Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 158

Thread: Heart - Prog or Not?

  1. #1
    Oh No! Bass Solo! klothos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    305

    Heart - Prog or Not?

    ......if not, I think I can postulate a great argument for them to qualify for their first four albums (especially the first two)....However, its possible that they are riding that knife edge of progressive "Rock" and not "Progressive Rock"


    Just curious of your opinions

  2. #2
    Member moecurlythanu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    The Planet Lovetron
    Posts
    6,800
    Seriously?..I think I got redirected to PA.
    "If you want to see the true nature of humanity, just look at the internet."

    http://www.discogs.com/user/moecurlythanu/collection

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Serbia
    Posts
    1,882
    It's '70s Rock, which as a genre was often "heady" due to then-zeitgeist, but not Progressive rock.




  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Kalamazoo Michigan
    Posts
    3,886
    I would not call them prog, but they do have proggy moments such as this one. Probably my favorite song by them:


  5. #5
    I've been a Heart fan since their first album, but they are not prog. There may be occasional moments, certainly. Great band regardless.
    The Wilson sisters can write and sing lovely harmonies. Their autobiography was fairly good as well.

  6. #6
    No, not "prog". They're better than prog.

  7. #7
    ALL ACCESS Gruno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Dio, Alabama
    Posts
    1,817
    Quote Originally Posted by GuitarGeek View Post
    No, not "prog". They're better than prog.
    Oh, so true!

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by moecurlythanu View Post
    Seriously?
    Obviously.
    "Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
    "[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Serbia
    Posts
    1,882
    Quote Originally Posted by GuitarGeek View Post
    No, not "prog". They're better than prog.
    Better than whole genre?
    I'm afraid that they were playing in the second league of the '70s Rock bands - because in the first league were The Who, Queen, The Rolling Stones, Bad Company, Peter Frampton, Bruce Springsteen...
    Last edited by Svetonio; 02-06-2017 at 06:52 AM.

  10. #10
    Oh No! Bass Solo! klothos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by rapidfirerob View Post
    I've been a Heart fan since their first album, but they are not prog. There may be occasional moments, certainly.
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveSly View Post
    I would not call them prog, but they do have proggy moments
    the question then becomes: "How many proggy moments does a band have to have to be deemed Prog?".....the first two albums are chock full of them, which is what prompted me to start this thread
    Last edited by klothos; 02-06-2017 at 07:36 AM.

  11. #11
    Oh No! Bass Solo! klothos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by moecurlythanu View Post
    Seriously?..I think I got redirected to PA.
    Quote Originally Posted by Scrotum Scissor View Post
    Obviously.
    I posted this thread in full anticipation of expecting snarky-ness from the elitists --- You guys deliver

  12. #12
    ^ Well, at least the band had Mark Andes in their ranks. That ought to count for somewhat of a "genre legitimacy", I guess.
    "Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
    "[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    3,004
    IMHO not. I'd put them in that 'FM rock'/early AOR category of a somewhat easier-to-digest version of the rock bands of the late 60s/early 70s. Led Zeppelin were always the obvious influence in this case.

    I don't see what's 'elitist' about finding the concept dubious.

  14. #14
    Oh No! Bass Solo! klothos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by JJ88 View Post
    IMHO not. I'd put them in that 'FM rock'/early AOR category of a somewhat easier-to-digest version of the rock bands of the late 60s/early 70s. Led Zeppelin were always the obvious influence in this case.

    I don't see what's 'elitist' about finding the concept dubious.
    Since being a member of PE, I find that the criteria varies from member to member -- some interpreting progressive Rock with "Progressive Rock" as the same thing while others don't

    To some folks here, part of the Prog criteria is based on packaging: how a group is marketed including their album art - name - logo, commercial spotlight evasion, having prog 'tude, less visually charismatic, and (in some cases) more of a cult-ish fan base as part of that criteria ---- which has absolutely nothing to do with the music itself......
    Last edited by klothos; 02-06-2017 at 09:48 AM.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by klothos View Post
    However, its possible that they are riding that knife edge of progressive "Rock" and not "Progressive Rock"
    I'd say it's this, if anything. I absolutely love those first five Heart albums, and I do hear some nods to "Progressive Rock" here and there on those albums. But it's not their bread and butter by any means, so I don't really consider them Progressive Rock. They definitely had their own sound, and definitely pushed the boundaries of rock music, so in that sense I suppose they were "progressive." But so many bands had elements like this in their music as well, so I think "riding the wave" of that sort of sound is a good description of what Heart did, and they did it well.

