Print

[A Friend of Charlie]

I like this list much better...know and like all but 2.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/11-best-prog-rock-tracks-to-test-your-hi-fi-system/ar-BB1hYFxc?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6cd5be4c9b224a3890157f6a71b3a76c&ei=75

I'd submit that "Dust in the Wind" is not really prog, and "Red Rain" is a severe stretch.

Just because an artist is or has done prog doesn't make any particular song they did progressive. That would be a Genetic Fallacy.

"Dust" may have an incidentally Baroque structure, but so does most folk music, and the song owes more to the Beatles - specifically "Yesterday" - than to any classical or romance composers. It's beautiful, but it's pop. It's exceedingly good and clever pop, on the whole, but it's pop. Nothing about it challenges the ear, the mind, or one's expectations, which is the defining characteristic of prog.

I believe you. But I had to read this twice because I wasn't sure I understood you.

[razgueado]

I like this list much better...know and like all but 2.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/11-best-prog-rock-tracks-to-test-your-hi-fi-system/ar-BB1hYFxc?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6cd5be4c9b224a3890157f6a71b3a76c&ei=75

I'd submit that "Dust in the Wind" is not really prog, and "Red Rain" is a severe stretch.

Just because an artist is or has done prog doesn't make any particular song they did progressive. That would be a Genetic Fallacy.

"Dust" may have an incidentally Baroque structure, but so does most folk music, and the song owes more to the Beatles - specifically "Yesterday" - than to any classical or romance composers. It's beautiful, but it's pop. It's exceedingly good and clever pop, on the whole, but it's pop. Nothing about it challenges the ear, the mind, or one's expectations, which is the defining characteristic of prog.

I believe you. But I had to read this twice because I wasn't sure I understood you.

Heh. Sorry.

"Dust in the Wind" began life as an acoustic guitar fingerpicking exercise that Kerry Livgren devised for himself. It was a pattern common in folk music. Theoretically, which is to say, "according to music theory," it has a chord structure akin to music by J.S. Bach. Bach was the first prominent composer of the "classical" period and represents the major transition point from the Baroque period to the Classical period, in the same way Mozart and Beethoven ushered in the Romantic period.

But Baroque music persisted in "folk" songs for centuries, including the "folk revival" of the late 50s and early 60s in the US and Great Britain. That folk revival produced such pop and rock luminaries as Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Neil Young, David Crosby, Paul Kantner, Jorma Kaukonen, Grace Slick, John Phillips, Joni Mitchell, and others in North America, and birthed the careers of the Beatles, Donovan Leitch, Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, and Jeff Beck in England (in the form of Skiffle).

Paul McCartney's classic songs "Yesterday" and "Michelle" both represent a folk influence, and are, incidentally, Baroque structures. So was that fingerpicking drill that Kerry Livgren created for himself, and at his wife's urging wrote lyrics for.

Prog music frequently makes use of Baroque, Classical, and Romance music theory. And Kansas was definitely a Prog band. But Prog music deliberately avoids or restructures pop music forms to challenge the listener. It was the Beatles who created the first progressive rock music, though they never defined themselves by it.

In my opinion, "Dust in the Wind" comes to its Baroque form by accident, and in any case doesn't remotely make the listener become versed in any particular music theory to understand it. It's just a beautiful song inspired by folk music. It's not "Prog."

[A Friend of Charlie]

I like this list much better...know and like all but 2.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/11-best-prog-rock-tracks-to-test-your-hi-fi-system/ar-BB1hYFxc?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6cd5be4c9b224a3890157f6a71b3a76c&ei=75

I'd submit that "Dust in the Wind" is not really prog, and "Red Rain" is a severe stretch.

Just because an artist is or has done prog doesn't make any particular song they did progressive. That would be a Genetic Fallacy.

"Dust" may have an incidentally Baroque structure, but so does most folk music, and the song owes more to the Beatles - specifically "Yesterday" - than to any classical or romance composers. It's beautiful, but it's pop. It's exceedingly good and clever pop, on the whole, but it's pop. Nothing about it challenges the ear, the mind, or one's expectations, which is the defining characteristic of prog.

I believe you. But I had to read this twice because I wasn't sure I understood you.

Heh. Sorry.

