QUEEN on progarchives

M@X wrote: QUEEN @ PROGRESSOR, GROUND N SKY, PROGNOSIS, GERP and now in PROGARCHIVES Queen (UK) - 1975 - "A Night at the Opera" Doubtless, "A Night at the Opera" by the legendary Queen is one of the greatest Progressive Hard Rock albums ever created in the history of Rock. More than the half of the songs contain real Progressive arrangements, and two of these songs I can call as full progressive compositions (incidentally, most prog-heads know it well, and I hope, will agree with my opinion). The both gem-pieces were placed on the LP's side B - the first and the pre-last. The Prophet's Song and A Bohemian's Rhapsody are unique proto-prog-metallic pieces based on high energy complex hard rock with lots of shifts, very good lyrics, and great varied polymorphic opera-like vocal harmonies. Source: http://www.progressor.net/review/q.html#queen_1975 PROGRESSOR is for me ,  one the TOP prog reviewer in the small (and opened-mind ) PROG community.

The main difference between the two "fractions" seems to be the question if "proto-prog" deserves to be called progressive:

• Some (including me and that review) say that although it's lacking some prog elements and is therefore called "proto-prog", it still IS progressive.
• The others (including maani) say that the elements that this music lacks are so vital to prog, that it may not be called prog, although it features many other elements found in progressive music.

congrats

I think bands like Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, and Deep Purple should be added to the archives before Queen! If bands like Queen are allowed into the archives, then it stretches the limits of true prog... there are tons of bands who write very creatively and wander into prog territory, but that doesn't mean they're a prog band!

richardh wrote: If we didn't have the label of 'progressive rock' then this site would have no point! Do we really want it to be a general pop/rock site? If so then carry on letting bands in like Queen,Deep Purple,Black Sabbath etc in.When that happens then this site will cease to be unique or interesting as far as I'm concerned.

Oh my poor dears.....still you suffer from the belief that Queen is just another ORDINARY ROCK GROUP.......Argh...May the musical God's have mercry on your souls....hee hee..

Queen is certainly MUCH MORE than an Ordinary rock group....and perhaps the fact that people struggle when trying to categorize Queen, is just proof of how freakin' amazing they are!!

M@X wrote: To continue the repetive and boring discussion Queen adicionados no Progarchives.com http://soundchaser.com.br/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7813   They even talk about the QUEEN addition in progarchives.com in BRAZIL   That is so cool !

Ah, yes, Max, but do you know what they're saying about the inclusion of QUEEN in the Archives?!

 

 

QUEEN @ PROGRESSOR, GROUND N SKY, PROGNOSIS, GERP and now in PROGARCHIVES

Queen (UK) - 1975 - "A Night at the Opera"

Doubtless, "A Night at the Opera" by the legendary Queen is one of the greatest Progressive Hard Rock albums ever created in the history of Rock. More than the half of the songs contain real Progressive arrangements, and two of these songs I can call as full progressive compositions (incidentally, most prog-heads know it well, and I hope, will agree with my opinion). The both gem-pieces were placed on the LP's side B - the first and the pre-last. The Prophet's Song and A Bohemian's Rhapsody are unique proto-prog-metallic pieces based on high energy complex hard rock with lots of shifts, very good lyrics, and great varied polymorphic opera-like vocal harmonies.

Source: http://www.progressor.net/review/q.html#queen_1975

PROGRESSOR is for me ,  one the TOP prog reviewer in the
small (and opened-mind ) PROG community.

 

 

 

 

Eddy wrote: i havnt been on for a while, and i here this queen nonsense, i personally think that thats one of the worse decision ever made on this site and i am concerned on the way this website is heading towards, its seems because of the crap load of more people, prog is becoming more genealized, i am disappointed.

"crap load of more people"?????????????????????....See this is what I'm talking about. I am just as much a member of this site as you...... this is an example of the elitist attitude I am making reference to.....maybe you guys should cut the number of members and exclude anything that you don't think is prog. Make the site REAL EXCLUSIVE!!!!..........somehow, that to me, seems more like a bad decision.

To continue the repetive and boring discussion

Queen adicionados no Progarchives.com
http://soundchaser.com.br/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7813

 

They even talk about the QUEEN addition in progarchives.com in BRAZIL  
That is so cool !

 

 

Edited by M@X

i havnt been on for a while, and i here this queen nonsense, i personally think that thats one of the worse decision ever made on this site and i am concerned on the way this website is heading towards, its seems because of the crap load of more people, prog is becoming more genealized, i am disappointed.

tuxon:

You say, "The funny thing is...those people opposed to Queens inclusion will only accept Queen if a complete new genre is introduced which would provide access to mentioned bands [i.e., Bowie, Beatles, 10CC et al.]"

You completely misinterpret my position.  I have already stated that I do not consider Supertramp prog, with possible exception of Crime of the Century - though that, too, includes at least one or two non-prog compositions which would thus render it not a wholly prog album, though I am willing to accept the position that the overall "concept" "covers" the one or two non-prog songs.  However, other than COTC, Supertramp put out precious little that could - or should - be classified as "prog," at least as that term is generally accepted.  They, too, should fall under "progressive pop."

My position has been that, if Supertramp are going to be included, then 10CC, and especially XTC, warrant inclusion as well, since they are both equally as "prog" as Supertramp (with XTC being even moreso).

However, I have accepted that Supertramp is here, and that 10CC and XTC are not going to be included.  Thus, it is because Queen has now been included - after being excluded for good reason for more than two years - that I suggest again that, if Queen is going to remain, the site desperately needs a new category for bands like Queen and Supertramp who are barely on the margins of "prog."  It just so happens that such a category would justifiably include other groups, including 10CC and XTC.

My position is not that I will only accept Queen if a new category is created.  My position is that if Queen and Supertramp are considered "prog," then so are 10CC and XTC, as well as other bands who have been excluded from the site for the same reasons that Queen has, until now, been excluded.

I would just as happily see Supertramp and Queen removed from the site.  However, if they are permitted to stay, then the non-inclusion of 10CC and XTC (among others) is arbitrary and capricious rather than being based on any supportable position.

Peace.