Well, okay, now I see you aren't exactly caught up on today's progressive scene. To me, progressive (or just "prog") is an entire genre in itself, even if the boundaries are pretty blurry. Today's prog/rock/metal players and this current generation of guitarists are anything but:
marlon said:...that whole stereotype about overdriven guitars, bald or long-haired heads flailing around, 35-minute solos, absolute carnage inflicted on amps and guitars, and those weird ideological, sociological, or existential detours—all wrapped up in that classic image of unrepentant junkies and total eccentrics....
Every single band you just listed (
The Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Fleetwood Mac, Jethro Tull, Deep Purple, Led Zeppelin, Emerson, Lake & Palmer, Dire Straits, U2, AC/DC, Eric Clapton, ZZ Top, Aerosmith, Bon Jovi, Iron Maiden, R.E.M., and even Queen and KISS) was massive back in their day—and still is. You can't really say the same for bands like Dream Theater, Pain of Salvation, Ark, Andromeda, Planet X, Psychotic Waltz, Fates Warning, Shadow Gallery... the list goes on and on... or guitarists like Steve Vai, Satriani, Mike Macalpine, or Petrucci...
Honestly, I highly doubt any of them will ever hit the level of popularity of the names you mentioned, let alone become mainstream or achieve that legendary status held by the likes of Led Zeppelin (who probably earned it, too).
And look, I'm not saying everything that's popular is garbage; I just wasn't sure what you were getting at. And no, I wouldn't call these other bands "avant-garde" or "cultural revolutionaries." They're just driven by a love for the music, trying out new things, and, like I said, they have an artistic mindset. Money isn't their main motivator in life—though obviously, they need it to survive through their music—it's primarily about the music itself.