Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Suggest New Bands and Artists
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Toto
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedToto

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Message
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 12:07
Originally posted by 1967/ 1976 1967/ 1976 wrote:

 
 
But Asia is here. Toto, in my opinion, is the American version of Asia. Or maybe... With more Prog elements.
 
Toto are also mentioned in too many sites/ magazines that deal with Prog for to not be included in PA. (And that's why we are Asia in PA, I think).

Asia official formation included
  1. Geoff Downes (Yes)
  2. Carl Palmer (ELP - Atomic Rooster)
  3. John Wetton (UK, King Crimson, Uriah Heep , etc etc etc)
  4. Steve Howe (Yes)
For prog icons from at least 10 of the most representative Prog bands.

According to the site's rules, that grants them inclusion in Prog Related

Non Prog site has TOTO included except maybe Proggnosis who has them as Fusion Related (?????????) taht is absurd, because in that case we could add Chuck Mangione or Herp Albert as Fusion Related

Toto has like 20 albums and non of them is mainly Prog or  completely related.

So I insist, I don't believe Toto has a place here, specially uif they are recognized as the most representative AOR band.

Originally posted by lucas lucas wrote:

 
I don't believe the following artists/bands (here in prog-related) have a single prog song :
Toy Matinee
GTR
Asia
John Wetton
Greg Lake

Toy Matinee: Not familiar with them, but Kevin Gilbert from Giraffe is there
GTR: Hackett + Howe is enough
Asia: I already said it
John Wetton: UK, King Crimson, Uriah Heep are enough?
Greg Lake: The Gods, King Crimson and ELP are more than enough to grant them an inclusion.

Iván






Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - June 10 2012 at 12:12
            
Back to Top
Triceratopsoil View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18016
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 12:08
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

most representative Prog bands.





Clown
Back to Top
lazland View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 13795
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 12:17
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by Failcore Failcore wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:


A couple of proggy songs don't make them a Prog or Prog Related band, specially when they released so many AOR albums.

Actually, I think it kinda does. By your logic, Genesis shouldn't be here, because their pop songs are double their amount of prog songs.

Do you know something about Genesis or math?

Toto has a couple of proggy songs in like 20 albums

Genesis has 7 full Prog albums, 2 at least Crossover and one Related.

Now to stop this nonsense always repeated

Genesis has 15 studio albums
  1. From Genesis to the Revelation - Not Prog
  2. Trespass - Prog
  3. Nursery Cryme - Prog
  4. Foxtrot - Prog
  5. SebtP - Prog
  6. The Lamb - Prog
  7. A Trick of the Tail - Prog
  8. W&W - Prog
  9. Attw3 - prog
  10. Duke - Prog
  11. Abacab - Partially Prog
  12. Genesis (Shapes) - Not prog
  13. Invisible Touch - not Prog
  14. We Can't Dance - Not Prog
  15. CAS - Not Prog
This means
  • 9 full Prog albums 60%
  • 1 Proggy album 6.6666%
  • 5 Non Prog albums 33%33 Non Prog

So this is not "a couple of tracks" unless you don't know what the meaning of "a couple is".

The vast majority of Genesis albums are Prog on the other hand 2 at the most 3 Toto songs are proggy

Toto has no place here, Genesis is an icon of Prog.

Iván

I agree with Ivan re Toto, but the problem with long explanations is that they very often leave the author open to debate.

In my case, I regard Genesis, Invisible Touch, We Can't Dance, and Calling All Stations as being prog rock albums. They might not be symphonic prog albums, but prog they are.
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org

Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!
Back to Top
Icarium View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34083
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 12:18
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by Failcore Failcore wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:


A couple of proggy songs don't make them a Prog or Prog Related band, specially when they released so many AOR albums.

Actually, I think it kinda does. By your logic, Genesis shouldn't be here, because their pop songs are double their amount of prog songs.

Do you know something about Genesis or math?

Toto has a couple of proggy songs in like 20 albums

Genesis has 7 full Prog albums, 2 at least Crossover and one Related.

