they are Goth Metal. If I had the distasteful task of categorizing their music, that's what heading I would put them under. We had an add compaign here where I live years ago for a sticker to put on household cleaning products to protect young children from poisoning themselves. It was a green sad face sticker. It was called "Mr. Yuck." The theme music for the slogan was this simple tune built on a diminished chord and a tritone that said "Mr. Yuck is green, Mr. Yuck is Mean!" It sounded exactly like the two Opeth songs I just listened to.
------------- Jim |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 06:56
Of course Opeth is not "prog". Opeth is progressive metal, which is not "prog" (like King Crimson, Gentle Giant, etc.). We should quit using "prog" when talking about modern progressive genres because old-timers don't know what we're talking about.  |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 06:56
|
Oh, and here it is on youtube! The essence of Opeth. Although I had the words reversed. enjoy! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLsONa3gKIQ - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLsONa3gKIQ
------------- Jim |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 07:00
|
Good suggestion! However, the term Progressive Metal is sort of an "oxymoron" I suppose. Black Sabbath sounds more progressive now than the so-called Progressive Metal of today. hehe
------------- Jim |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 07:34
Not at all an oxymoron, you just haven't listened to progressive metal, and the little progressive metal you've listened you're not interested in understanding it as progressive metal because you simply don't like it and you only define something as progressive if it "progresses" like Gentle Giant, King Crimson, Yes etc. did. (which is not the only way to progress musically but that's the only one interesting to you). (It's true though that there are many progressive metal bands that are not really very progressive, I'm not talking about the whole genre, but only about those bands who are progressive in a certain degree). |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 07:40
|
I see what you are saying. So, I must review Progressive Metal, so called, within it's own category Metal, to see if it is actually improving upon it's category, correct? So the said "Metal" music might have to be incorporating elements of more complex music, i.e. more unusual chord progressions, modulations, more free and liberal usage of modal thematic material, time signature changes etc. to be called Progressive Metal?
------------- Jim |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 08:15
|
Although I do have to take issue with your term "old timers" because I know quite a few people that are in their early twenties and several under 18 years of age that do agree that Progressive Metal is not PROG. They identify prog as the style of music that is played by the bands that I mentioned. So it is NOT an age issue.
------------- Jim |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 09:45
| ^ It is an age issue, exceptions to the rule are just that, exceptions. And btw this site is open to any forms of progressive rock or progressive metal, not just what you call "prog". I choose not to call "prog" a lot of the progressive stuff that I like becuase of this kind of misunderstandings and prejudices. And your attitude on Opeth is not something which is shared by our community, and does not do you any favour as a credible member. |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 10:03
|
Ah, Ok, so I understand that it is a requirement to not disagree with people so that you can remain in the club? Interesting. Do I get a special Opeth ring if I follow the rules?
------------- Jim |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 10:21
| As I already said, it's about attitude, not opinion. |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 10:31
|
I will try to change my attitude in future posts as to not voice my opinion so strongly so as not to offend. It is interesting that I also listened to a lot of Porcupine Tree recently as a result of these posts. In my opinion of course, they fit more into my "opinion" of what Prog is than do Opeth, even though I do not prefer to listen to them either. In my opinion they are a much more creative band in terms of the structure of their songs, the chords, etc.
------------- Jim |
Posted By: Nuke
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 12:45
Heh, not goth metal at all, but judging by your posts you probably don't care to learn all about the different genres of metal. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Seabury">
|
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 13:13
|
Hi, I listened to Porcelain Heart, Windowpane, Burden, Bleak, and the Grand Conjuration. I think I started to listen to a few others but couldn't get past the intros. I was most impressed that they had a keyboard player, but most of the time I couldn't hear any keyboards on the live stuff. I think I've been misinterpreting this website. Seems that everything is progressive and they just keep splitting bands down into smaller and smaller categories. I thought it was funny that they give Italy it's own category. I guess progressive classical would be Claude Debussy, or Stravinsky, or Jehan Alain.
------------- Jim |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 13:37
Sorry for the belated response, but I was away and just noticed this now. Avant-Pop (and experimental pop) commonly refers to music that employs conventional pop idioms/ form such as a verse/ bridge/ chorus structure and common pop harmonic melodies and puts experimental, avant-garde spins on the music. Bowie and Bjork, for example, have music that is considered Avant-Pop. I don't think it's unintelligent to play around with Pop conventions and incorporate avant-garde elements.... Rock is generally a simple form of music (and often considered a subset of Pop), and I don't blame bands for using standard rock conventions as a base for more progressive music (e.g. Progressive Rock). Tell me it's a pop rock album, and I probably won't be that interested, however. Here's a fun little read: http://www.altx.com/manifestos/avant.pop.manifesto.html - http://www.altx.com/manifestos/avant.pop.manifesto.html |
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 13:44
|
No problem, thanks for the interesting read, I will definitely check it out. I've never thought of Henry Cow as avant pop, maybe avant broadway sometimes such as Desperate Straights, but usually I've seen them as progressive rock. I think I might agree with you on Bjork, that sort of fits the description you gave. Threre are also a number of young classical composers that are apparently writing for rock groups now because they cannot get their symphonic works played by orchestras. Interesting!
------------- Jim |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 13:56
Just to clarify, though, I mentioned Henry Cow in relation to Slapp Happy, though (collaborations such as Desperate Straits and In Praise of Learning), and it's Slapp Happy to which I was assigning an Avant Pop status. |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 14:12
Yep. We're pretty much all idiots here. At least this is a niche site that no one visits or takes seriously. |
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 16:04
|
I wonder what that was that Akerfeldt said once about him ripping off Camel in a lot of his songs.... -------------
|
Posted By: SMSM
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 17:38
|
The Gentle Giant recordings: The Missing Piece and Giant for a Day are some of the greatest pop recordings around.
Kansas recordings with Steve Morse are terrific, but need redoing to get rid of that 80's synth drum sound and other new wave effects
The Rennaisance recordings starting with Camera Camera, When Geneis became Phil Collins back up band in the 80's and Asia recordings of that same time period are not prog.
Personally, I consider Pink Floyd's Money and Jethro Tull's Aqualung to be rock songs, not prog songs
|
Posted By: Nuke
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 18:00
The epitome of progressive classical = beethoven. I kind of like this genre Anyways, I've only listened to 3 of those, and I thought bleak was by far the best. I seem to remember the 1st 2 songs on the album "Ghost reveries" being a bit more progressive in the sense that it is normally referred to than the ones you listened to. I doubt I could get you to like them, because quite honestly I'm not the biggest fan myself, but I'd say that if you are really determined to give them a fair shake relisten to bleak or else listen to the ghost of perdition. I find they have lots of progressive moments in their music, but you might not see it unless you listen to it from a death metal perspective, where the prog touches seem more unusual wheras to the prog fan they might seem so natural they go unnoticed. It's no big loss if you don't like them, but you probably should give them enough time so that you understand what everyone else is talking about... ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Seabury">
|
Posted By: LanCaiHe
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 06:15
|
Haha! I totally agree!
------------- Jim |
Posted By: friso
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 10:45
| One thing is for shure, If you want a discussion of more then four pages, you only have to state that a highrated PA band 'might not be progressive'. Usually a lot of people get hurt. |