Originally Posted by Firth
You're right but Rush had that general sound on 2112. 2112 is not significantly heavier than the heaviest albums by those bands imo(especially BS who were way heavier than Rush).
You're right but Rush had that general sound on 2112. 2112 is not significantly heavier than the heaviest albums by those bands imo(especially BS who were way heavier than Rush).
Not really. That soon became a 'muso genre' which doesn't mean anything beyond other musos- is that innovative? The earlier stuff- Weather Report, Mahavishnu Orchestra, Herbie Hancock etc.- is groundbreaking, because it's not just 'look at how many chord changes I can cram into one track' and 'look at how fast I'm soloing'. There's nothing innovative about just 'playing to the gallery', IMHO.
Weather Report and Herbie Hancock both had a lot of experimentation with sound textures and creating atmospheres, whilst there was something volcanic about early Mahavishnu that made them connect to a rock audience, not for nothing was their debut called 'The Inner Mounting Flame'.
my thoughts exactlyOh.
How . . . . . . . diverse . . . . . . .
BTW, they forgot to mention... *no people who were part of the original, multi-cultural Prog music explosion or listened to Prog music in 1972 were asked to vote in this poll*
Why is it whenever someone mentions an artist that was clearly progressive (yet not the Symph weenie definition of Prog) do certain people feel compelled to snort "thats not Prog" like a whiny 5th grader?
I remember that year well!
like yesterday to me
Why is it whenever someone mentions an artist that was clearly progressive (yet not the Symph weenie definition of Prog) do certain people feel compelled to snort "thats not Prog" like a whiny 5th grader?
Fusion = Jam bands!? you must not have heard much music in the style
Last edited by MYSTERIOUS TRAVELLER; 08-27-2013 at 03:48 AM.
Why is it whenever someone mentions an artist that was clearly progressive (yet not the Symph weenie definition of Prog) do certain people feel compelled to snort "thats not Prog" like a whiny 5th grader?
He was pointing at the rhetorical hypothesis I presented in my own post, the contents of which you'd might want to contemplate before commenting. Though, for the record, I never mentioned "fusion".
But where on earth did you collect the perception that jam bands "don't know how to structure a piece of music"? Do you think, in all seriousness, that improvised sound does not imply structure? And that the casual "prog" artist somehow deals in actual composition and thus delivers structure? From countless other postings of yours, it appears as though your point of definition resides somewhat on the side of the matter - and that progressive rock music emannates somewhere between Europe and Asia. At least this would explain your stance against all sorts of music about which you obviously know very little indeed.
"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
I certainly agree that I have no interest in fusion/jam bandsother than going down the local pub's 'jam night for local musicians' to prop up the bar rather than to pay any attention to the background racket! I guess that's the type of music you like, that's fine but give me melody and structure any day of the week!.
Christ! The point was that you have to know what words mean before you point an opinion at them! Now please answer the damn questions i posed - this is a discussion forum!
"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
Nothing to discuss, how many people even here on PE have heared of any of the bands you mentioned ! Must be a reason for that !!!!
come on.... even Atom Heart Mother topped the charts in the UK when it was released... If AHM was not mainstream, DSOTM's phenomenal success made Floyd mainstream
my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicts to complete nutcases.
Plenty more than what you would might expect. But I suppose that goes to show. Compared to what those names were doing, most 70s "prog" bands were by your own definition NOT able to "structure a piece of music", seeing how their works were loose and relatively simple. And I'm not even talking about "Heat of the Moment" now.
"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
How many more albums will One Direction sell this year than every prog band discussed on PE this year, combined? Is that for the same reason?
Point being there dosnt appear to be much love for those bands even in the prog community ˇ. Not talking about general appeal ˇ
It's a mostly meaningless point, for the same reason as I pointed out. Some general music fans also know/like prog, but most don't. They like other bands. There are some prog bands who are only known to a relatively small number of prog fans; the majority of whom like other bands. But that doesn't, in itself, mean anything. Once you start going down the road of "there's a reason for that" with respect to a band's popularity, or lack thereof, you inevitably fall into a hole that is hard to extricate yourself from.
Just interpret the statement in a way that helps you make an argument. The word fusion goes way beyond what you have picked out. So you don't like fusion and I don't care.
Pink Floyd was psychedelic and experimental at the beginning. But starting with Meddle they are definitely Prog. I always tough the top 5 in prog were Floyd, Yes, Genesis, K.C and Tull. No?
“One good thing about music, when it hits you, you feel no pain.”
From a cynical point of view, perhaps with Rush getting into the Rock HOF, Rolling Stone is trying to appear current. Would they have rigged the poll votes as well to get a current 'it' band to the top of the list.
Wrong , replace Genesis for ELP who where the biggest prog band on the planet at the time !
Whether you or anybody else dosnt rate them is irrelevant to what is factual history !
Correction, pop acts like this don't sell CDs. They sell downloads. How many teenage girls even have CD players these days? Not any I've seen.
I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down.'- Bob Newhart
I didn't say that they sold CDs. I purposely used the word "album," which has become synonymous with the title of a long-playing release, and no longer associated with any particular physical format. In case you were wondering, One Direction's latest album has already sold more than 4 million copies (all formats).
Who is "one Direction"?... I never heard of 'em!
http://www.thenektarproject.com/geew...um/default.asp ...where CLASSIC Nektar lives[/I]
New mega popular new boy band.
What can this strange device be? When I touch it, it brings forth a sound (2112)
Try to maintain that for as long as possible......
ELP were indeed very popular in the early-mid 70s. I would say that, in the style of Symph Prog, they were in the top 3 with Yes and King Crimson in the circles I was a part of... in the Fusion style it was Mahavishnu, Return To Forever and Herbie Hancock.
Why is it whenever someone mentions an artist that was clearly progressive (yet not the Symph weenie definition of Prog) do certain people feel compelled to snort "thats not Prog" like a whiny 5th grader?
Yep what I understood from what I read about the scene, the order of 70s popularity for the top groups with prog pedegree was more like ELP, Pink Floyd, Jethro Tull then Yes, King Crimson and finally VDGG, Genesis who were well behind...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks