TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- What does PROGRESSIVE mean in music
Pages (6): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »

lol at the retardness here.

wtf, have you people even listened to any 90's electronic music?

Progressive house was called progressive because it was different. It has nothing to do with the structure.

Progressive trance was called progressive because it was different. It has nothing to do with the structure.

Epic trance is in fact just a genre that sprung from progressive trance. It pushed the new direction trance was taking, to the extreme.

quote:

Originally posted by distant wtf, have you people even listened to any 90's electronic music? Progressive house was called progressive because it was different. It has nothing to do with the structure. Progressive trance was called progressive because it was different. It has nothing to do with the structure. Epic trance is in fact just a genre that sprung from progressive trance. It pushed the new direction trance was taking, to the extreme.

er...so how can you classify anything these days as "progressive"?

There's rarely anything groundbreaking these days.

Basically you're implying that progressive as a genre is dead.

quote:

Originally posted by Beat Blog er...so how can you classify anything these days as "progressive"? There's rarely anything groundbreaking these days. Basically you're implying that progressive as a genre is dead.

It's just a bleedin' name. It stuck. It was called progressive because it was new and innovative at the time, obviously it couldn't stay that way forever, but the name stuck.

And there's plenty of genre-fusion going on, you just haven't found it yet. Drop the defeatist mentality.

EDIT: In case I wasn't clear enough: Progressive is NOT a genre. It means absolutely NOTHING unless you put something after it. It's a prefix, just like "nu-", "neo-" and "post-".

quote:

Originally posted by distant It's just a bleedin' name. It stuck. It was called progressive because it was new and innovative at the time, obviously it couldn't stay that way forever, but the name stuck. And there's plenty of genre-fusion going on, you just haven't found it yet. Drop the defeatist mentality.

Defeatist?

Ok, so instead of championing my own view, maybe now I'll probe yours (SYSTEM-J please answer, would love to hear).

If then, you think that progressive is defined by sound and not structure, what sounds/instruments separate a progressive song from a normal one?

What sounds define it?

quote:

Originally posted by Beat Blog Defeatist? Ok, so instead of championing my own view, maybe now I'll probe yours (SYSTEM-J please answer, would love to hear). If then, you think that progressive is defined by sound and not structure, what sounds/instruments separate a progressive song from a normal one? What sounds define it?

Compare German trance from 1992 to British trance from 1998.

Compare Chicago house from 1988 to British house from 1994.

Seems pretty obvious. You can't have a group like Leftfield who fucks up the idea of house music, and simply call them "house". They changed the genre. They're progressive.

And again you're making the mistake of refering to "progressive" as a genre. Asking what sounds define it makes no sense since you haven't defined what progressive music you're talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by distant Compare German trance from 1992 to British trance from 1998. Compare Chicago house from 1988 to British house from 1994. Seems pretty obvious. You can't have a group like Leftfield who fucks up the idea of house music, and simply call them "house". They changed the genre. They're progressive. And again you're making the mistake of refering to "progressive" as a genre. Asking what sounds define it makes no sense since you haven't defined what progressive music you're talking about.

You can't define a genre by comparing two different things!

That's like saying "listen to song x, then listen to song y, and you will understand what house music is" to someone who's never heard it before.

Ok...explain what sounds you think are prevalent and defining in progressive house.

quote:

Originally posted by distant Seems pretty obvious. You can't have a group like Leftfield who fucks up the idea of house music, and simply call them "house". They changed the genre. They're progressive.

You just shot yourself in the foot.

When the first acid house came out...it was new. Did everyone call it "progressive house" because it was different and changed the genre?

No, it became a new genre in itself, with a proper name.

If something's new, it gets a new name. When trance first arose, did people call it "progressive house" because it was a new variant of house? No, they called it "trance", because that's what it was!

Trance was a new variant of techno, not a variant of house.

We've already established that Leftfield's music wasn't called progressive because of its structure, so obviously it must be because they threw in african, electro, dub, techno and whatever other influences into their music.

So how could it be that progressive TRANCE, a genre very closely associated with progressive house, suddenly takes it name from its changes in structure? How does that make any sense?

As for the acid house sentiment, it was called acid house because it ALWAYS involved a certain instrument called the Roland TB-303. Acid was chosen as a name. Sure you could replace progressive with afro-electro-dub-techno, but that doesn't make sense since not ALL progressive house tracks had ALL of those influences. That was the point of progressive house: it allowed various influences, it had no real boundaries. Hence, progressive. But it was still technically house, so there you go: progressive house.

Tracks that dont follow the typical pop formula and use different arranging techniques.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Trance was a new variant of techno, not a variant of house.

