Judas Priest for Prog Related! |
Post Reply | Page <1 456 |
Author | |||
rushfan4
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: May 22 2007 Location: Michigan, U.S. Status: Offline Points: 66266 |
Posted: November 07 2011 at 15:49 | ||
It has been stated to me multiple times that it is M@x's position on additions of bands to PA that if a band has 1 full-fledged progressive album then they should be added. This is regardless if they released 99 other albums that were purely polka. There are those that would argue that they have 4 progressive albums with the 4 mentioned in the 1st paragraph. I can't say that any of them are full-fledged progressive albums though and that is the rub. Sure there are songs and parts of songs on those albums that are progressive, there are a couple of really good progressive songs on those albums that it is a shame aren't somehow included on PA (their goodness being subjective, of course). In all seriousness, one could probably argue that are many bands in PA that did not release any full-fledged "progressive rock" albums, per se, but the general drift of the album was progressive rock. (i.e. they had a song like "I Know What I Like In Your Wardrobe" or some such thing which would probably not be considered progressive, but the majority of the songs/pieces on the album are progressive). In conclusion, I accepted that the Admins decided not to add Judas Priest 3-years ago and I moved on, and although I don't necessarily agree with their decision, I feel that their decision was based on what they felt was their correct evaluation of Judas Priest and what they felt was best for the site. I also won't be surprised if they get suggested another 50 times by people like me or South Side of The Sky who feel that there is reason enough for them to be included. Such is the way of PA.
|
|||
|
|||
rushfan4
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: May 22 2007 Location: Michigan, U.S. Status: Offline Points: 66266 |
Posted: November 07 2011 at 15:55 | ||
|
|||
|
|||
Bosh66
Forum Senior Member Joined: February 23 2009 Location: Bolton, Lancs Status: Offline Points: 528 |
Posted: November 08 2011 at 02:19 | ||
Or explicitly tag such albums like "Point of Entry - Not Prog"? Mind you the problem with this is we then get into auguments on which non-prog albums have significant proggy moments on them, which would be the same problem with only listing "prog" albums. We could list the first four and the last one, but even straight rock albums like British Steel, Painkiller and Angel of Retribution have proggy parts. This is a minefield!
Being a Priest fan, I'd say there's enough about JP that's progressive to at least have them in Prog Related, aside from their influence on the prog-metal genre. I can't see how placing them in Prog Related waters down the prog authenticity of this site one iota.
As an aside, there's arguments on this thread supporting JPs inclusion or exclusion that references the non-prog albums of Yes or Genesis. I've never understood this view of their later albums. They were certainly less symphonic prog and more poppy, but still very much have a prog sound and (inconsistently) a prog structure to them. Just more crossover, perhaps?
|
|||
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
Posted: November 08 2011 at 02:26 | ||
If 80s Genesis is proggy enough for CROSSOVER, then maybe we'd need to evaluate Police (Synchronicity/Ghosts in the machine), Prince (Purple Rain), Donald Fagen and also consider moving Kate Bush from Prog Related to Crossover (and Tori Amos from crossover to PR ).
|
|||
DamoXt7942
Special Collaborator Joined: October 15 2008 Location: Okayama, Japan Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: November 08 2011 at 03:32 | ||
Let me say only that; Rocka Rolla is a progenitor of Stoner Rock, and in this sense I consider this album be progressive. (But Prog-Related? Hmmmm ... )
|
|||
Bonnek
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: September 01 2009 Location: Belgium Status: Offline Points: 4515 |
Posted: November 08 2011 at 07:07 | ||
|
|||
DavetheSlave
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 23 2007 Location: South Africa Status: Offline Points: 492 |
Posted: November 08 2011 at 07:59 | ||
It has been stated to me multiple times that it is M@x's position on additions of bands to PA that if a band has 1 full-fledged progressive album then they should be added. That was from RushFan4 post
I agree fully with what he said. Some people here seem to get whatever they choose included and as for the rest they stand firm. There are inclusions in PA at the moment which are severely questionable and there are inclusions being added regularly which are questionable.
However when I suggested Stratovarius I was chewed up once and I really don't understand the standpoints that were raised.
Judas Priest, to me, stands head and shoulders above Metallica as a PA addition however the Metallica fanboys got their way and I don't see the JP fans standing a chance of having something they enjoy included. When Sad Wings of Destiny was released - at that point in time - it was different and almost revolutionary - hell it was prog then.
I burn about the non inclusion of Stratovarius in the past and I learned just to let things pass because some things are pointless irrelevantly of their worthiness here. Edited by DavetheSlave - November 08 2011 at 08:00 |
|||
Icarium
Forum Senior Member VIP Member Joined: March 21 2008 Location: Tigerstaden Status: Offline Points: 34055 |
Posted: November 08 2011 at 08:12 | ||
Edited by aginor - November 08 2011 at 08:15 |
|||
|
|||
Negoba
Prog Reviewer Joined: July 24 2008 Location: Big Muddy Status: Offline Points: 5208 |
Posted: November 08 2011 at 09:12 | ||
No.
