Is there such a thing as progressive blues?

I say there is. Although there are some who say "Blues and prog are antithetical", and some define "Prog" as having classical elements and complex time changes with "no trace of the blues", I find that definition rather confining and academic. A lot of music that has been labeled Progressive rock is labeled as such partially on its use of extended improvisations (a key element in progressive jazz which was a major influence on progressive rock) and these improvisations often find expression in blues forms. Examples:
1. The Progressive Blues Experiment by Johnny Winter. Most traditional blues artists began their recording careers in the age of 78 RPM records which had a time limit of 3 minutes per side, and with a few exceptions, most of them usually stayed within that framework. Johnny Winter was one of several blues artists who extended those time limitations.
2. The Paul Butterfield Blues Band, with the blues as a basis, branched out into some very progressive pieces like "East-West."
3. The Allman Brothers Band and the Grateful Dead often worked in a blues framework as a basis for long, exploratory jams involving classical and jazz influences.. This is not to say that the Dead and the Allmans were exclusively prog bands but much of their music had quite progressive elements.
4.. Cream's epic length jams on blues standards like "Spoonful" are about as close to progressive jazz as any rock music I've heard, getting "outside" and "real gone" on extended improv and knowing when to "bring it home."
5. IMO, the definitive progressive blues album is Canned Heat's double Living the Blues which is very rootsy and very progressive and experimental at the same time, especially on the 20-minute blues suite "Parthenogenesis" and the 41-minute "Refried Boogie" with its jazz and raga elements and Henry Vestine's spacey unaccompanied guitar solo.
6. No one would say that Emerson, Lake and Palmer were not progressive but they used blues elements in several of their pieces, particularly the "Blues Variation" on "The Old Castle" from their rocked up version of Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition.
Perspectives will differ according to the divergent definitions of "Progressive" or "Prog" (which I see as the same thing since one is simply a shortened form of the other, although some have different definitions for the full word and the abbreviation of it). It's all subjective, but that's my take on it.

 

But these are all rock and roll examples.

One could argue Corey Harris' blues work at broadening in modern times, whilst anchoring the blues to its past is progressive.

And possibly, Elliott Sharp's deconstructionist Fractal Blues is progressive.

 

Interesting post. I think there's a tendency for some folks to want to categorize music into a particular genre. And then you have sub-genres.
Artists are influenced by previous artists, and meld their own style into their influences. While a large segment of music can be clearly defined by genre, the rest cannot. I have 2,000 albums, and I don't use genre tags at all. May work for many people, but too complicated for me.

 

Not strictly progrock, but in the early seventies there were many british bands playing a hybrid of different styles, seamlessly shfting from blues, to progressive, heavy rock, folk and whatnot. The Groundhogs, Man and Edgar Broughton Band come to mind. We might even include Led Zeppelin in the discussion.

 

General speaking Blues is a form while progressive rock is a style. Gershwin and Cole Porter sometimes wrote in blues forms, though the hallmarks of what most consider the blues (pentatonic notes, flat 5; mournful, often repetitive lyrics) are absent. Students studying jazz at a high level are always playing blues, say such as Monk's Blues, that sound nothing like Muddy Waters. Blues structure is an essential building block for jazz.

I feel that if you're looking for music that is using blues forms, in a heavy, post-rock way; in odd time signatures, impressive soloing, that unfolds over long periods of time - you are actually describing progressive rock's sister, fusion jazz. Artists like Robben Ford, Headhunters, Return to Forever, Al Dimeola have all taken blues to the absolute extremes in their fusion jazz work.

 

Arguably all or most of jazz is 'progressive blues', applying the licks and feeling to other structures.

 

I am one of those people who considers prog and blues to be antithetical, but that’s not to say there weren’t bands who dabbled in both. Along with some of the bands already mentioned in the OP, Deep Purple comes immediately to mind as a band who borrowed a lot from both blues rock and progressive rock. That being said, I still wouldn’t say there’s any such cohesive genre as “progressive blues rock” or anything like that. Rather, there are just a few bands who happened to try a bit of both.

Another point I would like to make is the distinction between progressive music and prog rock. “Progressive” is generally a broad term that basically means “experimental,” whereas “progressive rock” refers to the very specific style of music primarily made by bands like Genesis and Yes in the early 70’s (which, ironically, hasn’t always been particularly “progressive”). Thus, you can have rock bands who are by definition progressive, but who aren’t “progressive rock.” That’s what I think you have in cases like the Grateful Dead and Cream. They were undeniably experimental or “progressive, they have no real connection to “progressive rock,” aside from the latter band’s possible influence on the genre.

Despite there not being any cohesive “progressive blues rock” genre (at least that I’m aware of), I won’t say there aren’t styles of blues music that are by definition “progressive.” I’m not particularly knowledgeable about blues, so for all I know there could be blues music out there that pushes the boundaries of the genre in the same way as someone like Tim Buckley did for folk or someone like Sun Ra did for jazz.

 

Maybe American Primitivism artists like John Fahey, Sandy Bull and Suni Mcgrath should be mentioned as well. Although I'd file them in the first place under 'folk', they borrowed heavily from the blues, while also using raga-influenced eastern-flavored patterns. This is a sidelong suite from 1969, by Suni McGrath:

 

What about something like Grinder Blues which is self described as ZZ Top dropped to B.

 

Progressive blues, hmmmmm......Jethro Tull seems to fit this category.

 

Blues with strings by Harry Lowther

 

and vice versa.

 

Johnny Winter—Progressive Blues Experiment.
See the link below. But it’s really just electrified Blues.
Zappa played a lot of Blues based music that was borderline “prog.”

 

I am confused.

 

Progressive blues? That's easy.
I want to know what would a Progressive Punk Rock band sound like.
Anyone?

 

Captain Beefheart?

 

Yes. Chris Whitley's music headed in this direction.

 

Little Axe.

 

The Doors, when they wanted to.

Try the second Ultravox record. Maybe the closest thing if we're speaking of conventional definitions of either.

 

Grinder Blues is more like Kings X Lite.

 

I think it was Pil

 

Gentle Giant were out there musically, but the guitarist was playing blues rock most of the time.

 

I dunno, is it even possible to "wake up this morning" in alternate measures of 13/16 & 7/8?
And, would you be a wood sprite, or a wizard..

 

So, it appears any blues rock from '68 - '72 can be considered progressive blues.

 

Groundhogs from the UK.