Kenneth R.
Cináed
i'd agree and by my definition they'd be progressive.John Gargo said:I don't know about getting owned... By his "boundary breaking" definition, the first punk band is considered prog because they were "innovative" and "creative..."
"prog" isn't limited to metal and rock. it's not necessary to include organs or jazz as NFU said above. "prog" is Change! any change. this could be time signature change, style change, instrumental changes, lyrical, anything. it does not have to be a technical change. as i said above, it can be interpretational or arranging.
a 3 chord song, if it does something no other 3 chord song has ever done, and does it effectively, is imo, prog. a song that uses unusual instruments to create a new kind of sound is prog. a band that may be mediocre instrumentally but writes lyrics that go where no one has before, and does it effectively, is prog.
prog is pushing the limits.
that does NOT necessarily mean technical or speed limits. those are included, but not limited to the art of progress. music can progress in any direction. if we only look into one aspect of change, we're ignoring so much in other areas.
a song does not have to be 20 min long, have chords only an alien could play, and change time signatures every beat with 6 guitar solos and a concept theme as well as spiraling keyboards and a 100 piece drumset. in fact, that's been done. to pull something like that again, without taking it somewhere new and different, is not prog. you can play any style of music you want, and if you don't take the next step, it's not prog.
the moment you walk onto untread ground, prog you are.