"Dust in the Wind" began life as an acoustic guitar fingerpicking exercise that Kerry Livgren devised for himself. It was a pattern common in folk music. Theoretically, which is to say, "according to music theory," it has a chord structure akin to music by J.S. Bach. Bach was the first prominent composer of the "classical" period and represents the major transition point from the Baroque period to the Classical period, in the same way Mozart and Beethoven ushered in the Romantic period.

But Baroque music persisted in "folk" songs for centuries, including the "folk revival" of the late 50s and early 60s in the US and Great Britain. That folk revival produced such pop and rock luminaries as Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Neil Young, David Crosby, Paul Kantner, Jorma Kaukonen, Grace Slick, John Phillips, Joni Mitchell, and others in North America, and birthed the careers of the Beatles, Donovan Leitch, Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, and Jeff Beck in England (in the form of Skiffle).

Paul McCartney's classic songs "Yesterday" and "Michelle" both represent a folk influence, and are, incidentally, Baroque structures. So was that fingerpicking drill that Kerry Livgren created for himself, and at his wife's urging wrote lyrics for.

Prog music frequently makes use of Baroque, Classical, and Romance music theory. And Kansas was definitely a Prog band. But Prog music deliberately avoids or restructures pop music forms to challenge the listener. It was the Beatles who created the first progressive rock music, though they never defined themselves by it.

In my opinion, "Dust in the Wind" comes to its Baroque form by accident, and in any case doesn't remotely make the listener become versed in any particular music theory to understand it. It's just a beautiful song inspired by folk music. It's not "Prog."

I love it. Very interesting to me especially because I like that Kansas song and am a big Beatles fan.

[A Friend of Charlie]

I like this list much better...know and like all but 2.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/11-best-prog-rock-tracks-to-test-your-hi-fi-system/ar-BB1hYFxc?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6cd5be4c9b224a3890157f6a71b3a76c&ei=75

I'd submit that "Dust in the Wind" is not really prog, and "Red Rain" is a severe stretch.

Just because an artist is or has done prog doesn't make any particular song they did progressive. That would be a Genetic Fallacy.

"Dust" may have an incidentally Baroque structure, but so does most folk music, and the song owes more to the Beatles - specifically "Yesterday" - than to any classical or romance composers. It's beautiful, but it's pop. It's exceedingly good and clever pop, on the whole, but it's pop. Nothing about it challenges the ear, the mind, or one's expectations, which is the defining characteristic of prog.

I believe you. But I had to read this twice because I wasn't sure I understood you.

Heh. Sorry.

"Dust in the Wind" began life as an acoustic guitar fingerpicking exercise that Kerry Livgren devised for himself. It was a pattern common in folk music. Theoretically, which is to say, "according to music theory," it has a chord structure akin to music by J.S. Bach. Bach was the first prominent composer of the "classical" period and represents the major transition point from the Baroque period to the Classical period, in the same way Mozart and Beethoven ushered in the Romantic period.

But Baroque music persisted in "folk" songs for centuries, including the "folk revival" of the late 50s and early 60s in the US and Great Britain. That folk revival produced such pop and rock luminaries as Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Neil Young, David Crosby, Paul Kantner, Jorma Kaukonen, Grace Slick, John Phillips, Joni Mitchell, and others in North America, and birthed the careers of the Beatles, Donovan Leitch, Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, and Jeff Beck in England (in the form of Skiffle).

Paul McCartney's classic songs "Yesterday" and "Michelle" both represent a folk influence, and are, incidentally, Baroque structures. So was that fingerpicking drill that Kerry Livgren created for himself, and at his wife's urging wrote lyrics for.

Prog music frequently makes use of Baroque, Classical, and Romance music theory. And Kansas was definitely a Prog band. But Prog music deliberately avoids or restructures pop music forms to challenge the listener. It was the Beatles who created the first progressive rock music, though they never defined themselves by it.

In my opinion, "Dust in the Wind" comes to its Baroque form by accident, and in any case doesn't remotely make the listener become versed in any particular music theory to understand it. It's just a beautiful song inspired by folk music. It's not "Prog."

I love it. Very interesting to me especially because I like that Kansas song and am a big Beatles fan.

My son Max will also be very interested in it when I feed him this nugget.

