Do all modern prog bands sound the same?

[bondegezou]

Perhaps its says more about your average prog listener than it does for the magazine? (which bothers me even more, honestly).

PS: Yes, I think it does say more about the average prog listener. But that doesn't bother me, to be honest. I'm interested in bands beyond the obvious ones, I like way-out avant-garde stuff, and I'm glad to have an online community here that supports that, but if a person just likes Yes, Genesis and ELP and doesn't wish to devote a chunk of their life to exploring beyond that, then so be it. I suspect that person has some deep insight into something I know nothing about.

Ultimately, all prog bands benefit from the big name bands having a higher profile.

Henry

[Mikhael]

I think it's interesting that we were discussing "What *is* Prog?" on alt.music.progressive, and we're still bandying it about today. I haven't seen a certain person weigh in yet, though. Think: Fusion is Prog and Funk is Prog and Symph is for Weenies and Anything-I-Like is Prog and gets Capitalized.

[bondegezou]

I think it's interesting that we were discussing "What *is* Prog?" on alt.music.progressive, and we're still bandying it about today.

I suggest it is a subject that all fans of genres discuss: what is [insert name of genre]? It is an inevitable question.

Henry

[zombywoof]

Ultimately, all prog bands benefit from the big name bands having a higher profile.

Henry

This is true in some regard, but the big name's habit of releasing pricey deluxe editions of 40+ year old albums we already own certainly doesn't benefit the small acts. Brilliant records, of course, but given the choice between rebuying music and discovering new music, give me new music any day (even if it's 40 years old and simply new to me).

[Trane]

Is Prog "exceedingly UK centric"? Well, Prog is published in the UK, by an editorial team in the UK, with writers largely in the UK, and -- as far as I know -- sells mostly in the UK. It is a UK magazine, so I see it as having an understandable UK focus. If you want a magazine with, say, an American or a Spanish focus, you'll need to interest an American or Spanish publisher, I suppose. That said, I think Prog has got better in terms of covering the scene internationally. Unlike in earlier issues, we regularly have live reviews from outside the UK now and many of the new bands featured in the first few pages are non-UK now.

Overall, I enjoy Prog. I remain a subscriber, I look forward to new issues and read most of each magazine. That said, they're far from perfect. There are odd omissions (nothing on Peter Banks' passing, for example, while Classic Rock had a 4-page (IIRC) article). Some of the articles get a bit hagiographic; there are errors.

Do they have a neo-prog "obsession"? Do the covers tend to feature the same artists in rotation? That depends on your own experience of the genre, perhaps. Magazines generally are in steep decline given competition from the Internet. For Prog to be a going concern, it has to sell to a broad audience, and the broad prog fan audience are most interested in Yes, Genesis, ELP, Tull, Crimson, Rush, Steven Wilson and Marillion. You may not be personally, but those bands do stand out for most prog fans. They're the ones that sell albums and concert tickets and, thus, magazines. Likewise, the weight given to UK neo-prog bands like IQ, Galahad and Twelfth Night, I think represents their popularity, at least in the UK. Given this, Prog magazine may well not be for you, but I don't think that's Prog's mistake: I think they understand that most prog fans have a narrower range of interests than you.

Henry

I'd be curious to see the breakdown on their overall sales domestic vs worldwide.

So yeah, they've gort a Brit slant and it's normal... Hard to blame it on them, especially that they manage to remain alive (vo small feat in this day and age when lots of mags asales are dwindling). I'd even say they manage a lot betyter than Blues or AOR sister mag... (they're more ancient, but the others don't seem to achieve a cruising speed)... To be honest, I haven't bought a Prog mag in over 18 months, but I still leaf through whenever I'm at a Waterstone or WS Smith. Let's face it, in the same timespan, I've bought Classic Rock mag four times (mind you, they're a monthly), including the latest . And not to mention the hefty price asked for Prog outside UK boundaries (16€), which doesn't help, even if I could easily afford every issue, and that's almosr double the price of a CR mag.



But to reinforce the general sentiment of this thread, you'll have to see the free CD compilations they give away... it's pretty hard to tell one apart from the rest of the selection, let alone onwhich comp discs you're on...I guess !it's kind of also related to the general UK prog sensibilities and whatever the Brit groups put out for music... Indeed, just like the Netherlands, the UK have an evident symph/neo slant, and I'ml ot really all that aware of new bands (I mean groups whose members are in the 30's or younger) that venture out of the general aural safety zone.

[Esoteric]

This is true in some regard, but the big name's habit of releasing pricey deluxe editions of 40+ year old albums we already own certainly doesn't benefit the small acts. Brilliant records, of course, but given the choice between rebuying music and discovering new music, give me new music any day (even if it's 40 years old and simply new to me).

If I can just mention one thing that has contributed to this somewhat is the major label "buyouts" in recent years. When catalogue goes to a new label it has to be remanufactured and artworked from scratch to incorporate new bar codes, new labels , new catalogue numbers etc, none of this comes that cheap with big catalogues and hence the urge to "add to" etc.

[PeterG]

means absolutely nothing whatsoever. Genesis with Gabriel, for instance, could easily be happy gay-dance fairy sissy prick-rock - and not "prog".

