Besides the long solos and the nerdy lyrics. Does ProgRock have less melody that other Rock? I mean what is it that distinquishes it, musiclaly?
It has no input from coloured musics.
Normally, I’d answer this one, but I think I’ll leave it for Geir.
Progressive rock lyrics are no more or less nerdy than those in any musical genre.
They are meaning full and abstract, and are not about going to bed and indulge in sexual preversions which is separate them from horrible influences of amelodic blues rubbish.
“sonically” isn’t the right place to search for clues (even though there are probably some very general tendencies, such as average longer song length than “other rock” or something), I’d go for “conceptually”. And even then, good luck — it seems like every prog rock message board I’ve been on has a new “what is prog” thread every few weeks, and nobody ever really manages to pin it down. imo here are too many prog bands that don’t sound much alike to really say prog is this or that.
PEW makes me:
Guys this is easy, the answer is mellotrons.
paul edward wagemann, dj martian, and marcello in witless parody mode all on the same thread
and what... is in cloaking mode
paul edward wagemann, dj martian, and marcello in witless parody mode all on the same thread
like the three points of an equilateral triangle.
Prog rock is proggier, sonically. . . .????
But what about rhythm and melody? Is it fair to say that ProgRock has less emphasize on rhythm and melody than other Rock?
I think Rhythm and Melody moved to Japan, dude.
i knew this was a PEW thread—this guy is the fucking worst
“ProgRock”
Is Emo similar to punk in that it is all about the attitude and the clothing?
It seems that the music itself sounds like slightly updated Bob Jovi Pop-rock—only the singers pretend to be depressed because it’s trendy and it makes teenage girls think they are sensative.
I swear if I hear one more kid sulking “Moooooooom, how can I be happy if no one thinks I’m depressed?!?” because mommy wont buy then black clothing, I’m gonna pas gas in a crowded elevator...
— Paul Edward Wagemann (PaulEdwardWageman...), July 15th, 2006.
it seems like ILX has become PEW’s personal sounding board to ask infantile questions about ROCK music
Is it fair to say that ProgRock has less emphasize on rhythm and melody than other Rock?
I don’t really follow this. If anything, it would seem that something like “And You and I” has more emphasis on melody (at least in the sense that there’s more going on melodically) than, I dunno, “Anarchy In the UK” or “Walk This Way”. And surely what’s happening rhythmically is a pretty important part of “Close to the Edge” or “Red”. Do you just mean that the rhythms (and melodies?) are less straightforward and obvious?
I think there are sonic elements that are pretty clearly shared between various prog bands that distinguish them from other rock bands but they’re the ones you could find in any basic book on this (mix of trad/folk/classical instruments with rock instruments and new-for-the-time electronics, larger-scale song/composition structures, a tendency towards more complex rhythms, jazz and/or classical influences, bombastic but usually on-pitch singing, etc). Are you looking for something else?
Bob Jovi!
(I don’t really know why you’re getting this level of abuse though.)
xpost
you don’t know his history here
Macan also mentioned an emphasis on the contrast between the peaceful and the threatening, which is interesting and seems pretty insightful when I think about it.
it seems like ILX has become PEW’s personal sounding board to ask infantile questions about ROCK music
More like his personal experimental troll lab. Considering the number of folks who respond as if he’s 100% sincere and not taking a giant piss-take at ILM, PEW’s skills are quite sharp. Far better than Buttez (RIP).
I’ve missed the problem too, clearly. Maybe he is a new type of troll, a clever one... One that asks quite normal, on-topic questions, and then stands back and laughs as everyone discusses them!
The guy asks the exact same questions all over the internet. Earlier this year, he was posting on Sound on Sound magazine’s forum, for example, copying & pasting both the exact same thread questions and then the exact same answers as well.
loflz @ the prospect of PEW poking his head above the parapet at the prog ears forum, as per matian’s post upthread. He’d get eaten alive.
Neither of those threads seem like trolling in any real sense to me, though the questions are kind of loaded and I disagree with him about emo.
I still don’t get it. These two threads, he asks a question and immediately everyone takes the piss. He comes off quite well, if you ask me.
