Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
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.
Man, you're really making it difficult for me not to be a dick about this. I really don't want to do this but you just won't let it go....
Again:
quote:
Originally posted by 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.
A) It's not hard to define. It's only becoming hard to define due to the misused of the term as System-J eloquently surmised, and that people who don't know their EDM history keep assuming it was named under the same convention as prog jazz or prog rock (which is wasn't).
B) It was called progressive due to the nature of it's production aesthetics; progressively adding elements.
You did state it clearly what it was NOT about and unfortunately that was exactly what it is about. and no, it's mot the same thing.
Just sayin'
The article (and others, not to mention those who have a decent claim to it's heritage like Leftfield) state what the name is about. If you want to infer they secretly meant something else, then I can't fix that, but I'll just read the actual words they said, rather than making an assumption to to coincidence of name usage. I can see how the mistake could be made though, it's not a difficult (albeit incorrect)leap to make.
Looney4Clooney
all EDM progressively adds elements
so.......
they didn't use it in the 80s for that, they used it to differentiate ital disco from normal disco. WHy because it was different. Different is the common theme.
Beatflux
quote:
Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
all EDM progressively adds elements
so.......
LOL
That's what I was thinking. It's not just EDM either...
Looney4Clooney
yup. wherever that term is used, there has always been that narrative of different, more mature better more complex. not that other the kids listen to. This has not changed in 100 years except instead of prog, they used modern, then they used post modern, now they use prog. They might talk about aesthetic but it is not a coincidence that they can't just describe the music as is. There is always a value judgement. Always. And when you brush away the bull, all prog has ever meant was better. Not that stuff. That stuff , but better. Not so much that but more this and mature, bigger better more ....
DJ RANN
quote:
Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
all EDM progressively adds elements
so.......
they didn't use it in the 80s for that, they used it to differentiate ital disco from normal disco. WHy because it was different. Different is the common theme.
quote:
Originally posted by Beatflux
That's what I was thinking. It's not just EDM either...
Erm, you could easily argue that nearly all music in general progressively adds elements so that does nothing for your argument.
I mean here's the ing wiki:
Progressive house: Progressive house is typified by accelerating peaks and troughs throughout a track's duration....Layering different sounds on top of each other and slowly bringing them in and out of the mix is a key idea behind the progressive movement.
Then there's the mixmag article or this from electrowow.com:
quote:
A key idea of progressive house is the layering of sounds and bringing them in and out of a mix, and due to the complexities of the sound, it is considered a deeper form of House music. A Progressive House track is also typically longer than a House track because it generally has a longer bar structure.
Sorry man but do some reading. You're arguing against something that is very well documented, and something I remember first hand.
I know you don't want to back down which is why you keep banging on about the term prog being used in other genres like rock but as shown, that's not the case here.
SYSTEM-J
quote:
Originally posted by DJ RANN
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;
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:
No, you're wrong actually. L4C is basically right. They called it progressive house because it was next-wave house. British house. Smarter house. Notice the condescending dismissals of breakbeat hardcore and US garage in the article. There were a lot of genre politics at the time and the progressive house scene set itself up in opposition to more mass-appeal sounds of the day. Simon Reynolds details much of this ideological war in his chapter on the origins of progressive house in his book Energy Flash.
Here's a quote from an article about Leftfield from that era:
quote:
It’s inevitable that we’re back on the subject of P*** house. However much they hate the thought of being associated with that phrase, Leftfield acknowledge that it identifies a real, sexy, vibrant and distinctly British dance music movement. And, however dubious the designs of Leftfield copyists, let's not forget the innovation of acts like The Future Sound of London, DOP, Jet Slags and The Diceman, and DJs like Weatherall, Darren Emerson and "Boss Drum" remixer Justin Robertson. Each holds a key position in p*** House, and each is intent on pushing club music a bit further. Each has the sense to see P*** House as an attitude, a state of mind, rather than a sound.
The "progressive" word partly came from this forward-thinking attitude, partly came as a throwback to the days of prog rock - as L4C said, it's a wanker term used to describe self-styled "deeper" music. In practical terms, progressive house originally meant melodic, energetic British house with lots of influences from dub, trance, techno and plenty of samples from world music.
This idea that it describes music that "progresses" or builds incrementally is inaccurate, and basically came around when prog house became massively popular around 1999-2002 and a load of people who hadn't been around in 1992 heard these ultra-long Sasha and Diggers records and decided the music must be "progressing" incrementally, hence the name. A lot of the classic progressive house records are pretty short, 5-6 minutes, and change pretty rapidly, often with extremely song-like structures. There were a lot of acts, like Underworld, Fluke and William Orbit, who were heavily influenced by rock music.
What you shouldn't assume is that "progressive" actually means anything musically. Prog house has almost nothing in common with prog rock, apart from a pompous self-image and love from working class lads who don't otherwise like arty things. And progressive trance? That was just trance that had been influenced by progressive house, particularly when Brit house producers like Sasha, Bedrock, Quivver and Evolution started making it around 1997. Slower, chunkier, more melodic and a little more adventurous than the classic German stuff. Again, nothing to do with how quickly or slowly the music "progressed".
