|
Post by dvh on Aug 13, 2014 20:35:29 GMT
losenot , You may just be right p.s - as a general rule , i think people who listen to classical music should be denied an opinion on rock and roll That's OK then, because prog isn't rock and roll, so classical fans, fill yer boots.
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Aug 13, 2014 20:43:43 GMT
OK, I'll take that cue. As a fully paid up classical punter I don't really 'do' prog - not really heavy enough for my taste, so not surprising that the only lp's I own from the list are all the Rush ones ...
|
|
|
Post by jammy on Aug 13, 2014 23:08:17 GMT
Toss up......17 or 5......Decisions Decisions.......17 nudges it, quite sublime with the cans on.
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 14, 2014 5:42:46 GMT
Hi Jules If you lie Rush and like the heavier side of prog worth checking out a few others on the list Dream Theater, Porcupine Tree, Tool, Pain of Salvation Queensryche and even Opeth
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 14, 2014 6:56:38 GMT
No Black Sabbath! I know they created heavy metal and are not considered prog, but there are other non-prog bands in there. Sabbath deserve recognition.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Aug 14, 2014 7:03:59 GMT
At the time, they were considered to be progressive. Which they were! That highlights one of the problems with labeling things. Half the prog fans define it as having been only over a specific period, while the other half insist it carried on. It can only lead to arguments. The first lot should call it regressive music! Reg Rock! Or is that name already used by that the genre of music that consists only of Elton John tribute bands?!
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Aug 14, 2014 10:29:12 GMT
I've never considered Sabbath to be 'prog'. They were 'progressive' in the literal sense of the word, as their first release was hugely innovative and ground breaking in its time, but I see prog as a genre and style of music as typified by Yes / Genesis / ELP that Sabbath doesn't fit into of course.
|
|
|
Post by danielquinn on Aug 14, 2014 10:33:22 GMT
prog is of course short hand for middle class rock stars
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Aug 14, 2014 10:42:15 GMT
Hi Jules If you lie Rush and like the heavier side of prog worth checking out a few others on the list Dream Theater, Porcupine Tree, Tool, Pain of Salvation Queensryche and even Opeth Hi John, they're just not my thing really ... early Queensryche was cool though - I bought their debut ep back in 1983 which blew me away.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Aug 14, 2014 11:57:58 GMT
I've never considered Sabbath to be 'prog'. They were 'progressive' in the literal sense of the word, as their first release was hugely innovative and ground breaking in its time, but I see prog as a genre and style of music as typified by Yes / Genesis / ELP that Sabbath doesn't fit into of course. Yes, well you would fit into the second category, along with most people. I just think of it as rock music. Take In the Court of the Crimson King: the first track is as heavy as anything on the first Sabbath album. The rest of it? No, labels are counterproductive!
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 14, 2014 12:04:40 GMT
I'm with you there, Chris.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2014 12:07:13 GMT
I had never heard the term 'progressive rock' until I started inhabiting the forums. It was all just rock to me - apart from the pop bits that is.
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Aug 14, 2014 12:28:19 GMT
I've never considered Sabbath to be 'prog'. They were 'progressive' in the literal sense of the word, as their first release was hugely innovative and ground breaking in its time, but I see prog as a genre and style of music as typified by Yes / Genesis / ELP that Sabbath doesn't fit into of course. Yes, well you would fit into the second category, along with most people. I just think of it as rock music. Take In the Court of the Crimson King: the first track is as heavy as anything on the first Sabbath album. The rest of it? No, labels are counterproductive! Whatever works for you Chris. I think labels are fine and can be a useful shorthand, as long as that doesn't blinker you from any possiblity of exploring music within a certain genre you tend not to like. Whilst I'm not a big fan of the kind of prog I mentioned, as a result of this poll and thread, I went to YouTube to check out the no1 Yes album as a result. Of course where bands start and end up in terms of their style is another matter - Queensryche being a perfect case in point. King Crimson is another - I find much to like in the lp you mention but didn't find the rest of their output as appealing. Again, it didn't stop me exploring it just because I or others might label it as 'prog'! The difference between 'prog' and the 'hard rock' or 'metal' that I listen to (yes I'm using easy labels for shorthand) is much more than just 'heavyness' as such - it's a combination of lyrics / instrumentation / attitude etc etc
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Aug 14, 2014 12:45:03 GMT
So who's the progiest of the TAS members by this definition then? 64! Oops (might have been a lot more if I liked Rush, but I don't have a single Rush album - and Sgt. Pepper prog?)
I'm a bit like Chris too, almost impossible to pigeon hole music these days as there are too many crossovers. People think I just listen to country, but what the heck is country? Music changes and evolves over time and slapping a definitive label on something can make those less inclined to experiment dismiss an entire artists work, because they have defined it as coming from a certain genre. I would say I enjoy music which has it's 'roots' in American country, folk and blues, but country music per se as people commonly define it, I don't like - so it's impossible and somewhat foolhardy to clearly define genres IMO, but having said that I don't consider Sgt. Pepper's to be prog, so that's a classic example that pigeon holing music is too difficult. It was however most definitely a ground breaking album, but 'progressive' music as most people seem to define it, I'm not so sure - it would be interesting the see what André made of that list?
60 - 100 years ago maybe you could have a better shot at categorising music, as it was much more clearly defined, but these days it's too tough. I reckon if you stick rigidly to what you think will fit what you like by genre, you could miss so much, so it's disadvantageous to pidgeon hole music and very foolhardy to do it to a single artist, as more often than not many artists styles can change during a recording career, certainly if they stay productive it can.
|
|
|
Post by canetoad on Aug 14, 2014 12:56:40 GMT
31 for me.
|
|
shane
Rank: Duo
Posts: 56
|
Post by shane on Aug 14, 2014 13:34:51 GMT
Land of Pink and Grey? can't say I've heard that one...
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 14, 2014 13:53:17 GMT
Back when Sabbath first came out they were sometimes promoted as a Progressive band I think over time definitions change and was a lot more liberal back then than now.
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Aug 14, 2014 14:36:14 GMT
Land of Pink and Grey? can't say I've heard that one... A typo everyone else seems to have missed !
|
|