1. It means something to me & to those who understand it & agree with it.
2. I agree, Genesis with Gabriel is happy gay-dance fairy sissy prick-rock

[zombywoof]

If I can just mention one thing that has contributed to this somewhat is the major label "buyouts" in recent years. When catalogue goes to a new label it has to be remanufactured and artworked from scratch to incorporate new bar codes, new labels , new catalogue numbers etc, none of this comes that cheap with big catalogues and hence the urge to "add to" etc.

Oh , I didn't know that. That's for the insight! By the way , I don't consider Esoteric to be guilty of this. Esoteric has a knack for reissuing stuff that has been out of print for 10, 20, 30, 40 years and for that, I am grateful.

[peppot]

Yes.

[Esoteric]

Oh , I didn't know that. That's for the insight! By the way , I don't consider Esoteric to be guilty of this. Esoteric has a knack for reissuing stuff that has been out of print for 10, 20, 30, 40 years and for that, I am grateful.

Thanks but no I didnt think you were getting at Estoteric in particular as we tend to specialise in the reissues that the major labels "wont" be doing-- but my other half Mark Powell "does" do a fair bit of work for the majors too (for instance he does Mike Oldfields catalogue and Moody Blues etc and currently on several other big projects and between 2003 and 2009 in particular did very large amounts for the majors) so I do know what the score is. Its difficult, as when labels get sold on (and the EMI sell off was a biggie with some going to Warners, some to Universal and some to BMG rights) it has meant that to get these titles out in the market and available again correctly rebadged once current stocks have gone means a lot of upfront money has to be spent and its natural that they would try to make a "reason to buy" in order to get some of the costs back --Any other business in all honesty would do the same, its either that or they would eventually fall off catalogue or if hell freezes over they might licence some of them to us!!

[Trane]

The worst offenders in this "all-sounding-the-same" category are those Classic Rock series New Species compilations...

You'd actually swear that this is only one artiste doing an entire album... I think I saw n° XII out recently...

One band called New Species that did 12 times the same album...

[bondegezou]

To return to the question of whether Prog is too UK focused, I took the latest issue and did some counts.

Section: bands from each country

News items: UK (4), Sweden (1 - Opeth), France (1 - Lazuli), US (1)
Mini-features: UK (2), US (2), India (1 - Coshish), Canada (1 - Intervals)
Regular columns: UK (3), US (1), Indonesia (1 - I Know You Well Miss Clara), Italy (1)
Main features: UK (8, including cover), UK/Sweden (1 - Se Delan), US (2), Australia/Italy (1), Finland (1 - Tuomas Holopainen)

I didn't count reviews but those for releases included many UK and US bands, but also acts from Sweden, the Netherlands (Epica), Italy (Chat Noir; Il Segno del Comando), France, Canada, Norway, Finland (Sammal), Australia and Germany (Mekong Delta). There were 17 live reviews, 14 for events in the UK and 3 in the US. Bands covered were mainly from the UK, but included others from the Netherlands, Sweden, Japan, Canada, Australia and the US.

So, yes, a clear UK focus, but plenty of coverage of non-UK acts too.

Henry

[MJBrady]

It seems to be like the NEO prog dilemma, where the less "Proggy" the music, the "Samey-er" it sounds, so many bands do in fact sound similar when concerning lack of instrumentation identity, or compositional sophistication, but, there is no doubt, that there are plenty of artists that are continuing to expand the boundaries of the many progressive genres.

[bondegezou]

Listening to the latest Prog sampler disc. A much more diverse set of bands and sounds; lots of good material.

Henry

[bob_32_116]

Certain things repeat themselves in any musical genre. the difference with prog is, that's not SUPPOSED to happen. You might love or loathe the Sex Pistols, say, or AC/DC, but if you said their songs all sounded the same they would not necessarily take that as a criticism. "It's punk" or "It's heavy rock" they would say - "Get over it". One hardly expects punk to evolve. Prog on the other hand HAS to evolve, in order to avoid disappearing up its own arse. Then of course that creates the problem that people say "that's not prog", by which they mean it does not sound like any of the Big 5 progressive bands of the 1070's.

[tallliman]

^^ Reminds me of my favourite quote from Angus Young:

Interviewer: "Some people would say that AC/DC have released 10 albums that sound pretty much alike"
Angus: "I disagree, I'd say it was more like 12"

[Poisoned Youth]

Prog on the other hand HAS to evolve, in order to avoid disappearing up its own arse.

See, I feel that this expectation is one that is almost completely fan and critic driven. Even if the idea was originally "pushing boundaries of rock" back then, the idea that they would have to keep evolving (as opposed to perfecting) is a standard no artist could live up to.

One would think the idea of following the literal meaning of the word "progressive", would have died out considering that virtually all of the iconic pioneers did not follow that career path.



Then of course that creates the problem that people say "that's not prog", by which they mean it does not sound like any of the Big 5 progressive bands of the 1070's.[/QUOTE]

Yep. Hence the broad definition of modern "big 5" bands in a recent thread. Many people don't recognize bands like Tool, Radiohead, and The Mars Volta to be the next generation. Others don't consider it to be PTree, TFK, SB, etc. for the fact that it's derivative.

[tom unbound]

Even if the idea was originally "pushing boundaries of rock" back then, the idea that they would have to keep evolving (as opposed to perfecting) is a standard no artist could live up to..

Steve Hillage is the exception that proves that rule .

[Splicer]

As long as progress doesn't mean everyone sounding like a post-rock band. Strumming, strumming, more strumming, droning, strumming...