Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowquill
lawl.
|
Sorry, I didn't see that post. I'm happy to stop arguing about this - but I know that you'll start ranting about prog again as soon as you leave this thread. And it looks stupid to rant about something if you don't know much about it. Just saying.
But just on the side, I'm interested that you consider Porcupine Tree technical. It's a bit of a grey area - in general I consider their music to be mostly un technical apart from the drumming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Expletive Deleted
I've never met anyone that considered Radiohead prog. All that layering/whateverwhatever can be explained by them being big fans of IDM, not prog.
|
It doesn't matter where their sound came from, how it can be explained, and whether they have prog influences. The important thing is that they have those components. And while they don't have 20 min epics, they have many many prog elements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Expletive Deleted
I was more pointing out this bit, "we just don't sing about unicorns and wander off for twenty minutes on each song," and the parts about prog sucking. I thought it was kind of funny how Seltzer went on about Radiohead being a prime example of prog, only to remember that Greenwood hates it.
|
I think it's kind of funny, but he has a bit of distorted perception of prog if he thinks the songs have to be long and be about unicorns. :lol:
Nevertheless, I like Radiohead. I consider them to be a prog band with an alt rock kind of sound.