Dear Reviewers: Stop Using The Term "Crossover Prog".

[Splicer]

I'm looking at you Progarchives.

Before anyone says it, yes, we've spent a long time trying to define "Prog" and are still arguing about it. That said, the term "Crossover Prog" is nothing but a milquetoast catchall term. It is being used for one of two main reasons:

1. The reviewer is too lazy to delve deeper into the sound by making connections and associations with other artists or musical movements.
2. The site needs content so anything that remotely has a sound that might be considered Prog when looked at sideways is called "Crossover Prog" to satisfy the quota of daily posts.

As I do every Saturday morning while drinking coffee and rage-tweeting at Trump, I look through the Progarchives New Releases and see what's available on Spotify (quite a bit, actually). I've just listened to my fourth "Crossover Prog" artist. I hear post-rock, something that sounds like folk-rock, some keyboards, some songs that are vaguely in sections, lots of random lyrics, a female singer who is terrible, one guy who wants to be Jeff Buckley in the next life, and a guitar solo.

I admit that my tastes are all over the place although they usually land on very melodic Symphonic Prog (I like to cry at melodies a lot), but the term "Crossover Prog" is meaningless garbage.

[interbellum]

I never used it (not being at PA), but you almost inspired me
Just gidding: I think you're right that it's meaningless, because to what genre does prog cross over?
I'd rather use "progressive pop" or "jazzy prog" or "progressive jazz-rock" etc. to make sure what's the connection.

[Koreabruce]

Blame it all on our pal Svetonio...

[moecurlythanu]

Any Prog that puts the ball on the floor and either breaks your ankles on a drive to the hoop or pulls up and knocks down the 15-foot jumper is clearly "Crossover Prog." There's nothing else to call it.

What's that? "Crossover" refers to crossing over to the mainstream and enjoying radio airplay and chart success? Well, I'll just be damned.

[Poisoned Youth]

In my experience, the term is used to define music more influenced by modern styles (modern as in 90s and beyond) than by classic ones that is also "proggy" or has prog elements. It's certainly a lazy catch-all term but at the same time, given the average prog fan's ironic lack of open-mindedness, if music doesn't conform to a set of traditional standards, it's not prog. The term "crossover prog" serves both to loosely define and to marginalize at the same time.

[Progbear]

While we’re raging about stuff that, in the greater sense, doesn’t really matter, also stop using other meaningless weasel terms like “eclectic prog” and “art rock.” Also stop using the non-word “keyboarder.” The word is “keyboardist.”

And stop abbreviating decades like “70ies” or “70ties.” It looks like “seventyies” or “seventyties” and makes my head almost explode.

[Vic2012]

^......

[dgtlman]

While we’re raging about stuff that, in the greater sense, doesn’t really matter, also stop using other meaningless weasel terms like “eclectic prog” and “art rock.” Also stop using the non-word “keyboarder.” The word is “keyboardist.”

And stop abbreviating decades like “70ies” or “70ties.” It looks like “seventyies” or “seventyties” and makes my head almost explode.

I like the words drummist & basser or maybe the fancier term bassier.
As far as the OP term, what is Prog anyway?

[Scrotum Scissor]

To be rude, the term "eclectic prog" is just as silly. Etymologically and historically speaking, ALL so-called progressive rock was partly identified precisely from its eclecticism.

Sadly, a term such as "symphonic prog" means little more, as there's hardly anything even remotely nearing an actual symphonic approach in most of it.

And still, life goes on until it one day doesn't.

[aith01]

To be rude, the term "eclectic prog" is just as silly. Etymologically and historically speaking, ALL so-called progressive rock was partly identified precisely from its eclecticism.

Completely agreed.

Sadly, a term such as "symphonic prog" means little more, as there's hardly anything even remotely nearing an actual symphonic approach in most of it.

Oh no! Now how am I going to categorize my music library?

[moecurlythanu]

Sadly, a term such as "symphonic prog" means little more, as there's hardly anything even remotely nearing an actual symphonic approach in most of it.

Finally! Someone says it...My faith in humanity is restored.

[Scrotum Scissor]

My faith in humanity is restored.

Meh. The value of 'faith in humanity' appears generally overrated, Moe.

[regenerativemusic]

Symphonic Prog should have been String Synthesizer Prog!






I demand a refund.

[Mr.Krautman]

Usually I'm not too bothered by generic music classification terms and have learned to live with, but when I read this from the OP:

"...I hear post-rock, something that sounds like folk-rock, some keyboards, some songs that are vaguely in sections, lots of random lyrics, a female singer who is terrible, one guy who wants to be Jeff Buckley in the next life, and a guitar solo..."

This is so close to my personal experience that I can't add nothing but agree.


The side effect of this is that the term crossover prog became a repulsive to me and each time I see it I pass over without listening.

[NogbadTheBad]

I think you guys are being a little harsh, PA is a bit obsessed with genre definitions, most of the time they are just trying to list bands that have some proggy elements and the sub-genre definition is a lot less of an issue. Is it ok for bands like Bent Knee, Big Big Train & Phideaux to be found by people surfing for proggy stuff?

