Add SOUNDGARDEN to the archives!

Odysseus wrote: I don't think grunge has anything to do with prog......... Sorry, I see SG more as one of the ultimate grunge bands. Not prog though.

Their last two album started to evolve beyond grunge ... but they never got complex enough to be called prog. But songs like Spoonman could easily qualify as Prog Metal, and Applebite might be called Post Rock ... but it's simply not enough.

Kubla Khan wrote: Odysseus wrote: I don't think grunge has anything to do with prog......... Sorry, I see SG more as one of the ultimate grunge bands. Not prog though.     prejudice...

Hangedman wrote: Kubla Khan wrote: does anyone of the people in desagree have listened to "superunknow" or "down on the upside" ? Yup, listening to Superunkown at this exact moment actually, and no still not prog.

analize it!

you could get the time signatures o f each song...and the tunings...listen to down on the upside album.

Ed_The_Dead wrote: Get offa Tool You bastards!

Tool
 

Wolf Spider wrote: Ed_The_Dead wrote: Get offa Tool You bastards! Tool

Thats not a good outlook, what if i followed you around going

Garfield

Ben2112 wrote: Kubla Khan wrote: soundarden is a graet band with a unique and original sound, they are influenced by led zeppelin, black sabath and PINK FLOYD. in his last three albums they develop a progressive way of make music, using many different time signatures riffs , using diferent kinds of guitar tunings , guitarist kim thayil make an exellent "athmospherical use of the guitar" that at times he can make it sound as a synth only with basic effects ,other point is that matt cameron -the drummer- works with geddy lee solo album. albums i recomended to hear: down on the upside                                                            superu nknow. bye! Great great band that is in my top 5 of the '90's, but come on... This is getting a bit silly.

Although ironically enough ... the Soundgarden stuff I've heard isn't too different from the King's X stuff I've heard (and there were a few people championing their inclusion) ... personally, based on what I've heard (which I admit is a minority of each group's output) I would describe neither as being even close to progressive rock

I think they were very progressive, but what some folks need to realise is that progressive dosent always equal prog if you know what i mean, progressive music and prog are not the same, if they were, that would make stravinsky more prog than soundgarden, if anybody is really worthy of the archives, its the beatles, they should make the archives before the doors, zeppelin and especialy soundgarden, not only because they had several prog elements in their later albums(especialy sgt peppers and the white album)but because they also played a role in progs creation as well, IMO sgt pepper was a prog album anyway you look at it, that dosent mean the beatles themselves are a prog band but the point is they made a prog album, zeppelin had houses of the holy and the doors had soft parade, those 3 bands at least made 1 prog album, soundgarden havent, they may have made a couple of prog songs or whatever but they never made an overall progressive rock album...anyway im not saying the beatles should be added, just that i would rather see them added before any other "kinda" or "almost" prog band.

Edited by boo boo

Trotsky wrote: Ben2112 wrote: Kubla Khan wrote: soundarden is a graet band with a unique and original sound, they are influenced by led zeppelin, black sabath and PINK FLOYD. in his last three albums they develop a progressive way of make music, using many different time signatures riffs , using diferent kinds of guitar tunings , guitarist kim thayil make an exellent "athmospherical use of the guitar" that at times he can make it sound as a synth only with basic effects ,other point is that matt cameron -the drummer- works with geddy lee solo album. albums i recomended to hear: down on the upside                                                                 superu nknow. bye! Great great band that is in my top 5 of the '90's, but come on... This is getting a bit silly. Although ironically enough ... the Soundgarden stuff I've heard isn't too different from the King's X stuff I've heard (and there were a few people championing their inclusion) ... personally, based on what I've heard (which I admit is a minority of each group's output) I would describe neither as being even close to progressive rock

Yeah I know what you're saying. I'm probably the biggest King's X fan on this site, but I have never, and would never, push for their inclusion.

As far as Soundgarden and KX being similar in some respect, I absolutely agree. Heck, many of the better Seattle bands name King's X as a primary influence, what with the psychedelic vibe and the dropped-D riffage. I know Alice In Chains and Pearl Jam have name-dropped the mighty KX on occasion, and it wouldn't surprise me if Soundgarden had too.

what's next nirvana!!!!

darksideone wrote: what's next nirvana!!!!

Great band, one of my favorites, most certainly not prog, but i think The 60s band Nirvana could make the Archives.