Proggy rocky

General discussion about Pink Floyd.
Spinoza
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 540
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 5:35 pm

Post by Spinoza »

To RPITI:
1. it's not about "which came first"
2. I do make a difference between lyrics and their meaning, but hey, are the lyrics of eg ANIMALS that "intellectual" ? No, they are good, they tell something, sometimes very sharp ( like the "dying of Cancer-bit ), but then nothing deep. The Wall is slightly better, the concept is really great and although i doubt that Waters at that stage understood the consequences of his own lyrics himself they really got some very good thoughts. But do you really think that people hurry to the shop to buy the wall because of the great concept and lyrics. There are quit a few good concept albums with great lyrics in speed black metal style. Are you going to listen to them ????
3. I do not look much at movies. Sometimes they can be eye candy sometimes not, but never forget that you get that much out of a movie as your intellectual bagage lets you. same thing for books. The more you know from medieval or scholastic philosophy, the more you will get insight in a book like "The Name Of The Rose" by Umberto Eco.
User avatar
mosespa
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11194
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:54 pm
Location: In the editing bay...working on the final cut...

Post by mosespa »

Spinoza wrote:Thanks Mosespa:
You're welcome.
Spinoza wrote:You wrote "I though that I had when I said earlier that Progressive Rock is an attempt to apply "Classical" music theory to rock."

What do you mean with Classical music -theory ???
Hopefully I won't be getting too academic here...In popular music, the chords are typically either major ("happy sounding") or minor ("sad sounding") and use the root/third/fifth construction almost exclusively. This is to say, the root note which defines the chord, the third (which is the major or minor note) the defines the mood of the chord, and the fifth which traditionally completes the chord. I say "completes" because in the standard "Rock Power Chord" the structure used is simply root/fifth. No third to define mood. The power chord is pretty generic in that regard. Also, in popular music the progression (series) of chords used in a song are very rarely more than three or four chords long and consist of a selection of chords that all share a common tonic (note which all the chords have in common in some regard,) and thus give a "satisfyingly complete" feel to the chord progression.

In popular music, there are only so many chord progressions that can be used (according to popular opinion) because there are only so many chords that "sound good" together.

In Progressive Rock, however, all bets are off. You can do whatever you like with music so long as it's what you want the music to do. You are not bound by the rules of popular music...the melody doesn't have to be particularly catchy, it doesn't even have to work in the context of the melodic structure of the chord progression.

This is where Progressive Rock actually gets hard to define. Seemingly there is no definition that does it justice. To attempt to describe the process of creating progressive rock is akin to tryint to describe the political structure of anarchy. There seems to be none at all...but there really is one, it simply doesn't conform to the popularly accepted rules.

(At this point, I have to offer a retraction (and I have Spinoza to thank for pointing this out to me.) My comment about applying the rules of classical music theory would seem to apply more to popular music than to progressive rock. "Classicism" is a rigidly defined and adhered to set of rules for the construction of a work. Since "Pop" music must seemingly conform to so many different rules, it would seem to be the more "classically" oriented of the two.)
Spinoza wrote: Mosespa wrote:"Progressive" attempts to intellectualize rock. Deeper subject matter in the lyrics, a lot of instrumental showing off, obvious knowledge of music theory demonstrated by the musicians in the use of odd time signatures and chord changes. "

Spinoza wrote: This could be used as a definition pro and anti Pink Floyd. Are most of the Floyd-albums progressive . In fact not ( as you stated before, no ??? )
Pink Floyd do not qualify as a progressive rock band (according to MY understanding of "progressive rock") because the majority of their songs (i.e. the bulk of their material, most of what they have done and what they are remembered for) conform to the "rules" of popular music. The chord progressions conform to the "tonic" principle mentioned above, the solos are "blues" based and center around the minor pentatonic scale (which only contains five notes as opposed to the many other scales which are comprised of at least seven notes,) the time signatures are usually in 4/4 time (common time) or a variation of waltz time (which is not nearly as unusual as one might think...even today.) Even "Money's" 7/4 time signature isn't unusual in light of Rush's "Tom Sayer" (and many other songs by Rush) and Blondie's "Heart Of Glass."

Much (in fact most...almost all) of Pink Floyd's music could be considered "smart pop." Even the middle and end sections of ASOS (the song, possibly the most "progressive" thing Floyd ever did) are in common time. Few of Floyd's songs extend beyond three to four chords per progression.

To put it another way (and I have an old school friend to thank for these distinctions): Popular music is "simple" and Progressive Rock is "complex."


Spinoza wrote: Mosespa wrote: "The typical listener, in fact (as per my experience), is usually turned off by progressive rock, describing it as "noise," "weird," and "annoying." "

Spinoza wrote: So are there Floyd-songs that fall in this category ???
There are, I'm sure. But these songs still don't really qualify (to me) as being "pure" progressive. Floyd are, to me, an "Art Rock" band. To really illustrate the distinction between the two (although this is not at all a flattering definition): An "Art Rock" band is a band who tries to play Progressive Rock without the knowledge of music theory.

