boo boo

Speaking of art rock, there really wasn't much distinguishing the two terms back in the 70s. It was used to describe Genesis just as often as it was used to describe Roxy Music.

If OK Computer and Kid A were released in the 70s they would undeniably be considered prog albums.

But now of course prog is a term used to describe bands that take obvious influence from other prog bands. So it's very common to see a bunch of tards saying "Radiohead are not prog, I can't hear any Yes or Genesis influences at all".

That's a pretty good description, though I love Rush, they're an obvious inlfluence on Dream Theater. But overall DT do remind me more of Kansas and Toto with a metal twist.

I don't consider Toto to be much of a prog band actually. In the late 70s you had arena rock bands like Journey and Toto embracing some prog influences but when these bands get lumped into the same category it's quite embarassing.

I think of bands like Kansas and Styx as being lite prog or commercial prog, a combination of prog and arena rock. And yes, DT reminds me a lot more of Kansas and Styx than they do King Crimson and Yes. And the saddest part is...

Kansas and Styx are still way better.

Heh if anything progressive metal is more metal than it is prog. At least in my opinion.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs