PR Omissions

 

They are listed ... just in different places. The term progressive is way too generic and the sub-genre tends to tie these groups up in places they should not be. I don't listen to any of them because of their classification, and if you do, I seriously doubt your love for music, period!

 

Moreover, if the list includes bands from the other side of the Atlantic such as Santana and Hendrix then clearly Jefferson Airplane, It's A Beautiful Day, and Quicksilver Messenger Service - the list is endless - must also appear.

 

I'm one of the few that tends to talk a lot about the West Coast thing. Being in Santa Barbara the whole 70's and some of the 80's, and driving almost every other weekend to LA to catch a lot of music ... helped a lot. I really thought it deserves a bigger ear, but it is my contention that too much of the "prog" definition centers around London and that takes away from what some folks did here which many times is way more progressive and experimental, albeit it could be said that it had a few less influence in classical music than it did jazz and rock found in the bars and clubs. And some of it was good and some not as good.

 

The difference?

 

America did not develop a respect for the music or the arts. America is about money and many of those folks never really did as well as they should have or could. And the California music scene got raped until it bled of aids! It was one of the saddest things you ever saw! And even with Rolling Stone, there is not enough care, respect and appreciation for much of anything except Gonzo (now anyways, but then he was a freak!) and the Grateful Dead, which also got massively trashed in their early days for their jams that could go on all night!

I still stick with the music a lot more than I do definitions. They tend to blur things and hide things.