It could be said that "Art Rock" is spontaneous whereas "Progressive Rock" is more calculated and thought out.
User avatar
Real Pink in the Inside
Judge!
Judge!
Posts: 2012
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
Location: The Dark Side of Neptune

Post by Real Pink in the Inside »

Spinoza wrote:But do you really think that people hurry to the shop to buy the wall because of the great concept and lyrics.


Yes.
Spinoza wrote: There are quit a few good concept albums with great lyrics in speed black metal style. Are you going to listen to them ????
If I dig the music.

It's about the music AND lyrics to me.
User avatar
TheVegetableMan
Axe
Axe
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 7:57 pm
Location: NYC

Post by TheVegetableMan »

PF the first Prog band....What about bands and artists like The Soft Machine and Deavid Allen, who were slighty ahead of PF in making albums.


PF may have not been one of the first, but they sure did out last most others.
Spinoza
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 540
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 5:35 pm

Post by Spinoza »

To Mosespa: thanks for that insightful comment. There are as you stated other definitions of progressive rock/pop, in which numbers as Shine On, Echoes, Interstellar overdrive and Animals could fall, they are not very Radio-friendly.

In case of Interstellar Overd and ASOS one could state that that they are in fact difficult to listen to ( same can be said about Rick Wright's Broken China ).

Could you please give me a bands name and or a song that would fit in your definition of Progressive rock/pop.
User avatar
Keith Jordan
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 16678
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 6:54 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Cheshire, England

Post by Keith Jordan »

I am inspired to brush up on my music theory!
User avatar
mosespa
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11194
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:54 pm
Location: In the editing bay...working on the final cut...

Post by mosespa »

Spinoza wrote:To Mosespa: thanks for that insightful comment.
It was my pleasure:)

Spinoza wrote:Could you please give me a bands name and or a song that would fit in your definition of Progressive rock/pop.
I will be more than happy to.

Rush--Check out Xanadu and A Farewell To Kings

Yes--The Revealing Science Of God

King Crimson--Anything they have ever done

Dream Theater--I'm not familiar with their music, but I've read interviews with various band members and have seen transcriptions of pieces of their songs.

Soundgarden--Check out Half (from Superunknown)

Tool--Thier album Aenima is comparable (in my opinion) to DSOTM

Mahavishnu Orchestra (in it's various forms)--I've only owned one tape and my tape deck ate it before I could hear it all, but there was some fascinating stuff going on there.

Emerson Lake and Palmer--Just about anything they've done. Their most un-progressive song is Lucky Man, but it's an awesome song.

A Perfect Circle--The lead singer of Tool sings for this band as well. It's a little more "pop" than Tool in some respects and also slightly more progressive in other respects.

Faith No More--Their album Angel Dust is some fantastic progressive/metal/pop stuff. Singer Mike Patton is a genius in my book.

Mr. Bungle--Mike Patton's other band. I feel that their self-titled debut album is, quite simply, one of the most important albums since Sgt. Pepper. WARNING--this album is not for the faint of heart. It can cause whiplash and/or nightmares. Just imagine if Frank Zappa DID do drugs.

Frank Zappa--'nuff said.

Peter Gabriel era Genesis.

U2--The album Achtung Baby in particular has some nice progressive touches...not exactly a progressive album as such, but Brian Eno was involved.

The Beatles--The albums Revolver and Sgt. Pepper are, to me, the beginnings of Progressive Rock.

Procul Harem have a reputation for being a progressive band, I've only hear A Whiter Shade Of Pale, though.

Jane's Addiction--They take time to grow on you, but there's some interesting stuff going on there.

Stone Temple Pilots--These guys are pretty adept at combing Progressive elements with Pop elements.

Queensryche--Progressive Pop Metal. Some very good stuff...check out Silent Lucidity, Anybody Listening? and Sign Of The Times.

Living Colour--Robert Fripp of King Crimson said at one time that he felt that Living Colour was trying to do the same thing that Crimson was trying to do. An African American Funk Metal Band, check out their album Stain.

This is just a handful of bands that I consider 'Progressive' in some form or another. More than a few of these bands are closer to Pop than Progressive, but there are still elements of Progressiveness in their music.

It's no secret that Tool are up there with Floyd in my book. I consider them a latter day Floyd (albeit with a metal edge.) I highly recommend putting aside any prejudices one might have regarding "metal" music and purchase Aenima. Treat it like DSOTM...just start the CD, kick back and let it take you wherever it goes...ride it out to the end...and listen to it more than once.

