About Progressive music...

[razoredge]

what good does a list of progressive metal bands do to support or disprove this statement "Prog has also never had to include musical or virtousos technicality" which prior to elective editing continued to at least give a simple example "Pink Floyd was progressive and they were a far cry from how Kansas applied their touch."

christ all mighty

 

[Meedleyx10]

I'm not sure why you are having such a hard time following all of this.

You: Prog has also never had to include musical or virtousos technicality

Me: Exactly, but a lot of bands are given the label of "progressive" based only on those (and similar) qualities, which is where one of the many issues of "progressive" the genre versus "progressive" the adjective comes up.

You: What bands would those be ?

Me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_progressive_metal_artists

That's a list of "progressive metal artists". The presence of certain bands on that list (for example...circus maximus, adagio, jason becker, Impelliteri, and a shitload more) proves my point which is that today, the term is used for bands that don't fit the textbook definition of the word "progressive" and that's where the confusion/bitching comes from concerning the issue of "progressive" the genre versus "progressive" the adjective.

 

[Iced Dog]

This thread =

 

[razoredge]

Me not have hard time fouling, me just want few zamples...... lol

I consider Circus Maximus and Adagio very much progressive maybe not ground breaking but they sure arent straight forward metal or top 40 material. Cant speak for Becker or Impelliteri if they are who I'm thinking of, I believe we used to call that instrumental speed metal which I rarely gave a second listen. Still it was probably pretty progressive, in the same way that fusion was progressive.

Ive seen that list many times, at one time I used it to check out other bands, it was smaller then.

I think people need to stop worrying about whether one can apply the old English Webster definition to to the prefix..... because if thats the case........ we're really screwed trying to explain the "metal" suffix

 

[DoomsdayZach]

I consider Circus Maximus and Adagio very much progressive maybe not ground breaking but they sure arent straight forward metal or top 40 material.

See, this is what makes me laugh... right here you've differentiated between "prog" or "progressive metal" as a genre and the term "progressive" as an adjective... you have essentially said you consider the bands prog (true) but not progressive. yet you continue to argue that they're one and the same.

It's too late for me to care any further. Just pointing it out.

 

[Meedleyx10]

maybe he'll understand it the way you said it, because clearly the number of times it's said has no effect.

 

[proulxski]

@ Zach: You owned right there!

 

[Meedleyx10]

@ Zach: You owned right there!

if you're referring to my post....no. I was commenting on the fact that despite the same thing being said multiple times, razoredge is still missing the point. I was being literal, not sarcastic.

 

[proulxski]

I was saying, that zach owned with his post, because its true! Had nothing to do with you're post dude.

 

[DoomsdayZach]

nah i think he was talking about my post to razoredge or something.

 

[proulxski]

yep!

 

[Meedleyx10]

ah, read that wrong

 

[proulxski]

no problem dude! Happens all the time on the internetz!

 

[razoredge]

Look bozos . I said repeatedly that I dont care what the Webster defination of the word progressive is, and I dont think anyone cared when it was applied either, aint me wherein lies the thick headedness

as for ownage sorry......... but this was a grand slam that obviously went right over the head, cause I see it was totally avoided

"I think people need to stop worrying about whether one can apply the old English Webster definition to to the prefix..... because if thats the case........ we're really screwed trying to explain the "metal" suffix"

{trust me, my sacasm is strictly tongue in cheek and mean no insult but Im clearly not the one struggling to understand what the term progressive applied to rock and metal music means} ........ I do wish someone could explain what type of rock, rock music is and what type of metal, metal music is, because I think from this day forward use of these terms should no longer be allowed.... have a nice day.... =}

 

[Meedleyx10]

We're only pointing out a few simple things:

-the meaning of the word "progressive" as it pertains to music has changed over the years. Originally, it was being used in a way that lined up it's dictionary definition. That is no longer the case in most situations.

-Because of that, we now have "progressive" the adjective (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/progressive) and "progressive" the genre(s) of music and they are two different things.

-the fact that you don't care about the actual definition of progressive proves that point.

-No one is saying that it's blasphemous to use the term "progressive" to describe music that isn't actually progressive, as that is what the genre(s) has/have come to be known as.

-Again, nobody cared when the term was first applied because the music actually was progressive (in the textbook sense) at that time and this whole thing was't an issue. Over time, the meaning of the word shifted to being a term to describe bands that had a lot of the same sounds and characteristics as the originals, despite the fact that it was no longer progressive.

-"I consider Circus Maximus and Adagio very much progressive maybe not ground breaking but they sure arent straight forward metal or top 40 material. Cant speak for Becker or Impelliteri if they are who I'm thinking of, I believe we used to call that instrumental speed metal which I rarely gave a second listen. Still it was probably pretty progressive, in the same way that fusion was progressive." Here, you have pretty much agreed with all of this. CM and Adagio fall under the genre of prog-metal, but they are definitely not progressive in the textbook sense.

Is this really that hard for you to comprehend? It's been explained multiple times by several people so if you really lack the basic reasoning skills to understand this then fine, I'm done trying to explain it.

 

[1by4by9]

Now that I think about it, the progressive taxation system really is progressive:
-suit wearing men with lots of cunning virtuoisity playing your money away
-they always have something new for you
-lots of odd numbers which will make your head spin
-they never make a mistake

 

[DoomsdayZach]

We're only pointing out a few simple things:

-the meaning of the word "progressive" as it pertains to music has changed over the years. Originally, it was being used in a way that lined up it's dictionary definition. That is no longer the case in most situations.

-Because of that, we now have "progressive" the adjective (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/progressive) and "progressive" the genre(s) of music and they are two different things.

-the fact that you don't care about the actual definition of progressive proves that point.

-No one is saying that it's blasphemous to use the term "progressive" to describe music that isn't actually progressive, as that is what the genre(s) has/have come to be known as.

-Again, nobody cared when the term was first applied because the music actually was progressive (in the textbook sense) at that time and this whole thing was't an issue. Over time, the meaning of the word shifted to being a term to describe bands that had a lot of the same sounds and characteristics as the originals, despite the fact that it was no longer progressive.

-"I consider Circus Maximus and Adagio very much progressive maybe not ground breaking but they sure arent straight forward metal or top 40 material. Cant speak for Becker or Impelliteri if they are who I'm thinking of, I believe we used to call that instrumental speed metal which I rarely gave a second listen. Still it was probably pretty progressive, in the same way that fusion was progressive." Here, you have pretty much agreed with all of this. CM and Adagio fall under the genre of prog-metal, but they are definitely not progressive in the textbook sense.

Is this really that hard for you to comprehend? It's been explained multiple times by several people so if you really lack the basic reasoning skills to understand this then fine, I'm done trying to explain it.

man, this has gone way too far. But this is probably the most clear explanation yet, and regardless if people choose to recognize the points we're saying or even agree, kudos for the clarity

 

[proulxski]

i much prefer leaving it at 'where bozoz'!

 

[Kenneth R.]

not ground breaking = not progressive. case closed.

 

[Ascension]

Prog has also never had to include musical or virtousos technicality,

Exactly, but a lot of bands are given the label of "progressive" based only on those (and similar) qualities, which is where one of the many issues of "progressive" the genre versus "progressive" the adjective comes up.

What bands would those be ?

Freak Kitchen