/prog/

Prog sucks. If you like it unironically and you're older than 14 you should off yourself tbqfh senpai desu desu dezu

>>74232948
>Why don't we make these more often edition.
because most of us aren't underage

prog metal>prog rock

>>74233130
>>74233206

>tfw I discovered prog when I was 17
fast forward 2 years
>tfw I'm listening to my Thick as a Brick record as I type this

stop making me feel insecure guys :(

On topic though, Just because Pink Floyd is popular doesn't make them not prog. Just listen to Animals and forget that Dark Side of the Moon is even a thing and you'll agree.

>Is Pink Floyd really prog?
I've seen them being described as Space Rock.

>>74232948
Is that image oc? If yes congratz to you

>>74233346
I DEFINITELY wouldn't say that

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mb5TV7JUvzo
This and a lot of ELO's discography is space rock

>>74233387
ok

>>74233278
>dsotm isn't prog
LITERALLY, FIGURATIVELY and METAPHYSICALLY kill yourself

>>74233278
>stop making me feel insecure guys :(
Most of the people on this board listen to mopey, gay post-punk/indie rock music or unironically like rap so I wouldn't take any insults from these people too seriously.

>>74233461
>uses le quoting arrows
>doesnt actually quote something I said
Thats not what I meant by that anyways. I was just saying that people who haven't listened to Pink Floyd usually dismiss dsotm as a shitty dad rock album that they used to hear on the radio in the car.
Personally I love the album and its probably my second favorite by them and its DEFINITELY prog.

>>74232948
New Steven Wilson just leaked, did anyone listen to it

>>74233130
t. Nu-male

File: neu.jpg (40KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 1000x1000px

Reminder that pic related is the greatest prog album of all time and there is literally nothing that you can do about it.

>>74233630
how is that prog?

>>74233645
It's krautrock, which is a subgenre of prog.

>>74233382
It is indeed. I'm glad you liked it.

>>74233645
How it isn't? "Krautrock" is prog under a different name.

>>74233672
>subgenre
Nah, it's the same thing.

>>74233645
I always thought Krautrock was just a name for an artsier and more german version of prog.

>>74233672
>>74233697
>>74233744
Krautrock isn't actually a genre you know. Experimental rock music made by Germans in the 70s isn't a genre in itself. Experimental rock music (which is what Neu! actually is) isn't prog either since what is generally called prog is usually very conservative and consists of imitating famous bands to which the label is traditionally applied.

Eloy is german prog, notice how similar they sound to English prog, whereas Can was a german experimental rock band who bare more similarity to rock in opposition and other experimental rock bands than to King Crimson and Genesis.

>>74233744
>>74233797
Can was a self-described "progressive rock" band.

>>74233848
>self-described
[citation needed]

>>74233797

>Krautrock
>related to RIO

do what now

>>74233797
>Krautrock isn't actually a genre you know.
I know that.
>isn't prog either since what is generally called prog
Why do you care about what is generally considered prog? Krautrock is also generally considered an actual genre (which it isn't) and you don't care about that. Also it's really really REALLY retarded to give a genre called "PROGRESSIVE rock" a defining sound. This retarded way of thinking is why most prog pioneers considered it dead as a genre by the late 70s.

>>74233219
Prog metal is laughable at best. But at least you proved you're underage.

I feel that if music was described in movements rather than genres we wouldn't have those identification problem

>>74233893
>RIO is actually prog
This is simply not true. If anything RIO was a reaction against bands playing excessively ornate baroque guitar solos and singing (badly) about dragons, then smugly congratulating themselves on how "progressive" they were being. RIO owes absolutely nothing musically to any prog band you can name, other than the utter disgust RIO musicians felt towards them.
>>74233933
>Why do you care about what is generally considered prog?
Because I hate good music being lumped in with the absolute shit bucket that is prog.

Sorry for being ignorant but what the fuck is RIO?

>>74234112
Some gay shit.

>>74234112
rock in opposition
here, give this a listen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmji113JJD4

>>74234112
Rock in Opposition.

>>74234145
>doot doot doot doot doot doot doot DOOT DOOT DOOT doot
Damn...

>>74234205
I don't understand.

>>74234145
Sounds like rock that tries to be progressive to me.

>>74234265
It's worth pointing out that making progressive 'rock music' is different from making 'progressive rock' music, since the former involves originality and experiment, but the later involves imitation of King Crimson and fantasy based lyrics.

>>74234349
Says who?

>>74234407
I only speak for myself.

>>74234349
Why do you dislike Crims so much?

