Why Is Post 1977 (Non Metal, Non Avant Garde/Kraut) Prog So Maligned?

Now there's the right question

(And The Flower Kings are awesome btw!)

I have seen the flower kings live, and I contest your assertion, geir. They were terrible. God, did they ever go on (and on and on and on)

Post 77 prog I don't think does get maligned, because it's under the radar, critically. You can't malign that which you aren't aware of, I think?

Well, as for the above the radar stuff, like disco, people were getting sick of it. shrug.

Since you didn't exclude it though, there was lots of Euro prog-funk from the late 70s that certainly wasn't maligned, at least in retrospect. (Ralph Lundsten, etc.)

God, did they ever go on (and on and on and on)

Since when is that a bad thing?

The great classical masters made lots of 20-30 minute works. Why shouldn't pop/rock do the same?

The Flower Kings would have been classic only for the fact that one of their "songs" lasts for more than an hour.

It's a bad thing when there are no dynamics and it's just a bunch of fuzak-y noodling stretched out for 20 minutes.

Well, in fact, there is a lot more than that. Lots of beautiful melodies, for instance, or I wouldn't have liked it that well.

Post 77 prog I don't think does get maligned, because it's under the radar, critically. You can't malign that which you aren't aware of, I think?

People were definitely very aware of Marillion in the 80s. I guess they are the most commercially successful (although far from the best) neo prog band.

Well, there wasn't when I saw them live, believe me. Just a bunch of showoffy instrumental gymnastics. Zzzzzzz. It was the absolute definition of an endurance test to sit through it. Bear in mind that this is coming from a guy who likes "Supper's Ready", "Tales from Topographic Oceans" etc.

x-post yeah, true, Marillion got some notice because they had hit records etc, as for anything else, wether it be IQ or Guapo or anything in between, it's basically been off the map as far as getting any notices in the weeklies or monthlies.

I did hear about Pendragon in the 80s already, although it took ages before I actually heard any of their music.

Pendragon did get one of their albums reviewd in "Q", I remember. They were pretty harsh about it, something like "it starts off as a knock off of Camel, then goes into as knock off of "shine on you crazy diamond" and so on. They stumped up a shitload of cash and put in a quarter page ad in the same issue hawkinfg the album, which sold shitloads off the back of the review! I bought the album and the review was pretty OTM (unusually for Q) it was like someone made a jigsaw picture out of bits of "classic" prog albums. That was unusual, the most common scenario was that small progressive band or label would send copies of their new album out to all of the regular music pubs, and if you were REALLY lucky you might get a three-liner one star write up if you released in a queit month. I used to communicate with a guy who ran a label which had a few decent-selling releases (like way more than the 2500-copy glass ceiling a lot of the smaller bands operated on) and he never got a single one of his releases reviewed, ever. Pendragon themselves, they sold a whole shitload of records in the '90's, I forget the figure I was quoted, but it was astonishingly high, I have never ever seen n interview with them in a british magazine beyween "Sounds" packing up and "Classic Rock" starting.

I was mad for Neo-Prog in the early 80s and I thought Pendragon were really uninteresting, too. It's not like I didn't "get" them.

The sneaking thing is that "prog" by 77 was slowly starting to morph into punk and new wave. (ssssssh!)

First 2 IQ albums = dope, on the other hand.

Most of the vaguely commercially solvent Neo bands seemed to be in a hurry to go AOR as quick as possible tho.

I think that most 80s prog suffered from a general tunelessness. IQ a bit better than the rest, but they have improved in the 90s and 2000s too. To me, Spock's Beard and The Flower Kings are the ones that have come closest to what Genesis and Yes were about in the 70s. And, to me, that is more important even though Marillion, IQ and Pendragon may be more "up-to-date" through incorporating elements of synthpop and new wave in their sound.

Prog is totally alive and well. It just mutated into post-rock, maths-rock and MICROPROG.

The first couple of albums were pretty decent "The Jewel" and "9:15 Live" but after that they got into this leaden, mushy symphonic sound which I don't dig at all, plus, Nick Barrett's vocals are kind of really annoying to me. I've got a load of respect for what they've achieved, but the couple of albums I have by them rarely get spun, I must admit. Gimme IQ, 12th Night or Anglagard any day of the week.

(x-post to NV)

Prog is totally alive and well. It just mutated into post-rock, maths-rock and MICROPROG.

That is why I wrote non avant garde. Non-melodic prog was never washed away by punk the way symphonic rock was.

Currently loling at the Flower Kings wikipedia, which notes in its first paragraph that they have released 18 hours of music in 10 years. Umm, OK, sure, I guess that's a lot.

