• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

How are Pink Floyd considered PROG rock?

#143
inthevelvet said:
Agree. Plus depends when you grew up and probably where to a degree. To me, Rush, Genesis, and Dream Theater are the first 3 bands that come to mind when I think of “prog”.
Click to expand...

And Rush wasn't even in the ballpark when Genesis and Yes were in their heyday. To me they were Canada's Yes clones who managed to make it on the benefit of their own talents, despite borrowing heavily from that sound.

Not disparaging them in any way other than to recognize that they were absolutely not part of the first wave of progressive music and were inspired by what came earlier, as were many other bands. But they are certainly not what comes top of mind to me when I think of prog.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sid Fang, Kickass, Durham52 and 3 others
#150
MidnightRunner said:
I think one of the reasons why Pink Floyd cannot be prog is that they have a mass appeal and they had a huge mainstream success (the run of albums DSOTM - The Wall), in fact they're among the biggest rock bands in general. So how are they PROG? Prog is supposed to be 'niche' music (or in other words, music not for the masses) and PF played stadiums.

Also PF lack virtuoso instrumental playing, they have no odd time signatures in their songs and they don't have complex compositions and arrangements and their music is not influenced by classical or jazz music.

What would you say? Why are they considered prog?
Click to expand...
I dont associate prog with being unpopular. Don’t really see where that mindset comes from? Because it’s not on corporate radio? Worldwide some of the most popular bands are actually prog bands. Bands like Dream theatre (love them or hate them) for example who I definitely consider prog can go anywhere in the world; Europe, Asia, South America, you name it and they sell out the biggest venues everywhere and have done so for decades. I’d definitely say Pink Floyd was prog at the the time they did albums like Dark side of the moon. Especially considering the other music of that time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mickey666, DJ Bebop, Iristone and 1 other person
#151
LBS-bass said:
That is because most people only know the Phil Collins fronted era of Genesis, which was massively commercial.
Click to expand...
Or more precisely, the hit singles during that era which didn't showcase their prog sensibility (but otherwise they probably wouldn't have become hit singles).
Being a King Crimson fan in the beginning, when I first listened to Abacab I thought, 'Isn't that Discipline? The songs are woven of arpeggios!'
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJ Bebop and LBS-bass
#152
GeorgesEric said:
When I grew up, what we called progressive rock was the stuff from Gentle Giant, Morse Code, Genesis w/t Peter Gabriel, Yes, to name a few. The 1970-75 era with 5-6 members in a band, lots of synths, Rickenbacker basses, virtuosos, intense arrangements, sophisticated story telling, long songs with various sections, served in often very cool albums art.

That’s what we called progressive rock.

Come to think of it, we did not label much when listening to music aside from that progressive stuff.

Basically the stuff we enjoyed listening but couldn’t play with our music buddies. Rush, Pink Floyd, Zep’s Achille’s Last Stand, that was doable to the extent of our limited skills, the progressive rock was not.
Click to expand...
Wow, Morse Code. I have an LP from them here…
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mickey666 and DJ Bebop
#155
D.A.R.K. said:
Couldn't be arsed to read through, but "Money" is in 5/4 (except during the lead section). You can argue genre labels all day, but we know of "prog" (progressive) as one because of massively popular bands.
Click to expand...
7/4…

Anyways, here in Québec, we had Contraction, Octobre, Harmonium and Morse Code. Four different styles categorized nowadays as « prog ». It was only pretty good music with a lot of Jazz/classical/fusion elements and a lot of virtuosity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: D.A.R.K. and DJ Bebop
#157
2112 said:
I'm not much on black & white labels in music, clearly there is overlap and evolution everywhere we look... But to the OP's and others' points:

1. Lack of popularity or not being "mainstream" is not a requirement for music to be considered prog rock. It's more that most prog rock is not very popular or mainstream because people don't like it.

2. David Gilmour is most certainly a virtuoso, IMHO. Virtuosity ain't all about cramming as many notes into a given space. And even those that can aren't necessity virtuosos.

3. The early PF stuff was definitely prog and psychedelic. And most certainly not mainstream. I don't think I've ever heard Astronomy Domine on the ol' transistor.

4. Not all prog involves weird time signatures, ridiculous lyrics, or overly complex arrangements. And not all music that involves weird time signatures, ridiculous lyrics, or overly complex arrangements is prog.

5. Music evolves, even with the same musicians. Today's prog isn't the same yesterday's prog. And musicians that once made music that could be considered prog may eventually come to write less proggy stuff... and vice-versa.

Now... its time for me to go get my geek on with some Starcastle. :bassist:
Click to expand...



Please give me one Starcastle song to start on, heard about them for years.

I'm a massive YES fan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2112 and DJ Bebop
#158
5StringBlues said:
So, how 'bout those rainbow suspenders?

Pretty cool way to hold up your pants! :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
saqgsgijzox85b4y1gdu.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5StringBlues

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back