Prog Music v. Jam Music
 

Would you say that Prog and Jam are the same thing? Do they subscribe to the same ethos even if bands we call Prog or Jam doesn't sound like one another?

If they aren't the same thing, what differentiates one genre from another? Are we splitting hairs with artificial distinctions or is there a real division between the genres that isn't as simple as aesthetic appeal?

Edit: Some conversation starters...

Are Phish and King Crimson two sides of the same coin?

Does the String Cheese Incident have the same writing model as Tool?

Does Umphree's McGee secretly listen to Yes? Does Porcupine Tree steal tricks from moe.?

A very good thread and a good question. When I think of prog I do think of innovation and when I think of jam I think improvisation (I'm not saying that jam bands aren't creative). The best place to start would be the late 1960s here, as San Francisco had some of the pivotal Jam style bands of the time the Grateful Dead, Moby Grape and Quicksilver Messenger Service etc The east coast had the Allman Brothers Band. Whilst the groundwork for prog was being laid down by the likes of the Moody Blues and Procul Harum in the UK. There are some drastic differences but there are also some great similiarities as well, which hopefully can be debated over.

Well, those are interesting questions and due to time constraints, I'm just going to say:

Probably not

Probably not

Maybe

Maybe

and see where the others views on this go. I'll think on it today and get back to you. They are very unique questions and I almost feel like it could have been asked in jest but I do look forward to reading the discussion.

IMO the biigest difference in the two is while jam just jams for the jam's sake, prog, at least in the beginning, was about making "artistcally relevant music". So most prog is more grandiose in nature, whereas jam bands just jam, they don't necessarily try to make a statement about the virtuoso players in the band they just make extended jams.

That was well said Unknown Soldier and Cledussnow.

But to those arguing that its bands just "jamming", I'd agree that there may be less improvisation in Prog, but Jam bands aren't just all noodling. I mean one-guy, sure. But that needs to be built on a structure of some sort.

Its jazzy, but it tends not to be littered with dissonant sound, and even jazz requires players to be relatively in key.

It shouldn't be a battle between the two. Both types of music are great in their own right.

How is it a battle?

Did you read the OP? This isn't a battle, just a conversation about the two styles' relationship to each other.

Anyway, on the topic: I think, while there is a lot of overlap, they're not the same thing. The big differentiator comes from the very core of these two styles I think, in that prog tends to lean in the direction of being very meticulously plotted music while jam music is, by it's very nature, improvisational. It's basically like the difference between classical music and jazz, which is kind of fitting since prog tends to be more classically influenced while jam is definitely more jazz influenced.

I never mentioned "noodling". I didn't mean to imply that.

Let me put it this way: A band like Phish is WAY more like sitting around a campfire, or being at a party, whereas many of the Prog bands are more like being in a theater or some much more "proper" setting.

I don't know if that is any clearer really, but it's the best I could come up with...

if you're created a chart of relationships, how would these 4 genres and metal all connect? I've heard a few people comment here on how Metal is a sort of nexus of Classical and Jazz.

I was listening to Wings for Marie pt. 2 yesterday, and the common riffs and melodies that come back into the song after 3 minutes just struck me as something a jam band might do. Am I crazy or is there something there that links these bands more securely than their fans might suggest.

I'd say metal is more like the nexus of classical and rock, or maybe classical and blues. Jazz had very little influence on metal at the root level imo, though there have certainly been some great examples of metal bands incorporating jazz into their sound over the years.

Well I didn't mean influence, I more mean how it can be (metal) as improvisational as Jazz.

Metal may have been an evolution coming out of Rock, but only from a loud, angry, or abrasive aspect.

I don't think Blues has much of a relationship with modern metal as does Jazz or Classical, no?

I think metal that's as improvisational as jazz is a very rare thing, it's certainly not a defining feature of metal like it is with jazz. If anything, I'd say metal is know for being very structured.

Depends on the type of metal. Doom metal, which is the oldest branch of the metal tree certainly has a strong blues influence. Sludge as well. What types of metal do you feel have a strong jazz influence?

I think that's like saying your hand and your foot are the same thing because they both have 5 appendages.

Ultimately based on my own definitions of both Prog and Jam music, I'd say no, they're not the same beasts at all. While the outsider listening in through the walls might not be able to tell the difference, a focused listener should be able to recognize the distinctions.

As most of the others have mentioned it boils down to intent. The prog band intends to lead the listener on an aural trip, it's a guaranteed journey, it will happen at this show, and it will happen again at the next one. The jam band may well lead the listener on an aural trip, but it's a unique occurrence, it just happens and if you happen to be in the crowd that night when it was truly magical then great, but it's not going to happen again at the next show.

