CINERAMAX
701 Club - QQ All-Star
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2017
- Messages
- 776
Article Analyses Prog Rock
- Thread starter CINERAMAX
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
Not sure I agree with all the writers assessments, but it was a good read.
a name better suited to a law firm (second line of the article, about ELP)
They cannot let it go of their contempt for Prog rock. They have to start their article by mocking the name of a band (it’s not like they aren’t numerous bands whose name are just the names of the musicians, like Beck, Bogert & Appice).
I’m so pissed of this continuous hatred for a musical genre. It’s just music, let people enjoy it.
Persistence of Prog Rock, in spite of the journalists and the establishment hatred for the genre.
They cannot let it go of their contempt for Prog rock. They have to start their article by mocking the name of a band (it’s not like they aren’t numerous bands whose name are just the names of the musicians, like Beck, Bogert & Appice).
I’m so pissed of this continuous hatred for a musical genre. It’s just music, let people enjoy it.
Persistence of Prog Rock, in spite of the journalists and the establishment hatred for the genre.
Completely agree. It was an interesting read, but littered with lazy comments mocking the music that has become known as "prog rock". That title, and comments about what that type of music is and isn't are (in my opinion) a work of journalistic fiction, that has become fact in many people's eyes over the years.
Back in the good old days, music was called progressive rock if it was different to a normal song structure, for example if it had unusual instrumentation. The songs didn't have to be long or clever, they were just more "interesting", for want of a better word. One of the record shops that I frequented back then had a "progressive rock" section, and this included albums by the likes of Yes, Rush and Genesis etc, but also artists such as Kate Bush, David Bowie, Frank Zappa even Led Zeppelin and Miles Davis! That's what I grew up thinking progressive rock was, and I loved all (well most) of it.
Go forward in time and lazy journalists, who didn't want interesting music, they wanted music they could pigeon hole into "genres", invented a new term, the shortened (more derisory) term "prog rock". And they would have you believe that this "genre" consisted almost exclusively of long form songs, with no feeling, with technicality for its own sake, and with lyrics mostly about fantasy worlds. What complete tosh! My favourites of the older "prog rock" bands, e.g. Yes, Genesis, Crimson, Floyd, Tull, Rush, Gentle Giant, Van Der Graaf, Camel, Alan Parsons aren't that similar to each other really when it comes to instruments, musical style, singing style, subject matter, and don't really need to be put in a genre, other than "good interesting music" as far as I'm concerned. The newer bands of that "type", e.g. Steven Wilson and Porcupine Tree, Big Big Train, Marillion, Tool and yes Radiohead, are also not that similar to each other really.
This sentence in the article annoyed me:
"Progressive rock, broadly defined, can never disappear, because there will always be musicians who want to experiment with long songs, big concepts, complex structures, and fantastical lyrics. "
If he'd have said instead "because there will always be musicians who want to experiment with interesting and unusual structures and instrumentation.", then I'd have let him off, but no, he had to go with the long songs, fantasy lyrics bullsh**t!
Sorry everyone, rant over, it was my lunch hour!
And the most annoying thing that this journalistic negative slant has caused me over the years is having to explain musical tastes to others. You tell someone that you like progressive rock, and, because of what they have been lead to believe, they immediately come back with something like "oh, that boring technical music, with really long songs about elves and fairies, with lots of organ solos"!
I've always found it curious that hatred towards progressive rock, and also, why not say it, the opposite hatred towards reggaeton, is a persistent topic that spans much of society and media debating about modern music.
On the other hand, I don't believe that this debate arises about classical music, orchestras, chamber music, or even jazz. It seems unlikely that when someone is asked, "What kind of music do you like?" And they answer: "I like classical music," the same derogatory debate as with progressive rock would arise.
I wonder if this is due solely to an excessive polarization of the masses who like simple music, which doesn't require effort to evaluate and appreciate, or if there's also a part of ourselves (the progressive rock fans) who feel singled out (if not ridiculed) and give too much importance to these comments. Not to mention that the music industry also has its share of "blame" in its eagerness to sell music to the masses.
If someone who's a fan of classical music is told, "Wow, you're boring," they may not take it as personally as we do when our favorite style of progressive rock is criticized.
When I'm asked what kind of music I like, I no longer answer "Progressive Rock", but rather say something like "I prefer instrumental music. I consider voice as another instrument. I like listening to the different electronic instruments and appreciate the sound and the composition." And the interlocutor no longer keeps asking me... I don't know if I achieve the desired goal, or if they simply label me as some weird geek.
On the other hand, I don't believe that this debate arises about classical music, orchestras, chamber music, or even jazz. It seems unlikely that when someone is asked, "What kind of music do you like?" And they answer: "I like classical music," the same derogatory debate as with progressive rock would arise.
I wonder if this is due solely to an excessive polarization of the masses who like simple music, which doesn't require effort to evaluate and appreciate, or if there's also a part of ourselves (the progressive rock fans) who feel singled out (if not ridiculed) and give too much importance to these comments. Not to mention that the music industry also has its share of "blame" in its eagerness to sell music to the masses.
If someone who's a fan of classical music is told, "Wow, you're boring," they may not take it as personally as we do when our favorite style of progressive rock is criticized.
When I'm asked what kind of music I like, I no longer answer "Progressive Rock", but rather say something like "I prefer instrumental music. I consider voice as another instrument. I like listening to the different electronic instruments and appreciate the sound and the composition." And the interlocutor no longer keeps asking me... I don't know if I achieve the desired goal, or if they simply label me as some weird geek.
