No, but when I was 18 I certainly knew about the origins of progressive house. I suppose it wouldn't matter so much if the industry had just come up with new terms rather than torturing words like "progressive", "electro" and "trance" beyond recognition. I actually welcome these daft new terms like "complextro" and "progno". They may sound ridiculous but they at least acknowledge a change in sound.
Seandroid
quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
No, but when I was 18 I certainly knew about the origins of progressive house. I suppose it wouldn't matter so much if the industry had just come up with new terms rather than torturing words like "progressive", "electro" and "trance" beyond recognition. I actually welcome these daft new terms like "complextro" and "progno". They may sound ridiculous but they at least acknowledge a change in sound.
Yeah, they sound ridiculous but it will make it easier to find tunes on Beatport. The top 100 on Beatport ALL sounds exactly the same... I call it "supersaw house."
It's always categorized on there as progressive house. It's really hard to find tracks like this now:
Which I like a heck of a lot more.
Regardless I don't think I should have to "research the history of progressive house." I just listen to & make the music I like.
SYSTEM-J
quote:
Originally posted by Seandroid
Regardless I don't think I should have to "research the history of progressive house." I just listen to & make the music I like.
I'm not saying you necessarily should. There are some scenes, notably the whole Resident Advisor deep/tech/haus scene, where there's a ridiculous amount of reverence for historical music, and every producer pretends they grew up on Parliament Funkadelic and Miles Davis, and all their records are copies of Basic Channel and Theo Parrish.
But equally, I generally think any musician is better for having heard a huge variety of music, and there are a lot of new dance records where it's painfully obvious the producer has never heard a dance record from earlier than 2005, everything is so incredibly rigid and formulaic.
-FSP-
What's funny is as I listen to RA's top charted tracks of April, I wouldn't be surprised to hear lots of those songs in say a global underground deep dish compilation. I don't think those artists want to be associated with prog house though and would rather be associated with parrish and davis etc. rather than the ravey doowop rainbow connotations of prog house. I look at a lot of my GU CDs and browse the prog house area in Beatport and you have two different sounds.
Lots of post-dubstep is trip-hop too. I'm just saying!
DJ RANN
quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
It was coined a lot earlier than that. It's general agreed that this Mixmag article from 1992 is the origin of the term, although the music itself can be traced back even earlier to 1990. Leftfield - Not Forgotten is generally agreed to be the first progressive house record, although there is an outside shout for React 2 Rhythm - Rhythm Addiction from the same year.
In all fairness, there is almost no prog whatsoever being made these days that is genuine "progressive house", the term has become totally meaningless. No surprise when kids like Seandroid, who weren't even alive when that article was written, are the people producing modern club records. I wouldn't be surprised if he'd never even heard of Leftfield.
quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
No, but when I was 18 I certainly knew about the origins of progressive house. I suppose it wouldn't matter so much if the industry had just come up with new terms rather than torturing words like "progressive", "electro" and "trance" beyond recognition. I actually welcome these daft new terms like "complextro" and "progno". They may sound ridiculous but they at least acknowledge a change in sound.
Great posts and couldn't agree more especially about distorting the essence of these genres. I find the people getting in to what is referred to as "prog" have little to no idea actually what prog was for over a decade.
This whole thing about history reminds me of something Paul Bagala (political strategist and Obamas campaign manager for 2008) said in an argument to Meghan McCain (John McCain's daughter) on Bill Maher's show;
He was talking about the republicans such as her father making the same mistakes as previous administrations (Reagan etc) and how she couldn't see it and Meghan went "well I wasn't born then so how should I know?" and Paul returned with "I wasn't born during the French Revolution but I still know what happened then."
I too think you shouldn't churn out the same stuff that was being played 10 years ago just to be true to a genre, but it should be an evolution, not a complete bastardisation and deviation to the point of no relevance to the original.
Seandroid
quote:
Originally posted by DJ RANN
Great posts and couldn't agree more especially about distorting the essence of these genres. I find the people getting in to what is referred to as "prog" have little to no idea actually what prog was for over a decade.
This whole thing about history reminds me of something Paul Bagala (political strategist and Obamas campaign manager for 2008) said in an argument to Meghan McCain (John McCain's daughter) on Bill Maher's show;
He was talking about the republicans such as her father making the same mistakes as previous administrations (Reagan etc) and how she couldn't see it and Meghan went "well I wasn't born then so how should I know?" and Paul returned with "I wasn't born during the French Revolution but I still know what happened then."
I too think you shouldn't churn out the same stuff that was being played 10 years ago just to be true to a genre, but it should be an evolution, not a complete bastardisation and deviation to the point of no relevance to the original.
Comparing a mountain and a molehill much? I listen to plenty of music that fits your definition of progressive house and I'm well aware it's not the same now. That's not even what I said. In fact, what I was asking was whether or not progressive house was really definable because I thought the term in itself meant house that takes the genre to new places.
Looney4Clooney
It is hard to define prog because it is a judgement based on what it isn't rather than an aesthetic. Prog has always been a term to mean different, closer to classical music, more complex ....
the one thing it has never meant is a progression of melodic sounds. The progressive refers to the fact that it acknowledges what has been done and progresses beyond that. People think, oh a chord progression, that is progressive. If there is a tonal chord progression, that would make it trance which is also a perversion of what trance used to be.
It is a wanker term tho. Every single genre that used that term were made by wanker bands.
