I must admit, when I first posted this, I knew very little about prog-rock..Now I know that only two of Jethro Tull's album can be considered prog, and ELO is very far from progressive. I now know many other bands that should be on this list like Emerson, Lake & Palmer, King Crimson, Gentle Giant, Babe Ruth, etc..So, when I posted this, I was very naive of progressive rock, but now I know what it's all about
It's all right. It took me quite a while to figure out what Progressive Rock even loosely implied, and that was a year into my minor in composition, which might be quite sad, if I thought about it too hard. In truth, nearly any style of Jazz with the exception of early swing, with their elements, could be considered "Progressive", if they didn't already have a label, and, in fact, many critics called the '90s Acid Jazz and 'Avant Garde' Jazz "progressive Jazz". It's all quite contrived, The New Yorker kind of pseudo-intellectual bullshit. It is somewhat important, though, to understand what compositional techniques are implied when speaking loosely of progressive rock. In other words, calling The Verve or Blur or some such music progressive anything would sound quite strange in a discussion and could very well find you on the receiving end of the incidental goo of a music elitist's intellectual masturbation session, which is quite the traumatizing experience...or...so I'm told.
Yeah, it does seem a bit like it might as well be pluralism, but the guy probably did it unintentionally, and this poll had been made in good fun. The minimum, I think, for this style of poll, should be 10 or so bands.
Top 5 in no order: 1)Yes 2)Rush 3)Dream Theater (it's so much more prog than metal if you play an instrument and know what you're talking about.) 4)King Crimson 5)Umphrey's McGee
Well, it was for progressive rock and not metal and therefore Umphrey's and Dream Theater would have to be relegated to a "Top 5 Best Prog-Metal Bands". After seeing their live show, I would have to definitely say there's less rock about Umphrey's than there is metal. It's pretty heavy and it's like watching a cheesier, heavier '70s incarnation of Pink Floyd (although they're good, even given my connotation of indignance about them). My top 5 would be similar to yours, though. I'd take out King Crimson because the only good thing about them to me is the lyrics of Fripp and the rest is rather boring to me. Jon's Top 5: Yes Emerson, Lake & Palmer (if you've heard Tarkus or Tocatta you've heard early progressive rock in all its rapturous, experimental glory) Frank Zappa & the M.o.I Rush Genesis (Gabriel/Hackett Genesis is best) So, Zappa is not considered progressive by most, but the typical progressive structures exist, short of epic, conceptual lyrics that are allegorical and imbue some deeper meaning (most of his were goofy and/or hilarious). The coolest part of it, though, was that the composition, when broken down, is incredibly intricate for a lot of it, but juxtaposed you have lyrics that don't take themselves too seriously at all. Yes is first for many, and first for me because the vocal harmonies are that of early C.S.N. when they were really putting out amazing vocal material, the guitar work is jagged and asymmetrical (although amazingly at times strictly traditional classical in its performance technique), the bass lines are like that of post-Bela Fleck Wooten and the synth work of Wakeman is nearly as stunning as Keith Emerson's. My only problem with Yes is that a lot of the lyrics seem to be either going nowhere/mean nothing or are simply too basic to really captivate me entirely. The over-all intensity of the band's composition make up for it, though, and excellent vocals hide the fact that half the time nothing of a lot of real substance is truly being said. Either that or some of the rhetorical device's purpose in the context of the song is beyond me and maybe some of the lyrical material is too visceral and spread out too thin, with phrases too few, over the idea to truly make a lot of sense to anyone but the writer.
Has no-one said Mars Volta - I know they're new but that's the point with progressive music. It's a whole new level, absolutely amazing. Also Pink Floyd and King Crimson - the guy who used to play violin with them played in a jazz band with my dad for years.
-not many people have said camel, I will add them -same with van der graaf generator -I will take one of the four, pink floyd -I will add a rare one but a gem, FOCUS. never mind hocus pocus either, they have even better songs a great band! -anyone who thinks prog is largely based on classical has not heard Mahavishnu Orchestra, yes some classical influences, but they prove that jazz is ALSO a key ingredigient to prog...heard of fusion? defiantly a sub genre of prog as well as jazz. Triumvirat is better than ELP .
I cant give a top 5 lol but top 5 from from C ahahahah Caravan Camel Colosseum Cressida and urm.... Conexion - Harmony
I don't really believe that it is the complexity which makes the band progressive, I don't think its fair to disregard them from the genre just because they're minimalists. Sure, they lack virtuosic playing but that's not really what their music was about, it wouldnt work that way. They admittedly have a poppy quality to much of their music, the re Listen to Darkside of the Moon or some of their other albums as just one long, epic song, that's why I consider them progressive. Many of their songs don't stand alone as well as they do blended with the ones they were meant to be played with. That said, I will admit that Floyd's lyrics(which usually aren't a very big deal to me) and conceptual aspects are an incredible asset to their quality, and if it was simply their music without the themes and dramatization I probably wouldn't like them as much, even though they are my favorite band. I don't see how Aqualung can be any more progressive than Darkside.
Is Pink Floyd Progressive Metal or Psychedelic rock??I always wanted to know but I never got an answer..