[razgueado]

I like this list much better...know and like all but 2.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/11-best-prog-rock-tracks-to-test-your-hi-fi-system/ar-BB1hYFxc?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6cd5be4c9b224a3890157f6a71b3a76c&ei=75

I'd submit that "Dust in the Wind" is not really prog, and "Red Rain" is a severe stretch.

Just because an artist is or has done prog doesn't make any particular song they did progressive. That would be a Genetic Fallacy.

"Dust" may have an incidentally Baroque structure, but so does most folk music, and the song owes more to the Beatles - specifically "Yesterday" - than to any classical or romance composers. It's beautiful, but it's pop. It's exceedingly good and clever pop, on the whole, but it's pop. Nothing about it challenges the ear, the mind, or one's expectations, which is the defining characteristic of prog.

I believe you. But I had to read this twice because I wasn't sure I understood you.

Heh. Sorry.

"Dust in the Wind" began life as an acoustic guitar fingerpicking exercise that Kerry Livgren devised for himself. It was a pattern common in folk music. Theoretically, which is to say, "according to music theory," it has a chord structure akin to music by J.S. Bach. Bach was the first prominent composer of the "classical" period and represents the major transition point from the Baroque period to the Classical period, in the same way Mozart and Beethoven ushered in the Romantic period.

But Baroque music persisted in "folk" songs for centuries, including the "folk revival" of the late 50s and early 60s in the US and Great Britain. That folk revival produced such pop and rock luminaries as Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Neil Young, David Crosby, Paul Kantner, Jorma Kaukonen, Grace Slick, John Phillips, Joni Mitchell, and others in North America, and birthed the careers of the Beatles, Donovan Leitch, Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, and Jeff Beck in England (in the form of Skiffle).

Paul McCartney's classic songs "Yesterday" and "Michelle" both represent a folk influence, and are, incidentally, Baroque structures. So was that fingerpicking drill that Kerry Livgren created for himself, and at his wife's urging wrote lyrics for.

Prog music frequently makes use of Baroque, Classical, and Romance music theory. And Kansas was definitely a Prog band. But Prog music deliberately avoids or restructures pop music forms to challenge the listener. It was the Beatles who created the first progressive rock music, though they never defined themselves by it.

In my opinion, "Dust in the Wind" comes to its Baroque form by accident, and in any case doesn't remotely make the listener become versed in any particular music theory to understand it. It's just a beautiful song inspired by folk music. It's not "Prog."

I love it. Very interesting to me especially because I like that Kansas song and am a big Beatles fan.

My son Max will also be very interested in it when I feed him this nugget.

If you really want to blow his mind, show him this clip of a teenaged Jimmy Page playing in a Skiffle band, doing a classic American folk song.

This is from April 1957 which was just a few months before Paul McCartney met John Lennon and joined his band, and just shy of a year before McCartney invited his friend George Harrison to play with them.

https://youtu.be/20zIiUDlVcc?si=WpmAfxe_pZNCzUjT

[Travellin Dave]

I like this list much better...know and like all but 2.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/11-best-prog-rock-tracks-to-test-your-hi-fi-system/ar-BB1hYFxc?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6cd5be4c9b224a3890157f6a71b3a76c&ei=75

I'd submit that "Dust in the Wind" is not really prog, and "Red Rain" is a severe stretch.

Just because an artist is or has done prog doesn't make any particular song they did progressive. That would be a Genetic Fallacy.

"Dust" may have an incidentally Baroque structure, but so does most folk music, and the song owes more to the Beatles - specifically "Yesterday" - than to any classical or romance composers. It's beautiful, but it's pop. It's exceedingly good and clever pop, on the whole, but it's pop. Nothing about it challenges the ear, the mind, or one's expectations, which is the defining characteristic of prog.

I believe you. But I had to read this twice because I wasn't sure I understood you.

Heh. Sorry.

"Dust in the Wind" began life as an acoustic guitar fingerpicking exercise that Kerry Livgren devised for himself. It was a pattern common in folk music. Theoretically, which is to say, "according to music theory," it has a chord structure akin to music by J.S. Bach. Bach was the first prominent composer of the "classical" period and represents the major transition point from the Baroque period to the Classical period, in the same way Mozart and Beethoven ushered in the Romantic period.

