ARENA
Mark
To anyone reading this newsgroup and unaware of the release of the new
ARENA album 'PRIDE', I'd like to tell that if you might happen to see
this album in your record store.....BUY IT!
This album is even better and more spun out (if you know what I mean)
than 'the lion's cage'.
As you will already know, the album is written by Mr. Mick Pointer
(ex-Marillion) and Mr. Clive Nolan (Pendragon, Shadowland, Casino,
Strangers on a train, No, Tracy Hitchings, The Thin ice Orchestra and
others). Including the new vocalist, this album is worth listening!
THanks for your attention!!
harmless
In article <325034...@sci.kun.nl>, Mark <mki...@sci.kun.nl> wrote:
>To anyone reading this newsgroup and unaware of the release of the new
>ARENA album 'PRIDE', I'd like to tell that if you might happen to see
>this album in your record store.....BUY IT!
>
If I decide not to buy this album, or god forbid, buy it and decide
I don't like it, am I performing a sacrilegious act upon the
church of neo-prog ?
For what its worth, although it was a decnt effort, I thought the frist
ARENA album was WAY over-hyped, and it seems like this one is getting
even more hype and bandwagon attention than the first one.
Am I the only one who is getting burnt out on the vast amount of
product that has been churned out by UK neo-prog. bands over
the course of the last couple of years ?
***************************************************************************
* -harmless- * "...no mainstream bore playing 13/4..." *
* bgr...@netcom.com * *
***************************************************************************
Jed Levin
harmless (bgr...@netcom.com) wrote:
: For what its worth, although it was a decnt effort, I thought the frist
: ARENA album was WAY over-hyped, and it seems like this one is getting
: even more hype and bandwagon attention than the first one.
: Am I the only one who is getting burnt out on the vast amount of
: product that has been churned out by UK neo-prog. bands over
: the course of the last couple of years ?
No, your not the only one, but to be fair, it's all Clive Nolan's fault!
:-) Seriously though, there's not too much English neoprog that I like,
though I do like the better offerings of it very well. I actually like
Songs from the Lion's Cage though, especially the song Solomon, which
while it's mentioned a lot by people, is definitely NOT overhyped. The
(old) singer's voice on that song is fantastic!
--Jed Levin
inf...@pacbell.net
Mark wrote:
>
> To anyone reading this newsgroup and unaware of the release of the new
> ARENA album 'PRIDE', I'd like to tell that if you might happen to see
> this album in your record store.....BUY IT!
>
> than 'the lion's cage'.
>
> As you will already know, the album is written by Mr. Mick Pointer
> (ex-Marillion) and Mr. Clive Nolan (Pendragon, Shadowland, Casino,
> Strangers on a train, No, Tracy Hitchings, The Thin ice Orchestra and
> others). Including the new vocalist, this album is worth listening!
>
CD I have autographed copies available while they last. I also handle
Shadowland "Mad As A Hatter" as well as all things 'Pendragon' (shirts'
posters and CDs) also I.Q. shirts and soon Arena tour shirts.
contact:'Pendragon Merchandising USA' at Fax#909-784-8625 or write to:
2805 Jane St. Riverside, CA. 92506 USA for merchandise list.
All The Best,
Dave Mulloy
Wurensh
<<Am I the only one who is getting burnt out on the vast amount of
product that has been churned out by UK neo-prog. bands over
the course of the last couple of years ?>>
Speak for yourself... actually, I'm getting pretty burnt out on the
"neo-prog" slams... although there's much music out there - I'll still
take the kick'n "neo-prog" over just about anything... (iQ, Grey Lady
Down, Hackett, Camel, Jadis, Collage). But I suppose you'll go off and
listen to Douche Ex Muckina.... (I know - I know)....
in other words, there are as many opinions out there as there are orfices
- it just is a question of what orfice the comment is coming out of.
