Why are Porcupine Tree listed as "heavy prog?"
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
Forum Description: Discuss specific prog bands and their members or a specific sub-genre
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=71484
Printed Date: December 01 2024 at 22:10
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Why are Porcupine Tree listed as "heavy prog?"
Posted By: Prog_Traveller
Subject: Why are Porcupine Tree listed as "heavy prog?"
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 22:33
| Sorry folks but I don't get it. On this website Porcupine Tree are listed as "heavy prog." They started out as a psychedelic/ space rock kind of band so I think if anything they should be under that category. Do we list Yes or Genesis as crossover bands or prog related? No they are listed as symphonic prog. OK you might argue and say that PT are most well known as a heavy prog band. Maybe maybe not. I think most of the hardcore fans of the band knew them when they were more in the Pink Floyd direction and that is when they really became accepted in the prog community. Their later heavier albums are less prog and shouldn't be considered the essence of what the band was or even is. Sure, they have heavy moments but they always have. Feel free to debate me. I don't expect the category to be changed but I just wanted to make my point. I think it's one of the reasons why the categories don't work so well on here. Many bands can easily fit under more than one category so maybe that's something to look into. |
Replies:
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 22:37
|
Because... theyz heavy... and theyz prog... What would YOU call them? Metal? You'd be a crazy person. Symphonic? Then you deserve the wraiths of hell. Neo-prog? I've seen men eat their own livers over making such a terrible mistake. |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 22:41
|
They were originally in Psych, but whoever is in charge decided that Heavy was more accurate for their current direction. The late period of Yes and Genesis don't count because those albums aren't prog, while modern PT is (I guess), so I agree. Max has been promising genre tagging by album for quite some time now, but I'm pretty sure it's never going to happen. :(
------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 22:44
| well, I'd say that 3 of PTs albums are psych (Sunday, Downstair and Sky) while the rest are HP (Signify, Lightbulb, Stupid, Absentia, Deadwing, Blank, Incident) - although Lightbulb and Stupid do often border on Xover. |
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 22:49
|
I agree with the OP, they're either Xover or Psych, depending which period you're taking in account.
Since they're not playing psych prog anymore, I would list them under Xover.
|
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 22:52
| Come on Pablo. That's a gross miscategorization. Based on everything from Absentia until now they're 100% heavy prog. Put them in Xover and the whole website might as well be there. Call it Xoverarchives. |
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:00
Maybe I'm making Heavy Prog as a rather limited sub-genre, since I mainly think it's rather for heavy rock bands that delve through Prog Rock some way or another. And not for Alt. Rock bands or Prog Rock bands that delve through heavy territory, I really can't think of many cases of the latter.
Anyway, we clearly have different conceptions of the genres and of the band. For me Porcupine Tree's 99-10 music is alt. rock inspired music with prog, psych and metal influences. Not saying they're not Prog, but they definitely have a strong inclination towards alt. rock or pop or however you want to call it.
BTW: I wouldn't even consider The Mars Volta Heavy Prog, for me they belong to Eclectic. I'm telling you this so you can know how my mind works.
|
King By-Tor wrote:Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:02
|
And that makes them HP, is what I'm saying. My definition of HP is whatever the current generation considers Heavy rock + prog, which is exactly what their last 4 albums is, Xover would make them to be a more Radiohead kind of output. Whatever, this website doesn't know its own definitions from a piece of rock. Which is half the reason I quit   |
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:06
That's not Porcupine Tree for me. For me their 1999-2009 period is: Alt Rock + Prog + Metal (not in the heaviest way) = Crossover. But I'm no expert on the Xover genre neither that expertise on the Heavy Prog genre.
|
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:10
|
but that so clearly = heavy prog! They are the clear leaders of the genre as it exists in the modern age! Xover is for more poppy bands. Whatever. My definition of prog is not what others is. Otherwise they wouldn't have added Tori Amos and Nine Inch Nails. Big f**king mistakes, IMO. But hey, the category will never change, so this argument is all for naught. And even if it did, all I would do is complain - it wouldn't actually effect my day-to-day life. So whatevs. This website is in the sh*tter enough as it is. Let's add Gaga under related while we're at it for her progressive effect on pop music. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:12
|
Because we've clearly given up.
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:27
| lol. |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:55
Dude really?? I mean come on, clearly Lady goo-goo Gaga would be Eclectic Prog...or maybe Zeuhl (just cause I dunno what that is...)
 IMO Porcupine Tree are disco since all the songs have a catchy beat and are easy to dance to.
 -------------   
|
Posted By: Prog_Traveller
Date Posted: September 19 2010 at 23:59
|
Lot's of stuff is heavy. Relayer and Drama by Yes are heavy. The knife from the Trespass album is heavy. You can even say some PF and JT stuff is heavy especially JT. Oh well. I give up.
Oh and aren't Rush listed as heavy prog too? Maybe half of their stuff is heavy. The other half is either prog, synth rock, new wave or modern rock. I'll let them slide though since they seem to be back into a heavier direction again. Boy do those guys flip flop. ;)
|
Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 00:07
|
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 05:09
And this debate exemplifies the eternal madness of endlessly categorising bands into strict sub genres
------------- 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: Any Colour You Like
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 05:28
|
The first four PT albums in Psych/Space, SD and LS in Xover and the rest in HP. But... that won't happen yet... maybe ever. |
Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 05:30
|
I've always thought tagging should be done by album, not by band, and that multi-tagging should be possible.
