I disagree that meaning in music is subjective. Subjectivity isn't very meaningful. There must be an objective basis in reality, or else meaning is completely arbitrary and can change on whim. And that is pretty much contrary to the definition of meaning. I think meaning is something that is transmitted from one person to another, reinterpreted in the process.

People seem to confuse the meaning of a piece of art with how it makes them feel. You might say something like "this song means a lot to me" when you're actually trying to say that you've made an emotional connection to the piece and the mental associations it evokes. But strictly speaking, isn't meaning something epistemic or rational, saying or signifying something? The meaning of a word is the thing it refers to and how it's used in language, not how it makes you feel subjectively. Etcetera, etcetera.

Anyway, I'm not sure where I'm going with this. I've just had enough of people claiming things like meaning and interpretation in is subjective. By all means, it's not definite or quantifiable. There is a strong interpretational element, but it has to be based on something objective and real, if it is to be anything other than imaginary whims. So I maintain meaning can be discussed and analysed, as long as the participants are part of roughly the same cultural context, because meaning is inter-subjective.


I don't think progressive music pushes boundaries, to be honest. At some point, maybe it did. But even then, it was mostly just importing concepts from other genres into rock music. Experimenting with long suites and mimicking classical music can be refreshing and ambitious, but it hardly guarantees real innovation or artistic value. Then again, I disagree with the definition common in metal, that prog is just anything technical and seemingly new. Prog is definetely a stylistic convention which reached its peak in the 70s, and modern music that doesn't somehow trace its past to that genre shouldn't be called progressive.

It can be, but it is also not exclusive of that genre.

Besides, it's always gonna be a personal thing, meaning it will have different meanings for different people.

There is also a lot of prog out there which isn't worth it, so it is always dangerous to generalize.

There may not be causality between Progressive music and the depth but I would say it definately has correlation.
People who like to do such complex music often like to make it deeper too. Now depth in music has a lot to do with variety of emotions. Extreme metal tends to bring out just the darker feelings and some power metal bands stay only on the good side. Progressive music mixes different styles and emotions a lot (when done right). Such high mucial intelligence may also correlate with deeper and more allegorical lyrics.

Progressive music is the music I definately respect the most and it also needs to be listened not just heard. It is music that you spend time listening doing nothing else but enjoying the music flowing. Yet there are many other styles of music that are very likeable with their own strenghts and weaknessess. There is a musical style for every moment.

Not all the bands that create progressive music are very meaningful
but overall progressive among other genres of metal is somehow more mysterious and meaningful

100% Dream Theater

A lot of the times I'd say the exact opposite. Prog can be the worst genre for obscuring emotion/feeling with pointless, shallow, chauvinistic wankery.

All genres have their ups and down sides. This is one that makes it hard for me to listen to prog.

Written by Doc G. on 10.08.2011 at 00:51

A lot of the times I'd say the exact opposite. Prog can be the worst genre for obscuring emotion/feeling with pointless, shallow, chauvinistic wankery.

All genres have their ups and down sides. This is one that makes it hard for me to listen to prog.

Being technical doesnt always mean prog.

Written by Guest on 12.08.2011 at 15:29

Written by Doc G. on 10.08.2011 at 00:51

A lot of the times I'd say the exact opposite. Prog can be the worst genre for obscuring emotion/feeling with pointless, shallow, chauvinistic wankery.

All genres have their ups and down sides. This is one that makes it hard for me to listen to prog.

Being technical doesnt always mean prog.

Thank you for the...uh...correction?

Quote:
A lot of the times I'd say the exact opposite. Prog can be the worst...

Written by Doc G. on 12.08.2011 at 23:08

Written by Guest on 12.08.2011 at 15:29

Written by Doc G. on 10.08.2011 at 00:51

A lot of the times I'd say the exact opposite. Prog can be the worst genre for obscuring emotion/feeling with pointless, shallow, chauvinistic wankery.

All genres have their ups and down sides. This is one that makes it hard for me to listen to prog.

Being technical doesnt always mean prog.

Thank you for the...uh...correction?

Quote:
A lot of the times I'd say the exact opposite. Prog can be the worst...

Sorry, I'll explain what I meant. By wankery, im assuming you dont like being overly technical at the expense of song writing. From what you said earlier i thought you meant that you thought that all prog was technical, which is not the case. Having said that, you probably knew that and I probably misinterpreted what you said.... On that note i'll stop typing to stop myself looking like an idiot...

Written by Guest on 12.08.2011 at 23:15

Sorry, I'll explain what I meant. By wankery, im assuming you dont like being overly technical at the expense of song writing. From what you said earlier i thought you meant that you thought that all prog was technical, which is not the case. Having said that, you probably knew that and I misinterpreted what you said.... On that note i'll probably stop typing to stop myself looking like an idiot...