But Baroque music persisted in "folk" songs for centuries, including the "folk revival" of the late 50s and early 60s in the US and Great Britain. That folk revival produced such pop and rock luminaries as Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Neil Young, David Crosby, Paul Kantner, Jorma Kaukonen, Grace Slick, John Phillips, Joni Mitchell, and others in North America, and birthed the careers of the Beatles, Donovan Leitch, Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, and Jeff Beck in England (in the form of Skiffle).

Paul McCartney's classic songs "Yesterday" and "Michelle" both represent a folk influence, and are, incidentally, Baroque structures. So was that fingerpicking drill that Kerry Livgren created for himself, and at his wife's urging wrote lyrics for.

Prog music frequently makes use of Baroque, Classical, and Romance music theory. And Kansas was definitely a Prog band. But Prog music deliberately avoids or restructures pop music forms to challenge the listener. It was the Beatles who created the first progressive rock music, though they never defined themselves by it.

In my opinion, "Dust in the Wind" comes to its Baroque form by accident, and in any case doesn't remotely make the listener become versed in any particular music theory to understand it. It's just a beautiful song inspired by folk music. It's not "Prog."

And contrary to speculation, Dust in the Wind is not from biblical reference, but from a Native American poem as may Kansas pieces have Native American origins or reference.

[razgueado]

I like this list much better...know and like all but 2.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/11-best-prog-rock-tracks-to-test-your-hi-fi-system/ar-BB1hYFxc?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6cd5be4c9b224a3890157f6a71b3a76c&ei=75

I'd submit that "Dust in the Wind" is not really prog, and "Red Rain" is a severe stretch.

Just because an artist is or has done prog doesn't make any particular song they did progressive. That would be a Genetic Fallacy.

"Dust" may have an incidentally Baroque structure, but so does most folk music, and the song owes more to the Beatles - specifically "Yesterday" - than to any classical or romance composers. It's beautiful, but it's pop. It's exceedingly good and clever pop, on the whole, but it's pop. Nothing about it challenges the ear, the mind, or one's expectations, which is the defining characteristic of prog.

I believe you. But I had to read this twice because I wasn't sure I understood you.

Heh. Sorry.

"Dust in the Wind" began life as an acoustic guitar fingerpicking exercise that Kerry Livgren devised for himself. It was a pattern common in folk music. Theoretically, which is to say, "according to music theory," it has a chord structure akin to music by J.S. Bach. Bach was the first prominent composer of the "classical" period and represents the major transition point from the Baroque period to the Classical period, in the same way Mozart and Beethoven ushered in the Romantic period.

But Baroque music persisted in "folk" songs for centuries, including the "folk revival" of the late 50s and early 60s in the US and Great Britain. That folk revival produced such pop and rock luminaries as Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Neil Young, David Crosby, Paul Kantner, Jorma Kaukonen, Grace Slick, John Phillips, Joni Mitchell, and others in North America, and birthed the careers of the Beatles, Donovan Leitch, Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, and Jeff Beck in England (in the form of Skiffle).

Paul McCartney's classic songs "Yesterday" and "Michelle" both represent a folk influence, and are, incidentally, Baroque structures. So was that fingerpicking drill that Kerry Livgren created for himself, and at his wife's urging wrote lyrics for.

Prog music frequently makes use of Baroque, Classical, and Romance music theory. And Kansas was definitely a Prog band. But Prog music deliberately avoids or restructures pop music forms to challenge the listener. It was the Beatles who created the first progressive rock music, though they never defined themselves by it.

In my opinion, "Dust in the Wind" comes to its Baroque form by accident, and in any case doesn't remotely make the listener become versed in any particular music theory to understand it. It's just a beautiful song inspired by folk music. It's not "Prog."

And contrary to speculation, Dust in the Wind is not from biblical reference, but from a Native American poem as may Kansas pieces have Native American origins or reference.

It's both. The song was written in 1977. Livgren would ultimately convert to Christianity about 1979, after a long period of spiritual exploration that had led him to explore Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, the Urantia Book, Native American spiritualism, and the Bible. When he wrote the lyrics, he was pondering similarities among these influences. He has said the Bible was as much an inspiration as the others, as they all express the transience of life in terms of dust before the wind.

Livgren's conversion would ultimately lead to a somewhat famous exchange between him and Steve Walsh when Walsh announced he was leaving the band because Livgren was writing so much about his newfound Christianity. Livgren said something to Walsh to the effect of, "Jesus is the problem? You didn't seem to have an issue when I was writing about Buddha."