Posting the same questions all over the internet is odd, but not actually a problem. It could be a sign of a troll, but this, and the others, are not completely stupid questions.
Maybe someone can point to a thread where he posts something and there are quite reasonable responses, but he still winds people up.
x-post
ban all three named people, plz
Cutting and pasting the same questions is OK, I think. Cutting and pasting the same answers, which to be fair I haven’t seen him do in a long while is a bit out of order?
This is the only ‘answer’ he’s posted on this thread:
But what about rhythm and melody? Is it fair to say that ProgRock has less emphasize on rhythm and melody than other Rock?
— PEW (HouseholdNam...), December 12th, 2006.
I think it’s a fair follow-up question for him to ask (even though I don’t see where it’s coming from and answered accordingly), even on more than one board.
Okay, sundar and Keef, seriously, the guy is a troll. I can’t access all of old ilx, but trust me, it has been established that he is a troll,
Y’know it’s funny, because before I even clicked on this thread, I saw the title alone and knew it was a PEW-post
He truly doesn’t mean to be a troll. He just doens’t really have a good grasp of what ILX is, and why his threads/questions aren’t relevant or appropriate.
Y’know it’s funny, because before I even clicked on this thread, I saw the title alone and knew it was a PEW-post
— RIYL Christiane F. (MyNameIsActuallyStev...), December 12th, 2006.
Was it the double commas in the title? Kind of a dead giveway, amirite?
Haha no, actually. It’s that no one else on here would ask such a question.
I knew it was PEW as well!
(cue Dom’s lady-with-magnifying-glass jpg...)
You suck too.
No, you suck.
In fact, you make me wanna
Bored with both of you now. Leaving for better threads.
indeed. this thread is making me feel rather
I’ve missed the problem too, clearly. Maybe he is a new type of troll, a clever one... One that asks quite normal, on-topic questions, and then stands back and laughs as everyone discusses them!
Yes and no. I don’t really wanna Google up his best threads, but PEW drops little hints of his real intentions only when folks are drawn into extended discussions with his impossibly-obtuse persona. By that point, his sparring partners are so pissed-off at him that they have no chance to pick up on these morsels, but they’re a bit more apparent to the uninvolved spectator.
Maybe Buttez realized that his 1995-era trollkit wasn’t working when folks started to come out and proclaim him the god of ILM amusement, and then he refitted himself with a more modern set of eye-pokers as PEW. Or not. Buttez really was never as good as PEW.
JordanC OTM.
When I say that Rock seems to put more of an emphasis on melody and rythm than Prog Rock, what I mean is that the melody and rythm in a Rock song is at the forefront, it is obvious. That along with the beat and the riffs. But in Prog, the melodies/rythms often seem hidden behind the show-offish instrumentation, elongated solos and such. It can be argued that melody and rythm isnt something that should be ‘overthought’ otherwise its not going to be ‘catchy’ if you know what I mean. A complex melody/rythm is going to take several listens before it touches someone on a visceral level—an then only if it is very good. Genesis ‘carpet crawlers’ is a good example of this IMO. That song took forever to catch on with me...
I didn’t really think PEW was a troll til I witnessed the epic pwnage administered to him on the “Louie Louie”/garage rock ILM thread
shit i missed that one
basically he was “arguing” with several of us that Louie Louie was not garage rock
was it GarageRock?
what I mean is that the melody and rythm in a Rock song is at the forefront, it is obvious. That along with the beat and the riffs. But in Prog, the melodies/rythms often seem hidden behind the show-offish instrumentation, elongated solos and such
if you’re a troll, I didn’t write this. otherwise, there are probably a lot of people who would agree that melody and rhythm in regular rock songs seems more “obvious” than in prog. Why is that? It isn’t really the instrumentation that is show-offish about some progressive rock — bass, drums, guitar, vocals, keyboard are all featured in most normal rock too — but the actual patterns being played, sometimes the harmonies, these are not only what differentiate (musically speaking) a prog song from a “normal rock” song (and also every other kind of music from every other kind of music). However, it’s a mistake to think you can generalize progressive rock by the kinds of rhythms being played. Rhythms are essentially numbers and accents. If you divorce them from what you hear on a CD, even the most complicated ones aren’t inherently any kind of music — they’re just bits of information, and maybe came from a Yes record, or maybe came from a folk song from ancient China. This is why I say it’s hard to generalize prog as being one kind of thing. The same thing goes for normal rock music, though I would argue that a greater number of people at least have a semi-passable definition of what they think it is (which isn’t saying much).