Now to stop this nonsense always repeated

Genesis has 15 studio albums
  1. From Genesis to the Revelation - Not Prog
  2. Trespass - Prog
  3. Nursery Cryme - Prog
  4. Foxtrot - Prog
  5. SebtP - Prog
  6. The Lamb - Prog
  7. A Trick of the Tail - Prog
  8. W&W - Prog
  9. Attw3 - prog
  10. Duke - Prog
  11. Abacab - Partially Prog
  12. Genesis (Shapes) - Not prog
  13. Invisible Touch - not Prog
  14. We Can't Dance - Not Prog
  15. CAS - Not Prog
This means
  • 9 full Prog albums 60%
  • 1 Proggy album 6.6666%
  • 5 Non Prog albums 33%33 Non Prog

So this is not "a couple of tracks" unless you don't know what the meaning of "a couple is".

The vast majority of Genesis albums are Prog on the other hand 2 at the most 3 Toto songs are proggy

Toto has no place here, Genesis is an icon of Prog.

Iván

I agree with Ivan re Toto, but the problem with long explanations is that they very often leave the author open to debate.

In my case, I regard Genesis, Invisible Touch, We Can't Dance, and Calling All Stations as being prog rock albums. They might not be symphonic prog albums, but prog they are.
they are more crossover prog/neo prog
Back to Top
Horizons View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: January 20 2011
Location: Somewhere Else
Status: Offline
Points: 16952
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 12:21
I agree with the great post Ivan made. Thumbs Up

Toto does not belong here in any genre. 
Crushed like a rose in the riverflow.
Back to Top
lazland View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 13795
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 12:35
Originally posted by aginor aginor wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by Failcore Failcore wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:


A couple of proggy songs don't make them a Prog or Prog Related band, specially when they released so many AOR albums.

Actually, I think it kinda does. By your logic, Genesis shouldn't be here, because their pop songs are double their amount of prog songs.

Do you know something about Genesis or math?

Toto has a couple of proggy songs in like 20 albums

Genesis has 7 full Prog albums, 2 at least Crossover and one Related.

Now to stop this nonsense always repeated

Genesis has 15 studio albums
  1. From Genesis to the Revelation - Not Prog
  2. Trespass - Prog
  3. Nursery Cryme - Prog
  4. Foxtrot - Prog
  5. SebtP - Prog
  6. The Lamb - Prog
  7. A Trick of the Tail - Prog
  8. W&W - Prog
  9. Attw3 - prog
  10. Duke - Prog
  11. Abacab - Partially Prog
  12. Genesis (Shapes) - Not prog
  13. Invisible Touch - not Prog
  14. We Can't Dance - Not Prog
  15. CAS - Not Prog
This means
  • 9 full Prog albums 60%
  • 1 Proggy album 6.6666%
  • 5 Non Prog albums 33%33 Non Prog

So this is not "a couple of tracks" unless you don't know what the meaning of "a couple is".

The vast majority of Genesis albums are Prog on the other hand 2 at the most 3 Toto songs are proggy

Toto has no place here, Genesis is an icon of Prog.

Iván

I agree with Ivan re Toto, but the problem with long explanations is that they very often leave the author open to debate.

In my case, I regard Genesis, Invisible Touch, We Can't Dance, and Calling All Stations as being prog rock albums. They might not be symphonic prog albums, but prog they are.
they are more crossover prog/neo prog

Indeed, but Ivan said they were non-prog albums, and that is to me nonsensical.

BTW, I have always struggled to understand why people describe some of the Genesis albums as neo, as you have done. It simply makes no sense whatsoever, either.

The neo prog movement was started in the early 1980's by a bunch of bands who took their inspiration from bands such as Genesis, Yes, VDGG & etc., but turned those influences into a far different beast, i.e. a new movement in prog, or, as many have described it, a second wave.