>What have you been listening to recently?
Arx Pilosa by Bob Drake. Crazy stuff in the vein of Cardiacs but even crazier. This guy sets a new precedents for quirky manic eccentric stuff.
>Any new prog releases?
See above.
>Is Pink Floyd really prog?
Depends on the album, but as a general rule, no.

>>74233182
Haven't listened to it. Thinking Plague are a good band, but I'm always skeptical of new releases by old artists.

>>74233219
No, sorry.

>>74233278
>Pink Floyd so they can't be prog
Said nobody ever.

>Just listen to Animals and forget that Dark Side of the Moon
Animals is arguably, Dark Side is not.

>>74233387
>I DEFINITELY wouldn't say that
>he hasn't listened to 60s Floyd
oh god

>>74233630
It's not prog though. It's about as prog as This Heat's debut.

>>74233672
That's simply wrong. Krautrock and Progressive Rock have almost nothing to do with each other.

>>74233797
>Krautrock isn't actually a genre you know
Eh, it depends. If well defined krautrock is an actual genre, but people don't know shit about krautrock, so...

Good point on Eloy anyways, more people need to hear that argument.

>>74233848
King Crimson repeatedly denied being progressive rock, so your point is?

>>74233893
RIO is not a genre.

>>74233958
Genres should be described taxonomically, just like living things, and in fact that's what happens most of the time unless people use a stupid genre name (such as krautrock, or post punk, or post rock, etc).

>>74234145
That album isn't really RIO...

>>74234349
Correct. King Crimson is a bad example though as they were always at the vanguard and later the tangent of prog rock.

>>74234579
I don't hate King Crimson. KC were actually progressive; it's the imitators I dislike.

Please leave the thread, nobody wants to deal with your retardation and autism.

>>74234898
>That album isn't really RIO...
What is RIO then? I always though Henry Cow were considered the most prominent band in RIO.

>>74234941
Aight.

File: RockInOpposition_flyer.jpg (99KB, 287x375px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 287x375px

>>74234970
>not giving me a (You)
fuck you

>>74234976
Firsts, RIO is not a genre.
Second, RIO started in 1978, and Unrest is from 1974.
But yeah, Henry Cow (and later Art Bears, News From Babel, etc) were the most important of the RIO bands.

File: Old_neu_1417000765_crop_550x352.jpg (24KB, 550x352px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 550x352px

>>74234898
AND THERE IS LITERALLY NOTHING THAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT!

>>74235020
>RIO is not a genre
n-never claimed it was
>Second, RIO started in 1978, and Unrest is from 1974.
that's a good point, I didn't realise this. However what I would still say is that a lot of krautrock especially the more experimental bands like Faust bore less resemblance to progressive rock than it did to experimental rock like Henry Cow, The Residents, Zappa, Beefheart and others, especially those who later became associated with RIO.

File: get a load of this guy.jpg (146KB, 496x496px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 496x496px

>>74233797

>>74235114
I have no idea to which thing I said you are replying to... Is it the prog thing? Because they are not prog, and krautrock is not a prog subgenre.

>>74235149
Just a clarification, because RIO is considered a genre at RYM and other similar sites.

About the second thing you said, I don't know. I mean, Captain Beefheart was never prog in the slightest, while Faust arguably was. The Residents are a weird case, they are a genre on their own, but you can still tell they owe their style to Frank Zappa. The same goes for Henry Cow and Faust to some extent.

>>74234898
>Genres should be described taxonomically

That's kind of my point. Music always takes from many traditions and other genres that you can't label an artist with only one genre especially in a discipline where being unique has so much value. I think it should be described in movements or periods.

btw punk was a derogatory term

>>74235304
The problem with movements and periods is that genres can extend indefinitely completely disregarding the chronological dimension. I can play Krautrock today the same way someone could have played it during the 60s.

>>74235225
>Because they are not prog
They sound pretty progressive to me, desu.
>and krautrock is not a prog subgenre.
It's not a genre at all. It's more of a scene than anything.

File: 1494299462170.jpg (366KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 1000x1000px

>>74235149
>n-never

>>74235360
progressive (adj) rock (noun) is not the same as "progressive rock" (noun)

>It's not a genre at all. It's more of a scene than anything.
It was both really. But it can be defined as a genre. Can, Neu, Faust to some extent, and all the generic krautrock bands are all part of the same rock genre.

>>74235359
I totally agree with that but no one will want to call it Krautrock. You'd get a label like neo-kraut or something of the like. I don't claim to have a solution to this but I clearly see a problem when naming music. Also you couldn't play punk, emo or psychedelic rock today and have the same credibility it has when those genres came to be. It would only be pastiche. Genres are always related to the socio-political climate of the time.