To the best of my knowledge, trance evolved from the rave/acid house scene, simultaneously in the UK and Germany (Age Of Love, Jam & Spoon, Oliver Lieb) which was completely separate from what was going on in Detroit at the same time.

quote:

Originally posted by distant So how could it be that progressive TRANCE, a genre very closely associated with progressive house, suddenly takes it name from its changes in structure? How does that make any sense?

Huh?

You�ve completely misunderstood me. I�m saying that ALL progressive music, whether it be progressive breaks, progressive trance, progressive house, or even progressive rock music, is defined because of its structure, not because of the specific way it sounds. Hence why the word �progressive� can be applied to so many genres, because it�s a non-specific term that delineates a �normal� or �epic� structure from that of the more carefully constructed and subtle �progressive� structure.

quote:

Originally posted by distant As for the acid house sentiment, it was called acid house because it ALWAYS involved a certain instrument called the Roland TB-303. Acid was chosen as a name. Sure you could replace progressive with afro-electro-dub-techno, but that doesn't make sense since not ALL progressive house tracks had ALL of those influences. That was the point of progressive house: it allowed various influences, it had no real boundaries. Hence, progressive. But it was still technically house, so there you go: progressive house.

That�s a fair point, thought I was exaggerating by using acid house as an example.

So, you�re basically saying that everything called progressive house can only be called so if it has an afro-electro-dub-techno sound to it?

I can�t agree with that, so we�ll have to agree to disagree...when in Rome.

quote:

Originally posted by distant We've already established that Leftfield's music wasn't called progressive because of its structure, so obviously it must be because they threw in african, electro, dub, techno and whatever other influences into their music. So how could it be that progressive TRANCE, a genre very closely associated with progressive house, suddenly takes it name from its changes in structure? How does that make any sense? As for the acid house sentiment, it was called acid house because it ALWAYS involved a certain instrument called the Roland TB-303. Acid was chosen as a name. Sure you could replace progressive with afro-electro-dub-techno, but that doesn't make sense since not ALL progressive house tracks had ALL of those influences. That was the point of progressive house: it allowed various influences, it had no real boundaries. Hence, progressive. But it was still technically house, so there you go: progressive house.

Pretty much sums it up.

quote:

Originally posted by Beat Blog To the best of my knowledge, trance evolved from the rave/acid house scene, simultaneously in the UK and Germany (Age Of Love, Jam & Spoon, Oliver Lieb) which was completely separate from what was going on in Detroit at the same time.

German techno, not Detroit techno. Although it has roots in acid house, too.

quote:

Originally posted by Beat Blog So, you�re basically saying that everything called progressive house can only be called so if it has an afro-electro-dub-techno sound to it?

No, that was my point. If it ALL had afro-electro-dub-techno influences in it, then call it afro-electro-dub-techno house. But since all tracks don't, it's called progressive for lack of a better term to describe it. That's all it is, forward-thinking house music. It's still fundamentally house, you can hear it in the groove, but Leftfield, Spooky and all these other guys just added something new to it.

quote:

Originally posted by distant No, that was my point. If it ALL had afro-electro-dub-techno influences in it, then call it afro-electro-dub-techno house. But since all tracks don't,

Well then, in your version of progressive, what's the comment element that links all the tracks together and defines them as the same genre?

Don't say "cutting-edge" or "new" again, because I don't think that's a valid way to describe a genre.

If, as you say, progressive is a term to describe "cutting-edge" tracks, that would mean that Leftfield's work, or anything made past the start of this year, is no longer "progressive" because people have since copied that sound, whatever it may be, and it is therefore no longer unique, and therefore no longer "cutting edge", even if it was in the past.

Imagine for a second that I get hold of a "progressive" track from the 90's (using your definition here, not mine), which I've never heard. How will I know it's progressive, if I've heard hundreds of others like it, because they've since copied it?

Again, your definition makes no sense...it's entirely subjective, depending on a person's previous exposure to music.

Wow, u guys have different definitions of definitions

this is gonna be a real can of worms to sort out...

I think it's just a term people use in a very blaze fashion, but a lot of people have adopted to refer to sounds like that of shulz today, I think progressive only really got reasonably popular in the more mainstream EDM community (which still isn't very mainstream compared to a lot of the cheese out there) since shulz.

I dont know much about progressive I'm afraid. Though I do like some Schulz sets here and there.

BTW, I'm pretty sure Digweed was one of early pioneers of the term, but dunno if he was one of the first to actually start off with the sound.

Hell, according to my last paragraph alone, it's confusing to talk about progressive in that fashion, because it assumes progressive is a sound.

quote:

Originally posted by Beat Blog Well then, in your version of progressive, what's the comment element that links all the tracks together and defines them as the same genre?