I had tears of joy last week listening to Close to the Edge. mch DVD-A.
I would only say that for some critics, Prog is too white.
I would only say that for some critics, Prog is too white.
If your attention span is three minutes or less, then prog rock isn’t going to float your boat. Stick with top 40 and avoid thinking hard.
To fans of Prog a song doesn't get interesting until it gets past the 5 minute mark. The bottom line is that no one should give a rat's ass what other people think of their preferred music genre. True, it does get annoying when you hear the same criticisms and when I was younger it pissed me off. Now I'm beyond caring.
Maybe it's something similar to try to appreciate another type of more... 'cultured' art, like painting. Some prefer to use the term "Art Rock" as a more universal term that encompasses Prog Rock.
I always give the example that it is not normal for someone to criticize Ravel's Bolero, as something boring, long or something worse. Really, to evaluate Ravel's Bolero you have to listen to it long enough. Not only the first 30 seconds and only say: "I can't hear it, i'm not interested."
It strikes me why prog rock is criticized, but the same is not done with classical music.
I think progressive rock is criticised because that form of music has been deemed laughable, overblown and not trendy or worthy by certain music journalists over the years. And those journalists wouldn't dare to do the same to classical music because that's not the done thing. Its like the common fallacy that journalists would have you believe that punk killed off progressive rock. The reality is that some of the prog rock bands were on the way down anyway and some shifted and updated their music slightly and survived (and outlived) punk. Many of the punk and new wave acts turned out to be progressive rock fans anyway!
I agree with your rat's ass comment, but don't make it about length (oo er missus!). There's not many Gentle Giant songs longer than 5 minutes, but their songs are packed with different interesting ideas and themes.
A common theme I hear in criticisms of Prog Rock is that rock and roll is supposed to be about rebellion / anti-establishment, and prog rock runs counter to this by taking itself and the music too seriously. I guess that's why some people prefer the Sex Pistols to, say, King Crimson. Classical doesn't suffer from this since it is (generally) SUPPOSED to be "serious music".
Personally, I guess I was never pissed off enough to embrace punk and that sort of thing, I just didn't get it. I am much more interested in the complexities and shifts that exist in prog. (But as with anything else, there is good prog and bad prog, and likewise there is some punk I like.)
As an aside, I am no expert in classical music but I believe there have been similar criticisms going back though time within the classical world, about preferences by some for less complex vs. more complex compositions, and vice-versa.
Anyway, it's all good, like what you like. (Unless it's whatever it is that passes for country music these days.)
Personally, I guess I was never pissed off enough to embrace punk and that sort of thing, I just didn't get it. I am much more interested in the complexities and shifts that exist in prog. (But as with anything else, there is good prog and bad prog, and likewise there is some punk I like.)
As an aside, I am no expert in classical music but I believe there have been similar criticisms going back though time within the classical world, about preferences by some for less complex vs. more complex compositions, and vice-versa.
Anyway, it's all good, like what you like. (Unless it's whatever it is that passes for country music these days.)
Is Opera a form of progressive cock?
jimfisheye
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 3,433
Opera is one of the screaming genres. Like some hair metal. (Apologies to hair metal lovers!)
The hate on some of the more art rock stuff seems really defensive.
The hate on some of the more art rock stuff seems really defensive.
As I see it, music is entertainment. Some people are entertained in ways I don’t and don’t need to understand. I like a lot of prog rock, but certainly not all of it. I rarely challenge posts where someone says “X is amazing!!!” and I simply can’t stand the singer’s voice, because it’s all subjective. My earlier post about attention span is clearly a rebuttal of some songs being “too long.”
True story. We had season tickets to an orchestra back in the 1990s (we’ve moved away since then), and most of the people who were seated around us were regulars, and while we might not have been friends with all of them, we recognized them and their voices. One evening they were playng Beethoven’s 9th symphony, which typically runs around 70 minutes. One of the patrons behind us said “I hope this isn’t one of those long ones.”
You just can’t account for other people’s tastes.
True story. We had season tickets to an orchestra back in the 1990s (we’ve moved away since then), and most of the people who were seated around us were regulars, and while we might not have been friends with all of them, we recognized them and their voices. One evening they were playng Beethoven’s 9th symphony, which typically runs around 70 minutes. One of the patrons behind us said “I hope this isn’t one of those long ones.”
You just can’t account for other people’s tastes.
I find these type of articles denigrating prog. rock rather ridiculous as they tell me more about the biases of the writers than the music itself. Critics like Christgau and Bangs fail the most basic criterion of a reviewer because their perspective on the quality of what they hear is based on one thing: whether they just like it or not. They may as well just say: "I don't like progressive rock", and leave it at that. Snide remarks like prog. rock being "silly" and "pretentious", are no more informative than Christgau's verdict of the Close To The Edge album as a "waste" and the band as "a one-idea group", whose next effort on Tales reveals that YES could just be "full of shit".
And to pick up on another post above about prog. being "too white", this article by James Parker is a good example of what these critics are: intellectual clowns in a musical circus of mediocrity.
The Whitest Music Ever
And to pick up on another post above about prog. being "too white", this article by James Parker is a good example of what these critics are: intellectual clowns in a musical circus of mediocrity.
The Whitest Music Ever
Yes, it's just as good as it was six years ago...when it was published.
really one of the best articles on prog ever to appear in a mainstream, nonmusic magazine.
Didn't read the whole article, did you?
The article does not have a negative slant.