>>74235454
>You'd get a label like neo-kraut or something of the like.
And that would be wrong. It's still Krautrock.
>Also you couldn't play punk, emo or psychedelic rock today and have the same credibility it has when those genres came to be. It would only be pastiche. Genres are always related to the socio-political climate of the time.
I completely disagree. The musical style (or genre) remains the same.

>>74235507
musical style =/= genre

>>74235524
What is the difference in your opinion?

>>74235393
>progressive (adj) rock (noun) is not the same as "progressive rock" (noun)
It should be. Otherwise the genre doesn't make sense.

>>74235551
Genre is era/location specific.

Style is how it is played and from which tradition it takes.

Genre would be: two rap artists from different area that sounds extremely similar but would be called different genres only because of where it is made.

At least this is how I see it.

File: Godspeed+You+Black+Emperor+PNG.png (373KB, 715x530px) Image search: [Google]

373KB, 715x530px

Reminder that punk is more about the attitude than anything else.
t. Efrim

File: god-i-hate-krautniggers1924ufj293rfj23cv.png (408KB, 1454x1208px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 1454x1208px

reminder

>>74235594

Rock in Opposition always felt like Prog's punk rock, musically and obviously politically.

>>74235581
On the contrary. The genre doesn't make sense if it "progressive"+"rock". Progressive Rock is a specific genre related to artists like The Nice, Procol Harum, and The Moody Blues (eventually Yes, Genesis, Gentle Giant, etc).

>>74235582
>Genre is era/location specific.
But that's wrong. Let's take a look at Baroque music for example. It's defined as a "musical style" of art music composed from approximately 1600 to 1750.
There might be differences between genre and style, but not the ones you mention. I mean, if you define genre as related to location, your argument above is "true" by circular logic.

>>74235594
t. retard

>>74235625
It's the other way around actually. Krautrock as a whole was more innovative than Prog Rock.

>>74235628
Well, Etron Fou Le Loublan were kind of progressive punk, so...

>>74235625
if i had a raging angry pepe, i would post it

>>74235020

Rock in Opposition was a festival.

That's it.

Singular. The six bands that were present at the time are part of the RIO movement, and that's it, if you want to be anal about it.

>>74235641
Correct. Arguably the bands from the second festival (and third, etc) can be added on top of the original six.

>>74235656

No less semantic than including bands who clearly fall in line with Stormy Six or Henry Cow or whatever but weren't present.

>>74235675
huh?
why would you consider bands who were not part of a festival part of a festival? just because they sound similar? weird

>>74235696

I'm not saying one way or the other; I'm saying that the line between being categorized as Avant-Prog or Rock in Opposition was playing at one concert in the late 70s.

>>74235715
All RIO bands were Avant-Prog, so what's your point?

File: 81OmBeaXt7L._SL1500_.jpg (237KB, 1500x1494px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1500x1494px

i like this album very much

>>74235636
>There might be differences between genre and style, but not the ones you mention. I mean, if you define genre as related to location, your argument above is "true" by circular logic.

Those weren't good examples I guess. I'm reading about classical music classification and they seem to have it right compared to any other types of music.

>>74235771

Me, too

>>74235771
Not Prog Rock though.

>>74235774
I would still call Baroque Music a genre anyways (but it's still a weird case because of all the different sub "genres" or "styles" the "genre" had).

>>74233957
Calling someone else underage when you're a tripfag.

Goodness gracious.

>>74235907
what genre would you classify it as?

>>74235741

That people calling bands similar to Henry Cow RIO as a way to describe a sound is only invalidated by silly semantics.

The whole discussion about genres is really futile. We are pretty much eating journalists shit, atm. And arguing about completely meaningless shit that not a single respectable artist cares for.

>>74235934
He is a namefag not a tripfag, my dear friend.

>>74235944
Experimental Rock. It was with Larks that King Crimson stopped being Prog Rock.

>>74235952
RIO does not describe a sound.

>>74235954
Fuck you, I love arguing about music genres and categorization in general.

>>74235954

Yeah let's just talk about music.

>>74235978
>Fuck you
No fuck YOU, you shit eater. Stop enabling journalist hack with supporting their retarded imaginary genres.

>>74235907
Larks tongues is objectively progressive rock, you would have to be one of the following to disagree

>Retarded
>Trolling

I'm not even going to fully humor your bait shitpost with reasons why because I'm betting your head is way too far up your ass to consider anyone's opinion other than your own. This is just more of a PSA to anyone that is thinking about taking your opinions seriously.

>>74235978

It has absolutely been adopted as a moniker for Avant-Prog sounding music, largely thanks to sites like ProgArchives.

