Should ProgArchives turn into ProgMusicAr - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

1800iareyay View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: November 18 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2492

Posted: June 24 2007 at 20:48

^ now who can argue with that?

cuncuna

Forum Senior Member

Joined: March 29 2005
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 4318

Posted: June 24 2007 at 20:43

¡Beware of the Bee!

TheProgtologist View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: May 23 2005
Location: Baltimore,Md US
Status: Offline
Points: 27802

Posted: June 24 2007 at 20:40

chamberry wrote:

Erik, why did you mentioned Tool? They are a prog band and are added under a prog genre here in PA.

Exactly,this prog "snobbery" and elitism is getting OLD.

I guess some people aren't interested in music expanding,growing and changing,but just like listening to the same recycled stuff.....over and over again.How very BORING.

Well.......................to each his own.

erik neuteboom View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: July 27 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 7659

Posted: June 24 2007 at 20:32

I have the opinion that the name Prog Archives with the subtitle The Ultimate Source For Progressive Rock (in the PA logo) is confusing, it suggests that the focus in on progressive rock while the reality is that many progressive bands (in categories like folk and electronic) lack the elements rock and lots of non progrock bands with some progressive ideas have been added. So in fact we are more moving towards the music in Bradley Smith his wonderful book The Billboard Guide To Progressive Music. That's my idea behind my post.

1800iareyay View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: November 18 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2492

Posted: June 24 2007 at 20:12

erik neuteboom wrote:

Ivan, you sound like a progrock missionary with your wish to us collaborators to add as much as possible genuine progrock bands but you seem to underestimate the fact that since the inclusion of bands like The Beatles, The Doors, Talk Talk, JM Jarre, Iron Maiden, Blue Oyster Cult, Tool and Magnum, Prog Archives cannot stop the increasing demand for more non-prog bands. You should prepare yourself for that and be aware that this is no longer an exclusive progrock site, it has turned into a prog music site.

About The Bee Gees: their very early work is way more progressive and interesting than many non-prog bands on this site so watch out for cynical remarks, it would be great if Prog Archives offers a possibility to add only the progressive work of the early The Bee Gees, they were part of the progressive rock movement in the late Sixties/early Seventies

I don't see how adding non prog bands (as you deem them), means that the site should be renamed ProgMusicArchives. Doesn't that title imply that the site is as progressive as before? To me, it suggests that the current site deals with progressiveneess in all realms (i.e. visual art, etc.), and that "now we just focus on music." If what you say is true, it should be renamed MusicArchives, or RockArchives.

Regarding the Bee Gees, I think that debate would make the venomous squabbles that surrounded the Doors, Maiden, and Zeppelin look tame in comparison

1800iareyay View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: November 18 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2492

Posted: June 24 2007 at 20:07

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

1800iareyay wrote:

Why does this discussion never cease? Ever since I joined purists complain about the very existence of the prog-related genre. Why does it bother you so much?

Nobody complains about the existence of Prog Related, some of us disagree withe the ABUSE of Prog Related, if a band is really related with Prog add them but if it's not clear or influenced everybody else, it's not a Prog Related band, it's an influential band in Rock as The Who, The Rolling Stones, The Animals, etc, which don't belong here.

You say purist as a bad word, well it's not, I'm one of them and I'm proud of it. If Prog has survived more popular genres like Punk, New Age or Disco is because the fans are faithful to the sound, Prog has managed to keep the identity almost intact, the day we start to accept everything as Prog Related, that identity will be lost.

Now DT is getting blamed for being too popular here. That's is so f&^%ing stupid. Yes, Dream Theater garners more attention thatn, say, Amon Duul. Them's the breaks. Are you suggesting we throw out the kings of progressive metal just because you're sick of seeing them?

Nobody is against Dream Theater or Prog Metal (Well, maybe a few), they are Prog and they deserve to be here, but you are pretty new, several weeks before Octavarium was added, we had at least 50 reviews giving Octavarium 5 stars, and the lamest thing is that people was rating a LaBrie album that was rounding the net.

Now that's really fuc*ing stupid.

Bands like Zeppelin and The Who have had profound impact on prog becuase they have had profound impact on music in general.

Let me tell you a secret....Prog Archives is not suposed to be a general music site, it's a Progressive Rock site, we should care about bands that influenced PROG, that are related to PROG, that are almost PROG, not bands that influenced everybody.

In that case lets add Chuck Berry, Little Richard and Elvis Presley, they had impact in all Rock, but then we would have to change the name to Non Prog Archives.

Don't laugh, it's exactly the same argument you're giving.

The Who were the first to incorporate the idea of theater into rock. That's quite a big part of progressive music.

Yes???? Are you sure??? When????

Not even the first Rock Opera, "Then an Alley" was released by Tito Schipa, Jr. in 1967 who adapted 18 Bob Dylan's songs to an Opera and stage format.

Theatrics? The Who were never specially theatrical on stage, Arthur Brown, The Bonzo Dog Band and even David Bowie were doing theatrics before The Who.

BTW: One element does not make a band Prog or Prog Related, there's theatric in almost every Rock genre.

Stop focusing on bands you think taint the perceived perfect prog blood of the site and just have fun. That's why the site exists.

Yes, we're here to have fun but focussing in PROGRESSIVE ROCK, the huge majority of members joines Prog Archives because WE LOVE PROG, if not we would be members of a general Rock site.

This is PROG ARCHIVES, created to be a PROG resource, there are a lot of general Rock sites that you can join to dedicate to all the genres, but this is not one.

Iván

I didn't mean purist as a bad thing, and I realize that's how it sounds, so apolgies. I couldn't agree more with the criticisms of DT albums being reviewed before release (Systematic Chaos befell the same fate as Octavarium). I've suggested the admins not allow reviews pre-release date because of it.

When it comes to Led Zeppelin, I believe their sound progressed quite a lot from blatantly stealing Detla blues songs into fusing rock and folk (they certainly weren't the first to do that), and IMO they were the first to truly fuse Indian music with rock (George Harrison's experimentations were merely Indian music, it wasn't rock. Still good though). I know my statement is open-ended, but I'm sick of hearing about Zeppelin's inclusion. No, 50s guitarists don't belong here simply because you cannot DIRECTLY link them to prog. I believe you can with Zeppelin, what with inventive string arrangements and world music incorporation.

"Then an Alley" may be the first operatic use of rock, but I really don't think a unique covers album constitutes a landmark. Zappa introduced concept albums but The WHo took it to the nexzt level with Tommy. To me, Tommy is the first rock record you have to listen to in its entirety. Up to that point, albums could be listened to out of sequence with no consequence.

Yes, ProgArchives is a prog site. That should go without saying. Of course I don't want every band with the slightest ties to prog to be added. Then we'd end up with the Talking Heads, Black Sabbath, and a host of wonderful bands who nevertheless have no business here. I'm just sick of people taking offense when bands like the Who or Zeppelin or the Doors are considered and act like the admins have flipped. So Iván, I apologize for leaving my statements over-simplified, and I'm sure you'll still disagree with at least some of what I just said, but the point I was trying to make is these threads need to stop popping up every time someone is considered for prog-related or proto-prog. I know I'm new, but I don't want to include every band that I like, just the ones I feel truly have direct ties to the genre I love.

chamberry

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 24 2005
Location: Puerto Rico
Status: Offline
Points: 9008

Posted: June 24 2007 at 18:56

Erik, why did you mentioned Tool? They are a prog band and are added under a prog genre here in PA.

EDIT:
And from what I've heard there's already Progressive Punk artists and Progressive Trance artists here in ProgArchives. Look for Cardiacs and Anubian Lights.

Edited by chamberry - June 24 2007 at 19:13

erik neuteboom View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: July 27 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 7659

Posted: June 24 2007 at 18:47

Edited by erik neuteboom - June 24 2007 at 18:48

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: June 24 2007 at 18:06

1800iareyay wrote:

Why does this discussion never cease? Ever since I joined purists complain about the very existence of the prog-related genre. Why does it bother you so much?

Now that's really fuc*ing stupid.

Bands like Zeppelin and The Who have had profound impact on prog becuase they have had profound impact on music in general.

In that case lets add Chuck Berry, Little Richard and Elvis Presley, they had impact in all Rock, but then we would have to change the name to Non Prog Archives.

Don't laugh, it's exactly the same argument you're giving.

The Who were the first to incorporate the idea of theater into rock. That's quite a big part of progressive music.

Yes???? Are you sure??? When????

Not even the first Rock Opera, "Then an Alley" was released by Tito Schipa, Jr. in 1967 who adapted 18 Bob Dylan's songs to an Opera and stage format.

Theatrics? The Who were never specially theatrical on stage, Arthur Brown, The Bonzo Dog Band and even David Bowie were doing theatrics before The Who.

BTW: One element does not make a band Prog or Prog Related, there's theatric in almost every Rock genre.

Stop focusing on bands you think taint the perceived perfect prog blood of the site and just have fun. That's why the site exists.

Yes, we're here to have fun but focussing in PROGRESSIVE ROCK, the huge majority of members joines Prog Archives because WE LOVE PROG, if not we would be members of a general Rock site.

This is PROG ARCHIVES, created to be a PROG resource, there are a lot of general Rock sites that you can join to dedicate to all the genres, but this is not one.

Iván

Mandrakeroot View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Italian Prog Specialist

Joined: March 01 2006
Location: San Foca, Friûl
Status: Offline
Points: 5851

Posted: June 24 2007 at 12:56

erik neuteboom wrote:

That was a joke about The Stranglers, The Tubes and Journey (perhaps too much Double Dutch

!), I prefer to use my time for focussing on genuine prog the forthcoming months.

