From: manitp@vccsouth18.its.rpi.edu (Philip Joseph Manitta Jr.)
Subject: Define Progressive..... and a major tangent included
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 08:28:49 GMT

Hey;

Somebody recently asked for a definitive word on "Progressive".  Being
the musical snob that I am, I  think I have put together a fairly
comprehensive and agreeable definition of it.

There are three ways that it is commonly used.  First- there is the
version that calls "The Cure" a progressive band.  This is the group of
rebellious musical snobs who think any rock that does not sound like
Journey or Bon Jovi is "Progressive".  This is wrong.  That kind of music
is "alternative"  As you shall see in a minute, it has none of the
properties that properly defines "Progressive" music.

The second usage is an adjective.  This is used when describing a band
that clearly fits a particular genre but tends to break the rules and
be quite unique.  Hence King's X and Extreme become "progressive heavy
metal".

The third usage (which is by the way the ORIGINAL usage)  refers to a
specific genre that doesn't fit into any other. It's very hard to define,
but those of us who are into it instantly know when we hear something
that IS progressive.  So I will try to explain to you what some of the
characteristics that make progressive music "progressive" are:

	1) SUPERIOR MUSICIANSHIP:  most bands do not have the talent to be
progressive, even if they wanted to be!

	2) CONSIDERABLE RELIANCE ON CLASSICAL MUSIC:  Most progressive bands
know a whole lotta music theory- much more than the 12 bar blues. they
learned it from studying classical music and therefore know ALL the
tricks, not just the easy ones or the formulas.

	3) CONSIDERABLE INFLUENCE FROM STYLES THAT ARE NOT ROCK OR CLASSICAL: 
In many progressive bands you can find elements of
jazz/folk/metal/traditional/international.... YOU NAME IT- I can find a
band that plays it!

	4) ATYPICAL ARRANGEMENTS:  Any song that uses I IV V major or I III IV
minor is NOT progressive.  A band cannot be progressive unless they
have written at least one song with a time signature containing a prime
number bigger than 3!  IE time sigs like 7/4, 9/8, 11/32 qualify.

	5) EXPANSIVE ARRANGEMENTS: Rather than stick to a money making formula
and write songs that range from 3 and 1/2 to 5 minutes in length, prog
musicians will generally tend to play with a song until it is properly
finished. If that means the finished product is 35 seconds long- so be
it. If that means a song is 22 minutes long- so be it.  (I can find
numerous examples of both without having to dig for the single most
obscure song on the face of the planet!) In fact many of the REAL
progressive bands use to do it quite frequently.  

	6) THE SUM IS GREATER THAN ITS MUSICAL PARTS: Rather than define it- I
will give an example:  "Dies Irae" by Believer is NOT progressive
(although it IS awesome) because it sounds like Classical mixed with
thrash.  "Heart of the Sunrise" by Yes IS progressive because it sounds
like something totally original and happens to incorporate lots of
classical and rock into it. (rather than just being classical mixed
with rock.).............. which brings me to my next point-

	7) MUCH INDIVIDUALITY: ALL of the real prog bands had an identity.  NO
other band sounded remotely like them EVEN THOUGH THEY DREW FROM
SIMILAR ROOTS IE Pink Floyd did NOT sound anything like Yes did not sound
anything like ELP did not sound anything like STYX did not sound anything
like Queen........ etc.

	8) SOMETHING INTANGIBLE:  This is hard to explain. Although all of
them sounded distinctly different, there was some common unifying music
thread that makes a band sound progressive, and it isn't something that
anybody can put a finger on....... it just is there.  

	As you can see, bands like  The Cure (and their Christian counterparts
like the Choir) do not fit any of these qualifications.  (although in the
case of the Choir, at least, I will argue that they may have the physical
ability to be prog if they want to be!) 

	Unfortunately, after about 1980, all of the REAL prog bands left sort of
deteriorated to the point that they became merely "Progressive rock" (the
adjective sense, see the second of the three definitions I gave above) 
For example- Rush, who used to record 20 minute side-long tracks with 5
to seven interlinked musical movements, started writing songs like
"Limelight" which originally sounded to me like a heavy-metal remake of
"La Bamba"!!!!!!!!!!!  Yes, that band that between 1972 and 1977 did
not record a single song shorter than 9 minutes (!) began to write
songs like "Owner of a Lonely Heart" a typical I III IV minor piece of
POP! (this is the same progression that gave us "Seen and Not Heard" by
Petra. As well as "American Woman" by the guess who. As well as "Bad to
the Bone" by George Thorogood. As well as "Christian Man" by the
Allies. As well as "Lovin Touchin Squeezin" By journey. A well as
...........................     (Insert 12 bar blues song by any and
every band you've ever heard of hear!)  Kansas, that band that gave us
that wonderful 9 minute masterpiece "Song for America" started doing
stuff like "Fight Fire with Fire"! (disclaimer... I AM A MASTEDON FAN!)

	..... so that's why most people who didn't listen to secular music in
the seventies don't really have a clue what the progressive movement
was all about.  Unfortunately- the amount of Christian progressive
music is practically ZERO!! OK- occasionally we managed to get a band
like AD.  And then there was ARKANGEL. (for those of you who don't
know..... when RadioHalo had talent they were called ARKANGEL!  then they
decided to forget all the music they ever knew and become a cheesy
techno-pop band!)  I've noticed over the past couple weeks that there are
a few obscure Christian bands who are still trying to be progressive.....
GOD BLESS
'EM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IF ONE OF THEM EVER GETS AIRPLAY- THEN I CAN DIE A HAPPY MAN!  (well, I
can really do that already, since I know where I'm going afterward! 
:)  )  

Just for the record- I AM bitter and sarcastic about the pathetic state
of formulaic music in the 90's. Even "Alternative" music is becoming
formulaic.  So don't mistake my sarcasm- it's real and I make no
apologies for it!

These days, I look for a band that HAS and CAN EXHIBIT some degree of
talent within the confines of this pathetically commercial music
world.  That is why I love Whiteheart and hate Idle Cure (can you
say... "I wanna be a retarded clone of Bon Jovi without a
bassplayer......  "  ? Sheesh where I come from we used to call that
SACRELIGE!)  Petra even has a redeeming value...... come on..... think
REAL hard folks- what does Petra have that NO OTHER ARENA ROCK BAND IN
HISTORY HAS EVER HAD??????????  How about a keyboardist with an
identity?? NAW ! THINK SO?!?!?!? As opposed to most rock keyboardists who
do one of three things- add cheesy blues organ riffs that everybody and
their unborn grandson has already done <or> add typical special
effects/pop embellishments <or> play simple chords that would sound
better on a rhythm guitar anyway- John Lawry actually plays ! Check out
the neo-classical riff on Armed and Dangerous...... 'nuff said! OH- by
the way.. for all you skeptics who insist Lawry would be useless
without Sequencing/MIDI- I've sen him live from 3rd row, and aside from
that vocal sample/crap he calls a solo- he does ALL OF IT LIVE!  Nyah!

HMMMMMMM...................... seems I started to help with a technical
definition and then started preaching about the sad state of music
these days.  Or as Bill Bruford (of YES and a zillion other bands..) puts
it "At the time we doing our thing, there was a whole realm of musical
possibilities, and all you had to be was different!  Unlike today,
where all you have to be is the same!"  Also - I don't limit the
problem to Christianity like alot of us do- Sure "Seen and Not Heard"
sounds an awful lot like "Heaven's On FIre" by kiss.  But.........  if
you play a guitar, then you know how simple it is to come up with that
progression on your own.  as I said, It is the basis for 90% of all the
classic rock songs EVER made.  Also- I've seen this problem the other way
around too!  I heard a song played on top 40 this summer by......... I
think it might have been the Spin Doctors....... that sounded exactly
like the chorus to "Is It a Crime" by Zion.  And this time WE DID IT
FIRST!!! (any other Zion fans know what i'm talking about????  Also-
how many friends do you know who accused Queensryche's "Silent
Lucidity" of being a complete rippoff of Pink Floyd's "Comfortably Numb" 

Well, I didn't mean to ramble, but as a musician who sees music as an art
that isn't being artistically dealt with, it is something that I feel
very strongly about. I get off my soap box now.

OH! on the Petra note-- some wise guy is bound to point out that Jonathan
Cain of Journey was an arena rock keyboardist with an identity-
Ahem.... WRONG! On "ESCAPE" he was mostly a rhythm guitarist, and the
piano parts he played (although talented and intricate) sounded no more
distinctive than anything Jim Peterik ever played.  Same goes for
Frontiers (except that he used synthesizers). Granted- on "Raised on
Radio" he was QUITE distinctive- but ROR was NOT a rock album- it was a
pop album! (and a darned good one i might add!  - probably the ONLY pop
album you'll ever hear me say something good about!)

I'm rambling again.... let me try One more time to climb off my soap box.

PHEW I MADE IT!

bye.

One last disclaimer- I do not necessarily think that any music in the
categories of mainstream, alternative, pop, heavy metal
(non-progressive)... is bad or inferior. What i object to is the fact
that most of it has become so dreadfully commercial that it is hard to
find a band that isn't merely a parody of a style that's already been don
e a zillion times.  And in the pop/dance realm - talent doesn't count,
just so long as it's fun- I object to this whole philosophy! 

Bye now.

i know I'm bound to get flamed for this one....... let 'em come.

 

-- 
Philip J. "Ralph" Manitta Jr. (RLF)     _|_       " For me to live is
88 14th st.                              |        Christ, to die is
Troy NY, 12180                           |        gain!"   (manitp@rpi.edu) 
" Don't even think of copying this! The band NEEDS money! " -Fluffy
Organization: Doctoral student, Physics, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA