Underworld and Prog Bands

[amoe]

I like Floyd, and Tool if they qualify.

[stimpee]

I still fail to see how this thread has anything to do with Underworld.

[holden]

Originally Posted by stimpee

I still fail to see how this thread has anything to do with Underworld.

read Beatiful Burnout's first post and all is clear. Especially if you consider UW an "albums band" and more progressive than the average dance music band, i think it's obvious what we're getting at.

[stimpee]

Originally Posted by holden

read Beatiful Burnout's first post and all is clear. Especially if you consider UW an "albums band" and more progressive than the average dance music band, i think it's obvious what we're getting at.

erm no. " bands such as Underworld and Orbital taking the prog influence a step further" doesnt say anything. a lot of bands are "albums bands" and i dont believe Underworld are any more an albums band than most. Theyve released lots of singles too. The link is tenuous. Please define "progressive" in your sentence above.

[holden]

Originally Posted by holden

I think the term "progressive" is relative, since a lot of the bands that had that label in the 1970s eventually ceased to be progressive, not evolving and releasing the same stuff over and over, or else tainting the public's perception with ill-advised pop turns in the 80's (what wasn't ill-advised back then?!). Progressive usally means being on the forefront of music or a step ahead. i think this is UW's intent with the riverrun series.
i was and still am a huge fan of Genesis. Most Pink Floyd is enjoyable. But bands like Yes and ELP fell into that category of tiresome and repeating themselves. In the 90's, i guess everyone cites Radiohead as carying on the torch, along with Sigur Ros. But anyone who's into indie music will tell you that there are thousands of extremely creative bands that are truly progressing music. That's where i'd look for real experimentation.

holden

that's how i defined it previously. Feel free to disagree, though. Your dislike of this and Genesis in particular is pretty apparent on this and other threads, especially the tumbleweed comment before anyone else even said a word. It's opinion, like 99% of the posts around here, so i dont think it's any less valid than any Paul de Aragon musing or repetitive polling.


holden

[jose m]

well said !!! bit facist here sometimes isn't it?

[//\/\/]

Originally Posted by stimpee

erm no. " bands such as Underworld and Orbital taking the prog influence a step further" doesnt say anything. a lot of bands are "albums bands" and i dont believe Underworld are any more an albums band than most. Theyve released lots of singles too. The link is tenuous. Please define "progressive" in your sentence above.

i'd say they're progressive in that they don't stick to a strict formula, that they like to experiment. mostly this works, as they have high standards and are able to assess their work well. but sometimes they fall into noodley bollocks... i think progressive in electronic music also means that they shy away from the mainstream - many bands that use a lot of different styles and therefore cannot be pigeon-holed end up with the 'progressive' tag because it's easy for journalists.

[dubman]

Originally Posted by holden

It's opinion, like 99% of the posts around here, so i dont think it's any less valid than any Paul de Aragon musing or repetitive polling.


holden

goddamnit holden, shut up.

rules of subjectivity become abused when you start thinking a perpetual lush's opinion is the same as a crumudgeon you can't logically argue against because genesis are terrible!

[jose m]

greenslade????

[//\/\/]

Originally Posted by jose m

greenslade????

slade?!!!!!