Why? For me The Stranglers are good like Punk Prog band (and in fact this is!!!).
However introduced from you they has been not credible!!!

Limmagine%20“http://www.mondoglitter.it/emoticon/3d.gif”%20non%20può%20essere%20visualizzata%20poiché%20contiene%20degli%20errori.

Limmagine%20“http://www.mondoglitter.it/emoticon/3d8.png”%20non%20può%20essere%20visualizzata%20poiché%20contiene%20degli%20errori.

Limmagine%20“http://www.mondoglitter.it/emoticon/at15.png”%20non%20può%20essere%20visualizzata%20poiché%20contiene%20degli%20errori.

(This is the reason because this is a bad day in my house... So I go to do myself a

Limmagine%20“http://www.mondoglitter.it/emoticon/e3.gif”%20non%20può%20essere%20visualizzata%20poiché%20contiene%20degli%20errori.

[

Limmagine%20“http://www.prato.linux.it/~lmasetti/immagini/paperella.gif”%20non%20può%20essere%20visualizzata%20poiché%20contiene%20degli%20errori.

included] It hoping to find refreshment!!! AAAhhh... But the voice of Sandy denny and the music of Fairport Convention It is a good refreshment... Even if it works really too little!!!)

Edited by Mandrakeroot - June 24 2007 at 12:59

1800iareyay View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: November 18 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2492

Posted: June 24 2007 at 12:31

Why does this discussion never cease? Ever since I joined purists complain about the very existence of the prog-related genre. Why does it bother you so much? Now DT is getting blamed for being too popular here. That's is so f&^%ing stupid. Yes, Dream Theater garners more attention thatn, say, Amon Duul. Them's the breaks. Are you suggesting we throw out the kings of progressive metal just because you're sick of seeing them? Bands like Zeppelin and The Who have had profound impact on prog becuase they have had profound impact on music in general. The Who were the first to incorporate the idea of theater into rock. That's quite a big part of progressive music. Stop focusing on bands you think taint the perceived perfect prog blood of the site and just have fun. That's why the site exists.

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: June 24 2007 at 12:29

Sorry for going parragraph by parragraph, but I believe you made a good post here.

clarke2001 wrote:

Many thanks, Andu. You interpreted it in much better way that I am able to do.

As for the other issues:

It seem that the major problem (well, certainly one of them) is which path prog-related (and unavoidable, the entire site) should go.
People are not only debating about for vs. against issue, sometimes if both sides are not against, they're arguing about the amount - that is, where to draw the line, and that could be a very bitter topic.

That's the point, oif there are 1,000 really Prog Rrelated bands, lets add them, but lets focus in bands that REALLY INFLUENCED PROG ROCK and not in bands that influenced everything.

However, I'm still thinking that the inclusion of bigger number of prog-related bands won't hurt PA. Au contraire. I won't repeat my reasons why I think so, I explained in my previous posts, perhaps in a too "poetic" way.

If they are really Prog Related, I have no problem, but most of the bands being added lately have no relation, just POP, Blues or Jazzy bands that IMO shouidn't be here, but I trust the Admiistrators, they are very capable to decide.

I only believe we should give priority to Prog bands, the Prog Related bands will fall anyway here.

(As a sidenote, I don't think Police should be here, but I noticed members suggesting them for PR more than once)

Thanks God for that , and preople has proposed the Bee Gees, but the Administrators decided not even to taje them seriously.

Anyway, I think we agree when a say that every inclusion should be examined thoughtfully, 200% in the case of prog-related.

Again I agree.

But I also think that for every prog-related band at least 100 prog bands should be added. You may call me a hypocrite, saying that I care more about Prog bands than PR, and wasting my time on countless debates on forum. While I'm writing this, I could have write two reviews, or one biography, or add one album or two...but that's not only the case with me I guess.

Then we are fa behind with Blue Oyster Cult, Rainbow, Super Furry Animals, Kate Bush, etc, we should at least have 400 100% bands

It's a sad thing: I noticed more than once that our admins/colabs are saying something like XYZ band should be added to prog-related, but now it's not the appropriate moment.

Appropriate moment?

I believe that is a kind way of saying they don't believe it should be added, but lets wait for them to say so.

I understand that urge, but isn't that sad? Instead of people collaborating on this site have to worry only about music...but no...they have to worry about politics too... Dead

Well, every site has a policy, for example if a wrong band is added, it can't be deleted (Except extreme cases), we may agree or not, but that's not our call, the owners mark the policy of their site and we must accept it.

