I feel like I should like prog, and I want to like it - but there's just something about it which I don't get and I'm wondering whether it's just because I wasn't around at the time. It was clearly a defining period in musical history and we wouldn't have a lot of the music we now have without it, but is it's significance in it's influence rather than the quality of the music?
So prog rock, to really "get it" did you need to be there at the time?
Always be yourself! Unless you can be Batman, in which case always be Batman.My boss told me "dress for the job you want, not the job you have"... now I'm sat in a disciplinary meeting dressed as Batman.
Comments
But it's not the sort of thing I liked immediately. I heard the odd song and slowly got my head around it. Jethro Tull can certainly be a bit weird and inaccessable.
I think you either like it or you don't. I need to be very much in the mood for something like Pink Floyd.
Prog is probably more popular now than it has been since the late 70s.
Prog is one of these genres that I will never get. I like jazz, I like "difficult" music, I like "arty" music---so its not that I'm closed to solos or difficult listening---but most prog rock is a pile of tedious, pretentious, wanky, joyless, unlistenable shite to my ears.
As you can tell I'm not a huge fan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vj9ZUHju7JE
You must be thinking of Genesis.
I think you may have a point about the music, but I think Sturgeon's Law is applicable.
Don't talk politics and don't throw stones. Your royal highnesses.
Prog doesn't get much more gleeful than this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXaSHQL6oxY
Find your sub genre and a whole world awaits, just forget about Rick Wakeman and his Elizabethan nonsense.
They're the principle offenders (certainly, after Syd left---the earlier stuff isn't too bad) but I'd happily lump in Genesis, Yes, ELP, Rush, King Crimson etc etc too. Just not my cup of Lapsang Suchong (see, I even like pretentious tea: its just prog rock that's too much )
I'm with @UnclePsychosis i'm afraid!
Apart from Pink Floyd, a lot of 70's prog leaves me cold. I'm sure if I explored it and gave it time (if I had any to spare) I could find stuff I liked.
I prefer the spacier side of prog, such as Ozric Tentacles. Ed Wynne is a smokin’ guitarist.
.
Aphrodite's Child
Bodkin
Dark
Gravy Train
Gracious
Orangutang
Andromeda
Nightsun
Ancient Grease
That kind of thing
The term Progressive Music was coined because bands were moving away from three chord twelve bars and minor pentatonics. It came from many directions. There were classically trained musicians who knew other musical forms, and brought them into their writing. There were young musicians who were developing beyond their teenage capabilities. There were jazz musicians from the 50s and 60s who had been channelled into playing blues and rock as the market changed. It all felt natural and exciting. Don't forget that the Beatles had been doing something similar. We felt that the "underground" music of the late 60s had eventually achieved acceptance in the industry. For a while the record companies had less control of the product.
Sturgeon's rule definitely applies. Some of it I didn't like at the time, and some hasn't aged well, but a few pieces still shine. The same as any other musical form really. I find Bach accessible, but Bartok not. Thelonius Monk can be fascinating, but John Coltrane sounds as though he's practicing scales.