your definition of progressive rock

ahem.


Progressive rock = Ambitious, creative, innovative and/or boundary breaking rock music.



false defenitions include: rock with long songs. rock with concepts for albums. showboating or "flashy" soloing parts. mellotron or hammond organ being included. etc etc

granted these are things often found in progressive rock, but dont necessarily mean it is. for otherwise you could essentially make a 20 minute punk rock song with 3 chords, and add some mellotron in the background...if you catch my drift.
 
progressive = creating progress.

progress = forward movement into new territory.

so to me, "Progressive rock" is anything that goes :tickled: boldly :tickled: into a new musical space and does it effectively. this could include new techniques, new interpretations, or new arrangements. progression is the art of change, evolution, and adaptation.

and that is why the genre interests me so much. true progressive is the cutting edge of music.
 
Progressive Rock is music that actively attempts to break the "rules" of song structures (i.e. intro-verse-chorus-verse-chorus-solo-chorus-outro) and approaches to rock music (integrating unusual influences that one doesn't usually associate with rock music, for instance classical or jazz). Experimentation is the key ingredient for a band to remain progressive...
 
John Gargo said:
Progressive Rock is music that actively attempts to break the "rules" of song structures (i.e. intro-verse-chorus-verse-chorus-solo-chorus-outro) and approaches to rock music (integrating unusual influences that one doesn't usually associate with rock music, for instance classical or jazz). Experimentation is the key ingredient for a band to remain progressive...


one doesnt have to integrate non rock influences for it to be progressive rock.
 
NineFeetUnderground said:
one doesnt have to integrate non rock influences for it to be progressive rock.
I disagree.

When I say rock influences, I mean R&B that most "traditional" rock bands usually use as a basic template... It's when rock music takes inspiration from something other than this generally accepted norm (whether it can be defined as from another genre or simply abstractions), that it becomes progressive.

For instance... The Rolling Stones and Led Zeppelin initially started off doing R&B and blues covers. These were bands that were more influenced by artists like Elvis Presley, Chuck Berry, and other 50s rock standards. These bands are not considered prog...

You take a band like King Crimson or Yes, and you see the songs being influenced by classical music and other bizarre approaches that deviate strongly from the R&B mold... These bands ARE progresssive.
 
Silent Song said:
progressive = creating progress.

progress = forward movement into new territory.

so to me, "Progressive rock" is anything that goes :tickled: boldly :tickled: into a new musical space and does it effectively. this could include new techniques, new interpretations, or new arrangements. progression is the art of change, evolution, and adaptation.

and that is why the genre interests me so much. true progressive is the cutting edge of music.


Beautiful answer. Period.
 
I'd thought prog music was full of technicality, shredding, keyboards, etc... but Ninefeet has a better answer.

I can see how progressive music is out of the norm of traditional songwriting and is more of a creative approach to music.
 
John Gargo said:
I disagree.

When I say rock influences, I mean R&B that most "traditional" rock bands usually use as a basic template... It's when rock music takes inspiration from something other than this generally accepted norm (whether it can be defined as from another genre or simply abstractions), that it becomes progressive.

For instance... The Rolling Stones and Led Zeppelin initially started off doing R&B and blues covers. These were bands that were more influenced by artists like Elvis Presley, Chuck Berry, and other 50s rock standards. These bands are not considered prog...

You take a band like King Crimson or Yes, and you see the songs being influenced by classical music and other bizarre approaches that deviate strongly from the R&B mold... These bands ARE progresssive.


incorrect, but i see where youre going with that, and can understand why you might feel that way.
 
An interview with Rick Wakeman...

P: Finally, our site defines “prog rock” broadly as “a style that combines rock, classical, psychedelic and literary elements.” We also believe other important elements are: a certain approach to composition (i.e., more “scored” than “linear”), with what we call “evolving musical themes” (i.e., more “classical” in nature); use of non-standard and “shifting” time signatures; extensive use of keyboards, especially to add “texture” and “atmosphere”; use of non-standard instruments (especially percussives, strings and woodwinds); and, perhaps as important as anything else, a “conscious” use of the studio (i.e., production) as an important element in creating the music. Would you comment on this?

A: You’ve pretty well summed it up. I always say that it’s about breaking the rules. But the secret of breaking rules in a way that works is understanding what the rules are in the first place.


There you have it.
 
I used to use another relationship to get people to understand what prog was. Progressive in what way?

I equated prog as something along the lines of concept cars. They display the newest designs that are to be seen and released years into the future. Prog picks up bits and pieces from everywhere, makes them fit and pushes music forward.

Technology in general works the same way.
 
subjective concept. music as an art form is open to all kinds of criticism - which is always 100% subjective and not really accountable to any kind of serious peer-review. what one person says is "progressive" may be successfully argued that it is really "regressive"; that argument could go on forever. ninefeetunderground might not agree with this assessment and i would personally tend to agree with him but it's simply not possible to "prove" anything in art. thus, everything is open to interpretation. i think that's the whole idea.

ps: this is my 1000th post. yay.
 
dorian gray said:
subjective concept. music as an art form is open to all kinds of criticism - which is always 100% subjective and not really accountable to any kind of serious peer-review. what one person says is "progressive" may be successfully argued that it is really "regressive"; that argument could go on forever. ninefeetunderground might not agree with this assessment and i would personally tend to agree with him but it's simply not possible to "prove" anything in art. thus, everything is open to interpretation. i think that's the whole idea.

ps: this is my 1000th post. yay.

thats very true...and that is what is so cool about art.