space_cowboy


Miles was more experimental jazz no?

I think the "definition" of something like Miles Davis will have a hard time ... and in the end, it might even get taken away from jazz itself, since the definitions of music these days, tend to exclude "experimentation" and "improvisation" ... in its definitions, which makes "jazz" a piece of music that is defined by this and that ... it's all too academic.
 
The one thing that one of his bass players used to say, and it is written as such on an article on these on "Bass Player" monthly earlier this year (or last year -- not sure), was that Miles would say ... we start, then I do this, then you do that, then John does his thing, then Joe does his thing, then we come together and finish ... and this would be considered so much "free form" that most academic definitions will have a serious problem with it ... but in the end? ... Miles is probably one of the most important and influential people to the likes of what became known as "progressive" anything ...
 
Note here ... space ... you gotta look for that DVD on Tom Dowd ... that DVD has the best "history" of American music in the 40's, 50's and 60's than you could shake a stick at ... and the result was? ... a man that had an ear for music ... and gave us one of the most beautiful things ever done in rock music ... notice that it wasn't exactly composed either! You have to have an ear for the freedom and free from!

batsbrew


"What is Progressive Rock?"

To be honest with you, I would stay away from that website's definition of the music. Theirs is becoming an academic definition that is senseless and only 3 bands fit the mold, which is the excuse for them to say that KC/ELP/Genesis are the progressive bands and the rest is not and then create sub-divisions to make room for everyone else.
 
There is no care to understand and see, that these scenes existed in orhter places in the world. So by their definition, LA, SF, NY, Munich, Paris, Rio ... no other place in the world can have, or be "progressive" and there are many bands that went on to do a hell of a lot more -- and way better -- than those bands in London, that pretty much became media and hit music darlings for the record companies, although Robert Fripp revolted really hard.
 
Progressive has become a term to simply tell you ... longer cut, louder, noisier, more effects, and wierd lyrics, or strange sounds! And making sure they use the "loudness" techniques (DT), and so on ... and has very little to do with "progressive" any more than it does the Friday Night Lounge Lizard favorites that we love to listen to.
 
PA thinks that because Neil Peart read Ayn Rand that the music they put together is "progressive" ... but seeing someone use Burroughs on stage with his real voice (Lori Anderson) as lyrics ... is NOT progressive ... which kinda tells you how much music those folks listend to ... only the hits! ... sorry ... not qualified!

To be honest with you, I would stay away from that website's definition of the music. 

i just threw it out there for conversation's sake.

i don't care for labels at all.




to me, progressive, simply means arrangements and playing that stand out against 'standard' commercial music.


that covers a LOT of ground.


i laugh at a lot of folk's ideas of what 'progressive' means..


but when it comes to standard rock and jazz, and the more well known groups that have forged new ground during a time of development, it's fairly easy to document.

trimph1


mmmm...Hawkwind, Gong, Magma, Anekdoten, Yes, Gentle Giant, Van Der Graaf Generator, Triumverat, Genesis, Ozric Tentacles, Porcupine Tree, Arthur Brown's Kingdom Come, Ramses, Le Orme....sheeesh, I give up...

Over 3,000 albums here...and I ain't hunting them out'n this collection.... 

I'm reawakening this thread, not only because it contains a lot of really good content, but also because I'm creating a database of music that I either have or want to check out ('cause I'm a nerd).  I've added so many good choices from these threads, but I had a question for trimph1:
 
"With that many albums, how do YOU organize the lot?"
 
Now, I'm not looking to start the whole genre/subgenre can of worms, but I am trying to figure out how to make groups and subgroups (with labels) that make some sense.  So, in that frame of reference, I'm curious to see how others with large collections do it!

After a while Prog rock had just come full circle and they were beating the same horse with a different stick. I'll always be a fan but sometimes you just have to give it a break.

Actually, the way I have mine is just by artist name. Whether they end up in chronological order is completely a different matter..

If you were really prog you'd order them by something like album length, or average track length, or the amount of cyan ink used in the cover art...

OR BY HOW MANY UNICORNS OR BARBARIANS THERE ARE ON THE COVER

trimph1


Actually, the way I have mine is just by artist name. Whether they end up in chronological order is completely a different matter..

Hmm...  All I can say is if you have as many different genres as I do, "shuffle play" could get very interesting!

My albums are organized by what girl I was dating when I bought the LP

No it's just easier to keep things alphabetical.