Prog Definition

Actually I'm stoked this was started, because Zod asked me this question in the 66crusher thread and I didn't want to derail that.

Prog to me is rock that literally is progressive. It progresses beyond the 4/4 tempo verse/chorus/verse/chorus structure, has long songs, etc, jam sections.

The idea that people take "Prog" as this meta term that relates to "bands progressing" is too general to me. Post rock bands and avant garde bands do that, but I don't think Explosions in the Sky or John Zorn/Naked City would want to be, nor should they be, considered prog.

I mean, I see alot of these bands like Darkwater (although I admit I haven't heard much beyond a song or two from them) and similar acts described as prog and I don't get it. Without the vocals or the occasional guitar solo or tech-ish riff sprinkled in they sound exactly like Breaking Benjamin or (newer) Katatonia or Helmet or something of that nature. Not that there's anything wrong with that mind you, I love those bands. But I would not consider that "prog". But of course, at the end of the day, opinions are like bung-holes and we all have one.
 
Prog to me is rock that literally is progressive. It progresses beyond the 4/4 tempo verse/chorus/verse/chorus structure, has long songs, etc, jam sections.

Agree...see my definition (4 qualifications I outlined) above.

I mean, I see alot of these bands like Darkwater (although I admit I haven't heard much beyond a song or two from them) and similar acts described as prog and I don't get it.

Go listen to "Tallest Tree" and "The Play" by Darkwater and tell me that doesn't live up to the above definition you just outlined...
 
tumblr_lxj4pefPwT1r6sks6o1_400.jpg