Quite how one of those original sources of material can be themselves part of a second wave is rather beyond me.
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org

Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!
Back to Top
SouthSideoftheSky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Symphonic Team

Joined: June 29 2008
Location: Close To The...
Status: Offline
Points: 1960
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 12:57

People, take a look at the official definition/guidelines for Prog Related and please let that guide your pro- and con-arguments. That way, some irrelevant considerations and comparisons on both sides could hopefully be avoided.
 

No musical genre exists in a vacuum. Not all of the bands that have been a part of the history and development of progressive rock are necessarily progressive rock bands themselves. This is why progarchives has included a genre called prog-related, so we could include all the bands that complete the history of progressive rock, whether or not they were considered full-fledged progressive rock bands themselves. 

There are many criteria that the prog-related evaluation team considers when deciding which bands are considered prog-related. Very few bands will meet all of this criteria, but this list will give an idea as to some of the things that help evaluate whether an artists is prog-related or not. 

1) Influence on progressive rock - The groundbreaking work of artists like Led Zepplin and David Bowie affected many genres of rock, including at times progressive rock. Although both of these artists created rock music in a dizzying array of genres, both contributed to the ongoing history of progressive rock several times within the span of their careers. 

2) Location - Progressive rock did not develop at the same time all over the world. It may surprise some people that as late as the mid-70s the US had very few original progressive rock bands that did not sound like exact copies of British bands. Journey was one of the first US bands to present a uniquely American brand of prog-rock before they eventually became a mainstream rock band. We have collaborators from all over the world who tell us which bands helped the progressive rock scene develop in their corner of the globe, even if those bands were like Journey and were known more for being mainstream rock bands. 

3) Members of important progressive rock bands - Although most of the recorded solo output of artists like Greg Lake and David Gilmour falls more in a mainstream rock style, their contributions to progressive rock in their respective bands insures them a place in our prog-related genre. 

4) Timeliness - Like many genres, prog-rock has had its ups and downs. In the late 70s and early 80s prog-rock was barely a blip on the radar. During this time artists such as David Bowie and Metallica released albums that captured key elements of the spirit of prog rock and did so while contributing their own original modern elements to the mix. 

5) Integral part of the prog-rock scene - Sometimes you just had to be a part of the scene during a certain time period to understand how some bands fit with the prog rock scene of their time. Although Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath and Wishbone Ash may seem like mere hard rock bands, in their time they stood apart from other hard rockers with their more serious lyrical content and more developed compositions. Put simply, in the early 70s every prog-rock record collector usually had full collections of all three of these artists. These three bands were very much part of the prog-rock scene without being total prog-rock bands them selves. 

6) Influenced by progressive rock - From the late 60s till about 1976 the progressive tendency was in full effect in almost all genres of music. Once again, as we enter the second decade of the 21st century a melting pot of prog-metal, math-rock, progressive electronics and post-rock influences have once again made a progressive tendency in rock music almost more a norm than a difference. Yet in other periods of musical history receiving influence from progressive rock could really set a band apart and make them worthy of our prog-related category. 
Being influenced by progressive rock is hardly the only factor we look at, and in some periods of musical history it is almost meaningless, but still, it is almost a given that most of the artists listed in prog-related were influenced by the development of progressive rock. 

7) Common sense - Nitpicking over the above listed criteria is not necessarily the correct way to evaluate a band for prog-related. Sometimes you just have to use some common sense and look at the big picture. 
A very good way to describe prog-related would be to imagine an exhaustive book that covered the history of progressive rock. Would such a book include references to led Zeppelin's 'Stairway to Heaven', David Bowie's 'The Man Who Sold the World' or Queen's 'Bohemian Rhapsody'? Probably so. 
- Easy Money

Note especially the absence of any requirement as to the percentage of proggy songs out the artist's entire oeuvre. 
 
Back to Top
lazland View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 13795
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 12:59
^ A very good and informative post, of which I agree with absolutely every single word.
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org

Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!
Back to Top
SouthSideoftheSky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Symphonic Team

Joined: June 29 2008
Location: Close To The...
Status: Offline
Points: 1960
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 13:03
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

 

Toto, Boston and similar bands have been suggested repeatedly.

