PDA

View Full Version : Is this a progressive rock band?



King Fripp
Mar-20-2007, 23:10
Allright, in this thread we can duscus weather a band's music can be classified as progressive rock or not.

King Crimson - Yes
Hatfield & The North - No, Jazz-Rock
Yes - Yes (hehe)
Mike Oldfield - No, progressive folk rock
Genesis - Trespass - Wind & Wuthering, Yes
The Beatles - No, though one could label some of their last albums as proto-prog
Gentle Giant - Yes
Black Sabbath - No, hard rock. Though there are some moments on Sabbath, Bloody Sabbath (where Rick Wakeman played keyboards) and on Sabotage that could be progressive.
Anekdoten - Yes
Brand X - No, Jazz rock/fusion
Camel - Yes
Caravan - Yeee,eee,..no. Cantebury Rock/Psycedelic Rock. Though the "If I Could Do It All Over Again" an "In the Land of G&P" are at times progressive, as a whole, this is not a progressive rock band, but you se from my initial responce that I have some doubts
Deus Ex Machina - Yes. Some would perhaps classify this group as more jazz rock / fusion orientend, and I can see that.
Colosseum - No, rock.
Emerson, Lake & Palmer - Yes
Deep Purple - No, rock.
Focus - Yes
The Mahavishnu Orchestra - No, fusion.
The Mars Volta - Yes, this could argued tho'.
Electric Light Orchestra - No, rock.
Gracious - Yes
Zappa - No, Zappa :)
Änglagård - Yes
Gryphon - No, progressive folk rock.
Jethro Tull - Yes, but not all.
National Health - Jazz Rock
Led Zeppelin - No, rock.
McDonald & Giles - Yes
Pink Floyd - No, rock.
PFM - Yes
Happy The Man - No, avant-garde jazz.
Rick Wakeman - Yes
Sigur Rós - No, post-rock
The Tangent - Yes
The Soft Machine - No, 1&2=psycedelic rock. 3+=Jazz rock
Van Der Graaf Generator - Yes
Giles, Giles & Fripp - No, pop-rock.
Rush, Marilion, Dream Theatre & Tool - No, Neo-rock/metal.

Allright, this should piss some people off. Remember, this is just my silly litte opinion.

Discus!

Art Rock
Mar-24-2007, 16:58
What's there to discuss? Like you say, this is just your opinion. Mind you, your opinion deviates considerably from established reference sources (like the Prog Archives), and is hardly consistent: if something is progressive folk rock, then surely it is also progressive rock?

Good bands, nevertheless. Some of the major names missing:
Porcupine Tree
Marillion
IQ
Pallsa
Pendragon
Kayak
Renaissance

all the prog metal bands
all Italian prog bands

D_Outvile
Mar-29-2007, 19:39
Many good music can be classified as "progressive"... But really, guys... There's simply no really good music that can and should be classified. Any good music is outside style boundaries, and trying to classify it you have to name tons of styles and it still won't tell a thing... What's the point of saying Muse is progressive? What's the outrageous retardness to say SOAD is rap music (that nearly killed me when I first saw it...) Music is MUSIC. But I admit that, to start with something, it's Ok to say the band got some progressive feel to it...

Andrew Roussak
Apr-06-2007, 00:31
Hi people, as I believe, some great bands are still missing here - UK ( Wetton-Bozzio-Jobson ), ABWH ( Anderson-Brufford-Wakeman-Howe), GTR (Howe - Hackett ), Anyone's Daughter ( Germany ).
Then, answering to D_Outvile - I agree that music is music, and I believe moreover that f.e. J.S.Bach and F.Chopin could have described their works as just a good music or like ( who knows? ), but nowadays, you would rather use the terms like baroque and romantic , talking about the heritage of Bach and Chopin respectively. So - that's a point of classification.
Answering to King Fripp - I don't think you can directly compare Dream Theater to, say, Focus and therefore judge whether DT plays prog rock or not. The public taste ( sorry ) in the last 20 or so years was influenced by different metal styles and had therefore drastically changed . Rock is now generally heavier and faster, as it was in eighties. So maybe DT and the similar bands are however prog rock bands - of the 21st century?
Many greetings ,Andrew

Museo
Apr-14-2007, 00:23
Thanks for the list - very interesting. I think I have to disagree with you about Pink Floyd though as to be they virtually define what progressive rock was all about and they experimented with musical sounds.

Amigoboomer
Jun-05-2007, 19:17
to throw in my $0.02 in this discussion - the technology and the times themselves should be considered in the context of this question. The Beatles were most certainly Progressive Rock especially considering the very disparate elements they put into their music - yes it was Top of the Pops popular music but I have to say that most of even the most complex and progressive of compositions have basic song structures rooted in folk and pop music sensibilities - the best songs stand up with the simplest of arrangements as well as with the complex ones. You read most every progressive rock gods' influences and at or close to the top were The Beatles.

