Musician Forum - Band Discussion Board - BandMix

I'm a Prog nut, definitely.
Love the classics like King Crimson, ELP, Gentle Giant, Yes, etc
Yet I have to admit, there's a lot of Prog groups I really dig out now; Porcupine Tree, Dream Theater, Ayreon, Riverside, Pure Reason Revolution, Pain of Salvation, Gordian Knot, The Mars Volta, and others.
A lot of it is quite different than the classic groups, especially Progressive Metal bands, but still, I get my over the top instrumental complexity and 20 minute song fix.

I'm not a prog nut or anything but I actually really dig progressive music and I have a lot of respect for it. I'm not into a whole lot of the prog metal sh*t because most of it either sounds all alike or it just goes stale after a while. My only exceptions are the likes of Helloween, Symphony X, Opeth, and Psychotic Waltz. The best prog music is in the classic bands like ELP, Pink Floyd, Genesis, and Uriah Heep. Those, to me, are the most original, creative, and interesting prog bands. It's also the best music to have on while you're tripping out!

I'm probably the only guy I know that actually hates Dream Theater, and I know everybody probably wants to crucify me for that. I just find their music to be very boring and uninteresting. I heard so many good things about the band in high school so I really did try to get into them....but song after song, I just really wasn't feeling it. I mean sure, every member of the band is extremely talented. I think John Petrucci (sp?) is a pretty sick guitar player. But it doesn't matter if you're the best guitar player or drummer in the world because it's all about the songwriting. Maybe I'm not as smart as everyone else or there's just something I'm missing, but I just really could not get into them and I never understood why everybody was so obsessed with them.

Happy 4:20!

The Damn Yankee's is a perfect example of how a room full of talented musicians does not make a BAND. they might as well be doing ads for viagra!

tbh1989 wrote:I'm not a prog nut or anything but I actually really dig progressive music and I have a lot of respect for it. I'm not into a whole lot of the prog metal sh*t because most of it either sounds all alike or it just goes stale after a while. My only exceptions are the likes of Helloween, Symphony X, Opeth, and Psychotic Waltz. The best prog music is in the classic bands like ELP, Pink Floyd, Genesis, and Uriah Heep. Those, to me, are the most original, creative, and interesting prog bands. It's also the best music to have on while you're tripping out!

I'm probably the only guy I know that actually hates Dream Theater, and I know everybody probably wants to crucify me for that. I just find their music to be very boring and uninteresting. I heard so many good things about the band in high school so I really did try to get into them....but song after song, I just really wasn't feeling it. I mean sure, every member of the band is extremely talented. I think John Petrucci (sp?) is a pretty sick guitar player. But it doesn't matter if you're the best guitar player or drummer in the world because it's all about the songwriting. Maybe I'm not as smart as everyone else or there's just something I'm missing, but I just really could not get into them and I never understood why everybody was so obsessed with them.

Happy 4:20!

I've got to agree, I saw Dream Theater and left in the middle of the concert. Boring, unmusical drivel. But that's just me. I'm a fan of the classic prog stuff.

Ok...what's the dif between prog & art rock?

I like Jethro Tull, Genesis ( Peter Gabriel Genesis! ), Marillion, Pink Floyd, Gentle Giant, King Crimson, Alan Parsons Project, Brand X, Camel ( Andrew Latimer Camel - not Peter Frampton! ), Uriah Heap, ELP, things along those lines.

I've heard them described as "art rock" & "fusion" & "progressive," but is there a difference?

So many categories to learn!

I think it's just too hard to label & categorize so much music, & it's disrespectful, in a way, to lock an act into a slot just because you can't describe it well. ( although I loved it when Tull beat out Metallica for the best metal album back in '83...that cracked me up! )

philbymon wrote:Ok...what's the dif between prog & art rock?

I like Jethro Tull, Genesis ( Peter Gabriel Genesis! ), Marillion, Pink Floyd, Gentle Giant, King Crimson, Alan Parsons Project, Brand X, Camel ( Andrew Latimer Camel - not Peter Frampton! ), Uriah Heap, ELP, things along those lines.

I've heard them described as "art rock" & "fusion" & "progressive," but is there a difference?

So many categories to learn!

I think it's just too hard to label & categorize so much music, & it's disrespectful, in a way, to lock an act into a slot just because you can't describe it well. ( although I loved it when Tull beat out Metallica for the best metal album back in '83...that cracked me up! )

I believe art rock and prog rock are synonomous, fusion is most often used to describe jazz-rock (Al di Meola, Mahavishnu Orchestra, etc).

I think Tull won best Heavy Metal album in 1986.

I like Dream Theatre...

jimmydanger wrote:

philbymon wrote:Ok...what's the dif between prog & art rock?

I like Jethro Tull, Genesis ( Peter Gabriel Genesis! ), Marillion, Pink Floyd, Gentle Giant, King Crimson, Alan Parsons Project, Brand X, Camel ( Andrew Latimer Camel - not Peter Frampton! ), Uriah Heap, ELP, things along those lines.

I've heard them described as "art rock" & "fusion" & "progressive," but is there a difference?

So many categories to learn!

I think it's just too hard to label & categorize so much music, & it's disrespectful, in a way, to lock an act into a slot just because you can't describe it well. ( although I loved it when Tull beat out Metallica for the best metal album back in '83...that cracked me up! )

I believe art rock and prog rock are synonomous, fusion is most often used to describe jazz-rock (Al di Meola, Mahavishnu Orchestra, etc).

I think Tull won best Heavy Metal album in 1986.

Nah, it was later than that. Metallica was either on And Justice for All, or the Black Album when they got nominated. ...probably 91.
And yeah it was hillarious in the respect that it showed how clueless the corporate suits were. (Or still are.)

Maybe one could say that Art rock is more conceptual and not as depenent on technical proficiency.
Art rock is the painter, and Progressive is the theoretical physicist.

Yep, yer right, they won it 1988 for 1987's "Crest of a Knave".

http://www.prefixmag.com/news/jethro-tu ... kes/17157/

sanshouheil wrote:The Damn Yankee's is a perfect example of how a room full of talented musicians does not make a BAND. they might as well be doing ads for viagra!

That's an awesome analogy.

yeah funny thing about talent you don't need a lot of it to make a impact, you just need to know how to use what you have

I was pretty much raised on Prog rock (ELP, Yes, old Genesis etc), and wish it had more visibility these days. I think we are still coming off of the "Understated underdressed under...talented?" 90s vibe.

Just look at Punk Rock. The Ramones became millionaires and they couldnt even play! They just wrote catchy songs, jump around on stage, sell some t shirts, and before we even knew it, we had a revolution on our hands.

Whereas Progressive music, people bust their ass trying to learn their instruments and then bust even more ass to write a decent song and just when you think it's finally over, you have to bust more and more and more ass to get up on stage. But once you do finally get noticed, it's a huge payoff and extremely satisfying.

We are definitely prog-rock fans; Yes, ELP, King Crimson, Rush, Dream Theatre, etc... Couple the above with some "Fusion Jazz", and you get a mighty tasty gumbo!


Hell, throw it all into a blender! That's what we say!