|
Register | Blogging | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
01-19-2008, 06:01 PM | #11 (permalink) |
;)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 3,503
|
Well, they certainly were progressive and they certainly were a rock band. But I guess one of the main connotations of prog is that it tends to be pretty technical, with a lot of classical or jazz influences. I suppose that disqualifies Radiohead and VU. But if krautrock bands like Can or Neu! are progressive rock I don't see why Radiohead, VU, or Stereolab wouldn't fall under the same heading.
|
01-19-2008, 06:06 PM | #12 (permalink) |
The Sexual Intellectual
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere cooler than you
Posts: 18,605
|
But taking all that into account you would also have to include Roxy Music as well & they're about as far removed from prog as you can get.
__________________
Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave. |
01-19-2008, 06:14 PM | #13 (permalink) | |
Music Addict
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,221
|
I don't think it does - I think it depends upon the two factors of A: how the term is conventionally used, and B: whether or not the artists themselves would identify with it.
Prog as I see it is a controversial term, for one, which has generally been used to refer to a specific type of rock band and fanbase rather than clear stylistic elements. It's not the music one makes but rather whether or not they can fall in by association. ProggyMan, we had a similar discussion before, but about 'rock' itself. It is curious that you can even call Radiohead in the sense of e.g. "In Rainbows" / "Kid A" 'rock' music at all, given that you think 'rock' has stylistic criteria. Quote:
Progressive means nothing at all. It's one of the stupidest terms ever coined. Even some great pioneers of "prog" such as Fripp rejected the term and thought it a load of nonsense. Let's not apply such a vague, controversial term so freely, but rather on whether a band fits it by association. It's more of a movement, at the end of the day. I mean, hell... I used to think TOOL were experimental. I then had a look at indie music, and came across stuff so much more wildly experimental than Tool that it wasn't funny. And yet, there'd be absolutely no context in which it would be described as prog. Radiohead are just that - an experimental band. Last edited by Rainard Jalen; 01-19-2008 at 06:26 PM. |
|
01-19-2008, 06:47 PM | #14 (permalink) | |||
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Also, I think Radiohead and Roxy Music could both be considered prog, since they have a good deal of the characteristics I listed. I have them listed under Art Rock. Which is the term prog fans use to categorize bands that could be considered prog but don't fall into any of the sub-genres. VU however I don't consider to be prog. It depends on your definition. But one things for sure. There is a difference between progressive and prog. Just because a band is progressive dosen't make them prog. Last edited by boo boo; 01-19-2008 at 06:56 PM. |
|||
01-19-2008, 07:15 PM | #15 (permalink) | |
The Sexual Intellectual
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere cooler than you
Posts: 18,605
|
Quote:
Roxy Music were hated pretty venomously by fans & journalists who liked prog.
__________________
Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave. |
|
01-19-2008, 07:51 PM | #16 (permalink) | |
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
|
Quote:
You don't have to be technical to be prog either. Pink Floyd are by no means technical. But its pretty clear they are accepted as a prog band. And for the record, Roxy Music were pretty capable musicians. |
|
01-19-2008, 07:54 PM | #17 (permalink) | |
Music Addict
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 3,320
|
Quote:
2. I'm a self-admitted elitist, but hardly pretentious.
__________________
One note timeless, came out of nowhere... |
|
01-19-2008, 07:57 PM | #18 (permalink) |
The Sexual Intellectual
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere cooler than you
Posts: 18,605
|
Never said they wern't
All i'm saying is that they were totally at odds of the perception of what prog rock is and that they were reviled or loved for it depending on which camp you were in.
__________________
Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave. |
01-20-2008, 12:10 AM | #20 (permalink) |
Reformed Jackass
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,964
|
I define prog as experimental rock music, or rock music that is fused with other genres. Of course the most famous prog bands are the ones like Genesis, Pink Floyd and Yes from the early to mid 70's movement, but the fact that there are still many good prog bands like TMV, and Porcupine Tree.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|