However, if you say 85% of “normal rock” songs sound like they could be grouped in the “4/4 time, backbeat, doesn’t typically use highly altered chords, or highly unusual harmonic patterns in comparison with other songs in the genre” club, then you put prog in the “not necessarily 4/4/ time, not necessarily a backbeat, sometimes uses highly altered chords or unusual harmonic patterns”, then you can start to see general differences. The problem comes when you actually start analyzing data. A lot of prog stuff *is* in 4/4, *does* use pretty conventional harmonic and melodic patterns. I think the lesson is that there are a lot of things to be done w/normal sounding melodies, rhythms and harmonies that can create a whole piece which seems very not-normal.
As I see it, there are two ways to approach this question seriously. And one is just to say “I know it when I hear it”, and this prog song x is different from this rock song y because of a, b & c. It’s quick and subjective, and what usually happens anyway, and as long as we’re not voting on government funding for the next 20 years, I don’t have a problem w/it. The other is a lot harder and more expensive: have a team of people who can agree on 50 songs they call “prog”, and 50 songs they call “normal”, and analyze their every musical, sociological and physiological aspect/effect. Over (a really long) time, patterns will emerge, and then someone will be able to make some (probably still very general) conclusions about differences. It would be fun to see even if I didn’t agree with anything that came out of it.
here it is. witness the idiocy:
ilx.wh3rd.net/thread.php?msgid=4882269
(or, uh, don’t)
And one is just to say “I know it when I hear it”
otm
but really, what is it that distinquishes it, musiclaly?
can’t dance to prog
heh
I guess this is the age old problem when it comes to talking about music—didnt frank zappa have a witty saying about this? SOmething about architects trying to describe dance or something? In the end, it always seems impossible to talk about music in any depth beyond ‘I know what I like“ or ”I know it when I hear it“ etc...
Still, its fun to try.
OH NO YOU DIDN’T
didnt frank zappa have a witty saying about this? SOmething about architects trying to describe dance or something?
Fucking CLASSIC!
didnt frank zappa have a witty saying about this? SOmething about architects trying to describe dance or something?
Well, actually, it was Pin... oh I get it.
I love the parallel universe in this thread. People talking about PEW while he continues the thread topic seemingly oblivious. PEWbot.
cache version of louie louie thread:
Good lord.
ah yes. the thread that brought us horse sushi
on second thought, it isn’t really fair to characterize PEW as a troll. He’s more of an attention-whore with incredibly bad, virtually nonexistent writing skills. I don’t think he’s deliberately winding people up or playing up a character as much as he’s just a total buffoon. sorta like geir, only with even less interesting opinions.
I don’t know, Dominique and PEW, is it really that problematic to say that, sonically, prog was characterized by certain general tendencies? Doesn’t mean that every prog record needs to have some classical or classical-music-referencing instruments combined with rock instruments AND electronic keyboards AND time changes AND suite-like song structures AND theatrical singing AND contrasts between threatening and peaceful passages etc. Or that no other rock records might have some of these. But that most prog records will have some of these, and they usually will fit into a general aesthetic/conceptual outlook that was typical of the genre? Like, I do think that Genesis, Henry Cow, Soft Machine, Van der Graaf etc do have a fair amount in common.
(Unless this is the same thing you were saying and I just didn’t understand you right.)
I don’t have much issue with the “nerdy lyrics” part, where nerdy = having intellectual as opposed to populist/visceral/erotic aspirations (or pretentions, some will say). I would have more of an issue with the “show-off-ish instrumentation”, not only for the reason Dominique gave but also because I strongly doubt the artists’ intentions in most cases were purely to show off and because I almost never hear it that way.
