Do all modern prog bands sound the same?

[soblivious]

to some people they do... and to some people they don't.... that said it's hard to find someone who's actually bothered to listen to them all....

[Matt Stevens]

I'm not saying they're bad -- the Stevens track is particularly good -- just all cut from the same cloth. Dark, drone-y, echoey, minor keys...

Henry

Thank you Um I dunno really, The Bridge is probably the most like that on the record, although the rest of it is a bit more all over the place. Porcupine Tree have never been a big band for me and I've not heard a lot of their stuff, I like Jesu and Celtic Frost and Cardiacs more so perhaps that's where the doomy minor thing is there. It's hard to judge.

[Esoteric]

And as mentioned whilst this track of Matts is possibly the track most in that style albeit instrumental, the album is actually as Matt describes a bit more 'all over the place" Whatever, it is we think a great instrumental and as you can see their are guys out there like Matt ploughing some very individual progressive fields, Have to say personally I don't like the Cardiacs music at all, maybe it's a bloke thing? I have tried, I know it seems sacrilege on here to say that!!! I think maybe that's just a bit too far out for my taste.

[progmatist]

It may just be a matter of taste. If I hear a Prog band I've heard before, even the more obscure bands, I almost always, if not always recognize the band. Just this morning, I heard Unifaun on the Canvas Prog Hour. I knew immediately who it was, even though it'd been more than a year since I've heard them. I didn't confuse them with any other Genesis style band. If it's a band I've never heard but like, I know right away I've never heard them, but plan on buying the album. Similarly with Classical, I know instantly if I've heard a piece or composer before. I don't always remember bands or composers by name, but then I'm bad with names in life generally.

Conversely, other genre's sound the same to me. I hear nothing unique about bands/artists in Alternative, Indie, Country, Hip Hop, or sub genres of Metal other than Prog. These are genres I don't particularly care for, so it turns into a mish-mash of sound in my head. But if you ask any kid who's into Indie, they'll be able to identify Indie bands upon hearing them. They (and most people for that matter) will say all Classical sounds the same to them. Again, a matter of taste.

[Facelift]

It may just be a matter of taste. If I hear a Prog band I've heard before, even the more obscure bands, I almost always, if not always recognize the band. Just this morning, I heard Unifaun on the Canvas Prog Hour. I knew immediately who it was, even though it'd been more than a year since I've heard them. I didn't confuse them with any other Genesis style band. If it's a band I've never heard but like, I know right away I've never heard them, but plan on buying the album. Similarly with Classical, I know instantly if I've heard a piece or composer before. I don't always remember bands or composers by name, but then I'm bad with names in life generally.

Conversely, other genre's sound the same to me. I hear nothing unique about bands/artists in Alternative, Indie, Country, Hip Hop, or sub genres of Metal other than Prog. These are genres I don't particularly care for, so it turns into a mish-mash of sound in my head. But if you ask any kid who's into Indie, they'll be able to identify Indie bands upon hearing them. They (and most people for that matter) will say all Classical sounds the same to them. Again, a matter of taste.

Yes, but in this case it's a matter prog fans identifying the samey-ness of the modern bands.

[Shadow]

It's not that they sound the same, they just don't sound different.

[perpetual strange]

Yes, IMO this describes a *lot* of music out there that falls into the "modern prog" category. And I definitely do NOT think that the '70s were more or less the same situation. There was a lot more diversity then, even if only because there was no consensus about what bands/sounds to borrow from.

My thought is there was variety then, and variety now-but the overall bent is much more dark and ... foreboding, heavy etc... now, due perhaps to a fusion of 90s rock and prog. In the 70s there was a lot more of a 'free spirit' feel, for lack of a better world. The music (and the times) were much more positive. You have some bands like that today, (glass hammer, cirrus bay, etc...) but they tend to be labeled for it. Porcupine Tree is more the norm. I think they would have been much less the norm in the 70s.

[spacefreak]

Perhaps the original statement should have been, "Do all modern prog bands that would tend to be featured on a cover-mount CD on a magazine called Prog sound the same?"

Yes they do! Because in order to be included on a post "Kerrang" mag you must be a post-heavy metal band whose "progressive" influences are:

PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD + PINK FLOYD + PORCUPINE TREE + RADIOHEAD...

[PeterG]

Response to those making long lists of prog styles - A lot of what the "prog crowd" subsumes as prog simply isn't prog.

[Scrotum Scissor]

Response to those making long lists of prog styles - A lot of what the "prog crowd" subsumes as prog simply isn't prog.

That's right, it's progressive rock. A lot of what the "prog crowd" subsumes as progressive rock is just "prog" - and not progressive rock. How about that.