BTW - I'll confer on the comments about Arena's 1st release... ho hum...
if I wanted Fish/Marillion, I would have purchased such.
Sorry for the comment - and sorry so many are so bitter about
"neo-prog"... like anyone who enjoys it has leprosy... Take two lumps and
call up something else in the morning.
:-PPPPPPPPPPPPP
ciao!
Hank
John
wur...@aol.com (Wurensh) wrote:
><<Am I the only one who is getting burnt out on the vast amount of
>product that has been churned out by UK neo-prog. bands over
>the course of the last couple of years ?>>
>Speak for yourself... actually, I'm getting pretty burnt out on the
>"neo-prog" slams... although there's much music out there - I'll still
>take the kick'n "neo-prog" over just about anything... (iQ, Grey Lady
>Down, Hackett, Camel, Jadis, Collage). But I suppose you'll go off and
>listen to Douche Ex Muckina.... (I know - I know)....
>in other words, there are as many opinions out there as there are orfices
>- it just is a question of what orfice the comment is coming out of.
....and I get totally fucking sick of all the high-brow criticism in
the prog world. If I hear the term "genesis clone" or "marillion
clone" one more time, I'm gonna start lopping off heads. Who the fuck
are we to criticize a band? They play what they play. Leave 'em alone.
So some bands have a sound that we call "neo-prog." Big fucking deal.
John Szpara
Exposure Radio Network
http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/1831
harmless
In article <52udc1$3...@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>,
John <expo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>....and I get totally fucking sick of all the high-brow criticism in
>the prog world. If I hear the term "genesis clone" or "marillion
>clone" one more time, I'm gonna start lopping off heads. Who the fuck
>are we to criticize a band? They play what they play. Leave 'em alone.
>
>So some bands have a sound that we call "neo-prog." Big fucking deal.
>
>
Well, that's an interesting point coming from you John. Wern't you
involved at one time with a magazine that specializes in reviews
of progressive rock albums. Are those reviews never negative or critical ?
Are you now telling me those reviewers don't have any rights to their
opions and "should have left those bands alone" ?
For what it's worth, Expose' is my favorite
magazine for prog album reviews, because the reviewers don't try to sweeten
up their opinions. They just tell it like it is. Certainly their
reviews at times have criticized albums and musicians of all sorts
of progressive genres.
Anyway, the original point of my post, was to rant about the bandwagon
technique of pushing a prog album out to us fans. It wasn't an attempt
to bash neo-prog, or any other genre. It is just my opinion
that a lot of product has come out of that genre recently; some
of it great, some of it fair, some of it terrible, and that there
seems to be a great urgency by some of these bands/artists/management
companies to push as much new material out, even when it is
substandard in originality or creativty. And there seems to be
an urgency among certain individuals to hype the shit out of
a new release because it's there pet band, and they can't fathom how anybody
COULDN'T like the album.
I have no opinions about the new Arena album yet because I havn't heard it.
All I know is based on their first album, which I think is good musically,
wonderfully produced, but terribly unoriginal (and the drumming is crap too
IMO). That album, much like the new one, seemed to get a number of
unsubstantiated reviews of greatness after it's release by simply
die-hard fans fans going on rave missions.
But I am wary of those that tell me to buy it because it's "great" and
so n' so plays on it, so I'm gonna love it, so don't worry, just give
us your money. A little bit more substantial information about the album
other than "Greatest Prog Album of all time" would certainly help
me make an informed decision.
I've bought a number of albums off pure hype alone and have learned
my lesson.
Now if you want to hear a really good album that I guarantee you'll
love....ahh, nevermind..
John
bgr...@netcom.com (harmless) wrote:
>In article <52udc1$3...@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>,
>John <expo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>....and I get totally fucking sick of all the high-brow criticism in
>>the prog world. If I hear the term "genesis clone" or "marillion
>>clone" one more time, I'm gonna start lopping off heads. Who the fuck
>>are we to criticize a band? They play what they play. Leave 'em alone.