I know there are going to be many exceptions to this, but I feel that progressive rock is generally composed. Someone sat down and thought it should go like this and this and then there's a different theme here .. Think ELP's Tarkus, anything from Gentle Giant, Yes, National Health and so on. When there is improvisation, it's often because room for improvisation was written into the song.

Jamming is a different approach to music, although of course it is an approach that prog bands as well as all other bands might use to come up with interesting stuff to put into their compositions.

edit :

Ehf, most music is composed. I mean more elaborately composed than the average tune you might hear on the radio, like a Frank Zappa song might be (ex. "Montana"). I believe Dave Stewart from National Health would require his band mates to play his (ambitious) compositions exactly as he wrote them down to the smallest detail.

Noodling around the campfire sounds very much like Phish. Now I'm not attacking jam bands there but they do noodle.

Talking of relationship charts, I'm surprised the psychedelic genre hasn't been mentioned yet, as this is the link between both prog and jam bands in the late 1960s. Folk was another element certainly with the San Francisco scene bands of that era as well. Now I'm seeing on these posts, that jazz is being being attributed as an influence on jam bands, well jazz was just as important on prog as well, The Canterbury Scene was dominated by the Soft Machine and Caravan two bands that had a big jazz influence, also King Crimson went through a jazzy spell as well. Of all the major music genres that were popular in the late 1960s its actually blues that has the least impact on either prog or jam bands (and I'm talking about traditional prog acts there) Most of the acts that were influenced by blues rock were normally hard rock acts and some of these hard rock acts like for example Uriah Heep and Lucifer's Friend basically mixed hard rock with prog rock whilst retaining a very bluesy feel, but your traditional prog bands steered clear of the blues. I think it was Janszoon that mentioned sludge metal and the blues correlation, well the obvious link there are bands like Black Sabbath and the lesser known Bang etc but apart from that, blues and metal are not normally marriage made in heaven.

I wasn't talking marrying metal and blues, I was saying that blues was one of metal's ancestors.

I know you wasn't and my remark was just confirming that the combination of the two usually doesn't go down that well, unless the artist knows exactly what they're doing.

Oh man. I don't usually point out bad grammar but that was like a sucker punch to the ribs.

Are you sure you have the right post here?

Are you suggesting I should have said "I weren't talking about marrying metal and blues..." instead of "I wasn't talking about marrying metal and blues..."?

Its been a long day, I've been up since 6.00, I've had an exam, a stressful day at work and shouted at by some woman whose parking space I nicked. I'm entitled to get "weren't" and "wasn't" fucked up. Thankfully I didn't need to use either in the exam, as I could have lost marks.:D

I never would have pegged you as the parking space stealing type!

I do some low stuff from time to time that I feel bad about afterwards. When I say my prayers tonight, hopefully I'll be forgiven.

If not, I wonder if there's a part of hell for parking space stealers. Maybe you end up driving around some crowded downtown searching for a parking spot while having to pee badly for all eternity?

God I hope so. That means I'm on the fast track to heaven. I park in the furthest aisle out to not have to deal with morons, space fights, or the family who's leaving for the day and giving up their space, but at their own pace.

Talking of bad grammar, I think you need to revise the above, here's a hint:pssst: think about intention and future tenses.

BTW shouldn't we be talking about prog and jam and not spotting errors?

So, for the sake of discussion, can I make the general sweeping statement that progressive rock is not improvised?

Anyone agree or disagree?

I'd agree with that, its meticulously prepared.

This all seems Prog oriented. By saying that, are you suggesting that all Jam Bands don't plan?

Well jam bands generally have a starting point from which they jump off from. Like the centre of the songs are generally what will be different every time, and maybe the ending. At least that's the pattern that I've been seeing.

It's more like a situation where Jam Bands seem to plan to 'not have a plan' during particular spots in their songs / set.

The other thing I notice is Jam Bands tend to stick to simple and recognizable patterns. Lots of I-IV-V progressions, nothing out of the ordinary, if there's a D and a C during a part then you can pretty well bet the other chord will be a G.

The whole point of Prog bands seems to be to eschew those traditional progressions to create something new and unique, which kind of requires organization, even if one musician is expected to improvise over a particular element of the composition.

Alright so are the similarities I'm hearing just a factor of music being more complex than pop, then? I feel like I listen to a lot of genres and few seem to have what I'll call movements for lack of a better word.

I would tend to think there are related and have things in common but there are differences enough to warrant (if one wants to) a distinction.