[PeterG]

It's not though, electronica is electronica, metal is metal, jazz is jazz, avantagarde is avantgarde, modern classical is modern classical etc.
Only proggers who like it call it prog & try to include it in prog. Everyone else calls it electronica, metal, jazz etc.

[Scrotum Scissor]

It's not though, electronica is electronica, metal is metal, jazz is jazz, avantagarde is avantgarde, modern classical is modern classical etc.
Only proggers who like it call it prog & try to include it in prog. Everyone else calls it electronica, metal, jazz etc.

I'm afraid the concept of "genre" doesn't work that way; most idiomatic descriptions denote (subjective) positions on inherent qualities in the music at hand. "Avantgarde" is not a genre; by definition, the debut King Crimson album was a work of avant-garde in rock. This doesn't render it any less of a "progressive rock" album. BTW, your beloved Cardiacs are mostly not defined or recognized as neither a "prog" nor a progrressive rock group by anyone else than those "proggers" you refer to. Go figure; perhaps they should be banned from discussions in here.

[PeterG]

Well I disagree, the average Joe knows what he means when he says pop, metal, jazz or classical and knows them as genres. It doesn't need to be more complicatred than that, and for most people it isn't. Overanalytical music fans bring a whole new set of problems to the table, which simply confuse the heck out of most people to a level that they aren't interested in anyway. They just want to hear the music.

[Werbinox]

Are Echolyn and Deus Ex Machina and Mr. Bungle "modern prog" bands. They certainly don't call themselves that, but it is their right. As fans of the genre / approach we are free to classify as we wish, too. So are they? Do they sound the same?

[Steve F.]

It's not though, electronica is electronica, metal is metal, jazz is jazz, avantagarde is avantgarde, modern classical is modern classical etc.
Only proggers who like it call it prog & try to include it in prog. Everyone else calls it electronica, metal, jazz etc.

So, if you call it prog, it is prog, because that means you are a 'progger who like(s) it and wants to include it in prog'.

but

if you have a skepticism of genre labels and don't want to call it 'prog' for any number of reasons, it isn't prog, because you don't want to include it in prog?



That means we can't consider Duke Ellington, Charles Mingus or Miles Davis 'jazz', y'know?

[Steve F.]

on the positive side, I have happily spent the last 30 years not releasing prog!

[NogbadTheBad]

on the positive side, I have happily spent the last 30 years not releasing prog!

Ah but by the time the box get's into my hot and sweaty hands it miraculously becomes prog

[Steve F.]

^ ^ ^ ^ ^

where's that god damn LIKE button...

[Scrotum Scissor]

on the positive side, I have happily spent the last 30 years not releasing prog!

Except for that Otolithen record.

[Yves]

ALL PROG IS ONE.

[infandous]

Define "prog".

Seriously, this is an entertaining read. I think people just want to define progressive rock however they want to, and seem to enjoy inflicting that definition on others. I will say that my definition of progressive rock used to be almost entirely symphonic music (with a bit of eclectic, avante stuff thrown in......usually based on instrumentation). Over the years though, I've more or less thrown that definition out the window, because I realized that I like a lot of music that defies straight up genre classifications. Personally, I still like the "derivative" bands just as much as the "cutting edge" bands. It's all good music.

I DO sense that the "doomy, dark and gloomy" approach the OP mentions is certainly the dominant trend in the "prog" rock world. Porcupine Tree was arguably the most popular of "modern prog" bands for quite some time so this isn't really surprising (also, there seems to be a trend amongst "neo" and "retro" bands to add more cruchy guitars and metal elements in the past decade or so...........something I find unpleasant usually).

[Sunlight Caller]

So, I'm listening to the latest Prog cover disc (P23: A Lifetime of Adventure...) and there's some good music on it. I'm enjoying it... but... well, they all sound the same! They're all in a Porcupine Tree/Radiohead vein. I exaggerate, but the tracks by Nick Magnus, Halo Blind, Melancholia, Matt Stevens, Eyes & Noeyes and John Bassett could all come from the same album. And the tracks by Preacher and Se Delan aren't miles away either. I'm not saying they're bad -- the Stevens track is particularly good -- just all cut from the same cloth. Dark, drone-y, echoey, minor keys...

Henry

The one you didn't comment upon Henry is the Sontaag track which kicks off the disc and is quite unlike the rest, it caught my attention straight away... Captain Lockheed and the Starfighters, filtered through an Orgone Accumulator, and given a sharp kick and a twist....

[tom unbound]

ALL PROG IS ONE.

That's the problem.

Everybody's "Going For The One" .

And now, it's too late.

"Prog" is now a cliché.

[JKL2000]

Surely we need to agree on what is prog before this question can be answered meaningfully?

[trurl]

Prog is what I say it is.