No, I know there is technical music out there that isn't prog, and that there's prog out there that isn't technical. However, it seems there's a strong emphasis on technical proficiency in a good majority of prog.

Is progressive music deeper and more meaningful? = It can be, but need not be always. Being emotionally involved with music depends on the listener alone.:thumbup:

Prog. music needs some mental abilities to be understood.
So if you don't like it, don't bother yourself.

Written by Mohamads7 on 07.09.2011 at 21:00

Prog. music needs some mental abilities to be understood.
So if you don't like it, don't bother yourself.

What do you mean by mental abilities, and what do you mean by understanding? And how do you come to this conclusion in the first place? Such bold claims need to be elaborated.

Don't mistake habit for insight. Just because some people are used to songs with a verse-chorus structure and therefore don't appreciate noodling interludes as much as those who're used to the hippie pomp of progressive rock doesn't make them less capable of musical competence. Ironically, that you may feel progressive is more "challenging" suggests you are simply a slave of habit and used to the conventional pop form. Swapping one convention for another (or abandoning convention completely) doesn't really provide any new challenges or rewards inherent to the music, but only in relation to our previous expectations.

I seriously doubt many prog fans "understand" the music in any notable way. Or do you disagree? Your thorough analysis of Aqualung or gtfo, please.

Is progressive music deeper and more meaningful? Depends. Progressive music is quite pretentious bordering pompous. To me, when it crosses into "pompous" is worthless. That is why I cannot get into "zeuhl".

I think finding a balance between technique, melody and experimentation is the most difficult thing and very few bands pull it off.

If we're talking meaningfull from the perspective of lyrics, it's all relative again; there are bands (as are in every genre) which have well crafted lyrics (Fish and hogarth of Marillion, Roger Waters of Pink Floyd, Peter Hammill of VDGG and many others). But unfortunately there is the opposite of that - ridiculously themed concept albums or just poor, meaningless lyrics.

"progressive" is another way of saying "i don't fucking know what exact style is being played". simple

The listener determines the meaning and depth of the music that is heard. now i'm not saying someone can have a spiritual epiphany and rediscover God while listening to AC/DC, i'm saying that some people listen to progressive music and get a lot out of it, and there are others who only like how it sounds and that's that.

progressive music may take more time and effort to write and play, but that does not necessarily mean it's "deeper"

Written by Hollberr on 01.08.2011 at 09:29

However, if we only focus on music, there's no doubt Prog Metal is way deeper. First, it is more complex and demands a higher musical knowledge than any other genres to appreciate, but also to write. You can't ask Metallica or Iron Maiden to make a good Progressive album. They just can't do it. You can, though, ask Dream Theater to make a thrash metal album and it's probably going to be VERY good (because of their talent).

Yet, when DT tried to cover Number Of The Beast and Master Of Puppets they both were absolutely TERRIBLE.

Written by Hollberr on 01.08.2011 at 09:29

Screaming SteelUs, you say there are many progheads who are arrogant and pretentious. I might be one of those. Not that I disrespect the Heavy metal fans or the thrash/hardcore fans, but I don't really like metal except Prog. It's too simple for me. I'm used to listening to classical music with very deep and complex melodies, and, except with Prog Metal, I don't find it elsewhere in the Metal scene. Bands such as Haken or Symphony X (I don't want to mention DT, it's too easy :p) have a special way to play with the scales, the rythm and the melodies, and this brings, for someone who analyses the sheet music, much more work than a... devildriver song.

So from the perspective of someone who studies music (forget the lyrics), Prog Metal is deeper - musically - than it's metal brothers.

This is everything that is wrong with the whole "Prog" mentality. It's a hipster community under the guise of something less superficial. Analyzing sheet music? Are you serious? I guess I can't fault you because you already openly admitted that you might be one of those arrogant and pretentious progheads. The only reason I'm being such a dick I guess is because I might be too pretentious to accept a misspelling of rhythm from someone who studies music... xD

Always nice to see guys like Intro who appreciate the genre for what it is rather than walking around with their head up their ass, deaf and blind to the lesser forms of life that only have the capacity to comprehend an Iron Maiden song. Maybe I'd like the latest Opeth album more if I went to university and read The Wall Street Journal.

Written by Troy Killjoy on 04.10.2011 at 06:28

Always nice to see guys like Intro who appreciate the genre for what it is rather than walking around with their head up their ass, deaf and blind to the lesser forms of life that only have the capacity to comprehend an Iron Maiden song. Maybe I'd like the latest Opeth album more if I went to university and read The Wall Street Journal.

You don't have to be intelligent in anyway to like prog. Some people just like the the rythms, or fell the music more or something... stoners fucking love prog too lol. I wouldn't say I'm amazingly intelligent, and I love it... so I don't think ones intelligence has to do with it at all. People who are absolutely braindead like tool, for exmple... which is probably why they sell so well...

