Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Proto-Prog and Prog-Related Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Objection: Queen/prog-related on top 100
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedObjection: Queen/prog-related on top 100
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
The Rock View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 30 2005
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 746 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2006 at 10:54

Queen deserves to be on PA.And if they have enough good prog and/or prog related moments to be in the top 100,then why not?

Same thing applies to Deep Purple,Uriah Heep,Styx,Magnum ect...

 
What's gonna come out of my mouth is gonna come out of my soul."Skip Prokop"
Back to Top
The Wizard View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 18 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7341 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2006 at 10:46

Just because something is glam rock dosn't mean it can't be progressive. Glam rock was more of alook and way bands presented themselves, the genre has little to do with actual music.

Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2006 at 07:40

This is a bit like the thread I started weeks ago.

 

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=20313& amp;KW=queen



Edited by Snow Dog
Back to Top
earlyprog View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Neo / PSIKE / Heavy Teams

Joined: March 05 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 2133 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2006 at 07:27
I now see that I shouldn't have mentioned Queen when I started this thread. It was intended as a much more general discussion.
Back to Top
mystic fred View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 13 2006
Location: Londinium
Status: Offline
Points: 4252 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2006 at 06:33

Originally posted by Paulieg Paulieg wrote:

Queen is glam rock.  They should never, never be in the top 100 list.  I take it as an insult to prog.

 QUOTE - "It's really undermining the credibility of this prog site that the main page has a top 100 list that includes prog-related bands like Queen. If/when some of these bands enter top 20 or 10 I can only foresee the adverse effect it will have on the marketing of this site to lovers of prog. Make individual top lists for each genre. I really cannot see the purpose of showing a composite top 100 on the main page - or can you?"


 

i agree queen had glam rock leanings in the early years, many groups dressed up in amazing costumes and were labelled glam rock if you like, but queen were much more sophisticated than their contemporaries and if you've ever listened to their early albums (especially queen II) the so-called  "prog elements" are there. queen were a fine group, were considered a progressive group in the early 70's  and well deserve their place in prog archives!!! i bet many grumblers on this thread have never even heard queen.



Edited by mystic fred
Prog Archives Tour Van
Back to Top
earlyprog View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Neo / PSIKE / Heavy Teams

Joined: March 05 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 2133 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2006 at 06:01

Originally posted by BebieM BebieM wrote:

Generally prog-related and proto-prog albums shouldn't count for the top100 on the first page IMO. It's good to have them on the site to see a) where prog came from and b) what bands border on being prog, but that's it. 

 

Exactly. Perhaps the administrators of this site should consider restructuring the site so that the main page allows you to enter either the (pure) prog portion of the site or the proto-prog and prog-related portion of the site. Also consider which of these segments the site wants to target. Targetting all segments most likely will result in fewer "customers" (us the prog lovers) who will find other sources on the internet.
Back to Top
earlyprog View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Neo / PSIKE / Heavy Teams

Joined: March 05 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 2133 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2006 at 05:51

Originally posted by opera_guy opera_guy wrote:

You can view the top 100 bands by genre, .

I must have missed something - how do I view the top 100 by genre?
Back to Top
BebieM View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 01 2004
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 854 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 13:04
Generally prog-related and proto-prog albums shouldn't count for the top100 on the first page IMO. It's good to have them on the site to see a) where prog came from and b) what bands border on being prog, but that's it. 
Back to Top
Duncan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: October 23 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 180 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 12:20
Originally posted by R_DeNIRO R_DeNIRO wrote:

The only "progressive thing" that Queen made was Bohemian Rhapsody. Definitively they aren't prog in any way; don't deserve be in the top 100. 


Christ, how much '70s Queen have you actually heard? I can appreciate most people's objections, but not with such a grossly misinformed example.
Back to Top
Bilek View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: July 05 2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 1484 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 12:08

I'm sick of Queen discussion...

nevertheless, I'll add something:

Paulieg is right that Queen is glam rock. Every possible musical website lists them as such (apart form our beloved archives!!!)
Of course they have progressive moments, but this doesn't mean we'll have to endure their presence in top 100!!!