Sundar, why do you think Led Zep is NOT generally grouped in with the Prog Rock bands?
john bonham
Like, I do think that Genesis, Henry Cow, Soft Machine, Van der Graaf etc do have a fair amount in common.
yeah, but how to name this? Somtimes kind of jazz-ish, sometimes discordant, or at least more harmonically varied than most songs you hear on classic rock radio, and songs usually goes on longer than most “normal” songs, ha, vocals can be grating (when they have them)... For example, what if I also threw Steely Dan in this mix? Are they prog?
no
Two ways to look at this.
1) Prog takes iteas and approaches from classical music and jazz and applies them to rock. It’s a self-consciously exploratory form that takes its own artistic worth very seriously. Prog musicans and fans tend to value heroic chops, wild ambition and a grandiose (grotesque?) sort of taste. Prog isn’t at all afraid of theatrical pretention or outright geekiness in pursuit that moment of majestic uplift. Long songs, complex/shifting time signatures, orchestral arrangements, and a certain kind of Nordic (70s) hygiene of mind all figure in. Stallions against the sunset, manes flowing untamed... Crucially, progressive rock is tied to a specific notion of progress: that onwardness and upwardness are tied together, that more and bigger are intrinsically better. Every day in every way we are getting better and better. Prog seldom says no to dessert.
2) Prog is that which sounds “proggy” to the listener’s ear, as informed by the doings of group 1, above.
proggy
proggy
proggy
proggy
If everything Zeppelin did sounded like “Stairway to Heaven” or “Battle of Evermore”, I’m sure they would have been grouped as a prog band. But it didn’t. I do think of those tracks (as well as lots of HOTH and various things from the later albums) as prog tracks and I know lots of prog fans do.
Steely Dan is just too ... American. The “general aesthetic/conceptual outlook” thing I mentioned—I think of prog as a pretty fundamentally European sensibility and something that was overtly tied to the counterculture. But even just on a sonic level, Steely Dan (at least from what I’ve heard, which includes a couple of albums and a lot of other songs) was way more tied to trad pop song form and songcraft than any prog band I can think of (certainly any that I listed). (They’re not that far off from The Eagles or Fleetwood Mac, really.) The vocals are more ‘street’ (and very American) and less theatrical than any of those bands. The lyrics are more concerned with a direct sort of realism.
I mean, it’s not an exact science but I don’t think that means it can’t be identified at all.
All the bands I listed, including Soft Machine and Henry Cow, have some strong influence from the Western classical music tradition (which includes 20th-century art music). I don’t get at all from Steely Dan.
Sundar, I agree with all of that — I guess I have a hard time separating progressive rock from other kinds of rock just based on sonic details. I think there is something to the idea that formally speaking, progressive rock tends to be “different” than other kinds of pop/rock music, but I don’t know that it’s different in one particular way. The same goes for the genre as a whole having ties to classical or jazz — I think it’s true that it does, but not really in one particular way, other than to say it isn’t married to the idea that a pop song has to be constructed with a verse/chorus/verse etc.
And I also think that our ideas of how much, say, Steely Dan owes to Western classical traditions has a lot to do with our proximity to Steely Dan. I think in 100 years, music historians aren’t going to find a lot of real difference in the harmonies and structures of Steely Dan and Soft Machine. Both of these bands owe a ton to Western ideas of melody and harmony, regardless of who they appeal to, and what they might have been thinking when they played their stuff. (the main difference they’d find, imo, is that SM improvised a lot more — but even then, far enough removed, how many people are going to be able to tell that SM were “out” and SD were “in”? or which one was more “street”?)
(and I’m the wrong guy to analyze lyrics...)
Well, there must be some American Prog bands, perhaps Frank Zappa? Or Styx? I mean is it mandatory for a Prog band to have that European midevil folklore vibe?
Here’s a goofy blog I wrote once about how I classify Styx as a Prog band (ProgPop perhaps—like Supertramp?) Anyway it only half serious:
[url]http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=66316956&blogID=133893366&indicate=1[/url]