[3RDegree_Robert]

^^^^^agreed^^^^^^^

As the recent “belle of the ball” band in PA’s Crossover Prog category,-my thoughts. I just think of it as the closest name they have for good ol’ Art Rock, meaning Prog that is more about songs, less about musical instrument prowess. They have a Prog Related category but most of what’s in Crossover is Prog as we broadly define it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Trane]

I'm looking at you Progarchives.

I've just listened to my fourth "Crossover Prog" artist.
I admit that my tastes are all over the place although they usually land on very melodic Symphonic Prog (I like to cry at melodies a lot), but the term "Crossover Prog" is meaningless garbage.

I'm also feeling a bit awkward about reading of "Crossover" or "Eclectic" prog, which were pure inventions when PA broke the "Art Rock" subgenre to be more manageable.

What's that? "Crossover" refers to crossing over to the mainstream and enjoying radio airplay and chart success? Well, I'll just be damned.

I believe that was the idea

I'd rather use "progressive pop" or "jazzy prog" or "progressive jazz-rock" etc. to make sure what's the connection.

That was my position when we "needed to create that subgenre"

While we’re raging about stuff that, in the greater sense, doesn’t really matter, also stop using other meaningless weasel terms like “eclectic prog” and “art rock.” Also stop using the non-word “keyboarder.” The word is “keyboardist.”

And stop abbreviating decades like “70ies” or “70ties.” It looks like “seventyies” or “seventyties” and makes my head almost explode.

Personally, I would've preferred to keep Art Rock as a subgenre but was outtvoted...

I mean, I (and plenty others too) used "Art Rock" to define the music we liked in the 70's in North Am... personally, I had no idea that the word "Prog" or progressive rock even existed in the early 90's... However, I must say that plenty non-english-speaking continental europeans had difficulties making a sonic difference between the words "Art Rock" and "Hard Rock". I must confess that using the words Art Rock was always confusing and provoked many time-wasting conversations/arguments before realizing that I meant "Prog".

To be rude, the term "eclectic prog" is just as silly. Etymologically and historically speaking, ALL so-called progressive rock was partly identified precisely from its eclecticism.

That's the other biggie that still bugs me nowadays... Some at PA are proud to see that both eclectic and crossover prog used over the net as a proof that PA is influential.

I think you guys are being a little harsh, PA is a bit obsessed with genre definitions, most of the time they are just trying to list bands that have some proggy elements and the sub-genre definition is a lot less of an issue.

Welllll, it seems that way nowadays, but back then the rage was about genre-ification...

Some collabs (thinking of MikeEnRegallia, notably) would've killed to have at least double the genres existing, but he wanted album tagging as well.

[NogbadTheBad]

Welllll, it seems that way nowadays, but back then the rage was about genre-ification...

Some collabs (thinking of MikeEnRegallia, notably) would've killed to have at least double the genres existing, but he wanted album tagging as well.

Yeah there are some that are still pretty dogmatic, Jazz Rock Fusion seem to be locked into Mahavishnu / RTF style bands as the only way you can merge jazz and rock, Electronic is very Berlin School focused. Others seem a bit more relaxed & go with "we know it's prog lets get it on the site somewhere".

Album tagging would be a big improvement and solve the issue with entries like Miles Davis where his full discography are up there and artists who change style regularly.

[Splicer]

While we’re raging about stuff that, in the greater sense, doesn’t really matter, also stop using other meaningless weasel terms like “eclectic prog” and “art rock.” Also stop using the non-word “keyboarder.” The word is “keyboardist.”

And stop abbreviating decades like “70ies” or “70ties.” It looks like “seventyies” or “seventyties” and makes my head almost explode.

The "eclectic" term bothers me as well because like "crossover", it is not even giving me a hint as to why it is considered eclectic. As for the rest, since I'm rather OCD, I will add those to my peeves as well. They're good ones.

[Splicer]

To be rude, the term "eclectic prog" is just as silly. Etymologically and historically speaking, ALL so-called progressive rock was partly identified precisely from its eclecticism.

Sadly, a term such as "symphonic prog" means little more, as there's hardly anything even remotely nearing an actual symphonic approach in most of it.

And still, life goes on until it one day doesn't.

I concur since a lot of the artists in any catchall category are often ill-defined by ad hoc reviews. Since my penchant is for "symphonic", I tend to see it as through-composed Rock that purposely borrows some of the structures of "classical" (the catchall term). All the bands can sound different, but they still have that quality to them. However, King Crimson have songs that are symphonic and others that are more akin to improvised Jazz, so they fall into multiple categories.

I simply bounce off of reviews of music that don't even seem to make the attempt to define what I'm listening to in some meaningful way.

[The Dark Elf]

The human mind requires things to be put in neat little boxes -- it's how we are wired. Perhaps there should be one giant catch-all box that is titled "I can't really define progressive rock with any certainty, but I know it when I hear it." That way, if a performer happens to traverse the edges of prog, or has an album or two that actually is proggy out of their discography, you dump them in the bin.

[moecurlythanu]

^ I've always viewed Progarchives as something of a bin.

[alucard]

I understand Crossover , but what is Prog ?

[aith01]

I understand Crossover , but what is Prog ?

Oh no!

[Splicer]

I understand Crossover , but what is Prog ?

I now disown this thread.