Written by Introspekrieg on 04.10.2011 at 06:15

Written by Hollberr on 01.08.2011 at 09:29

However, if we only focus on music, there's no doubt Prog Metal is way deeper. First, it is more complex and demands a higher musical knowledge than any other genres to appreciate, but also to write. You can't ask Metallica or Iron Maiden to make a good Progressive album. They just can't do it. You can, though, ask Dream Theater to make a thrash metal album and it's probably going to be VERY good (because of their talent).

Yet, when DT tried to cover Number Of The Beast and Master Of Puppets they both were absolutely TERRIBLE.

They are covers. They're not creative pieces. And I agree James Labrie is just a dick singing those songs! But that has nothing to do with Prog :p

Written by Hollberr on 01.08.2011 at 09:29

Screaming SteelUs, you say there are many progheads who are arrogant and pretentious. I might be one of those. Not that I disrespect the Heavy metal fans or the thrash/hardcore fans, but I don't really like metal except Prog. It's too simple for me. I'm used to listening to classical music with very deep and complex melodies, and, except with Prog Metal, I don't find it elsewhere in the Metal scene. Bands such as Haken or Symphony X (I don't want to mention DT, it's too easy :p) have a special way to play with the scales, the rythm and the melodies, and this brings, for someone who analyses the sheet music, much more work than a... devildriver song.

So from the perspective of someone who studies music (forget the lyrics), Prog Metal is deeper - musically - than it's metal brothers.

This is everything that is wrong with the whole "Prog" mentality. It's a hipster community under the guise of something less superficial. Analyzing sheet music? Are you serious? I guess I can't fault you because you already openly admitted that you might be one of those arrogant and pretentious progheads. The only reason I'm being such a dick I guess is because I might be too pretentious to accept a misspelling of rhythm from someone who studies music... xD

I'm actually studying music in a french university
You have your opinion, I have mine. I'm not saying Prog metal is better than any other metal genres. I'm just saying it's more complex.

I would say that progressive music usually explores more themes and concepts than other forms of music do. Along with more technically complex music, the lyrics often take a more philosophical, or even mystical approach, like Yes for example, who made an album made up of four nearly 20 minute epics (Tales from Topographic Oceans) that explored lead singer Jon Anderson's interpretation of a large footnote of four Shastric scriptures which covered art, medicine, religion, social life, architecture, and music.

I guess that the non-repeating/non linear structure, hence the 'progressiveness' of the genre can be more conductive to more ambitious compositions and lyrics, and could possibly therefore have the potential to be more deep and meaningful, but how deep or meaningful something is really is up to the listener. it seems that quite a few prog lyricists do try to use language that makes there material sound more meaningful though. Whether it works is, again, entirely subjective.

No.

How come I didn't notice this hilarious thread earlier
In short, I think that adding, or finding, extra, more profound meaning to any genre is preposterous and pathetic. It's like saying some shit smells sweeter than other

Music is just what it is, music. Deal with it.

Written by Skeletonryche95 on 27.11.2013 at 17:23
ambitious compositions

This summarises prog. Whether the listener enjoys such ambition or not, it must be appreciated as it is not easily actualised

Written by IronAngel on 04.08.2011 at 22:14

I disagree that meaning in music is subjective. Subjectivity isn't very meaningful. There must be an objective basis in reality, or else meaning is completely arbitrary and can change on whim. And that is pretty much contrary to the definition of meaning. I think meaning is something that is transmitted from one person to another, reinterpreted in the process.

People seem to confuse the meaning of a piece of art with how it makes them feel. You might say something like "this song means a lot to me" when you're actually trying to say that you've made an emotional connection to the piece and the mental associations it evokes. But strictly speaking, isn't meaning something epistemic or rational, saying or signifying something? The meaning of a word is the thing it refers to and how it's used in language, not how it makes you feel subjectively. Etcetera, etcetera.

Anyway, I'm not sure where I'm going with this. I've just had enough of people claiming things like meaning and interpretation in is subjective. By all means, it's not definite or quantifiable. There is a strong interpretational element, but it has to be based on something objective and real, if it is to be anything other than imaginary whims. So I maintain meaning can be discussed and analysed, as long as the participants are part of roughly the same cultural context, because meaning is inter-subjective.


I don't think progressive music pushes boundaries, to be honest. At some point, maybe it did. But even then, it was mostly just importing concepts from other genres into rock music. Experimenting with long suites and mimicking classical music can be refreshing and ambitious, but it hardly guarantees real innovation or artistic value. Then again, I disagree with the definition common in metal, that prog is just anything technical and seemingly new. Prog is definetely a stylistic convention which reached its peak in the 70s, and modern music that doesn't somehow trace its past to that genre shouldn't be called progressive.