Purple Rain is much more progressive than anything Judas Priest did. No Prince, no Priest.
|
|||
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
|
|||
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
Posted: November 08 2011 at 09:22 | ||
I actually agree but it would take a sea change in the mindset here if people are not to go "Purple Rain, are you crazy!!! " |
|||
DavetheSlave
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 23 2007 Location: South Africa Status: Offline Points: 492 |
Posted: November 08 2011 at 09:27 | ||
But - they won't be - there aint no growling in em Edited by DavetheSlave - November 08 2011 at 09:31 |
|||
Alitare
Forum Senior Member Joined: March 08 2008 Location: New York Status: Offline Points: 3595 |
Posted: November 08 2011 at 09:28 | ||
How is When Doves Cry more progressive than The Ripper? That song is so damn progressive. It's like eight minutes long with the funky jazz fusion middle section and the apocalyptic lyrics. The Ripper, man, is the cornerstone of prog. It had those electronically processed vocals and crazy saxophone/guitar interplays.The time changes are incredible. How can you think that The Beautiful Ones is more progressive than that monolithic epic? Clearly you have no no...
Oh wait, I'm thinking of 21st Century Schizoid Man, I'm sorry. You know who'd be fun on here? The Ramones, just to screw with our illustrious guests.
|
|||
Bonnek
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: September 01 2009 Location: Belgium Status: Offline Points: 4515 |
Posted: November 08 2011 at 10:50 | ||
Related to krautrock is not krautrock, and then krautrock isn't prog (it was meant to be the opposite) and the Scorpions' first two albums aren't even related to krautrock, just a bit Heavy Prog-ish. Well, maybe 3 times no give a yes? The Police, Prince and who knows what else (Madonna?) would all be fine in crossover prog; at least if you consider Amos, Björk, Talking Heads and NIN as relevant artists there. (Bites tongue in cheek) Edited by Bonnek - November 08 2011 at 10:51 |
|||
Marty McFly
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: March 23 2009 Location: Czech Republic Status: Offline Points: 3968 |
Posted: November 08 2011 at 12:17 | ||
^ There are hundreds of artists in Crossover genre. Those you named are the most controversial ones. Not just you. When some people speak about Xover, they just spell these names, but forget about hundreds of others. Doesn't sound fair to me. Remember, Crossover doesn't equal to just these artists, but to all artists that we have. |
|||
There's a point where "avant-garde" and "experimental" becomes "terrible" and "pointless,"
-Andyman1125 on Lulu Even my |
|||
katatonia
Forum Senior Member Joined: July 05 2012 Location: Iran Status: Offline Points: 112 |
Posted: November 04 2013 at 14:09 | ||
in my opinion,JP can be added wherever Black Sabbath is added.if they are not prog related or proto,then sure there would be nowhere to keep black sabbath either.but sure they both do fit.I've made a prog playlist of black sabbath and judas,and they both have at least 20-30 truely prog tracks
|
|||
Bonnek
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: September 01 2009 Location: Belgium Status: Offline Points: 4515 |
Posted: November 04 2013 at 15:20 | ||
If it was your idea remembering a dead (thread) then you're a couple of days too late. Aren't threads closed automatically after years of respectful rest? |
|||
lazland
Prog Reviewer Joined: October 28 2008 Location: Wales Status: Offline Points: 13634 |
Posted: November 04 2013 at 15:43 | ||
Your argument is more for Sabbath not to be on the site, than it is for Priest to be added merely because someone, or some bodies, made a mistake in the first place. Sabbath were never a progressive rock band. Neither were they a "prog related" band (whatever that is). Sabbath were the band who broke the UK Midlands hard rock/metal boom, and damned good they were too. Wakeman even played a couple of tracks for them, but even that does not make them a prog related band. Actually, Sabbath have less cause than a lot of artists to be added here, because they weren't even a part of that art rock movement that genuinely was related to the progressive rock of the time. My dog's arse has more prog related genes in her than Judas Priest, who were, and remain, a heavy metal act, simple as.
|
|||
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org
Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
|||
sukmytoe
Forum Senior Member Joined: March 18 2013 Location: South Africa Status: Offline Points: 291 |
Posted: November 04 2013 at 16:35 | ||
I disagree with the Sabbath side of your post Steve because at the time of the first 5 or so album releases Sabbath was progressive to the extreme - remember I say "at the time". I halfway agree with you relating to Priest however "Sad Wings of Destiny" gets in the way of me agreeing fully with you as does "Nostradamus". I would understand if Priest were never added here however if they were I wouldn't complain at all. An inclusion here that I will never fully understand is that of Metallica - they weren't prog in the least and they were never the best thrash metal band either. What Metallica did do was take thrash into the mainstream - they popularised it and drew a hell of an audience by doing so. |
|||
charles_ryder
Forum Senior Member Joined: April 15 2014 Location: St.Petersburg Status: Offline Points: 173 |
Posted: May 25 2014 at 10:35 | ||
I think Judas Priest are not prog-band. But their music is prog related. Listen to the early albums where the fine hard-rock with rare progressive elements is. So, like many other classic hard rock band, Judas Priest must be here as a prog related band.
|
|||
om mani padme hum
|
|||
Post Reply | Page <1 456 |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |