179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Andrei
To:
Date:
Wed, 13 Mar 2002 19:45:49 -0500
Subject:
Re: [idm] [OT] prog
Msg-Id:
<Pine.SGI.4.40.0203131934310.1461446-100000@shell01.TheWorld.com>
In-Reply-To:
<p05010401b8b59dd6a1db@[64.81.118.51]>
Mbox:
idm.0203.gz
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, omz wrote:
quoted 13 lines On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, donna summer wrote:> >On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, donna summer wrote: > > > >> Supertramp - Breakfast in America > >> What??? Don't get me wrong, very good album, but Prog? > >> -Donna > > > >Personally, I don't think Pink Floyd or Can are prog either and I think > >they generally made "tasteful" music. Neither had any sort of classical > >pretensions and all that kind of nonsense. > > I know a lot of prog-heads who would disagree about Can. Many view > them as the ultimate prog band (well Krautrock really, but we are > splitting hairs..)
The way I tend to look at it is that there is "prog" rock and then there's "art" or "experimental" rock. And there are quite a few bands who were both imo. I see Can as an art rock band. What I associate with prog is excess, technical pyrotechnics and "classical" pretensions. Art rock had much less to do with technical prowess and more to do with all sorts of crazy experimentation. For example I think Wire and This Heat were great art rock bands. I think art rock people tended to forget a lot less than the prog people that "complexity" isn't what makes rock music interesting. Andrei --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org