Meaning is always subjective.

There's a huge different between objective factual information and the overall interpretation you achieve by connecting pieces of factual data into matrices of meaning. Subjectivity is very meaningful, as each subjective perspective means that factual data will always "mean" something else depending on the position of the observer. If you don't believe me, just see how we're both using differing meanings for the word "meaning".

Meaning is something derived from the observations made by the observer, and the perspective of the observer is always subjective (unless the observer has all things in context--as well as all contexts in their own context--which can only be achieved by being omniscient). If we're talking about language, the meaning of words is hardly objective, as definitions constantly shift and change, and any particular word can mean something completely different in a different context. This includes apparent definitions or the more vague connotations associated with that particular word (these associations with words are most often based on personal experience). That's why colloquialisms are so prevalent within human societies, and you'll find different meanings for different words (whether slight or significant) within the same language as you go from place to place. Take any language anywhere in the world, and look at the history of that language back a few thousand years. Meanings have changed quite a lot over time, since changing societies provide new perspectives and new subjectivity as time wears on. That meaning is subjective is why semantics is such a big field of study.

To further explain the definition of meaning, Wikipedia defines it as:
"In linguistics, meaning is what the source or sender expresses, communicates, or conveys in their message to the observer or receiver, and what the receiver infers from the current context."
Dictionary.com:
"what is intended to be, or actually is, expressed or indicated; signification; import"
Mirriam-Webster:
": the idea that is represented by a word, phrase, etc.
: the idea that a person wants to express by using words, signs, etc.
: the idea that is expressed in a work of writing, art, etc."

In short, meaning refers to how something seems, not how it is.

The quantifiable, real hard facts that we base our meaning of music on is the fact that music is very mathematical. Pitches, timing; it's all quantifiable numbers. Each tone and each placement of each note is definitely factual and real. What's not factual is how it sounds to the observer, or what meaning they derive from the combinations of tones, timing, textures, pitches, etc.

Anyway, I agree with what you say about progressive music. While I like a decent amount of it, it's not always pushing boundaries. Rather, I'd say that, while it doesn't seem to stay confined within the structural boundaries that most other genres adhere to, it does seem to stay within its own, self-defined boundaries.

I also nearly completely agree (except for where you argue the definition of "meaning") with your post where you said the following:

Quote:

I wish I could be more on-topic, but I must refuse to answer the question. Without narrowing it down further, the question is fruitless. Like music, it has too many possible meanings to find any common ground and definitions to start from. This is one of those topics that simply doesn't have a correct answer because it's just too vague and based on gut feeling. Yavanna's post above is a prime example of the empty truisms which are the only answer anyone can honestly give: it's a sensible post, sure, but it isn't actually saying anything at all.

Anyway, great contribution to the thread overall. You're definitely an intelligent individual that knows what you're talking about. I just wanted to (respectfully) argue the definition of meaning with you.

Written by Omnicosm on 03.08.2011 at 01:57

post

I basically feel the same way you do about progressive music. I usually find that bands that I like with the "progressive" label are more interesting to me, as I like how they don't use predictable song structures, and many times use experimental elements to their sound. You can also, like you said, feel quite a bit of passion from their music (sometimes pure, unadulterated passion ).

Then there are tons of other progressive bands that make music that's nothing but a bunch of drug-induced technical wankery, and that's not interesting to me at all.

Basically the answer to this thread is no, progressive music is not deeper and more meaningful. It may suit the tastes of some people more, and it may be slightly more complex than some non-progressive music, which may or may not cause it to hold your attention more, but that doesn't mean that it's objectively or inherently better.

The first wave of Prog Rock was, inndeed, deeper than anything that has ever been done before to that date. Everything after that is just an echo of those years. It can be felt in stuff like In the Court of the Crimson King, Foxtrot or Close to the Edge, for example. Thick as a Brick is another example of how Prog music was just pushing boundaries. It was just something new

I obviously meant in terms of Rock ofc. But even in terms of Jazz, Prog was the evolution of jazz or the first real crossover between it and Rock, as you can check by all the classics, its Jazz being bigger and broader.

Its commonly said that, by the end of the 60's all rock bands were on a crossroad. They would either walk the Blues road and make Classic/Hard Rock or they'd go to the Jazz one and make Prog.

If you ask my opinion, the first prog wave was indeed, bigger than jazz in terms of "Deep Music", since, to me, the very definition of it comes to its Complexity in every aspect (musically, lyrically).

Well, it all depends of our own definition of Deep. To you Deep and Meaningful mean the same obviously.

I love all genres but, for example, something like Thick as a Brick or Close to the Edge are way over anything thats been done in terms of Thrash, Power or Death for example. Even an album like The Human Equation for example.