Achim Reichel is not even in the archives, and many Krautrock greats cannot find a place in top 100!!! (I'm not sure if there's any!)

Solution: Keep "prog related" and possibly "proto-prog" bands away from top 100 which will result in another problem, many greats' exclusion from the list, such as Moody Blues, Peter Gabriel, Deep Purple etc. Hey, what the heck is other genres for

Listen to Turkish psych/prog; you won't regret:
Baris Manco,Erkin Koray,Cem Karaca,Mogollar,3 Hürel,Selda,Edip Akbayram,Fikret Kizilok,Ersen (and Dadaslar) (but stick with the '70's, and 'early 80's!)
Back to Top
Paulieg View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 18 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 934 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 11:35
Originally posted by opera_guy opera_guy wrote:

How is Queen not progressive?  They were very original used dozens of different styles, complex harmonies, over-the-top arrangements.  Just because they have a hard-rock aesthetic doesn't mean they aren't "prog."  Last time I check it was Progressive Rock.  A band doesn't have to use moogs and mellotrons to be "prog."

I just don't feel Queen's main attributes are coming from "the progressive rock genre."  Queen was very progressive in their vocal harmonies and May's guitar tone was beautiful.  I guess it's all subjective when it comes down to it.  I didn't mean to insult anyone and am sorry if I did.  I still don't consider Queen "Progressive Rock." 



Edited by Paulieg
Back to Top
R_DeNIRO View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 17 2005
Location: Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 431 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 11:35
The only "progressive thing" that Queen made was Bohemian Rhapsody. Definitively they aren't prog in any way; don't deserve be in the top 100. 
We were always be much human than we whish to be.
Back to Top
opera_guy View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie


Joined: February 04 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 21 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 11:18

How is Queen not progressive?  They were very original used dozens of different styles, complex harmonies, over-the-top arrangements.  Just because they have a hard-rock aesthetic doesn't mean they aren't "prog."  Last time I check it was Progressive Rock.  A band doesn't have to use moogs and mellotrons to be "prog."
Back to Top
Paulieg View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 18 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 934 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 11:10

Originally posted by White Queen White Queen wrote:

Originally posted by Paulieg Paulieg wrote:

Queen is glam rock.  They should never, never be in the top 100 list.  I take it as an insult to prog.


Don't worry, they won't stay in the top 100 for long.  There's always people like you to give them bad reviews just because they aren't progressive enough.
 

I happen to like Queens first five releases.  Just because I feel they are more glam than prog and don't feel they belong in the "Top 100 Progressive Releases Of ALL Time" doesn't mean I'd give them a bad review.  Now if it was "The Top 100 Glam Rock Releases Of All Time" I'd vote them in the top 10 at least. 

Back to Top
White Queen View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 28 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 218 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 11:04
Originally posted by Paulieg Paulieg wrote:

Queen is glam rock.  They should never, never be in the top 100 list.  I take it as an insult to prog.


Don't worry, they won't stay in the top 100 for long.  There's always people like you to give them bad reviews just because they aren't progressive enough.
 
Back to Top
Winter Wine View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 12 2005
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 1140 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 11:03

Originally posted by Paulieg Paulieg wrote:

Queen is glam rock.  They should never, never be in the top 100 list.  I take it as an insult to prog.

You can't hear glamour. Queen made incredible innovative music, That's all that counts.
My computer's broke
Back to Top
Kid-A View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: October 02 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 613 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 10:50

Originally posted by opera_guy opera_guy wrote:

You can view the top 100 bands by genre, and why is it an insult Queen much better and more unique and innovative that 90% of the other bands on this site.

Because they aren't prog, and this is the progarchives. Doesn't matter how unique and innovative they are, they just aren't prog.



Edited by Kid-A
Back to Top
opera_guy View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie


Joined: February 04 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 21 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 10:28
You can view the top 100 bands by genre, and why is it an insult Queen much better and more unique and innovative that 90% of the other bands on this site.
Back to Top
Paulieg View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 18 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 934 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 10:09
Queen is glam rock.  They should never, never be in the top 100 list.  I take it as an insult to prog.
Back to Top
kebjourman View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 393 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2006 at 10:06
i like the idea of individual lists for each genre.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.227 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.