Why did all these classic, master prog bands all turn into ridiculously

>>74357789
It was trendy at the time and everybody was doing it

Drugs, the general cultural climate, the introduction of production techniques that made shit easy, age, the synthesizer, take your pick

File: tenor.gif (613KB, 498x498px) Image search: [Google]

613KB, 498x498px

>>74357789
>shitty

>>74357789
Genesis were still pretty good in the 80's, that Yes album isn't bad, King Crimson released some interesting stuff. I can't say the same for Pink Floyd though.

>>74357797
Basically this.

>>74357862
quality post

>>74357789
It wasn't drugs - the 1970's were the heyday for drugs.
it was the advent of sampling synths and electronic music workstations.
synthesizers had been around forever but the ease of creating sounds, of using all the programmed sounds seemed to overwhelm most bands.
Not all though, I remember Kate Bush complaining about it.
Interestingly Rush and Van Halen were two of the bands that were able to use just a touch here and there to serve the song.
But those were the rare ones.
It ruined a lot of elite bands from Yes to Earth, Wind, and Fire and a million lesser bands in between.

>>74357789
yoko ono

>>74357789
Because the majority of musicians didn't want to work a "regular" job in order to make a living.