[A Friend of Charlie]

I like this list much better...know and like all but 2.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/11-best-prog-rock-tracks-to-test-your-hi-fi-system/ar-BB1hYFxc?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6cd5be4c9b224a3890157f6a71b3a76c&ei=75

I'd submit that "Dust in the Wind" is not really prog, and "Red Rain" is a severe stretch.

Just because an artist is or has done prog doesn't make any particular song they did progressive. That would be a Genetic Fallacy.

"Dust" may have an incidentally Baroque structure, but so does most folk music, and the song owes more to the Beatles - specifically "Yesterday" - than to any classical or romance composers. It's beautiful, but it's pop. It's exceedingly good and clever pop, on the whole, but it's pop. Nothing about it challenges the ear, the mind, or one's expectations, which is the defining characteristic of prog.

I believe you. But I had to read this twice because I wasn't sure I understood you.

Heh. Sorry.

"Dust in the Wind" began life as an acoustic guitar fingerpicking exercise that Kerry Livgren devised for himself. It was a pattern common in folk music. Theoretically, which is to say, "according to music theory," it has a chord structure akin to music by J.S. Bach. Bach was the first prominent composer of the "classical" period and represents the major transition point from the Baroque period to the Classical period, in the same way Mozart and Beethoven ushered in the Romantic period.

But Baroque music persisted in "folk" songs for centuries, including the "folk revival" of the late 50s and early 60s in the US and Great Britain. That folk revival produced such pop and rock luminaries as Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Neil Young, David Crosby, Paul Kantner, Jorma Kaukonen, Grace Slick, John Phillips, Joni Mitchell, and others in North America, and birthed the careers of the Beatles, Donovan Leitch, Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, and Jeff Beck in England (in the form of Skiffle).

Paul McCartney's classic songs "Yesterday" and "Michelle" both represent a folk influence, and are, incidentally, Baroque structures. So was that fingerpicking drill that Kerry Livgren created for himself, and at his wife's urging wrote lyrics for.

Prog music frequently makes use of Baroque, Classical, and Romance music theory. And Kansas was definitely a Prog band. But Prog music deliberately avoids or restructures pop music forms to challenge the listener. It was the Beatles who created the first progressive rock music, though they never defined themselves by it.

In my opinion, "Dust in the Wind" comes to its Baroque form by accident, and in any case doesn't remotely make the listener become versed in any particular music theory to understand it. It's just a beautiful song inspired by folk music. It's not "Prog."

I love it. Very interesting to me especially because I like that Kansas song and am a big Beatles fan.

My son Max will also be very interested in it when I feed him this nugget.

If you really want to blow his mind, show him this clip of a teenaged Jimmy Page playing in a Skiffle band, doing a classic American folk song.

This is from April 1957 which was just a few months before Paul McCartney met John Lennon and joined his band, and just shy of a year before McCartney invited his friend George Harrison to play with them.

https://youtu.be/20zIiUDlVcc?si=WpmAfxe_pZNCzUjT

That's crazy and awesome. How did you come upon that?

[razgueado]

And I'm reluctant to name-drop here, because I've done it frequently. But I have had the great good fortune to meet a number of famous and semi-famous musicians - mostly semi-famous. Kerry Livgren is arguably the most famous artist I've met. Slightly ahead of Maria Muldaur and Eric Johnson. Maybe Cat Stevens tops them all, but I didn't so much meet Stevens as babysit him. Long story.

I met Livgren because my period of radicalized Christian theology and ministry coincided with his period of questioning his music-biz fame as a Christian. He attended a ministerial conference in Portland where I performed. We were introduced by my mentor Garry Friesen, who is semi-famous in Evangelical circles for his book, "Decision Making and the Will of God," which Livgren had read and which led him to seek out Friesen at the conference.  I was one of Friesen's "fair-haired boys," so I got to meet Livgren, and have a conversation with him, Friesen, and Tony Campolo. In those days, those guys were like demi-gods to me.

[razgueado]

I like this list much better...know and like all but 2.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/11-best-prog-rock-tracks-to-test-your-hi-fi-system/ar-BB1hYFxc?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6cd5be4c9b224a3890157f6a71b3a76c&ei=75

I'd submit that "Dust in the Wind" is not really prog, and "Red Rain" is a severe stretch.