But Geir, Spocks Beard only "came close" to '70's Genesis and Yes because they blatantly knocked off their style and sound and filled their albums with little rips off those bands tunes! How they got away with it I'll never know, you listen to one of their records and it's like here's a bit that sounds almost exactly like the beginning of "siberian khatru", here's a little bit that sounds almost exactly like "willow farm" and so on, they were outrageous, def the prog Oasis in that respect, plus they were SO SAPPY, yeuck, awful, awful band.

the prog-oasis explains why he likes them. he wants prog to sound exactly like the genesis albums he likes just as he wants all indie to sound like paul mccartney beatles songs

geir, rock != avant garde

oh never mind

But Geir, Spocks Beard only "came close" to '70's Genesis and Yes because they blatantly knocked off their style and sound and filled their albums with little rips off those bands tunes! How they got away with it I'll never know, you listen to one of their records and it's like here's a bit that sounds almost exactly like the beginning of "siberian khatru", here's a little bit that sounds almost exactly like "willow farm" and so on, they were outrageous, def the prog Oasis in that respect, plus they were SO SAPPY, yeuck, awful, awful band.

They aren't ripping off. They are very obviously influenced but not ripping off. Just like Oasis.

In what world is MICROPROG avant garde?

/these threads

The great classical masters made lots of 20-30 minute works. Why shouldn't pop/rock do the same?

The great Hollywood masters of the 1920s made short two-reel black and white silent films. Why shouldn't today's directors do the same?

I was mad for Neo-Prog in the early 80s and I thought Pendragon were really uninteresting, too. It's not like I didn't "get" them.

First 2 IQ albums = dope, on the other hand.

I am in total agreement with both these statements.

I hear some of these newer symphonic-or-whatever-you-want-to-call-it bands, and it's always just a lame knock-off of far superior 70s bands. It's the usual thing : Yes were influenced by psych pop, romantic classical, bluegrass, jazz, blues, Broadway musicals etc and melded it into something original. The Flower Kings are influenced by...Yes. You're always going to lose something like that, usually originality. And tunes.

I like current IQ better. 80s IQ was a bit too based upon the then recent sounds of the 80s. They got better when they fully embraced 70s prog without trying in the slightest to sound "new wave". The more retro, the better.

For instance, a drum machine just doesn't fit into prog, as it disturbes the dynamic qualities in the interplay between loud and quiet sections.

People seem to be loving Green Milk from the Planet Orange (from Japan). They are keeping the prog dream alive. And live is the only way to see them. Amazing.

For instance, a drum machine just doesn't fit into prog, as it disturbes the dynamic qualities in the interplay between loud and quiet sections.

But Geir, the volume knob.

This is about a bit more than volume. The quieter parts of Genesis' and Yes' works had absolutely no drums at all. Because drums would have disturbed the quietness.

Um ... oh never mind.

This is the thread Geir has waited 7 years to start.

This is about a bit more than volume. The quieter parts of Genesis' and Yes' works had absolutely no drums at all. Because drums would have disturbed the quietness.

So would a turned off drum machine. Ask Trevor Horn or the Art Of Noise dudes.

I wished all prog used Rhythm Aces or other 70s drum machines. Imagine how much more advanced prog *and* drum machine music would be.

arthur brown's kingdom come used a rhythm ace on their last album. and ONLY a rhythm ace. got it after their drummer ran away with their bassist's wife.

Geir, have you heard Abel Ganz? Listen to their new album! My brother's in them!

1978 being such a calamitous/weird-arse year for prog probably has something to do with it.

That's because the record companies had decided that prog was "dead", and prog bands were forced to make softrock/AOR instead.

The post 1980 age has seen some great albums by the likes of Marillion, IQ, Pendragon, Spock's Beard, Arena and most of all The Flower Kings though.

Interesting thread -- and I agree partly w the last point.Unlike today w nine million indies, what major label record companies thought in 1978 mattered -- and most of these groups were written off in an instant.

I do like the idea of prog bands using drum machines --tho they prob would've needed more programability than anything until the LM-1 lacked in order to have the requisite proggy interplay.

Recently electronic drums don't represent that much of a problem, as nowadays you have MIDI programs that are easier to edit. Back in the 80s, you just had drum machines. And, sure, they could be stopped. But most people were too lazy to do that. Including IQ (and Genesis in their most proggish 80s moments)

Been listening to the excellent remaster of IQ's Tales from the Lush Attic and I've been wondering this same thing; there's a big Genesis influence there but that album rocks harder than Genesis ever did. Do people still think that the 2nd or 3rd wave bands simply don't compare? Is it because a lot of them sound derivative of Yes?