Pink Floyd - most definitely Progressive considering the groundbreaking soundscapes they initiated. Also part of the forefront of the concept album...

Rush, Dream Theater, Marillion - all have put out releases that oscillate back and forth from progressive to metal to heavier pop... you really need to look at their individual CDs to determine what is classic progressive rock or not. i.e. - Farewell to Kings, Hemispheres are true progressive rock albums. Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures are neo-prog. The following 9 albums were more electro-pop/metal with this most recent release moving back towards the neo-prog.

Newer bands have both advantages and disadvantages due to technology - high end chops are not nearly as impressive since you can just as easily sequence serious keyboard runs and trigger them anytime during a performance. Or w.r.t. guitar - delays, sophisticated multiband overdrives, reverbs, rectifier amps have all thickened the sound of a guitarist to the point of removing the flesh and soul of the player. I admit as a guitarist that having the multitap delays is a serious assist in getting a sound, but some of the most rewarding playing I've done has been a simple rig of guitar->amp with the amp set to be at a "just breaking" point - that bluesy distortion that allows everyone to hear your picking mistakes as much as the tension increasing on the string as you bend into the note.

Anyways, especially with the advent of brilliant bands like The Mars Volta, Sigur Ros, Radiohead, Porcupine Tree, etc... the line is totally blurred, and as their popularity increases do they therefore become less prog?

jacobedmund
Jun-06-2007, 10:20
Hello
How you are defining good music. Good music is always outside style boundaries, and you trying to classify it. Music is MUSIC. Please complete the list by adding these bands. You must add these bands in your list
1. Anyone’s Daughter (Germany)
2. Pink Floyd
3. Kayak.
These bands are also good.

janny108
Jun-06-2007, 19:34
Allright, in this thread we can duscus weather a band's music can be classified as progressive rock or not.

King Crimson - Yes
Hatfield & The North - No, Jazz-Rock
Yes - Yes (hehe)
Mike Oldfield - No, progressive folk rock
Genesis - Trespass - Wind & Wuthering, Yes
The Beatles - No, though one could label some of their last albums as proto-prog
Gentle Giant - Yes
Black Sabbath - No, hard rock. Though there are some moments on Sabbath, Bloody Sabbath (where Rick Wakeman played keyboards) and on Sabotage that could be progressive.
Anekdoten - Yes
Brand X - No, Jazz rock/fusion
Camel - Yes
Caravan - Yeee,eee,..no. Cantebury Rock/Psycedelic Rock. Though the "If I Could Do It All Over Again" an "In the Land of G&P" are at times progressive, as a whole, this is not a progressive rock band, but you se from my initial responce that I have some doubts
Deus Ex Machina - Yes. Some would perhaps classify this group as more jazz rock / fusion orientend, and I can see that.
Colosseum - No, rock.
Emerson, Lake & Palmer - Yes
Deep Purple - No, rock.
Focus - Yes
The Mahavishnu Orchestra - No, fusion.
The Mars Volta - Yes, this could argued tho'.
Electric Light Orchestra - No, rock.
Gracious - Yes
Zappa - No, Zappa :)
Änglagård - Yes
Gryphon - No, progressive folk rock.
Jethro Tull - Yes, but not all.
National Health - Jazz Rock
Led Zeppelin - No, rock.
McDonald & Giles - Yes
Pink Floyd - No, rock.
PFM - Yes
Happy The Man - No, avant-garde jazz.
Rick Wakeman - Yes
Sigur Rós - No, post-rock
The Tangent - Yes
The Soft Machine - No, 1&2=psycedelic rock. 3+=Jazz rock
Van Der Graaf Generator - Yes
Giles, Giles & Fripp - No, pop-rock.
Rush, Marilion, Dream Theatre & Tool - No, Neo-rock/metal.

Allright, this should piss some people off. Remember, this is just my silly litte opinion.

Discus!



What about Argent?
Isn't that considered rock and classical? Or not?
Jan

Progger58
Jun-10-2007, 00:27
if something is progressive folk rock, then surely it is also progressive rock?

Totally agreed. :tiphat: :up:


Mike Oldfield - No, progressive folk rock
Caravan - Yeee,eee,..no. Cantebury Rock/Psycedelic Rock.can see that.
Colosseum - No, rock.
The Mahavishnu Orchestra - No, fusion.
Gryphon - No, progressive folk rock.
Pink Floyd - No, rock.
Happy The Man - No, avant-garde jazz.
The Soft Machine - No, 1&2=psycedelic rock. 3+=Jazz rock

I will have to totally disagree. To me (and to lots of other proggers I know around the world), all these are genuinely PROGRESSIVE. Progressive Rock is the genre, with several subgenres included: Cantebury, Krautrock, Neo-Prog, RIO, Progressive Folk, Prog Metal, etc. ;)

Cheers,
Demetrio.

Nigua
Aug-08-2007, 15:03
Pink Floyd-NO????
I cannot agree with that!
But anyway as someone said before, good music can't be classified!!!