>>
>>So some bands have a sound that we call "neo-prog." Big fucking deal.
>>
>>
>Well, that's an interesting point coming from you John. Wern't you
>involved at one time with a magazine that specializes in reviews
>of progressive rock albums. Are those reviews never negative or critical ?
>Are you now telling me those reviewers don't have any rights to their
>opions and "should have left those bands alone" ?
In all the time I've been associated with the newsletter, how many
reviews have you seen me write? The answer is 2 or 3.
>For what it's worth, Expose' is my favorite
>magazine for prog album reviews, because the reviewers don't try to sweeten
>up their opinions. They just tell it like it is. Certainly their
>reviews at times have criticized albums and musicians of all sorts
>of progressive genres.
The upside is that it is critical when it needs to be. The downside is
that I get sick of hearing how goddamn critical *everyone* in prog can
be. Like spoiled children.
>Anyway, the original point of my post, was to rant about the bandwagon
>technique of pushing a prog album out to us fans. It wasn't an attempt
>to bash neo-prog, or any other genre. It is just my opinion
>that a lot of product has come out of that genre recently; some
>of it great, some of it fair, some of it terrible, and that there
>seems to be a great urgency by some of these bands/artists/management
>companies to push as much new material out, even when it is
>substandard in originality or creativty. And there seems to be
>an urgency among certain individuals to hype the shit out of
>a new release because it's there pet band, and they can't fathom how anybody
>COULDN'T like the album.
It isn't directed at you, specifically. I'm just finding it very
difficult to serve the prog market and help it grow. Noone is ever
happy.
>I have no opinions about the new Arena album yet because I havn't heard it.
>All I know is based on their first album, which I think is good musically,
>wonderfully produced, but terribly unoriginal (and the drumming is crap too
>IMO). That album, much like the new one, seemed to get a number of
>unsubstantiated reviews of greatness after it's release by simply
>die-hard fans fans going on rave missions.
>But I am wary of those that tell me to buy it because it's "great" and
>so n' so plays on it, so I'm gonna love it, so don't worry, just give
>us your money. A little bit more substantial information about the album
>other than "Greatest Prog Album of all time" would certainly help
>me make an informed decision.
>I've bought a number of albums off pure hype alone and have learned
>my lesson.
That's why I created the radio show, and was hoping to reach people.
If I can *play* it for you, then you can use your own ears, rather
than someone else's. It is becoming appearent that I won't be able to
reach very many people with the radio show. The way things are going,
I'm ready to pack it in.
Michael Borella
In article <52vi5l$l...@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com>,
John <expo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>The upside is that it is critical when it needs to be. The downside is
>that I get sick of hearing how goddamn critical *everyone* in prog can
>be. Like spoiled children.
Not to play devil's advocate, but in a way it is refreshing to hear
people being critical for a change. The average person is (IMHO)
too ready to accept whatever is filtered to them by the mass media
as "good" or "relevant" or whatever. To a certain extent the
quality of a product is determined by its advertising campaign.
>It isn't directed at you, specifically. I'm just finding it very
>difficult to serve the prog market and help it grow. Noone is ever
>happy.
And they never will be. Its like trying to please a roomful of
perfectionists all with diffierent opinions. Remember than discussion
we had 3.5 years ago? I'm still amazed you managed to get something
on the ait in more than 3 places.
I'm tempted to say that good music follows a twisted application of
Zipf's law: quality and popularity are inversely proportional...but
that means you'll never have a popular show if you do it right
...and is probably an oversimplification.
-Mike
John
>Not to play devil's advocate, but in a way it is refreshing to hear
>people being critical for a change. The average person is (IMHO)
>too ready to accept whatever is filtered to them by the mass media
>as "good" or "relevant" or whatever. To a certain extent the
>quality of a product is determined by its advertising campaign.
That is absolutely true of the mainstream. I guess I was hoping the
proggers would be more open minded and tolerant. Isn't what led them
to prog in the first place?
>>It isn't directed at you, specifically. I'm just finding it very
>>difficult to serve the prog market and help it grow. Noone is ever
>>happy.
>And they never will be. Its like trying to please a roomful of
>perfectionists all with diffierent opinions. Remember than discussion
>we had 3.5 years ago? I'm still amazed you managed to get something
>on the ait in more than 3 places.
Of course. Room #(whatever) at the Hollywood Dive Hotel (whatever the
name). It was skepticism from people like you that made me hone my
approach, fine tune it. Ah, Progfest 93, the memories...
These days, I'm only going after places that I *know* have some sort
of prog following. It's the only way I can do this without spending a
fortune.
>I'm tempted to say that good music follows a twisted application of
>Zipf's law: quality and popularity are inversely proportional...but
>that means you'll never have a popular show if you do it right
>...and is probably an oversimplification.
Yeah, I suppose that bringing quality to the masses is as ill-advised
as giving pearls to swine. I guess I just expected more from proggers.
Was I wrong?
The Lighthouse Keeper
John (expo...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: ....and I get totally fucking sick of all the high-brow criticism in
: the prog world. If I hear the term "genesis clone" or "marillion
: clone" one more time, I'm gonna start lopping off heads.
Saying a band is a Genesis Clone or Marillion clone is not necessarily
criticism, unless you choose to take it that way. It's simply a means
of describing the music via comparison. Agreed that one may take that
as meaning a band is maybe not as original as they could be, but then
maybe some people want that. IQ and Arena certainly sell a lot
of records compared to most other progressive bands.
: Who the fuck
: are we to criticize a band? They play what they play. Leave 'em alone.
Are we not allowed to describe their music in words, or in terms of
how they might sound similar to another band?
: So some bands have a sound that we call "neo-prog." Big fucking deal.
Well then what's wrong with saying so? Other bands have a sound we call
"zeuhl" and others have a sound we call "fusion" and others have a sound
we call "RIO". So what? Are we allowed to use those descriptors for
those artists, but not allowed to call a band "neo-prog" if indeed that
is what they are?
--
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Peter | ...and though the past has its share of injustice |
| pt...@netcom.com | kind was the spirit in many a way |
| Expose'Newsletter | but its protectors and friends have been sleeping |
| | now it's a monster and will not obey. |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Visit the Expose' Web Page at: |
| http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/1831/expo-nl.html |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
The Lighthouse Keeper
John (expo...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: That is absolutely true of the mainstream. I guess I was hoping the
: proggers would be more open minded and tolerant. Isn't what led them
: to prog in the first place?
To be open minded doesn't mean you have to flip over every goddam
piece of shit that comes out claiming to be 'progressive rock'. Like
any musical genre, some of the stuff is good, some is bad, some is
original, some is mere imitation. Most of us are musicians (or we
*think* we are, or *wish* we were), so it's understandable that we
might settle for nothing less than complete originality and superb
musicianship at every step of the process: the composition, the
arrangement, the playing and production.
The Lighthouse Keeper
Michael Borella (cath...@xnet.com) wrote:
: Not to play devil's advocate, but in a way it is refreshing to hear
: people being critical for a change. The average person is (IMHO)
: too ready to accept whatever is filtered to them by the mass media
: as "good" or "relevant" or whatever. To a certain extent the
: quality of a product is determined by its advertising campaign.
True only if one confuses quality with public acceptance, assuming
that because something is popular, then it *must* be quality. I Think
most people at our level can see right through this, which is why we
listen to this weird shit and not the more 'acceptable' music forms
that will be out of style three months from now.
: I'm tempted to say that good music follows a twisted application of
: Zipf's law: quality and popularity are inversely proportional...but
: that means you'll never have a popular show if you do it right
: ...and is probably an oversimplification.
But it's accurate enough of a generality to apply in most cases.