Just because an artist is or has done prog doesn't make any particular song they did progressive. That would be a Genetic Fallacy.

"Dust" may have an incidentally Baroque structure, but so does most folk music, and the song owes more to the Beatles - specifically "Yesterday" - than to any classical or romance composers. It's beautiful, but it's pop. It's exceedingly good and clever pop, on the whole, but it's pop. Nothing about it challenges the ear, the mind, or one's expectations, which is the defining characteristic of prog.

I believe you. But I had to read this twice because I wasn't sure I understood you.

Heh. Sorry.

"Dust in the Wind" began life as an acoustic guitar fingerpicking exercise that Kerry Livgren devised for himself. It was a pattern common in folk music. Theoretically, which is to say, "according to music theory," it has a chord structure akin to music by J.S. Bach. Bach was the first prominent composer of the "classical" period and represents the major transition point from the Baroque period to the Classical period, in the same way Mozart and Beethoven ushered in the Romantic period.

But Baroque music persisted in "folk" songs for centuries, including the "folk revival" of the late 50s and early 60s in the US and Great Britain. That folk revival produced such pop and rock luminaries as Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Neil Young, David Crosby, Paul Kantner, Jorma Kaukonen, Grace Slick, John Phillips, Joni Mitchell, and others in North America, and birthed the careers of the Beatles, Donovan Leitch, Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, and Jeff Beck in England (in the form of Skiffle).

Paul McCartney's classic songs "Yesterday" and "Michelle" both represent a folk influence, and are, incidentally, Baroque structures. So was that fingerpicking drill that Kerry Livgren created for himself, and at his wife's urging wrote lyrics for.

Prog music frequently makes use of Baroque, Classical, and Romance music theory. And Kansas was definitely a Prog band. But Prog music deliberately avoids or restructures pop music forms to challenge the listener. It was the Beatles who created the first progressive rock music, though they never defined themselves by it.

In my opinion, "Dust in the Wind" comes to its Baroque form by accident, and in any case doesn't remotely make the listener become versed in any particular music theory to understand it. It's just a beautiful song inspired by folk music. It's not "Prog."

I love it. Very interesting to me especially because I like that Kansas song and am a big Beatles fan.

My son Max will also be very interested in it when I feed him this nugget.

If you really want to blow his mind, show him this clip of a teenaged Jimmy Page playing in a Skiffle band, doing a classic American folk song.

This is from April 1957 which was just a few months before Paul McCartney met John Lennon and joined his band, and just shy of a year before McCartney invited his friend George Harrison to play with them.

https://youtu.be/20zIiUDlVcc?si=WpmAfxe_pZNCzUjT

That's crazy and awesome. How did you come upon that?

There's a place called The Gear Page, where a bunch of musicians, mostly guitarists, hang out and talk about music and the equipment we use. It's like CigarBanter, but bigger.

[Travellin Dave]

I like this list much better...know and like all but 2.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/11-best-prog-rock-tracks-to-test-your-hi-fi-system/ar-BB1hYFxc?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6cd5be4c9b224a3890157f6a71b3a76c&ei=75

I'd submit that "Dust in the Wind" is not really prog, and "Red Rain" is a severe stretch.

Just because an artist is or has done prog doesn't make any particular song they did progressive. That would be a Genetic Fallacy.

"Dust" may have an incidentally Baroque structure, but so does most folk music, and the song owes more to the Beatles - specifically "Yesterday" - than to any classical or romance composers. It's beautiful, but it's pop. It's exceedingly good and clever pop, on the whole, but it's pop. Nothing about it challenges the ear, the mind, or one's expectations, which is the defining characteristic of prog.

I believe you. But I had to read this twice because I wasn't sure I understood you.

Heh. Sorry.

"Dust in the Wind" began life as an acoustic guitar fingerpicking exercise that Kerry Livgren devised for himself. It was a pattern common in folk music. Theoretically, which is to say, "according to music theory," it has a chord structure akin to music by J.S. Bach. Bach was the first prominent composer of the "classical" period and represents the major transition point from the Baroque period to the Classical period, in the same way Mozart and Beethoven ushered in the Romantic period.

