Re: AOR - 25 years old?
Posted by: koogles ()
Date: January 28, 2001 05:52AM

I think I know a few things about progressive rock. But it's not always as clearly defined as you'd like to think it is. Yes, ELP, Tull... all progressive bands without question. But by the late seventies, bands weren't as OVERTLY progressive as they were in the earlier half of the decade. Most mixed progressive elements into their music (Angel, Trillion, Styx, Prism etc.) and depending on where your needle fell on the record, could be considered progressive. I think to say that Boston was progressive (as long as, semantically speaking, we are talking "progressive" as prog rock and not "progressive" as innovatively forwarding the evolution of music), it's creative writing on your part. If anything, progressive rock died a grisly death at the hands of AOR acts like Boston, Foreigner and Toto. Combined with disco fever and punk rock, dinosaur bones would wash up on "Love Beach" after a turbulent "Stormwatch" on Topographic Oceans.

koogles

NP: Camel "Mirage"

Navigate: Previous MessageNext Message
Options: ReplyQuote


SubjectViewsWritten ByPosted
AOR - 25 years old? 121 Misterpomp 01/28/2001 12:49AM
Re: AOR - 25 years old? 88 koogles 01/28/2001 05:12AM
Re: AOR - 25 years old? 87 Eric Abrahamsen 01/28/2001 05:29AM
Re: AOR - 25 years old?79 koogles 01/28/2001 05:52AM
Re: Prog 75 Eric Abrahamsen 01/28/2001 07:10AM
Re: Prog 96 koogles 01/28/2001 07:28AM
Re: FM 86 Phil 01/28/2001 08:21PM
This is where you lose me ... 94 Misterpomp 01/28/2001 08:24PM
Re: This is where you lose me ... 79 Phil 01/29/2001 05:20AM
Re: FM 88 koogles 01/28/2001 11:57PM
Now that's nonsense! 92 Misterpomp 01/28/2001 08:21PM
Re: White Hot 84 Eric Abrahamsen 01/28/2001 10:01PM
Re: Angel's debut!! 103 Eric Abrahamsen 01/28/2001 05:17AM


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Powered by Phorum.

Disclaimer: melodicrock.com takes no responsibility for the contents of messages posted on this open forum, or for the sanity of those posting.