Popularity trends depend on response to marketing, whereas quality is
a far more personal concept based on discrimination and value judgement.
So they're not *really* inversely related, although an argument could
be made that it's easier to market something of dubious quality to
one who has a less developed sense of judgement and value.
James Alexander Chokey
In article <52udc1$3...@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>,
John <expo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>....and I get totally fucking sick of all the high-brow criticism in
>the prog world. If I hear the term "genesis clone" or "marillion
>are we to criticize a band?
Music-lovers who are capable of forming and voicing informed
opinions about the music we listen to. Would you rather that we
(whoever this "we" isn't entirely clear, but I presume that you mean
prog fans-- or perhaps those who read r.m.p.) suppress all of our
faculties of judgement when listening to, or talking about, this subgenre
of music called "prog"? Should we be empty-headed, closed-mouthed
drones void of opinions who refuse to make comparisons, judgements,
and assements of the music we listen to? Silent consumers who simply
accept everything that's put out there without making comparisons,
observations or judgements of taste; without noting trends or movements
within prog; or without expressing our own opinons about these bands
and trends?
-- Jim C.
==========================================================================
| James A. Chokey jch...@leland.stanford.edu |
| |
| The infinite, expressed finitely, is the essence of beauty |
| |
| --- Schelling |
==========================================================================
Adam Levin
On Wed, 2 Oct 1996, John wrote:
> ....and I get totally fucking sick of all the high-brow criticism in
> the prog world. If I hear the term "genesis clone" or "marillion
> clone" one more time, I'm gonna start lopping off heads. Who the fuck
> are we to criticize a band? They play what they play. Leave 'em alone.
You're absolutely right, John. Who are we to discuss progressive rock!
That's it, folks. No more criticizing, no more comparisons to other bands.
Let's just leave 'em alone. I guess it's time to close down
rec.music.progressive, because none of us are qualified to participate.
-Adam
---
"...if one strives at hearing for the sake of constant virtue,
out of seeking liberation from cyclic existence, gradually one
becomes a Hearer."
- Chandrakirti
Wurensh
ok... ok...
1st I'll say that I've made apology direct to "harmless"... just one of
those things - perceptions...
Scary when you're in an environment of "us and thems" that it can easily
carry over into other areas. So, I come home and kick the dog.
As for criticism... it's necessary - I too have been the subject of buying
"great" albums, only to find that they're nothing like what I expected, or
was lead to believe. Also finding that most descriptions making one band
analagous to another is usual incorrect - distant at best.
Shit - I even like John Denver, so go figure.
ciao!
Hank
Wurensh
In article <ptlkDyq...@netcom.com>, pt...@netcom.com (The Lighthouse
Keeper) writes:
>Are we allowed to use those descriptors for
>those artists, but not allowed to call a band "neo-prog" if indeed that
>is what they are?
Hey - I've got no problem taking a label such as "neo-prog" for the type
of music I like to listen to (at least for the most part), but I also
enjoy "fusion", "new age", "classic rock"... etc...etc... But, back to
the original point that I brought up, albeit inappropriately slashing at a
single "harmless" individual ;-) , the problem is with those folk (and
you know they exist) who not only feel but are very vocal about their
feeling that neo-proggers *do* have leprosy. One can call a spade a
spade, but don't discriminate against one who enjoys spades... that's all.
(Interesting discussions, I might add!)
ciao!
Hank
Miciah
>: So some bands have a sound that we call "neo-prog." Big fucking deal.
>
>Well then what's wrong with saying so? Other bands have a sound we call
>"zeuhl" and others have a sound we call "fusion" and others have a sound
>those artists, but not allowed to call a band "neo-prog" if indeed that
>is what they are?
I think that what is being left out of this is the negative slant that the
term Neo-Prog carries with it. And this has nothing to do with the music,
it has to do with the language.
The general kind of music we are discussing is "progressive rock."
Neo-progressive is a sub-genre of progressive like zeuhl or fusion. But a
term like "neo-prog," where you take the major category and then put the
word "neo" in front of it, infers that the music in that category is not a
legitimate style and automatically does the music a disservice. The name
is intrinsically insulting to the music it categorizes. The labels
zeuhl, rio and fusion do not bear this burden because they're not "neo"
anything.
What we need is different label for neo-progressive - one that does not
sound like an automatic slam to the listeners who enjoy this form of
music.
> Most of us are musicians (or we
>*think* we are, or *wish* we were), so it's understandable that we
>might settle for nothing less than complete originality and superb
>musicianship at every step of the process: the composition, the
>arrangement, the playing and production.
I've never understood why there is the misconception that the people who
listen to prog are mainly musicians. I even remember a post where it was
stated, as a fact, that the people who read rec.mucic.progressive were ALL
musicians.
I am not a musician. 90% of the people I've known over the last 25 years
who have listened to, or are still listening to, progressive music are NOT
musicians. The vast majority of the people whom I have met or
corresponded with who read this newsgroup are NOT musicians. Most of the
people I've spoken with at the various prog concerts I've attended are NOT
musicians.
Where does this come from?
Cheers,
Miciah
Richard Barnes
In article <5376pu$i...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, Miciah <mic...@aol.com>
writes
>The general kind of music we are discussing is "progressive rock."
>Neo-progressive is a sub-genre of progressive like zeuhl or fusion. But a
>term like "neo-prog," where you take the major category and then put the
>word "neo" in front of it, infers that the music in that category is not a
>legitimate style and automatically does the music a disservice. The name
>is intrinsically insulting to the music it categorizes. The labels
>zeuhl, rio and fusion do not bear this burden because they're not "neo"
>anything.
>
>What we need is different label for neo-progressive - one that does not
>sound like an automatic slam to the listeners who enjoy this form of
>music.
The term neo when used in the context of pre-existing styles merely
means that it seeks to emulate them. E.g. One encyclopedia definition
of neo-classical is:-
'Movement in art, architecture, and design in Europe and North America
about 1750-1850, characterized by a revival of Classical Greek and Roman
styles. Leading figures of the movement were the architects Claude-
Nicolas Ledoux and Robert Adam; the painters Jacques-Louis David, Jean
Ingres, and Anton Mengs; the sculptors Antonio Canova, John Flaxman,
Bertel Thorvaldsen, and Johann Sergel; and the designers Josiah
Wedgwood, George Hepplewhite, and Thomas Sheraton. Neo-Classicism
superseded the Rococo style and was inspired both by the excavation of
the Roman towns of Pompeii and Herculaneum and by the theories of the
cultural studies of the German art historian Johann J Winckelmann (which
revived Greek styles). Winckelmann identified the most important
elements of Classical art as being `noble simplicity and calm grandeur'.
Neo-Classical artists sought to capture these qualities by conscious
emulation of Classical styles and subject matter. They took themes from
Homer and Plutarch and were influenced by John Flaxman's austere linear
illustrations for the Iliad and Odyssey.'
I think a similar type of explanation could be given for neo-prog - one
can hardly deny their influences lie in music from the early 70s. I
fail to see why it should be considered an insult at all.
RIO and Fusion on the other hand sought to change styles or create new
ones which neo-prog has never pretended to do; being an emulation of an
earlier style, 'neo-prog' is quite rightly so titled IMO.
--
Richard Barnes (ric...@sandyrig.demon.co.uk)
"Close to the Edge"
Richard Barnes
>
>....and I get totally fucking sick of all the high-brow criticism in
>the prog world. If I hear the term "genesis clone" or "marillion
>clone" one more time, I'm gonna start lopping off heads.
>Who the fuck
>are we to criticize a band?
Customers actually - the next time you buy a car that doesn't work, I'm
sure you won't mind the dealer telling you to 'fuck off - who are you to
criticise when you can't make a car yourself?'
>They play what they play. Leave 'em alone.
>
>So some bands have a sound that we call "neo-prog." Big fucking deal.
>
Take a pill bozo
>
>John Szpara
>Exposure Radio Network
>http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/1831
>
--
John
> Music-lovers who are capable of forming and voicing informed
>opinions about the music we listen to. Would you rather that we
>(whoever this "we" isn't entirely clear, but I presume that you mean
>prog fans-- or perhaps those who read r.m.p.) suppress all of our
>faculties of judgement when listening to, or talking about, this subgenre
>of music called "prog"? Should we be empty-headed, closed-mouthed
>drones void of opinions who refuse to make comparisons, judgements,
>and assements of the music we listen to? Silent consumers who simply
>accept everything that's put out there without making comparisons,
>observations or judgements of taste; without noting trends or movements
>within prog; or without expressing our own opinons about these bands
>and trends?
I'm all for expressing opinions, but I've been around enough proggers,
coast to coast, festival to festival and on the net, to have formed my
own opinion (about them). There seems to be this perfectionist,
elitist attitude. One needs an open mind to come to prog, and it seems
like minds quickly close again once a progger finds what they are
looking for. Not necessarily a problem, until the comments become
derisive, which I see and hear (what I feel to be) too often.
It is possible to say "I don't like this" without making needlessly
cutting remarks. Speak with sensitivity, guys. Those musicans are
people, too.
The Lighthouse Keeper
Miciah (mic...@aol.com) wrote:
: I think that what is being left out of this is the negative slant that the
: term Neo-Prog carries with it. And this has nothing to do with the music,
: it has to do with the language.
: The general kind of music we are discussing is "progressive rock."
: Neo-progressive is a sub-genre of progressive like zeuhl or fusion. But a
: term like "neo-prog," where you take the major category and then put the
: word "neo" in front of it, infers that the music in that category is not a
: legitimate style and automatically does the music a disservice. The name
: is intrinsically insulting to the music it categorizes. The labels
: zeuhl, rio and fusion do not bear this burden because they're not "neo"
: anything.
I don't buy this. Just take neo-classical music for example, the prefix
neo- anything just means "new or recent" (according to webster), neo-psych
the same, and neo-prog is no different really, it's "new or recent" prog,
nothing insulting about that in and of itself.
Perhaps why artists don't like being called neo-prog is because so much
of this stuff is watered down, shallow, and transparently derivative.
But there is good neo-prog out there, don't get me wrong; unfortunately
the standard bearers of the movement are mostly the former.
John
>I don't buy this. Just take neo-classical music for example, the prefix
>neo- anything just means "new or recent" (according to webster), neo-psych
>the same, and neo-prog is no different really, it's "new or recent" prog,
>nothing insulting about that in and of itself.
>Perhaps why artists don't like being called neo-prog is because so much
>of this stuff is watered down, shallow, and transparently derivative.
>But there is good neo-prog out there, don't get me wrong; unfortunately
>the standard bearers of the movement are mostly the former.
I think 'neo-prog' has a bad connotation because of comments like the
above. That subgenre has been described by enough proggers in terms
like the ones you just used. And you wonder why it has an intrinsic,
negative connotation?
It's a mindset that one bad apple ruins the whole bunch, or the
exception negating the rule.
Tore Johnsen
>I don't buy this. Just take neo-classical music for example, the prefix
>neo- anything just means "new or recent" (according to webster), neo-psych
>the same, and neo-prog is no different really, it's "new or recent" prog,
>nothing insulting about that in and of itself.
the term neo hould be used about music that enhances and develops a style
(like neo-impressionism was a "more extreme" form of impressionism art)
the term Neo implies development, so it's highly misleading since most
""Neo""
progressive music seems to come out of the fact that Genesis went commercial
and thereby left their niche open for less talented bands.
Tore