However, nobody wants to go through the entire database retagging.
Except maybe Marty.
|
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 05:58
My thoughts exactly. ------------- 
|
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 13:11
|
all you need is 5 genre king crimson derived yes derived genesis derived pink floyd derived crossover |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 13:17
|
Seems to me as good a place as any particularly considering the more recent albums. Why won't bands stick to the sub-genres we stick them in, dammit?
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: Marty McFly
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 13:24
Correct, very correct indeed. However, with Crossover & Prog Metal Team + school + my girl taking most of my time, it's not much of free time as it used to be. ------------- There's a point where "avant-garde" and "experimental" becomes "terrible" and "pointless," -Andyman1125 on Lulu  Even my |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 13:41
|
They should be in Eclectic.
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 13:43
|
They should be in indo-raga ------------- 
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 13:48
|
They should be in Cognito ------------- What? |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 13:58
|
They should be in Stoke Newington. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 13:59
| they should be in absentia |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 15:49
No, that's not a good idea at all. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Any Colour You Like
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 16:01
|
How about we just have three genres Prog, Not Quite Prog, and Xover? |
Posted By: The Neck Romancer
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 16:19
|
Their music is a mixture of (not equal parts of) prog, ambient, psych/space, electronic, hard rock, krautrock, alternative, pop rock and extreme metal (e.g. heavy sections of Bonnie the Cat, Anesthetize and Way Out of Here). That's eclectic prog in my book. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 18:11
| I've always thought we should have "good" and "bad" as genres. |
Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 18:35
|
How about "U" and "No U"
|
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 18:45
|
I would say that all of their albums either fit in psych, crossover, or heavy prog. Unfortunately, all of their albums would be out of place in at least one of these genres. Thus, tagging doesn't matter very much in their case, as long as it applies to some of the albums. ------------- 
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 18:49
|
Eh? ------------- What? |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 18:55
Wow, I tuned back in and there were some really good answers.
Oh no, you're not turning into a slacker are you Marty? ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: The Monodrone
Date Posted: September 20 2010 at 19:10
|
I personally believe it's pretty difficult to pigeonhole just about any progressive artist into just one genre, sub-genre, etc. Even in their later albums (aka present day), PT still show an affinity for ambiance, psychedelia, and the occasional Krautrock (see: "Anesthetize"). Sure, they have a heavier style, but they're a very eclectic bunch. That being said, for organization/categorization purposes, I feel that heavy-prog fits them pretty well. -------------  
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: September 21 2010 at 15:58
|
Hi,
I would be more concerned with the worry about it being listed as A, or B, or C ... than I would the music itself ... even Steven has talked about that, btw!
But if you are worried about the description by someone that might not have heard the band properly, or felt that they were too "heavy handed" on the guitar once or twice in the whole album ... I'm not sure that you care that much about the band.
If I like something, it doesn't matter what anyone says ... so being defensive about it would seem a bit weird. I just want to see someone write down their view and expression and thought and justify it ... much more than a generic comment that has no basis in fact or time or place ... the reviews for a lot of the metal and goth fall in to that!
And yes, it is "heavy" ... but sometimes things are so heavy that they are weightless in space! ... and the point of view changes! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: September 21 2010 at 15:59
Yeah ... I concur! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: ferush
Date Posted: September 22 2010 at 15:31
| The great and unique rhythmic section marked the sticker heavyprog |
Posted By: himtroy
Date Posted: September 22 2010 at 15:51
|
We can't say crossover anymore? We have to say Xover? What is this, text messaging? ------------- Which of you to gain me, tell, will risk uncertain pains of hell? I will not forgive you if you will not take the chance. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 22 2010 at 16:10
No one is forcing anyone to say crossover or Xover...say what you like. But if I want to shorten a word or an album title or a band name. Then I will if I feel so inclined. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: ergaster
Date Posted: September 22 2010 at 17:58
Maybe they oughta have subcategories for bands like Porcupine Tree. At any rate, I'm not sure it's helpful to categorize a band like them, who change directions routinely, by what they started out as. They aren't that now. To stick them under "space rock" would make no sense to a newbie like me, who first heard Fear of a Blank Planet--I would be forced to conclude that the folks on Prog Archives don't know what the heck they are doing because they clearly don't know what "space rock" is. And really, for a fan, it is irrelevant when they became "accepted"; it comes down to whether you like them or not. I was astonished that they'd been around so long without my having a clue, but for me the "essence" of the band is not what style you can lump them under at what point in time, but what made you sit up and take notice in the first place. If it speaks to whatever internal musical cues that drive your preferences, it doesn't really matter what label is stuck on it. I mean, I'm a prog fan not because I think prog is the "best" music, but because if you add up all the kinds of music I like and have liked the best, most fall under that particular label. Porcupine Tree included. But no, I don't think calling them 'space/psychedelic' would be useful now. ------------- We have done the impossible, and that makes us mighty. Captain Malcolm Reynolds Reality rules, Honor the truth Chemist99a R.I.P. |