But Baroque music persisted in "folk" songs for centuries, including the "folk revival" of the late 50s and early 60s in the US and Great Britain. That folk revival produced such pop and rock luminaries as Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Neil Young, David Crosby, Paul Kantner, Jorma Kaukonen, Grace Slick, John Phillips, Joni Mitchell, and others in North America, and birthed the careers of the Beatles, Donovan Leitch, Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, and Jeff Beck in England (in the form of Skiffle).

Paul McCartney's classic songs "Yesterday" and "Michelle" both represent a folk influence, and are, incidentally, Baroque structures. So was that fingerpicking drill that Kerry Livgren created for himself, and at his wife's urging wrote lyrics for.

Prog music frequently makes use of Baroque, Classical, and Romance music theory. And Kansas was definitely a Prog band. But Prog music deliberately avoids or restructures pop music forms to challenge the listener. It was the Beatles who created the first progressive rock music, though they never defined themselves by it.

In my opinion, "Dust in the Wind" comes to its Baroque form by accident, and in any case doesn't remotely make the listener become versed in any particular music theory to understand it. It's just a beautiful song inspired by folk music. It's not "Prog."

I love it. Very interesting to me especially because I like that Kansas song and am a big Beatles fan.

My son Max will also be very interested in it when I feed him this nugget.

If you really want to blow his mind, show him this clip of a teenaged Jimmy Page playing in a Skiffle band, doing a classic American folk song.

This is from April 1957 which was just a few months before Paul McCartney met John Lennon and joined his band, and just shy of a year before McCartney invited his friend George Harrison to play with them.

https://youtu.be/20zIiUDlVcc?si=WpmAfxe_pZNCzUjT

That's crazy and awesome. How did you come upon that?

There's a place called The Gear Page, where a bunch of musicians, mostly guitarists, hang out and talk about music and the equipment we use. It's like CigarBanter, but bigger.

That doesn't take too much....    

[LuvTooGolf]

LT maddie

[A Friend of Charlie]

I like this list much better...know and like all but 2.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/11-best-prog-rock-tracks-to-test-your-hi-fi-system/ar-BB1hYFxc?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6cd5be4c9b224a3890157f6a71b3a76c&ei=75

I'd submit that "Dust in the Wind" is not really prog, and "Red Rain" is a severe stretch.

Just because an artist is or has done prog doesn't make any particular song they did progressive. That would be a Genetic Fallacy.

"Dust" may have an incidentally Baroque structure, but so does most folk music, and the song owes more to the Beatles - specifically "Yesterday" - than to any classical or romance composers. It's beautiful, but it's pop. It's exceedingly good and clever pop, on the whole, but it's pop. Nothing about it challenges the ear, the mind, or one's expectations, which is the defining characteristic of prog.

I believe you. But I had to read this twice because I wasn't sure I understood you.

Heh. Sorry.

"Dust in the Wind" began life as an acoustic guitar fingerpicking exercise that Kerry Livgren devised for himself. It was a pattern common in folk music. Theoretically, which is to say, "according to music theory," it has a chord structure akin to music by J.S. Bach. Bach was the first prominent composer of the "classical" period and represents the major transition point from the Baroque period to the Classical period, in the same way Mozart and Beethoven ushered in the Romantic period.

But Baroque music persisted in "folk" songs for centuries, including the "folk revival" of the late 50s and early 60s in the US and Great Britain. That folk revival produced such pop and rock luminaries as Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Neil Young, David Crosby, Paul Kantner, Jorma Kaukonen, Grace Slick, John Phillips, Joni Mitchell, and others in North America, and birthed the careers of the Beatles, Donovan Leitch, Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, and Jeff Beck in England (in the form of Skiffle).

Paul McCartney's classic songs "Yesterday" and "Michelle" both represent a folk influence, and are, incidentally, Baroque structures. So was that fingerpicking drill that Kerry Livgren created for himself, and at his wife's urging wrote lyrics for.

Prog music frequently makes use of Baroque, Classical, and Romance music theory. And Kansas was definitely a Prog band. But Prog music deliberately avoids or restructures pop music forms to challenge the listener. It was the Beatles who created the first progressive rock music, though they never defined themselves by it.

In my opinion, "Dust in the Wind" comes to its Baroque form by accident, and in any case doesn't remotely make the listener become versed in any particular music theory to understand it. It's just a beautiful song inspired by folk music. It's not "Prog."

