• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Why did prog rock never have mass popularity?

upload_2022-12-12_10-57-45.png
 
I put Hawkwind in with other space rock bands of the early 70's: Pink Fairies, early UFO, Stray, and the like.

Hmm, Rush did Swords and Sorcery AND stuff about space probes so now I'm very confused. To me if there's an associated role playing meme (D&D, Traveller) it's prog. Although I don't remember many role playing games about child poets, so now I don't know how to classify Jethro Tull, nor one about being a bridge in Newcastle.
 
Was it really even shorter lived than any other genre? People can talk about the old "GRUNGE KILLED HAIR METAL!" trope, but "grunge" (as either a genre or a marketing term) was really only the big deal for 3 or so years before music moved on, like it always does.
Grunge didn't kill it, I'm pretty sure Hair Metal immolated from all that hair spray.
 
Was it really even shorter lived than any other genre? People can talk about the old "GRUNGE KILLED HAIR METAL!" trope, but "grunge" (as either a genre or a marketing term) was really only the big deal for 3 or so years before music moved on, like it always does.
That's a great point. "Grunge" was extremely popular, the mainstream at one point, and while some of those bands managed to extend their lifespans way beyond the first few years of the subgenre's heyday due to being critically as well as commercially successful, or changing their sound a bit, they also managed to blend in with the next pop/rock music phase (until breaking up or losing members to death!).

The next phase in pop music, I think, was a more inclusive one in which pop, rock, metal, R & B, funk, electronica, and hip-hop all seemed to co-exist, and even that 70s subgenre of glam rock made an appearance.
So, if we're going by # of years, Prog Rock had a heyday that was just as long as other sub-genres.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Harper
Same here. The first time I heard Rush I was completely mesmerised by their sound. A buddy of mine was into Rush and let me listen to a few of their songs from the Moving Pictures album. The thing that immediately came to mind was that their music had a futuristic vibe to it.

Moving Pictures was a quite accessible material to a wider audience. But Hemispheres on the other hand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neil Folkard
...By 1980, prog became pop-ish, tighter, and more processed - or it faded out, looking rather silly, and self-absorbed (not like us!). "Owner of a Lonely Heart," "Tom Sawyer," "Abacab," "Heat of the Moment," "Neal and Jack and Me" (not a hit), became the sound of prog. Some of it danceable, some of it sorta about girls, some of it under 4 minutes, and catchy. So prog was still there, but it wasn't your father's prog, it wasn't extended organ solos, a section of Hymalayan bells and rare prayer cymbals with accompanying Tibetan chants, or the usual multi-layered guitar solo anthems, jarring time changes or the fun of adding an extra eighth note the 3rd time through for the hell of it - but it was prog, sorta....

And as that happened, a whole new neo-prog thing happened, at least in the UK. It didn't last long, but some of those bands are still going. Marillion was the big one that broke away and had mainstream success, but there was Twelfth Night, Pendragon, The Enid, IQ, Pallas. If you like classic prog and haven't heard those, have a listen you might like them. Last I looked, Twelfth Night are still going as are IQ.

Post-punk, prog was always a bit of an anorak throwback I suppose. Introspective earnest young (mostly) men. Some great music though, and neo prog was much more working class than the public school/art school rugby jersey vibe of your Genesis era. Less fairies and elves, more songs about terrorist bombings in Northern Ireland, unemployment, war, serial killers (they jut put a nasty one away in the UK in the early 80s), and as a nod to the rise of neoliberalism at the time, Orwell.

I was at the Reading Festival in 1983, and the lineup had a lot of prog bands. Marillion headlined one of the nights.




 
  • Like
Reactions: -Asdfgh- and rtav
That's the joke. They don't constitute "the people" in any way, shape, or form.
That wasn't one of my reasons.

1. the mathematical exactness expresses too much scientific cred.
2. although I might say this (as I've certainly quoted the 80-20% rule), it feels arrogant, so I want to add a little obvious error (humility) into the expression.
3. I feel that people who say this kind of thing (me included along with another 80% of the population) need an escape route so that we don't have to acknowledge the facts (which bucket we actually fit into).
4. I've heard it said that engineers (certainly smart and thoughtful) are the most gullible to financial fraud because they believe they know everything, or can know everything with a minimal effort (e.g. don't know their limits). So the ability to think is often limited to certain realms.

I hadn't articulated all that to myself when posting, but I think that's the gist of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mickey666
I felt the same about Pink Floyd for a long time. Compared to Gentle Giant or Yes' mid 70s stuff, a lot of their music seems pretty simplistic, compositionally and technically, on the surface.

But then I made up my mind that Prog Rock was more than being a virtuoso and playing 20 minute songs with odd time signatures. It was also about, you know, being "progressive", coming up with new sounds and ideas, and thinking outside the box as far as what the majority of your contemporaries are doing. Experimenting.

That's what the Beatles did with Sgt. Pepper and The White album. That's what Radiohead has done since their 3rd album. And that's what Floyd did on Dark Side to the Moon (and on their earlier albums). You can listen to that album today, and it sounds like it could have just been released. And there is a sophistication to DSotM that takes a bunch of listens to truly appreciate.

(To be fair, 1971's Meddle, the album before DSotM, had a 23 minute long song that was without question, prog. Animals is also pretty proggy, though I never cared for the sound of that album so never listened to it much; the newly reissued remix could change that).

I think with Floyd, the reality is that space rock/psychedelia and Prog are super super close genres. Pepper is a great example as it tends to be categorized as psychedelic rock.

Those genres aren’t different factually in many regards. Psychedelic drugs were supposed to be mind expanding. Psychedelic music therefore is best categorized as music that is mind expanding and/or is music best enjoyed while on psychedelics.

Prog is often mind expanding and a lot of people listen to it while blasted out of their gourds.

l’d argue the main factual delimiters are playing ability. But one could argue that era is also important.

Regardless, while I’ll agree that Pepper could be categorized as prog, it isn’t by the majority of listeners.

Personally, I feel like even stuff like Echoes, is more psychedelia than prog. Factually speaking, Floyd came out of the psychedelic movement. They did not form with the intent of making progressive music, in terms of like, you know, actual musical complexity. Unlike say Crimson, or Yes, or ELP, who all did.

Floyd imo is a psychedelic band that matured their production and synth programming abilities to a point where their music didn’t sound like psychedelic music anymore. Unlike many other proponents of the genre, they didn’t partake themselves, and were able to create professional sounding music.

As is, I don’t really think many sounds used by Floyd in DSoTM are that novel. They didn’t really think outside of the box as much as they kinda just used the same period gear, like synths, that their contemporaries did. But unlike their contemporaries their lack of virtuosity forced them to use those synths for atmosphere and texture, instead of playing like actual notes in the way Emerson did.

But yeah. I think they’re factually more of a psychedelic band that grew up, and was lumped in with a similar sounding genre by a mistake of categorization.
 
I never understood or appreciated the need to fit every piece of music into a category.
At least not from the perspective of a listener.
It serves no useful purpose, other than possibly what section to look for it in a record store.
But they don't have those anymore, so it's even less useful now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeff Scott