Likewise, Mr. Bungle's self-titled debut album. It's disturbing, but it's a work of absolute GENIUS.
Spinoza
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 540
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 5:35 pm

Post by Spinoza »

That's strange Mosespa: I have Queensryche "Empire" and "Operation Mindcrime" and although Silent Lucidity is a great song, i find Pink Floyd better. Also, i have "In the court of the crimson king" of King Crimson, which i think is a very nice album, but then again, maybe i'm not that much attracted by what you call progressive, but more to the difficult to listen, experimental or even psychedelic music or songs like interstellar overdrive or ASOS.

BTW, ever listened to Messiaen or ligetti ( classical mus )???
User avatar
Prkl
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 739
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 8:26 pm
Location: Finland

Post by Prkl »

One of my favourite albums desereves a mention here

Mansun - Six

If that's not progressive rock, I dunno what is. And great concept album too. Should be available in bargain bins around the world, since a lot of people were scared to buy it because it sound nothing like their debut, silly fools. :roll:
User avatar
mosespa
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11194
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:54 pm
Location: In the editing bay...working on the final cut...

Post by mosespa »

Spinoza wrote:That's strange Mosespa: I have Queensryche "Empire" and "Operation Mindcrime" and although Silent Lucidity is a great song, i find Pink Floyd better. Also, i have "In the court of the crimson king" of King Crimson, which i think is a very nice album, but then again, maybe i'm not that much attracted by what you call progressive, but more to the difficult to listen, experimental or even psychedelic music or songs like interstellar overdrive or ASOS.

BTW, ever listened to Messiaen or ligetti ( classical mus )???
No, actually. I've never even heard OF them.

I debated over whether or not to include Queensryche on the list...I don't care too much for them other than the songs I listed, but because they meet some of the criteria of what I consider Progressive, I included them.

By my definition, you can't get any more progressive than Crimson...but as I mentioned in a previous post, many people find progressive music hard to listen to.

You don't have to be a musician to enjoy progressive rock...but it helps.
User avatar
catch22_love23
Axe
Axe
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:13 am
Location: San Francisco

proggy ribbit

Post by catch22_love23 »

Some suggestions to add to a progrocklist :

Brian Eno - Taking Tiger Mountain, Another Green World

Can

Soft Machine (started in 1962) but they were way weirder-sounding than Pink Floyd.
User avatar
Feeling Very Pink
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 1083
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 4:52 pm

Post by Feeling Very Pink »

If anyone (Catch22..., perhaps?) could recommend a good Can album for me, I would be most appreciative. I used to know a Welsh/Danish guy who was really into said band, and raved aboot 'em a lot, so...

'Parently the first album's quite good.

German, aren't they. Isn't Kraut-Rock a horrible term?!

Recently read an article that dispelled the "David Gilmour wrote 'I Want More'" myth. Q magazine, it was. Suppose EVERYONE knew that apart from me...

Does anyone actually own the original Dark Side of the Moon album? I twunder. Medicine Head. Might get something by them, too.
User avatar
qjamesfloyd
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 636
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2002 1:59 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Southampton,England

Post by qjamesfloyd »

I personally don't think Pink Floyd after SYD can be called a prog rock band,but when SYD was in the band maybe they could,more so with all the long improvised Jam's,but i seem to think that Pink Floyd are perhaps the only band ever that can not be put into a catorgy,they are unique in many ways,plus i hate putting artists into a catorgy,it's all music,and you either like it or you don't.
Mike Oldfield is another similar artist,he is always being labled,but he is neither New Age or Prog Rock,and yet he is somtimes both.
User avatar
catch22_love23
Axe
Axe
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:13 am
Location: San Francisco

Post by catch22_love23 »

[quote="FeelingVeryPink"]If anyone (Catch22..., perhaps?) could recommend a good Can album for me, I would be most appreciative."

Sure thing, Feeling: Can's Tago Mago, released in 1971, is very interesting. This is their most well-known and first with Damo Suzuki, their main vocalist man from Japan... I'm listening to it now to try to give you a true impression. There's one heck of a gosh-darn lot of echo on it. It's more psychedelic than prog - not a lot of time-signature changes.

Out of curiosity, did a search and found this review of Tago Mago:
"Some of this album compares with early, experimental Pink Floyd, but Can´s drummer is a lot better (read: funkier). Be prepared to hook up the old Lava Lamp for this one."
lol, but I don't agree with this guy about the drumming at all. But it *was* funny....
(http://www.progreviews.com/reviews/can-tm.html - for this and more reviews of Can's Tago Mago)
Suzuki just played in San Francisco a few months ago (not with Can) - great show and very cool person - or warm, I should say.
Krautrock, the term, sounds o.k. to me...I suppose...what else could we call it?
User avatar
catch22_love23
Axe
Axe
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:13 am
Location: San Francisco

Post by catch22_love23 »

[quote="qjamesfloyd"]I personally don't think Pink Floyd after SYD can be called a prog rock band"

I totally agree.