The funny things about classifying bands of genres is that they are not totally embraced by artist whose music is classified in that particular genre. In some cases there are industry constructs that have more to do with marketing than the the bands bathos.

Not quite a Sam Dunn chart
The Rock and Roll > The Rock > The OAR:

• The Acid Rock
• The Art Rock
• The Blues Rock
• The Classic Rock
• The Flute Rock
• The Hard Rock
• The Jam Band Rock
• The Prog Rock

But anyways basically first generation of the Prog and the Jam Bands formed around at during same time circa mid 60s up to and around the beginning of the early 70's sooo if there was a ethos they shared it was getting toked.

Should not "sub-genre" be a more appropriate term?

No one's prefect.

It's not fun have your gramma errors spotted - believe you me.

Honestly to me that appears as the work ethic of that particular artist, not all bands operate in the same manner.

I disagree.

Sometimes jamming (and consequentially improvisation) plays an important part in construction of a song, where a band (even a Prog band) would jam together arrange and rearrange the structure of the song until they figure out the final cut. Sometimes, but not always, a musician gets painted in the corner where they have to play the song note-for-note as was on the record because that's what is excepted by their fans.

I pointed out this exception in an earlier post actually, pointing out that while prog bands use jams as an explorative way to come up with new music (just about all rock bands do), then end product is generally highly composed. If they improvise when playing a finished song, it's likely because they have room for improvisation written into the song somewhere and what's improvised then is typically a solo. That's not really jamming to me which is more when the whole band is free to improvise together.

I think the prog bands that improvise the most are the ones that approach jazz fusion, but then I think it's that jazzy part which explains the improvisation approach and not the prog part of the band.

I think prog is a little more planned out, a little more finely tuned and In most cases, more technical. And the while the theory behind some jam bands may not be too technical, the act of improvising can be. It's not easy to take a song in so many directions without really knowing where you're going. You really have to know what you're doing to spontaneously play off of each other and be complementing each other in different ways.

Take the allman brothers song "mountain jam". One of the finest examples of jamming in my opinion. It blows me Away. Probably the greatest jam band ever in my opinion. The whole band improvised together so well. Two drummers, two guitars, bass, organ. There were so many layers to their jams.

I mentioned Prog Rock bands use jam sessions too as part of the creative process because you said that Prog is not improvised, well really you asked permission to make the genereal statement that "progressive rock is not improvised" and that was said without the inclusion of the exception you actually made in an earlier post.

So from there I didn't agree, but it seem that you agreed with me from an early post - to a certain point later specified. I don't know what you mean by "improvisation is written into the song." Really anything can be improvised like rhythms or melodies; improvising doesn't mean playing something without knowing what comes next. It might sound off the cuff without any structure at all, but it really means playing what one feels - a variation on a theme that's somewhat established. (There is a difference between controlled chaos and chaos out of control.) Well lets say if we agree a solo is structured within a song than it's an instrumental section of the song. Because it is part of the song (the instrumental section) doesn't mean that a musician can not improvise the lead part or the band is not jamming behind him.

It's funny that you put quotation marks around this because that is not actually a quotation of what I wrote. I wrote "they have room for improvisation written into the song". By that I mean the composition as a whole may be musically defined except for some segments where the idea is specifically to improvise. Of course you don't write down and define what you're going to improvise beforehand.

The reason I asked permission to make the sweeping statement is not because I fully believe in the sweeping statement with everything that comes with it. Rather, it was to provoke argument. You don't really have to explain to me that there are such things as occasional improvisation in prog rock bands. Believe it or not, I am actually aware of that. What I actually want to argue/find out is whether or not the level of organization of their music could be a way to distinguish jam bands from prog bands.

That's probable. As pretentious as this is going to sound have you ever had the opportunity to sit in and jam within an improvisational setting? I think having that experience really helps differentiate the nuances that distinguish the styles.

Like someone else mentioned there's definitely some common ground, especially during the creative / origin phase. I don't doubt that there are plenty of prog bands who've built their compositions from the results of improvised jams. I think the blurriness between the lines stems from prog groups who embrace chaos and atonal melodies inherent within most improved music into their compositions which results in their sound appealing to fans of both styles.

I think there also needs to be a distinction made between jam bands and improv bands. They're not quite the same, and while there's a healthy level of improvisation within jam bands that's not to say they're all completely off the cuff either.

Another thing I've noticed with jam bands is they tend to recycle a lot, like they'll play the same groove over and over to keep one particular song going and going so long as the people are enjoying it. It's like the scope and duration of the jam song is determined by the reaction of the listeners. With a prog band the length of a song isn't normally artificially extended to suit the mood of the crowd, it's just a long composition.