In this case the Prog Related team said no, and I agree with them.


Does this mean that Toto has already been formally evaluated by the admins for Prog Related? Is there any official statement to this effect in some old thread?

I assumed it was the case that they had been suggested repeatedly, but never formally evaluated.  


Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 13:20
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

 

Indeed, but Ivan said they were non-prog albums, and that is to me nonsensical.



It's not nonsensical, it's an opinion.

I'm sure that  if you ask 100 persons in prog Archives, 60 o 70 will believe that post Abacab albums are POP 10 or 20 will tell you that everything after W&W is POP and only a few will believe that late Genesis albums are Prog.

Your opinion is not the only one that makes sense.

Iván
            
Back to Top
SouthSideoftheSky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Symphonic Team

Joined: June 29 2008
Location: Close To The...
Status: Offline
Points: 1960
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 13:20
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

 
Toto has no place here, Genesis is an icon of Prog.

(I know that it wasn't you who brought Genesis into this debate in the first place, Iván. And whoever did was asking for trouble! Smile). But of course Genesis are icons of Prog (Symphonic Prog), nobody is going to argue with that (I hope!) But that seems to be irrelevant to the question of whether Toto should be added to Prog Related or not. Genesis is not the relevant comparison here at all, but more those bands like Asia, Journey, etc. that are in Prog Related already.



Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 13:24
Originally posted by SouthSideoftheSky SouthSideoftheSky wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

 
Toto has no place here, Genesis is an icon of Prog.

(I know that it wasn't you who brought Genesis into this debate in the first place, Iván. And whoever did was asking for trouble! Smile). But of course Genesis are icons of Prog (Symphonic Prog), nobody is going to argue with that (I hope!) But that seems to be irrelevant to the question of whether Toto should be added to Prog Related or not. Genesis is not the relevant comparison here at all, but more those bands like Asia, Journey, etc. that are in Prog Related already.




I know, but it's absurd to say if genesis is here despite some POP albums, Toto should be here.

I was just explaining why Genesis is here.

I believe Toto should not be here, because it's a POP - AOR band with no Prog Relation except a couple of tracks that are not enough.

Iván
            
Back to Top
lazland View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 13795
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 13:24
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

 

Indeed, but Ivan said they were non-prog albums, and that is to me nonsensical.



It's not nonsensical, it's an opinion.

I'm sure that  if you ask 100 persons in prog Archives, 60 o 70 will believe that post Abacab albums are POP 10 or 20 will tell you that everything after W&W is POP and only a few will believe that late Genesis albums are Prog.

Your opinion is not the only one that makes sense.

Iván

It is indeed an opinion, a nonsensical one. Even the band's harshest critics accept that there are pure prog tracks on all the albums you mention. The commercial ones were also written with a prog sensibility, which set them apart from a lot of other pop music at the time. 

Of course my opinion is not the only one that makes sense. In this discussion, however, it is the only right oneEvil Smile
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org

Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!
Back to Top
Icarium View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34083
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 13:25
Originally posted by SouthSideoftheSky SouthSideoftheSky wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

 
Toto has no place here, Genesis is an icon of Prog.

(I know that it wasn't you who brought Genesis into this debate in the first place, Iván. And whoever did was asking for trouble! Smile). But of course Genesis are icons of Prog (Symphonic Prog), nobody is going to argue with that (I hope!) But that seems to be irrelevant to the question of whether Toto should be added to Prog Related or not. Genesis is not the relevant comparison here at all, but more those bands like Asia, Journey, etc. that are in Prog Related already.



and Saga, (not against anything about Saga but they are also similar
Back to Top
SouthSideoftheSky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Symphonic Team

Joined: June 29 2008
Location: Close To The...
Status: Offline
Points: 1960
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 13:47
Originally posted by aginor aginor wrote:

Originally posted by SouthSideoftheSky SouthSideoftheSky wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

 
Toto has no place here, Genesis is an icon of Prog.