I know all about the history of RIO since I genuinely love reading about music but you're raging against the march of etymology rather than anything meaningful lmao.

hey guys check my prog rock
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWtpAzbEnc8

File: 1497069989908.png (294KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 480x480px

>>74235978
>le king crimson isnt prog meme xD

fucking epic, yes isnt prog either. in fact nothing is prog, music doesnt exist, and anyone who disagrees is a pleb

File: Chart Listened.jpg (2MB, 2180x2360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2180x2360px

>>74235978
>It was with Larks that King Crimson stopped being Prog Rock.
My life has been a lie.

>>74233219
Not really.. in the other side, Avant Garde Metal has some pretty cool albums.
Recommend what i should listen next.

You can chose a listened album and a new album if you want to!

>>74236064
>didnt listen to tubular bells, crime of the century, or picchio

Kill yourself

>>74236021
Actually, this is an attempt to correct shitty journalists and their messy genre descriptions.

>>74236022
It's not. Again, progressive (adj) rock (noun) =/= "progressive rock" (noun)
You are the retarded one.

>>74236027
It's not Avant Prog either. It's Experimental Rock.

>you're raging against the march of etymology rather than anything meaningful lmao
Genre descriptions are an end on themselves.

>>74236055
They are, just not Larks Tongues. Yes is prog, In the Court is prog. Not everything King Crimson did was prog.

>>74236127
Only Tubular Bells is essential desu.

File: 1498471733032.jpg (52KB, 376x419px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 376x419px

>>74236150
xDDDDDDDDD

>>74236055
Reminder that "Prog Rock" died in late 70s when it became a self parody and stopped actually progressing. (progressing rock music was the whole point, you see). And every "progressive" band after that isn't actually progressive at all.

>>74236150
>Again, progressive (adj) rock (noun) =/= "progressive rock" (noun)
Complete bollocks. (You) are the one messing all up, btw.

>>74236169
haha

>>74236230
>And every "progressive" band after that isn't actually progressive at all.
>who is Art Bears, Tipographica, Thinking Plague, Ozric Tentacles, Ruins, Ground Zero, Rich Woodson's Ellipsis, Sajjanu, Flying Luttenbachers, etc?
Retard

>progressing rock music was the whole point, you see
(not true by the way)
By that logic Gentle Giant are not prog rock, or Beatles are (depending on what exactly you mean with "progressing").

bump desu

>>74234898
>Krautrock and Progressive Rock have almost nothing to do with each other.
This is bullshit.

>>74238310
It's not. They both developed independently from each other. They don't even sound similar for fucks sake.
Why is /mu/ so ignorant and plebeian?

>>74238353
Why do you have to come and fuck up every single prog thread?

>>74238369
I don't. It's anons who spout ignorant shit all the time. See >>74238310

>>74238448
Good thing you have a trip, now I can filter your bullshit.

>>74238448

Once you accept your autism your life will be a lot easier.

>>74238467
>filtering out the truth
>>>/pol/

>>74238474
Regardless if I have autism or not (I don't), that doesn't mean the anons above are right.

>>74238485
Even if you're right, which I don't say you are, the way you constantly fuck up prog/kraut threads is the real problem here. Fuck off mate.

>>74238504
How exactly is that a problem? The real problem here is anons who have no idea what they are talking about.

>>74238516
why do you act like a mega autist in every thread you post in? why do you feel the need to trip? your opinion is of no special value. you just make bad posts.

Anyone here like The Dear Hunter?

I'm getting into Beyond the Buried and Me, Thank You Scientist, and Closure in Moscow recently

>>74239397
I make good posts. I never shitpost. Tell me now, what's wrong with correcting people when they are wrong? Why do you think it's okay for people to spout ignorant opinions and spread their ignorance even further? I prefer to do my part to make /mu/ a good place.

File: mouthman.jpg (5KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 259x194px

guys guy calm down and just listen to my new album

>>74236064
>no tool
shit chart

>>74239668
That's because I excluded prog metal as a whole.

>>74239431

I like the Dear Hunter, but he's definitely got a sound that he's sticking to after his changes in sound didn't pan out.

>>74239741
https://youtu.be/f7A1cMfl0Xc?t=2m34s

2:34

File: 1494050860746.png (59KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 1000x1000px

What do you lads think of pic related? I heard it for the second time a little while ago and really liked it. Is there anything else that Vangelis did that's comparable to this?

>>74232948
holy shit what show is that from. I got a huge nostalgia feeling from that image.

>>74240289
The Fairly OddParents

File: 910zqg+H5kL._SL1500_.jpg (573KB, 1500x1486px) Image search: [Google]

573KB, 1500x1486px

SEE THERE! A SON IS BORN
AND WE PRONOUNCE HIM FIT TO FIGHT