    Quote Originally Posted by klothos View Post
    the question then becomes: "How many proggy moments does a band have to have to be deemed Prog?".....the first two albums are chock full of them, which is what prompted me to start this thread
    I think you're right. For me Progressive Rock albums are defined by their "immersion" in more challenging approaches to rock music. IMO, Heart lack that immersion. You clearly hear more "Proggy" stuff than I do, though I definitely hear it from time to time; but to me these albums aren't "chock full of Prog." It's more of an occasional spice. Heart's emphasis wasn't on pyrotechnics, virtuosity, or straying too far from conventional arrangements. To me, they were far more straightforward, but were immensely creative within that framework. Anne is a virtuoso singer, but she didn't apply her talents to particularly "virtuostic" singing intervals or melodies; she just killed it with more straightforward stuff. None of the other players, or the music itself, really push all that hard musically even when they are "pushing it" a bit, but the end result is fantastic within the rock context. Like Zeppelin.

    Again, love me some Heart on those first five albums. But I've never considered them Progressive Rock like Yes, Genesis, KC, GG, ELP, etc. were in their primes.

    Bill

  16. #16
    Geriatric Anomaly progeezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    11,310
    Quote Originally Posted by GuitarGeek View Post
    No, not "prog". They're better than prog.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gruno View Post
    Oh, so true!
    I'll make this a trio.
    "My choice early in life was either to be a piano player in a whorehouse or a politician, and to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference"

    President Harry S. Truman

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    3,004
    Quote Originally Posted by klothos View Post
    Since being a member of PE, I find that the criteria varies from member to member -- some interpreting progressive Rock with "Progressive Rock" as the same thing while others don't

    To some folks here, part of the Prog criteria is based on packaging: how a group is marketed including their album art - name - logo, commercial spotlight evasion, having prog 'tude, less visually charismatic, and (in some cases) more of a cult-ish fan base as part of that criteria ---- which has absolutely nothing to do with the music itself......
    Not really. I personally hear 'progressive rock' as being about experimentation and breaking musical barriers. I don't see how Heart did that, although I too appreciate their work. I think most AOR bands had an influence from the surface elements of some progressive rock (bravura synth solos and the like, 'mystical' lyrical content), it was part of their make-up, certainly at that time.

  18. #18
    Oh No! Bass Solo! klothos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by Sputnik View Post
    I'd say it's this, if anything. I absolutely love those first five Heart albums, and I do hear some nods to "Progressive Rock" here and there on those albums. But it's not their bread and butter by any means, so I don't really consider them Progressive Rock. They definitely had their own sound, and definitely pushed the boundaries of rock music, so in that sense I suppose they were "progressive." But so many bands had elements like this in their music as well, so I think "riding the wave" of that sort of sound is a good description of what Heart did, and they did it well.
    Im having two revelations in this thread: The first revelation is that part of the issue that I think we (in general) tend to label what is or isnt Prog by the artist...In actuality, this is wrong. It shouldnt even be judged album by album -- it should be judged from song to song, with some artists doing nothing but these type of songs (usually in full albums) while others may occasionally flirt with it ona song here and there -- but it doesnt make those songs any less Prog. I think many arguments here on PE can be avoided if this was the stance....The second thing is the realization that Prog itself isnt a well defined box: Its actually a gradient from one extreme (Prog) to the other (Not Prog) and a song can be dotted anywhere along that spectrum dependent on the factors and genetic makeup of the song.... Then we can see how many of the songs on Heart's first two albums are more "Prog" than some of the cuts on Yes' "90125".......or take a band like Sweet, whose body of work is mostly bubblegum, glitter-rock, and proto-metal yet appreciate a "Proggish" song that they have ("Medusa")

    Quote Originally Posted by Sputnik View Post
    I think you're right. For me Progressive Rock albums are defined by their "immersion" in more challenging approaches to rock music. IMO, Heart lack that immersion. You clearly hear more "Proggy" stuff than I do, though I definitely hear it from time to time; but to me these albums aren't "chock full of Prog." It's more of an occasional spice. Heart's emphasis wasn't on pyrotechnics, virtuosity, or straying too far from conventional arrangements. To me, they were far more straightforward, but were immensely creative within that framework. Anne is a virtuoso singer, but she didn't apply her talents to particularly "virtuostic" singing intervals or melodies; she just killed it with more straightforward stuff. None of the other players, or the music itself, really push all that hard musically even when they are "pushing it" a bit, but the end result is fantastic within the rock context. Like Zeppelin.