(I know that it wasn't you who brought Genesis into this debate in the first place, Iván. And whoever did was asking for trouble! Smile). But of course Genesis are icons of Prog (Symphonic Prog), nobody is going to argue with that (I hope!) But that seems to be irrelevant to the question of whether Toto should be added to Prog Related or not. Genesis is not the relevant comparison here at all, but more those bands like Asia, Journey, etc. that are in Prog Related already.



and Saga, (not against anything about Saga but they are also similar

Well, Saga is listed in Crossover (and rightly so, I think).
I actually think that Asia should be in Crossover too.

Relevant comparisons for Toto might perhaps be Ambrosia, FM, Journey, Magnum, and Styx

Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 14:27
Originally posted by SouthSideoftheSky SouthSideoftheSky wrote:

 

Relevant comparisons for Toto might perhaps be Ambrosia, FM, Journey, Magnum, and Styx


Fritz, as with Kansas, people are more familiar with STYX poppy music, but their first three albums before Curulewski left, were 100% Prog, as a fact they did a version of "Fanfare for a common Man" 5 years before ELP (It's called Movement for a Common man), even in albums like "The Grand Illusion", they have Prog tracks as "Man in the Wilderness" and "Fooling Yourself"

Journey, i don't know why they are here.

Not familiar with the other bands

But even if they were wrongly added, a mistake doesn't justify another mistake, if somebody leaves you a black eye, Ouch you don't go to the door and smash your other eye to make it even. Wink

Iván
            
Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32553
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 15:16
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:



Journey, i don't know why they are here.



First two albums and the Santana connection.
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 15:37
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:


It is indeed an opinion, a nonsensical one. Even the band's harshest critics accept that there are pure prog tracks on all the albums you mention. The commercial ones were also written with a prog sensibility, which set them apart from a lot of other pop music at the time. 



Since when are you in Prog Archives or any other forum or Prog site?

The general consensus except a few fans is that Genesis went POP, the problem is the moment
  1. Some say after W&W
  2. Some more say after ATTW3
  3. Most say after Duke
  4. A few say after Abacab
But everybody except some diehard Collins fans agree they went POP.

BTW Commercial with Prog sensibility? Confused

Iván
            
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 16:03
I'm definitely not a diehard Collins fan and I think the albums you call "pop" are quite proggy. Sure there are some shorter simpler songs in there but a lot of Prog bands did that even in their main prog phase. But one man's "pop" is another mans interesting music. Kansas are pretty "poppish" for starters. That is why I think quite a few people here don't like them.
Back to Top
SouthSideoftheSky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Symphonic Team

Joined: June 29 2008
Location: Close To The...
Status: Offline
Points: 1960
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2012 at 16:37
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by SouthSideoftheSky SouthSideoftheSky wrote:

 

Relevant comparisons for Toto might perhaps be Ambrosia, FM, Journey, Magnum, and Styx


Fritz, as with Kansas, people are more familiar with STYX poppy music, but their first three albums before Curulewski left, were 100% Prog, as a fact they did a version of "Fanfare for a common Man" 5 years before ELP (It's called Movement for a Common man), even in albums like "The Grand Illusion", they have Prog tracks as "Man in the Wilderness" and "Fooling Yourself"

Journey, i don't know why they are here.

Not familiar with the other bands

Yeah, first of all, as I stressed earlier in this thread, I'm not familiar with Toto at all (above the odd song or two). Hence, I'm not making any musical comparisons, and I'm not endorsing them. I'm just saying that if comparisons in terms of "degree of progness" or "degree of relevance for Prog" (or the like) are to be made, we should be fair and compare with other bands that are in the Prog Related category. Comparing Toto with Genesis, Kansas, Saga, etc. is irrelevant and unfair. 

I know the early albums by Styx and think it right that they are here. I also think it is right and proper that Journey is here (not just because of the Santana-connection).

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.223 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.