Should rock be considered prog just because it's technical? - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > Rock & Metal > Prog & Psychedelic Rock
Register Blogging Today's Posts
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 10-29-2011, 06:01 PM   #10 (permalink)
\/ GOD
 
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Nowhere...
Posts: 2,179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SIRIUSB View Post
Post a good example, because I can't find one.


I would say this song very much is a good example of promoting the compositional intricacy, and care that most mainstream rock is lacking. It's melodic, percussively interesting. Has moments of damn good coordination between instruments. A very unique aesthetic in terms of usage of carnival/cartoon tones(not many things in the 1970s were doing). Gradual progression. Unique structural elements. Nearly every instrument played masterfully. Apart from the vocals, gorgeously harmonic. Yet, even in the harmonic moments, no fear in experimenting in polyphonic, and light avant-garde elements. Plus, distinctly rock in tone(even if the jazz elements are very strong).

Just because it isn't 'serious' I don't think the craftsmanship in terms of musicianship really need to be discredited.

Where as Jethro Tull is significantly more simple rhythmically. Significantly less subtle thematically. More needlessly repetitive. Too focused on that catchy hook which makes rock accessible. Great band, worse example of 'progressing' from rock norms.
__________________
Quote:
Terence Hill, as recently confirmed during an interview to an Italian TV talk-show, was offered the role but rejected it because he considered it "too violent". Dustin Hoffman and John Travolta declined the role for the same reason. When Al Pacino was considered for the role of John Rambo, he turned it down when his request that Rambo be more of a madman was rejected.
Al Pacino = God
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Similar Threads



© 2003-2025 Advameg, Inc.