    Again, love me some Heart on those first five albums. But I've never considered them Progressive Rock like Yes, Genesis, KC, GG, ELP, etc. were in their primes.

    Bill
    Some things are well-hidden. One example is "Barracuda": when the verse/vox starts, if I was to score this (the F Clef/Bass Clef, anyway) I would score this as a bar of 9/8......I dont count it like that when I perform it -- For the sake of the emphasis of groove/locking in with the drums, I simply count the changes in fours:

    (Em) One - 2 - 3 - 4
    Two - 2 - 3 - 4
    Three -
    (C) One - 2 - 3 - 4
    Two - 2 - 3 - 4

    When counting a bar of 9/8 as part of a 4/4 drive , the change happens on the "2" of the third bar - where the snare usually goes in a 4/4 drive...Its really weird and can become a total clusterfuck if the rest of the group isnt counting this correctly...especially the drummer. Thats a pretty daring thing to do in a song, and its cleverly disguised

    this is just one example
    Last edited by klothos; 02-06-2017 at 11:55 AM.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by klothos View Post
    it should be judged from song to song, with some artists doing nothing but these type of songs (usually in full albums) while others may occasionally flirt with it ona song here and there -- but it doesnt make those songs any less Prog.
    I'd agree with this, but under these circumstance the songs themselves have to embody all the aspects of Prog Rock for me to consider them Prog. Heart songs rarely have everything from the bravura to the gentle, so I can't name one song that would totally qualify in my mind. The nice thing about measuring it across an album is that the album itself can embody a variety of elements from song to song, and the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Heart adds up a bit better to me in this regard, but those early albums still aren't Prog Rock to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by klothos View Post
    The second thing is the realization that Prog itself isnt a well defined box
    You're just now realizing that?

    Quote Originally Posted by klothos View Post
    Thats a pretty daring thing to do in a song, and its cleverly disguised
    Yeah, it's a great moment in a great song. It puts the listener a little off kilter in a gentle way, similar to the odd meter in Black Dog or The Ocean. Is it daring? For the day, I don't think so, and even bands like Soundgarden and Tool flirt with odd meters in their songs, so it's not that alien to the rock scene. To me, there's a lot more to it to be Progressive Rock, and while moments in rock stuff may make the rock more interesting, they don't make it Progressive Rock in my book. But obviously, there are different books out there on that subject.

    Bill

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    6,676
    In a word, no.

    No Mellotrons. No flutes. No advanced time signatures. No side-long epics. No lyrics or covers about floating mountains.

  21. #21
    Oh No! Bass Solo! klothos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by rcarlberg View Post
    In a word, no.

    No Mellotrons. No flutes. No advanced time signatures. No side-long epics. No lyrics or covers about floating mountains.

  22. #22
    Progga mogrooves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    The Past
    Posts
    1,884
    Led Zeppelin, but with ovaries.
    Hell, they ain't even old-timey ! - Homer Stokes

  23. #23
    Member dropforge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    1,831
    Is Heart prog? Who cares? Heart's awesome. Ann's one of the best singers on record (feel free to cut me down if you disagree).

    Sheesh, if I couldn't listen to something because it ain't "prog"...I'd have a much smaller collection.

  24. #24
    Member dropforge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    1,831
    Quote Originally Posted by rcarlberg View Post
    In a word, no.

    No Mellotrons. No flutes. No advanced time signatures. No side-long epics. No lyrics or covers about floating mountains.
    Better have a listen to Dreamboat Annie and Little Queen again.

  25. #25
    Member Lopez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Medford, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,260
    When Heart started getting a lot of airplay in Boston in 1977 or so, the radio DJs lumped them in with the perception of what New Wave was. Playing them along with the Ramones, Mink DeVille, Television, and the like. I didn't buy that characterization at all, and I can't buy them as prog, either.
    Lou

    Awarded the Krusty Brand Seal of Approval. It's not just good, it's good enough.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •