Well, anyone who hasn't taken the time to explore every single nook and cranny of these bands' long careers is probably going to come across as somewhat dismissive, but I've already admitted than I'm generalizing based on limited knowledge (only owning one album by each of those bands, but having heard a fair amount more than just that).

Anyway, simplistic generalizations don't apply to Can any more than they do to those other groups as they also went through different periods and line up changes and did put out some total crap late in their career.

Threads like this are always loaded with condescension, but you can't pin it all on me.

This is obviously sheer nonsense, Radcliffe.

Actually I buy this over anything else, so far. What's "progressive" about getting back to your roots?

Oh I don't really care for the term itself either, but the second half of his statement starting with "made by bozos" could be reconfigured only slightly to describe literally any set of bands from any genre of music.

1. Classical music is not the "roots" of rock. It may, however, have been the roots of some of the classically trained musicians who formed prog bands. Either way, mixing rock with classical wasn't "going back" to anyone's roots. It was creating a new combination, no matter how dubious it may be.

2. Radcliffe's conjecture as to the motives of everyone involved in prog rock trying to bring it closer to an "established yardstick of musical excellence" is in no way a reasonable statement. There were a lot of people coming at making rock music from a variety of different angles, and prog was composed of a lot of musicians that were more interested a different form or rock rather than just more aping of the blues and Chuck Berry.

I'm sympathetic with a lot of the motives and the spirit of exploration behind prog, just not a whole lot of the results.

I love Prague. Mom and I are going there for Christmas this year.

<--- voted "love some / hate some"

I can take some prog...but when it gets too theatrical or consists of too many "extremely proficient but emotionless guitar solos," I tend to cringe more than appreciate.

When Miles started to breakdown the chord structure of bebop, and extend his lines against modal settings... in some respects this was taking Jazz closer to classical or "serious" music. Was this progressive? Was this attempting to make bepop easier to measure against some established standards and in this sense reactionary or retrogressive?

Good to see music discussed on Obner. Almost feels like the old CMJ days.

I'd rather eat soup made of hair clippings swept from a barber's floor in a broth of that diarrhea that feels like you are peeing out of your butt (with a few pebbles thrown in to break up the flow) than listen to prog.

Hmm. I take that back about CMJ

And I thought the only controversial Genesis was the first book of the bible.

I am a big fan of Can, Neu! and basically most of the European prog bands similar to them. I have never been a huge Dream Theater fan nor do I consider myself a prog rock connoisseur, but I don't hate it.

For me, prog has just been laying a bit dormant for a few years. Just recently have I dipped my toe back into the pool, and have ventured a little further out. I've always been a fan of Genesis/Gabriel from when my dad used to blast it in the car. In high school and college it became a bit distanced with me, although I did listen to Floyd, Gentle Giant, early Genesis & Van Der Graaf Generator. Kraut Rock while in the same ocean I didn't feel was in the same boat. Why? I have no idea. I idolized Faust for about a year.

This past year I've gotten into Porcupine Tree, who I really like. I even tried Coheed and Cambria. The jury is still out on them. I can't stand Muse (who, I've read lumped in with the new "progists").

Prog is odd in that it really doesn't have a definition in musical terms, just bands who are considered to be "prog". Hypothetically, Roxy Music could be considered prog. I don't hate the genre. I've certainly found some albums that are bloated upon themselves, and while this seems to be found more in this "genre" than others, it certainly doesn't turn me off of the whole scope.

Has anyone heard Jon Anderson's "Olias of Sunhillow"? I keep reading that its a worthwhile listen.

A strong relationship exists between jazz, fusion, prog-rock & rock.
Like all great art, it demands to be reinterpreted. The options range from note for note replication to radical reinterpretation, both extremes are valid, as is anything and everything in between. IT ALL DEPENDS ON HOW WELL IT'S DONE.

part of the problem is in the term "progressive". any "new" type of music really is just a spin on what came before it. rock itself combines elements of country & western with r&b. Should rock be dismissed because of that?

if you don't like prog rock the main thing you probably don't like is it isn't straight ahead and to-the-point with what it conveys, coming off as pretentious or flat-out boring. But prog rock songs can rock out and be just as catchy as non-prog rock.

Anything this difficult to DEFINE, much less explain, cannot be good.

define "love". depending on your outlook on love, i've either contradicted or supported your statement.

no.

love, art and the colonel's secret ingredient. oh yeah!

You mean the hatred of all people of color?

maybe, raghead.

prog? more like BLAHg....AMIRITE LOLZ

As a drummer, I really appreciate some prog, such as King Crimson (Bruford, Mastelotto), Porcupine Tree (Chris Maitland, Gavin Harrison), Genesis (Collins & Thompson) and even some Dream Theater (I wish they'd lose the hack singer, though).

I appreciate the brains and skills it takes to play some of that stuff, even though I can't play a sixteenth of it. I can play indie rock all day long, though!