I know it's pretty difficult for you to back down in the current position you find yourself in, especially after schooling Seandroid about knowing what "progressive" means, but you really should. You weren't in the scene in 1992 so your information is as second or third hand as mine, and I've done a -ton of reading and listening on this period because early/mid-90s prog is a favourite sound of mine. Back in 2002 I thought "progressive" meant slow developing tracks that added layers as well, and I was wrong.
Looney4Clooney
EddieZilker
quote:
Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
:stongue:
Looney4Clooney
the weird thing is we had this argument about a year ago and we were in agreement. I mean exact same argument.
EddieZilker
SYSTEM-J's cogently explained it several times and I still don't want to hang my hat on any argument that involves the word. It's just too abused and even so-called authorities seem to get it wrong a lot of the time.
DJ RANN
quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
No, you're wrong actually. L4C is basically right. They called it progressive house because it was next-wave house. British house. Smarter house. Notice the condescending dismissals of breakbeat hardcore and US garage in the article. There were a lot of genre politics at the time and the progressive house scene set itself up in opposition to more mass-appeal sounds of the day. Simon Reynolds details much of this ideological war in his chapter on the origins of progressive house in his book Energy Flash.
Here's a quote from an article about Leftfield from that era:
The "progressive" word partly came from this forward-thinking attitude, partly came as a throwback to the days of prog rock - as L4C said, it's a wanker term used to describe self-styled "deeper" music. In practical terms, progressive house originally meant melodic, energetic British house with lots of influences from dub, trance, techno and plenty of samples from world music.
This idea that it describes music that "progresses" or builds incrementally is inaccurate, and basically came around when prog house became massively popular around 1999-2002 and a load of people who hadn't been around in 1992 heard these ultra-long Sasha and Diggers records and decided the music must be "progressing" incrementally, hence the name. A lot of the classic progressive house records are pretty short, 5-6 minutes, and change pretty rapidly, often with extremely song-like structures. There were a lot of acts, like Underworld, Fluke and William Orbit, who were heavily influenced by rock music.
What you shouldn't assume is that "progressive" actually means anything musically. Prog house has almost nothing in common with prog rock, apart from a pompous self-image and the love of working class lads who don't otherwise like arty things. And progressive trance? That was just trance that had been influenced by progressive house, particularly when Brit house producers like Sasha, Bedrock, Quivver and Evolution started making it around 1997. Slower, chunkier, more melodic and a little more adventurous than the classic German stuff. Again, nothing to do with how quickly or slowly the music "progressed".
I know it's pretty difficult for you to back down in the current position you find yourself in, especially after schooling Seandroid about knowing what "progressive" means, but you really should. You weren't in the scene in 1992 so your information is as second or third hand as mine, and I've done a -ton of reading and listening on this period because early/mid-90s prog is a favourite sound of mine. Back in 2002 I thought "progressive" meant slow developing tracks that added layers as well, and I was wrong.
Sorry, I don't agree.
Firstly, I've posted several links and quotes as to where the term came from and they all echo each other. I can't make up these links.
Just google the term: progressive house definition. It's all there about structure and elements being intrinsic to the definition. As I said earlier the misquoted alignment is secondary. It's not a internet wide conspiracy, people - progressive house was termed as such to describe it's form. That's what I believe and what people called that music.
There's no denying the influence of dub, techno etc - no one is even talking about that as a discussion point. Any new music has influences from others.
I remember Johnny and Enzo (founders of Plastic Fantastic in London, co founder of Hooj Choons) going through a pile of promos sorting them in to groups to sell. A few seconds of listening and one would be prog, one would be house, one would be trance. Why, because they had distinct markers to their sound. Now think about what you;re saying the meaning of prog house is (pushing something forward) and trying to put that in a discrete pile. It would be absurd to try.
Also, when you factor in that any new strand or genre in music is something new and therefore pushing something forward, again I don't blame people for making the mistake of linking it prog rock, but clearly it was not labelled due to it pushing something forward.
And I wasn't quite there in 1992, but I started buying EDM records in 1994 and clubbing at the same time with is a damn site better than anyone else commenting in this thread, trying to tell me what i saw and heard from record shops I frequented on weekly basis in and around London.
So please don't tell me what I witnessed or know first hand (not 2nd or 3rd as you're assuming). Those tracks that started it all were still being played in clubs (and not as part of classics revival) when I started going out.
EDIT: Actually, that interview somewhat proves my point. Furthermore, The quote you lifted jack, is narrative from the journalist, not leftfield, essentially saying that prog *should* be about a state of mind (blahblahblah) and not simply defined as the Sound (which by his appeal, it was defined as such, and something which he was trying to negate).
Looney4Clooney
what you witnessed were 2 guys that were calling something prog without explaining exactly what about it was prog. Had you asked them, they would of told you, well like there is house, and there is like prog which is like house, but this new form that is like way more cachet. So that doesn't help your argument.
And you can narrow down a sound without actually mentioning a sound. By saying it is like house, without the m1, or trance without the jp 8080, you haven't said what it is , but you've narrowed down what it isn't and thus sort of narrowed down what it is. But again the term is a relative term to what is there. You can't have just progressive. Ask yourself that. Why is there not just progressive ? Because it has , is and always will be a qualifier that relates to something else. The EDM that preceded progressive house still had layers, had a a progressive build in intensity. Ask yourself why there is always this sort of elitism associated with the term ? Why do the most serious djs seem to have to be progressive.