Site's policy should be re-evaulated and defined once for all...otherwise the major tension will be reluctant approval of PR's existance, and even expansion, but it will always stay between some kind of curtains, or fig's leaf, you name it. We do not deserve that tension, none of our hard-working collaborators do, we don't need it on the web site with huge popularity and good reputation.

The policy has changed:

First, a band required the majority of their releases to be Prog
Then just a part of it
Now they only need one 100% Prog abum for a main sub-genre and a clear relation with Prog to be included in PR

I can live with that, I don't believe it's perfect, but it0's their choice ad I respect it and try to work with that, I believe we have changed enough and no need to accept more bands that have no DIRECT relation with Prog.

To the hell with all that. Ivan, thanks for pointing out and lighting some issues, and many thanks for your feedback about the list of prog bands! I'll PM you as soon as I gather complete, useful data for some symphonic bands that deserve to be introduced first...

I been checking your list (Well, the ones wh have websites) there are a couple of very good additions for other genres but others that even their sites admmnit they are not Prog, there's a lot of material to work with, it's only required to sort it.

Really a great piece of work.

As sumary, I believe we don't disagree in the fundamenbtal issues, it's mostly a matter of degrees.

Iván

Mandrakeroot View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Italian Prog Specialist

Joined: March 01 2006
Location: San Foca, Friûl
Status: Offline
Points: 5851

Posted: June 24 2007 at 12:22

Snow Dog wrote:

Mandrakeroot wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

We have no Progressive Punk here or "Heavy Progressive"( I prefer a term I have come up with anyway "Progressive Hard Rock".

Why? aren't perhaps brand of the Art Rock?

Why are you asking me? I ain't proposing anything except an alternate name!

OOOOHHHH...

Limmagine%20“http://www.mondoglitter.it/emoticon/at7.gif”%20non%20può%20essere%20visualizzata%20poiché%20contiene%20degli%20errori.

Snow Dog

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995

Posted: June 24 2007 at 12:20

Mandrakeroot wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

We have no Progressive Punk here or "Heavy Progressive"( I prefer a term I have come up with anyway "Progressive Hard Rock".

Why? aren't perhaps brand of the Art Rock?

Why are you asking me? I ain't proposing anything except an alternate name!

Edited by Snow Dog - June 24 2007 at 12:20

erik neuteboom View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: July 27 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 7659

Posted: June 24 2007 at 12:19

That was a joke about The Stranglers, The Tubes and Journey (perhaps too much Double Dutch

!), I prefer to use my time for focussing on genuine prog the forthcoming months.

Edited by erik neuteboom - June 24 2007 at 12:21

Mandrakeroot View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Italian Prog Specialist

Joined: March 01 2006
Location: San Foca, Friûl
Status: Offline
Points: 5851

Posted: June 24 2007 at 12:18

Snow Dog wrote:

We have no Progressive Punk here or "Heavy Progressive"( I prefer a term I have come up with anyway "Progressive Hard Rock".

Why? aren't perhaps brand of the Art Rock?

Edited by Mandrakeroot - June 24 2007 at 12:19

Mandrakeroot View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Italian Prog Specialist

Joined: March 01 2006
Location: San Foca, Friûl
Status: Offline
Points: 5851

Posted: June 24 2007 at 12:15

erik neuteboom wrote:

Hello fellow progheads .. and fellow prog-related heads

I just woke up after my second night shift, still one to go

.. but after reading the new posts in this thread, I AM AWAKE

!!!

As suggested earlier in this poll, I am gonna set up a poll, you will read about it soon and I hope you will join in the same great way as here in this thread, many thanks, I am glad that we have discussed without a too emotional or negative attitude, I did my best too, not always easy and now I am going to prepare an inclusion of The Stranglers (progressive punk), The Tubes (prog-related) and Journey (heavy progressive), that is my conclusion after reading the 8 pages in this thread....... or does this sound a bit too subjective

Why, Erik? You will see how many reviews on these groups!!!

Edited by Mandrakeroot - June 24 2007 at 12:16

Snow Dog

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995

Posted: June 24 2007 at 12:15

We have no Progressive Punk here or "Heavy Progressive"( I prefer a term I have come up with anyway "Progressive Hard Rock".

Edited by Snow Dog - June 24 2007 at 12:16

erik neuteboom View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: July 27 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 7659

Posted: June 24 2007 at 12:04

Hello fellow progheads .. and fellow prog-related heads

I just woke up after my second night shift, still one to go

.. but after reading the new posts in this thread, I AM AWAKE

!!!

Edited by erik neuteboom - June 24 2007 at 12:08

Snow Dog

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995

Posted: June 24 2007 at 12:02

I'm against any title change. As it is now we have many bands not strictly Prog and not strictly Rock, but thats fine. We have a core iof Prog Rock. A tile change would mean that virtually anything could be included, from Trance to Dance!

(it rhymed) and I believe dilute the site irrevocably.