Spelling... Damn.

https://media.giphy.com/media/5ilsskakMwGT6/giphy.gif

I don't know how to read that, you don't believe Steve Morse should be brought up in a Progressive Rock discussion? Let me think this one out... Steve Morse played guitar for Kansas, Dixie Dreggs, Deep Purple, Flying Colors* and a few others. Kansas is classified as Art Rock and Progressive Rock, and Flying Colors as is classified Prog according to Wikipedia. Being the Prog expert you are, with those kind of credentials Steve Morse has, there would be no doubt in your mind that he does have a place in a Prog discussion.

I brought up Steve Morse and Satch. I didn't bring them up so much as examples as Prog musicians, but for other reasons. Tributary Records brought up concert numbers. I used Satch and Morse as examples of musicians who play small venues. Imo it seemed to me that he lamented Prog bands don't stadium numbers, and play small venues. To me, it was just how things are. Some bands sell out football stadiums, and then next tour they are playing smaller venues like hockey arenas. Bringing them up had to do with concert numbers, and how imo that is true across the board whether they are Prog, Rock or what have you.

There are musicians and bands out there that for what ever reasons play small venues. It seems like the natural progression of things imo. Take The Beatles, for example: They started off in dives, worked their way up A class venues, then they sold out football stadiums, stop playing live, and ended playing on the rooftop of Apple's HQ.


* Flying Colors - Mask Machine (Official Music Video)

You're reading it wrong now. I said I didn't know who Steve Morse was, and OP said he wouldn't consider him prog. Since I didn't know who he was, and OP said he wasn't prog, then I thought why bring him up? But now that you've explained who he is, he does of course have a place here, and OP is wrong.

Again.

And my confusing him with the Morse brothers in Spock's Beard just muddied the waters even more. Yay me! :finger:

Well I thought of it more that I was read wrong. I mention Steve Morse and Joe Satriani for one point - about concert numbers - but that put aside for an argue whether or not they belong in a Prog discussion.

It was response to this post below. I was questioning whether or not you can that assess that from a a single example that interest in Prog has dwindled. Maybe Prog has. I don't know if Steve Hackett still tours South America, but I heard he does better in South America. So does the San Fran concert really paint an overall picture?

Steve Morse and Satch were brought up to say that that sounds normal that Steve Hackett got that response, because they played the same size venue. Now add another guitars or add a few more acts and bill it as G3 then it would had larger concert numbers. I thought it would go without saying, maybe I should had mentioned it. And if hypothetically if Steve Hackett played with Genesis it would had sold out SF Levi's Stadium with tickets costing up to five or six times that amount. Still if that hypothetical reunion happened that would not be proof that Prog is alive and thriving. It would speak more of Genesis' popularity. I like Steve Hackett, but fans are not there only to relive Genesis' Proggy moments but his other works like Horizon or Black Light etc etc.

You're right, but it's the same really with any genre. Pick the top acts and they'll always fill stadiums. Go for smaller, lesser known ones, not so much. George Benson, Lionel Ritchie or even Diana Ross could fill arena-size stadiums many times over, even today. Maverick Sabre? Not a hope. Does that mean that soul is on the decline?

Note: this question is not addressed to you, but as a general rebuttal of the whole "prog bands can't sell tickets so prog is dead" nonsense that this uninformed and somewhat trenchant supposed fan is going on about. Or was. Seems he has left us now. May Anderson be praised, and may Gabriel bless and keep you.

Steve Morse Appreciation 101:

I see prog alive and well, just in a different more modern form.

Plenty of great math rock bands and progressive metalcore bands about. That's what really does it for me.

It all comes under a blanket progressive term for me but I realise they obviously don't sound much like Tool, Opeth & Dream Theater, which is I suspect what OP is getting at here. I'm sure there are plenty of bands like that knocking around though paying homage to them under the radar. I just wouldn't know about them as it's not really my cup of tea.

Prog lacks a proper definition. The confusion lies in the title of progressive meaning it has to change. We all know what traditional Jazz or Reggae is. Funk, Soul, etc. Prog in a traditional sense did have it's formula grounded in the late 60's through the mid 70's. All the classic prog bands that people are still talking about had jazzy drums and a strong keyboard palate.

The modern prog is metal based, not jazz based. Complex metal is seen as prog, but it wouldn't have been seen as prog in the traditional sense put aside the 70's bands. It would be compared more to bands like UFO, Scorpions, Judas Priest or Sabbath. Metallica came along with complex metal that wowed people, but was a far cry from traditional prog.

Metallica is complex...



Nobody's calling them prog either but that's a different story.

Frownie is being kind. Before you discuss prog I would suggest learning what it is. Maybe there's commonality between prog and metal in the 21st century but in prog's 1960's roots metal had yet to begin, even the hard rock bands of the day like Sabbath weren't metal yet, that really didn't start until the '80's