That's the thing, there was so much going on in the British house scene in the early 90's that it all simply got lumped together as "progressive". Rather have that than ten new genres, no? It was all getting played by the same DJ's anyway.

That's why the term doesn't make sense anymore, because there's no single "progressive house music scene" these days. It was very time/location-specific, and if that means it can't be a "proper" genre then so be it, but that's what it was called, and yes, those were the reasons. It has nothing to do with subtlety or progression within the music itself.

quote:

Originally posted by Abhay Wow, u guys have different definitions of definitions

I see what you did there.

quote:

Originally posted by Abhay I think it's just a term people use in a very blaze fashion, but a lot of people have adopted to refer to sounds like that of shulz today, I think progressive only really got reasonably popular in the more mainstream EDM community (which still isn't very mainstream compared to a lot of the cheese out there) since shulz. I dont know much about progressive I'm afraid. Though I do like some Schulz sets here and there. BTW, I'm pretty sure Digweed was one of early pioneers of the term, but dunno if he was one of the first to actually start off with the sound. Hell, according to my last paragraph alone, it's confusing to talk about progressive in that fashion, because it assumes progressive is a sound.

I know a lot of people call Schulz progressive, but I wouldn't.

Some progressive acts I like:

D-Nox
Luke Chable
Pryda (earlier works, such as Aftermath & The Gift)
Shiloh
Subsky
Nikola Gala
Tom Sawyer
Bart van Wissen
Kasey Taylor
Emjae
Paradise Soul (not ALL their work though)
Carl Craig (some stuff only, such as his Relevee remix)
Martin Landsky
Jim Rivers
Gabriel & Dresden (earlier works)
Way Out West
Jody Wisternoff

None of those producers, with the exception of Carl Craig, were/are particularly cutting edge, yet they are still called progressive by a majority of people. Why?

Their style is linked by their music structure, not a particular sound...

Now that I think of it, it's a lot like the term "garage", referring simply to what was being played at the Paradise Garage in New York. It doesn't mean anything, it just refers to a time and a place, and doesn't necessarily have ONE common denominator.

This thread is all kinds of ridiculous.

I've spent almost the whole day here at work, on and off, arguing about the definition of one simple word.

Let us never speak of this again.

quote:

Originally posted by Beat Blog None of those producers, with the exception of Carl Craig, were/are particularly cutting edge, yet they are still called progressive by a majority of people. Why?

Because 'progressive' is just one word that ought to define a whole movement in music. And maybe, the majority of people you talk about didn't look out the original definition of the word when they first heard it and interpreted it in their own way (that the term defines music by its structure)?

quote:

Originally posted by paulandrews Because 'progressive' is just one word that ought to define a whole movement in music. And maybe, the majority of people you talk about didn't look out the original definition of the word when they first heard it and interpreted it in their own way (that the term defines music by its structure)?

That made absolutely no sense.

Not in a "you're wrong" kind of way, but a "I have no idea what you just said" way.

quote:

Originally posted by Beat Blog That made absolutely no sense. Not in a "you're wrong" kind of way, but a "I have no idea what you just said" way.

I'll just quote wikipedia to make it clear:

quote:

Detroit techno producer Stacey Pullen said in an interview; "Back then, the music we called house music, techno, was also called progressive music � the meaning of 'progressive' was a futuristic way of thinking about music. That was what we called progressive."

quote:

Today, the term "progressive" typically refers to the structure of a track

So what's the reason why the definition of the word has changed?

quote:

Originally posted by paulandrews So what's the reason why the definition of the word has changed?

As per my first post in this thread (page 3):

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated I think that yes, originally, the term "progressive" was used to describe cutting edge music, especially the darker and breaksier sounds like nefardec was talking about.

The music I'm referring to above...as well as being "cutting edge", it was more subtle, dark and rhythmic than the gaudy, happy anthems at the time (i.e Strings Of Life, Good Life).

These days, that style of darker, subtle music is no longer cutting edge, however the other original element that defined it as progressive, its unique, subtler structure, still remains.

Hence why the definition of progressive has changed (in my eyes). Originally, it used to describe cutting edge music with subtle builds and great rhythm, which were completely new at the time, but after that type of music became commonplace (mid-late ninties), the only thing left to define it was the original unique structure it had.

quote:

Originally posted by distant Now that I think of it, it's a lot like the term "garage", referring simply to what was being played at the Paradise Garage in New York. It doesn't mean anything, it just refers to a time and a place, and doesn't necessarily have ONE common denominator.

True, but now a lot of people will consider garage its own genre, with similar drum patterns, instruments, and song progression.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.