From: buchekcm@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of term "progressive rock"
Reply-To: buchekcm@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 21:30:56 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.235220.6154@midway.uchicago.edu>, djb6@quads.uchicago.edu (dennis joseph brennan) writes:
>According to my humble understanding, Progressive Rock defines a genre 
>of rock music originating with jazz-rock fusion in the late sixties/early
>seventies.  Progressive rock seems to be characterized by intricate instru-
>mentals, predominant keyboard playing, and song length much in excess of 
>the typical three-minute pop song.  I suppose that the only true progressive
>rock bands around today are the surviving members of the same old bands
>that started the movement twenty years ago.  New bands with these philosophies
>would be called something else.

    I don't think the time period really has that much to do with the naming
of the type of music.  Unfortunately, anyone who started playing this kind of
music now would most likely be disregarded as a copy-cat of the earlier work
of the more popular "progressive" rock bands.  Also, many claim that most of
the "progressive" bands have lost their style.  To a degree this is true, but
many have simply turned to different and varied influences for ideas.  Just
because the music is popular does not mean that it is not "progressive".  But
the general idea is supposed to be that the music is more important than the
success; I think this is where some have sold out.
    Another important characteristic of "progressive" music is the detail of
the instumentation.  To be "progressive", the balance of the instruments has
got to be just about *the* most important aspect.  Just listening to the
music, you can pick out each instrument and listen to the intricacies.  I
think that's the reason the music has survived; each time you listen to it,
you can hear new things.

>Progressive Rock bands include:
>Yes, King Crimson, Moody Blues (probably the first), Emerson Lake & Palmer,
>Pink Floyd, Rush, Genesis.

    I'm not so sure about Floyd and Rush fitting in as well as the other
bands.  Certainly they are "progressive", but do not have the same musical
influences as the others.  I prefer the term "symphonic" rock (which is from
another thread) to refer to those particular bands that have a stronger
classical influence.  But the influences could be jazz, blues (Floyd,
Zeppelin -- yes I'd consider them very "progressive") or even opera (Queen's
"Bohemian Rhapsody").
    One thing common to all the "progressive" groups is their application of
new musical forms to rock.  ELP, the Moody Blues, and Genesis (early) all
have applied classical music to rock very well.  Other bands (like Rush) seem
to have applied more of their own style than any particular influence.  So to
be called "progressive", it really doesn't matter what the influence was, just
that they tried to make a difference in the way people viewed rock music.

>REM is not progressive rock.  I would classify "college rock" as a separate
>genre.

    Definitely.

>"Socially conscious" lyrics are sometimes present in progressive rock but
>certainly have nothing to do with defining it.

    At first, I thought I agreed with that statement, but when you consider
most of the songs, they have very deep and subtle social messages.  Think
about the message behind "Nights in White Satin" for an excellent example.
    Here's my list of "progressive" bands that everyone may not agree with,
or might not have thought of them as "progressive" at first glance:

Queen -- all sorts of influences from various types of music; excellent in
    the aspect of inticacy and instrumentation; terribly underrated; a bit
    late on the scene, but still "progressive"; perhaps my definition of
    not neccessarily "symphonic", but still "progressive" rock.
Eagles -- [flame-retard gear on] strong country influence; I wouldn't have
    considered them "progressive" except for their balance of instrumentation
    and application of a new influence to rock; not always "progressive".
Led Zeppelin -- strong blues influence; another fine example of the
    application of a comletely new influence; great attention to musicianship
    and balance.
Jethro Tull -- I haven't heard too much Tull, but I know that they have gone
    through many phases of different influences; some albums are "symphonic",
    others sound like country; perhaps the best at experimenting with
    different musical influences.

Ducking flames,

Craig M. Buchek
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig.M.Buchek@Rose-Hulman.Terre_Haute.IN.USA.Earth.Sol.Milky_Way.Universe
BuchekCM@RoseVC.Rose-Hulman.Edu.InterNet         Genesis, Floyd, Zeppelin  //
C.Buchek@2021.New_Jamestown.St_Louis.MO.63138.USnail    C, Oberon, Icon  \X/ 42
"Am I wrong to believe in a city of gold that lies in the deep distance?"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.rock-n-roll