QUEEN on progarchives

richardh wrote: The problem is that Queen were not a prog band though..they just had some prog influences..and thats all.

That's a difference of opinion, i doubt i can sway you to think otherwise, and I assume you know all queen albums, so your opinion is probably based on something, as is mine.

But that doesn't change the fact, that I will not go as far as to go and include bands that have a vague resemblens to Queen, or have IMO only faint progressive influences. i regard each band as a sole entity, regarding the music they make, and comparing that with what i understand to be progressive rock, if they pass that test, with at least one full progressive album, and some progressiveness along the line in other albums, I think that is sufficient for me, and for the site.

If the aim is to be the most accurate and complete website regarding progressive rock, you can't neglect bands like Queen and Supertramp and their ilk, those are genuine progressive rock bands, that indeed on many albums border on mainstream rock, or even are just mainstream (Genesis excample), but to exclude them would be a mistake in my book.

anyway, i respect your opinion regarding Queen not being progressive in your eyes, but i happen to think otherwise.

Tony R wrote: 1. Brighton Rock (5:08) 2. Killer Queen (2:57) 3. Tenement Funster (2:48) 4. Flick of the Wrist (3:46) 5. Lily of the Valley (1:43) 6. Now I'm Here (4:10) 7. In the Lap of the Gods (3:20) 8. Stone Cold Crazy (2:12) 9. Dear Friends (1:07) 10. Misfire (1:50) 11. Bring Back That Leroy Brown (2:13) 12. She Makes Me (Stormtrooper in Stilettoes) (4:08) 13. In the Lap of the Gods...Revisited (3:42) 1. Death on Two Legs (Dedicated to...) (3:43) 2. Lazing on a Sunday Afternoon (1:08) 3. I'm in Love With My Car (3:05) 4. You're My Best Friend (2:50) 5. '39 (3:25) 6. Sweet Lady (4:01) 7. Seaside Rendezvous (2:13) 8. Prophet's Song (8:17) 9. Love of My Life (3:38) 10. Good Company (3:26) 11. Bohemian Rhapsody (5:55) Wow! Two albums chocked full of prog!!! Not!!! What's the aural equivalent of rose-tinted glasses?

Ok ... now do the same with the progressive albums - Queen I & II.

tuxon wrote: IMO Queen passes that test gloriously with their first four albums

mike wrote: Ok ... now do the same with the progressive albums - Queen I & II.

He said first four! How many more times is this gonna happen Mike???

Edited by Tony R

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

 

 

 

 

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?!

 

 

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!!