What's your favourite old prog rock

Started by knniggits, March 09, 2009, 04:06:09 PM

Ferryman_1957

Don't buy it - whole Canterbury Scene was more jazz rock than real prog. Remember, Fear my wrath Fear my wrath Fear my wrath

But they all had long greasy hair, complex time signatures and long solos so I won't get too wrathful if you feel they are prog.

Cheers,

Nigel

Oldrottenhead

i'm standing my ground nigel.

re prog rock i dont consider a band like marillion to be prog caos they where only repeating what was already done, as for dream theater  lets not go there. lmfao.
ooh eck missus i can feel the wrath
whit goes oan in ma heid



Jemima's
Kite

The
Bunkbeds

Honker

Nevermet

Longhair
Tigers

Oldrottenhead
"In order to compose, all you need to do is remember a tune that nobody else has thought of."
- Robert Schumann

Ferryman_1957

Yes, you still see prog as "progressive", ie moving forwards, whereas I see prog as stuck in a timewarp. I'm being harsh, but that's the fundamentally difference. But I still quite like it.

Now here's a question - Muse? Prog or not?

Cheers,

Nigel

Ted

Quote from: Ferryman on July 07, 2009, 11:00:22 AMYes, you still see prog as "progressive", ie moving forwards, whereas I see prog as stuck in a timewarp. I'm being harsh, but that's the fundamentally difference. But I still quite like it.

On queue: Another plug for King Crimson. Many Prog bands pushed beyond the frontier of Rock, only to settle in their own territory--with occasional forays into other settled regions (pop, jazz, classical).

KC continued--and continues--to explore new frontiers.  Certainly not the most experimental band ever.  But Crimson appeals to fans (like me) who have one foot in the mainstream, but occasionally want to experience a some real musical danger.

Quote from: Ferryman on July 07, 2009, 11:00:22 AMNow here's a question - Muse? Prog or not?

By the static definition, no.  By the frontier-pushing definition, yes.
recorder
Boss Micro BR
recorder
Audacity
recorder
GarageBand for Mac
    


Oldrottenhead

QuoteMuse? Prog or not?
never been into them not really listened to them but apparently a good band,but ive heard them cried prog and they do sound like public schoolboy types but i dunno..

perhaps i should go listen suggest something nigel.
whit goes oan in ma heid



Jemima's
Kite

The
Bunkbeds

Honker

Nevermet

Longhair
Tigers

Oldrottenhead
"In order to compose, all you need to do is remember a tune that nobody else has thought of."
- Robert Schumann

Bosko Schwartz

#75
Muse?  Are you f-ing kidding me?  Nigel, it sounds like you just have a beef with Mr. RottenHead.  You would dare even consider Muse to be prog, yet discount Soft Machine and Lips?  Remember your own "time-warp" definition when considering Muse. ;D

Quote from: oldrottenhead on July 07, 2009, 10:50:28 AMas for dream theater  lets not go there. lmfao.

I, too, am Laughing My Fucking Ass Off.  Dream Theatre is the reason I don't care that I am not a musical virtuoso on any particular instrument.  Because ability alone is pointless without soul. 8)
www.myspace.com/thestanlaurels
www.soundclick.com/thestanlaurels
www.facebook.com/thestanlaurels

Bosko Schwartz

My opinion on Dream Theatre is just that -- an opinion.  Even things like "soul" are subjective.  What I think is soulful, others might think robotic.  And vice versa.

I'm completely with you on Rush (Signals was their last great album).  I love Rush, especially as a drummer myself, but there's also a reason Neil Peart is not my favorite drummer, or not even in my top 5.  He's incredible, but he's sometimes too machine-like.  My favorite drummer is John Bonham.  Not the fastest or most technically skilled, obviously, but goddamnit, his beats are just so thick, so driving.  He was the backbone of an amazing band.  As for Rush, Geddy and Alex are more "human" and less robotic than Neil, so there's a good balance there.  It's why there is still some soul in Rush, IMO.

I understand liking musicians who are technically superior, but with me, it's just more a case of appreciating those with technical brilliance.  My favorite band is The Beatles -- 'nuff said.  Not a technically incredible musician in the bunch.
www.myspace.com/thestanlaurels
www.soundclick.com/thestanlaurels
www.facebook.com/thestanlaurels

Bosko Schwartz

RE my above post:

Blooby ... umm ... did you remove your post, or do I now find myself in the Twlight Zone replying to something I thought I read but didn't really??? ???
www.myspace.com/thestanlaurels
www.soundclick.com/thestanlaurels
www.facebook.com/thestanlaurels

Blooby


Bosko, I must have deleted my tripe as you were typing.  Sorry.

Or did I? (insert spooky music here)

Blooby

Bosko Schwartz

IT DOES EXIST!!!  HA!  The beautiful wonders of the "BACK" button!

Recant?  Why would you recant?  Here it is ...



I would disagree to a point.  Some of my most enjoyable concert experiences have been the result of being blown away by technical virtuosity whether from Steve Vai, Jan Hammer, Kenny Garrett, Leo Kottke, or Neil Peart. 

As for the latter, I would be tempted to lump him into your above comment.  I am a fan of Rush (up through most of Signals), but I find his inability to swing/breath irritating at times.  Even when he did his Burnin' For Buddy (Rich) tribute, I found him immovably stiff.  I like him because of his technical brilliance.

Maybe the "soul" part of the equation is just incredibly idiosyncratic. 

My head hurts now.  I have to go mull some more.

Blooby
www.myspace.com/thestanlaurels
www.soundclick.com/thestanlaurels
www.facebook.com/thestanlaurels