Progressive rock -Rush - wankers
Progressive jazz - john mclaughlin - wanker
Progressive Metal - Dream Theatre - super wankers
Progressive house/trance - " ____________" - wanker
It doens't really matter when it was first used, it became popular at the end of the 90s to describe stuff that wasn't house, and wasn't trance, trance had those long progressions that kept building, that wasn't progressive music. And that is where this confusion comes from.
DJ RANN
quote:
Originally posted by Seandroid
Comparing a mountain and a molehill much? I listen to plenty of music that fits your definition of progressive house and I'm well aware it's not the same now. That's not even what I said. In fact, what I was asking was whether or not progressive house was really definable because I thought the term in itself meant house that takes the genre to new places.
It wasn't directed at you, moreso System-J's reference to kids not knowing what came before 2005. I never said you said it. The only thing I have specifically aimed at you (which are done and dusted now) was your assertion that prog was not definable (it clearly is or at least should be) and that Mau5 was well known before his 8th note prog (he wasn't as also pointed out).
quote:
Originally posted by L4C
It is hard to define prog because it is a judgement based on what it isn't rather than an aesthetic. Prog has always been a term to mean different, closer to classical music, more complex ....
the one thing it has never meant is a progression of melodic sounds. The progressive refers to the fact that it acknowledges what has been done and progresses beyond that. People think, oh a chord progression, that is progressive. If there is a tonal chord progression, that would make it trance which is also a perversion of what trance used to be.
Sorry man but you're talking utter .
You're making the mistake of applying the reasoning behind the naming of prog rock, to progressive house - not the same thing at all and prog house wasn't named for "fact that it acknowledges what has been done and progresses beyond that". That's prog rock, not prog house, so don't get them confused.
If you'd bothered to read that mixmag article posted earlier (even though i agree with Sys-J that's it's not quite the cornerstone), prog house was name exactly for the reasons you're trying say it not;
quote:
Originally posted by MIXMAG in 1992
The style is a music that builds on layers of percussion, that loops simple, funky riffs over and over. It's music for the open road, house that flows not judders, miles more mature than the ready-made riffs and the got-this-down-Kwik-Save 'uplifting' breakdowns of much rave.
It's exactly a music that progressively builds on layers, hence the name.
and by the way, that trance that has those progressions that keep building is called.....wait for it......
progressive trance :wtf:
Looney4Clooney
the key word
mature
They try to massage it in there, but its there and it is used, just like every other genre that used it to demark from what they thought was cheesy and commercial. It also says over and over, that isnt progression, layers of loops ? that could be anything. It distants itself form uplifting, and something that was a cornerstone of uplifting was the 8 minute build. So ya, honestly, what the is your problem . You might disagree, i think utter e is a little overboard. I do think your wrong. I think the article supports exactly what I said and that narrative, the same used for rock, metal , jazz .... is still being used.
We also had this argument, i said the same things, and you agreed. Not sure what the your deal is lately. And why you are picking on Sean for such trivialities based on nothing. I thought I was pedantic. But this is just inane. Seriously, all you ing idiots talk like you ing invented techno.
DJ RANN
quote:
Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
the key word
mature
They try to massage it in there, but its there and it is used, just like every other genre that used it to demark from what they thought was cheesy and commercial. It also says over and over, that isnt progression, layers of loops ? that could be anything. It distants itself form uplifting, and something that was a cornerstone of uplifting was the 8 minute build. So ya, honestly, what the is your problem . You might disagree, i think utter e is a little overboard. I do think your wrong. I think the article supports exactly what I said and that narrative, the same used for rock, metal , jazz .... is still being used.
We also had this argument, i said the same things, and you agreed. Not sure what the your deal is lately. And why you are picking on Sean for such trivialities based on nothing. I thought I was pedantic. But this is just inane. Seriously, all you ing idiots talk like you ing invented techno.
Easy there tiger, I'm not picking on anyone, not Sean or you, just this is how bull proliferates (like the mono in clubs thing for instance) - It's no being pedantic it's called seeing misinformation and not wanting it to spread. Sometimes if something incorrect is repeated enough it can beceom
I'm not sure whether you realize this but you state things in a very matter of fact way, and in this case, it's wrong. You can say they are trying to massage it in there, but that does a disservice to what they explicitly say, which is in direct contradiction of what you stated about it not being a progressive elements building on each layer.
My point was the naming convention did not come from the prog rock naming convention; it's a recent misconception that has no grounding in truth. Sure you could argue Prog house has a secondary meaning of "pushing things forward etc" but that's not why it was named the way it was. I've read that article more than once over the years and I read it
Sorry, I'm not trying to be a dick about it, but imagine I posted up some stuff about classical music history that was incorrect; you call bull on me in a heartbeat and rightly so.
DJRAMM
someone picking on L4C damn, times have changed.
Looney4Clooney
quote:
Originally posted by DJ RANN
My point was the naming convention did not come from the prog rock naming convention; it's a recent misconception that has no grounding in truth. Sure you could argue Prog house has a secondary meaning of "pushing things forward etc" but that's not why it was named the way it was. I've read that article more than once over the years and I read it
i never said it did, i said it means the same thing. Which it does. Which the article states, which i stated, which you also stated more or less.
And given the rather large coincidence that the same term keeps popping up whenever people want to distinguish their music as more serious and modern, i think whether the article says so or not, the link a pretty safe one to make.
What is annoying is that this term was used in the early 80s. and the 90s. For house for trance for everything. It has always meant "not the other stuff" Just like prog rock prog jazz , prog ....... And mixmag is just not a valid source as far as i'm concerned to base your entire argument.