I love it. Very interesting to me especially because I like that Kansas song and am a big Beatles fan.

My son Max will also be very interested in it when I feed him this nugget.

If you really want to blow his mind, show him this clip of a teenaged Jimmy Page playing in a Skiffle band, doing a classic American folk song.

This is from April 1957 which was just a few months before Paul McCartney met John Lennon and joined his band, and just shy of a year before McCartney invited his friend George Harrison to play with them.

https://youtu.be/20zIiUDlVcc?si=WpmAfxe_pZNCzUjT

That's crazy and awesome. How did you come upon that?

There's a place called The Gear Page, where a bunch of musicians, mostly guitarists, hang out and talk about music and the equipment we use. It's like CigarBanter, but bigger.

Bigger? How can that be? More than four dudes??

[A Friend of Charlie]

LT maddie

Mmmm. Haven't had one in a while. Pretty sure I can find some, if I bothered to look.

[razgueado]

I like this list much better...know and like all but 2.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/11-best-prog-rock-tracks-to-test-your-hi-fi-system/ar-BB1hYFxc?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6cd5be4c9b224a3890157f6a71b3a76c&ei=75

I'd submit that "Dust in the Wind" is not really prog, and "Red Rain" is a severe stretch.

Just because an artist is or has done prog doesn't make any particular song they did progressive. That would be a Genetic Fallacy.

"Dust" may have an incidentally Baroque structure, but so does most folk music, and the song owes more to the Beatles - specifically "Yesterday" - than to any classical or romance composers. It's beautiful, but it's pop. It's exceedingly good and clever pop, on the whole, but it's pop. Nothing about it challenges the ear, the mind, or one's expectations, which is the defining characteristic of prog.

I believe you. But I had to read this twice because I wasn't sure I understood you.

Heh. Sorry.

"Dust in the Wind" began life as an acoustic guitar fingerpicking exercise that Kerry Livgren devised for himself. It was a pattern common in folk music. Theoretically, which is to say, "according to music theory," it has a chord structure akin to music by J.S. Bach. Bach was the first prominent composer of the "classical" period and represents the major transition point from the Baroque period to the Classical period, in the same way Mozart and Beethoven ushered in the Romantic period.

But Baroque music persisted in "folk" songs for centuries, including the "folk revival" of the late 50s and early 60s in the US and Great Britain. That folk revival produced such pop and rock luminaries as Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Neil Young, David Crosby, Paul Kantner, Jorma Kaukonen, Grace Slick, John Phillips, Joni Mitchell, and others in North America, and birthed the careers of the Beatles, Donovan Leitch, Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, and Jeff Beck in England (in the form of Skiffle).

Paul McCartney's classic songs "Yesterday" and "Michelle" both represent a folk influence, and are, incidentally, Baroque structures. So was that fingerpicking drill that Kerry Livgren created for himself, and at his wife's urging wrote lyrics for.

Prog music frequently makes use of Baroque, Classical, and Romance music theory. And Kansas was definitely a Prog band. But Prog music deliberately avoids or restructures pop music forms to challenge the listener. It was the Beatles who created the first progressive rock music, though they never defined themselves by it.

In my opinion, "Dust in the Wind" comes to its Baroque form by accident, and in any case doesn't remotely make the listener become versed in any particular music theory to understand it. It's just a beautiful song inspired by folk music. It's not "Prog."

I love it. Very interesting to me especially because I like that Kansas song and am a big Beatles fan.

My son Max will also be very interested in it when I feed him this nugget.

If you really want to blow his mind, show him this clip of a teenaged Jimmy Page playing in a Skiffle band, doing a classic American folk song.

This is from April 1957 which was just a few months before Paul McCartney met John Lennon and joined his band, and just shy of a year before McCartney invited his friend George Harrison to play with them.

https://youtu.be/20zIiUDlVcc?si=WpmAfxe_pZNCzUjT

That's crazy and awesome. How did you come upon that?

There's a place called The Gear Page, where a bunch of musicians, mostly guitarists, hang out and talk about music and the equipment we use. It's like CigarBanter, but bigger.

Bigger? How can that be? More than four dudes??

Yeah, but with twenty times the bullshit, too.