Album Rating: 3.5

Oh damn I thought it was you. P/ P/ P/

Album Rating: 4.0

Let it P/

P/ as opposed to m/? That is new to me. P/

Album Rating: 3.5

Thanks, Jethro. I figured that the Flower Kings needed a reviewer to work with. Also, I might write a better review for the Rainmaker as well.

Album Rating: 4.0

Yeah P/ was thrown during a list about prog, maybe one year ago. To be more accurate, I dont remember exactly what was the goal, but the list was about me and my love for prog. Who did the list? I dont remember.



@Nightmare, thats pretty cool. You got one more reader!

Album Rating: 3.5

Well, it surely wasn't me, I joined about a half a year ago.

Album Rating: 4.0

@Nightmare, look I edited my last comment

Album Rating: 3.5

Yup Zet, it's for us stupid proggers :-D.



And continuing where we left off :P. Yeah whatever genre is messing around and not abiding by genre rules is progressing in essence I guess.



Wth is this Kayo Dot? I see it on sput a lot but never bothered to check.

I dont remember exactly what was the goal, but the list was about me and my love for prog. Who did the list? I dont remember.

Album Rating: 4.0

Kayo Dot is a solo project that was raised by the mastermind of maudlin of the Well.

I think we can label it avant garde metal. motw are way better though.

p/

Album Rating: 3.5

Motw? I'm intrigued.

Album Rating: 4.0

I think you're right Jamie, I'm gonna take a look

Edit; You're right, Jamie; This is the list where P/ is coming from

http://www.sputnikmusic.com/list.php?memberid=445848&listid=86381

Album Rating: 3.5

I got the message late, Jethro. I does certainly benefit to fill in the gap with a well done review.

Album Rating: 4.0

Keep up the good work, Nightmare.

Album Rating: 3.5

Of course, man. It looks like I'm turning into a Progrockadile.

Well, I want to put this to the consideration of the prog rock experts here. What follows is a very interesting comment posted on the following link: http://www.popmatters.com/pm/post/154150-the-10-best-progressive-rock-albums-of-the-2000s/

The comment is in regard of what makes the essence of prog rock:

"All of the bands who formed the genre from 1968 to 1975 or so have precious little rock to them at all. Where's the rock in Genesis under Gabriel or Hackett? Where, except for the end section of I've Seen All Good People is the rock in main sequence Yes? Where, except for maybe 21st C Schizoid Man and Cat Food is it in King Crimson? Where, except for a burst of blues guitar in Peel the Paint, is it in Gentle Giant? Where is it in VDGG's output? Where is it in Jethro Tull's music post-Aqualung?

Rock content makes up a minimal part of the oeuvre of the bands who created prog, so I think it's safe to say that adding rock (or metal) to the mix makes it something *other* than prog.

Prog is not a sub-genre of rock, but a genre of its own, and it didn't even spring out of rock. It came from British pop-psych which by the mid-60s had already taken several steps away from the idioms of rock and most of the major players of the scene came from that background (Howe from Tomorrow, Squire from The Syn, Genesis's debut IS a pop/psych record, Fripp and Giles from Gile, Giles and Fripp, Keith Emerson from The Nice, etc.)"

(cont.)

"In fact, it was the very lack of rock that made prog so hated and spat upon for decades. So calling all these metal and rock bands with prog influences the world's premiere prog bands is essentially capitulating to what the genre's detractors have been saying for decades.But, primarily, there's a very, very simple test for if something is really prog or not. Does it sound like fairly mainstream rock (or metal) for minutes at a time? If it does, it doesn't really matter how many technically intricate bits you throw in surrounding those regular-sounding sections.

Prog - as it at least once was before the term became only about structure and not about actual composition - doesn't sound like regular music for very long at all. There will always be something that marks it as different from the norm in any given 30-second stretch.

Using that fairly reasonable criterion, Dream Theater fail miserably as prog and even the implausibly lauded Spock's Beard don't do all that well. There's still prog out there, but it is often dismissed as copying the originators of the style, when they are in fact only using the genre's idioms. "Renewal" these days often takes the form of going backwards into rock or adding metal elements, neither of which is particularly progressive nor prog."

If you have any comments on the list itself, they are also welcome.

Album Rating: 3.5

Mind-blowing. Modern rock bands like those however, still incorporate prog-like elements, but are no longer of pure prog originality. Which is why they have a sub-genre called prog metal. Or Neo prog, Symphonic prog, and Avant-garde prog for that matter. It's no longer purely composed progressive elements, but it's not completely left behind. To say the it's not particularly prog or progressive isn't completely true or false, for the matter.

Album Rating: 3.5

It simply is, no longer the original style that was made in the 1970s anymore.