Originally Posted by Foxhound
I never said they were "prog" though. I said they were a progressive rock band.
That though is precisely the problem for me and the point on which we disagree. I don't believe the two terms should be used as synonyms. The people inclined to use the terms as synonyms are thereby co-opting the term "progressive rock" to refer merely to the narrow subset of those art rock bands like the six on your list. The original meaning of progressive rock was much broader. I had never heard the term "prog" until I joined the predecessor of this board in 2003 or so.
My favourite Ten Years After LP is either Ssssh
or Cricklewood Green
. It's a tough call for me.
Well..imho you are co-opting the term to use it the way you want to...prog was always merely a shortened usage for prog rock...again I have never read anything different by any music expert or reviewer. Please correct me and find such an article from back in the day and I'll be glad to concede to that point. The term art rock was used to mean prog rock also at times.
btw....one can still consider a band having prog elements without calling it a 'prog rock' band....bands like Zeppelin, The Who and BOC are on PA as either prog related or crossover bands. If we use the term as loosely as you would like then almost any band can be called progressive rock based on a personal opinion because they did one or two longer songs or used an unusual instrument once or twice...but does that make the band progressive? That's a whole discussion in itself.
Sssh is a good album but for me Cricklewood is the most interesting thing they did while still maintaining a blues rock foundation.