Grateful Dead for Prog Related?

Captain Midnight wrote: The Grateful Dead deserve a spot under prog related imo, yes they are a jam band however they have prog tendencies ... I'm interested in hearing other people's thoughts on this

You'll find plenty of peoples' thoughts on this subject here (Oct 2012), here (Apr 2011), here (Feb 2010), here (Dec 2008), here (Jun 2008) and here (Dec 2006). In June 2009, after the third of these proposals, Olav (Windhawk) wrote this: "Grateful Dead has been evaluated by the admin team as a suggestion for prog related, and has been given the big thumbs down. Verdict: Great band, but not progressive nor closely enough related to merit an inclusion", and in October 2012, as a comment in the most recent proposal, Andy Webb, who was an admin at the time, said this: "Yea, it's not a new subject. It's never had support before, so I can't imagine why it would now".

yam yam wrote: ... "Grateful Dead has been evaluated by the admin team as a suggestion for prog related, and has been given the big thumbs down. Verdict: Great band, but not progressive nor closely enough related to merit an inclusion", ...

progaardvark wrote: I think the site was much more restrictive in its earlier years. We have become a bit more inclusive in the last decade. Having said that, I don't really have a knowledgeable opinion to give since I don't really know their music well enough. I do think Terrapin Station qualifies to some degree as a prog album. As some have claimed on here, one prog album is enough for consideration. I understand the site rules seem to indicate that past decisions shouldn't be messed with (with the exception of active bands; releasing a new album merits re-evaluation), but with an evolving philosophy of what is or isn't prog merits reconsidering such a strict rule. I don't know if I'm alone in this opinion. I have my own issues concerning the Australian band Chetarca, which I think should be here but got dismissed and future conversations got locked down because it was already voted on.

FYI: I will move this from Suggest New Bands to General Music discussions. This has come up again and again, been rejected, and this thread does not meet the requirements for a new topic in this forum (see this topic for detaila on making topics in the Suggest New Bands forum -- https://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=122381 ).

I don't know Grateful Dead well, and was not an admin when it was formally rejected but I have followed topics on it before. I have heard Blues for Allah and Terrapin Station.

By the way, this site goes back before M@x was involved to 2002 at least. Population started with the original owners, they left, Prog Lucky bought it, and then he had M@x, who is web developer come on as partner. A lot was added before M@x and at one time anyone could add bands. The way things work were restructured by 2004, and then we had gatekeepers and quality control. M@x was not allowing all in, and his mind was changed on some by collabs when I was new to the game here.

This site has "evolved' over the years with how things work and what has been includable. I would say that we have been more open over the past eight years, say, than before that, while at the same time we upped some expectations due to the flooding of topics.

I agree that one should not need a new release for a re-evaluation if it had been formally rejected. And in fact this has been overturned or ignored various times over the years that I have belonged to this site when it comes to cases. Think more to the spirit of the law than the letter of the law and I expect teams to try also think, what makes sense here? Best to ask Admin and others in those cases if okay.

A band/artist may not have been properly evaluated originally, a poor presentation may have have been offered, the wrong material may have been evaluated, there may have been problems getting the music to the teams to listen to, team members sometimes do have bad days and make mistakes (we are all human), and importantly, personnel related acts may have been added in the meantime. One thing with Prog Related and Proto-Prog has been that it's not just about the music, it's about presenting good arguments, getting support from the public and collabs, and spelling-out clearly the relations to bands included in Prog categories. Some of the worst arguments have been of the "X and Y are here and therefore Z should be here" when X and Y don't even bear much in the way of relations at all (not in terms of sound, genre, personal relations, history....). That kind of thing hurts the case in people's eyes.

I don't expect to see The Grateful Dead in PA, partially as I have not been convinced of the arguments for it in the many times it has come up and that there has been significant people against it.

Oh, and Site Admin formally did not exclude bands based on sound they heard for years and is still officially the policy, it was not based on their listening, but instead the decision was based on evaluating the arguments that were presented by the sponsoring Special Collaborator and from reading the arguments in the threads. I would say that if people are to bring up bands for inclusion in PR and PP in Suggest New Bands, try to present a really knowledgeable and logical case in the topic, research any of the old topics on it (if one is unlocked still, things would automatically lock over time, use that) and try to tick off as many boxes as possible such as impact, similar bands included in Prog categories, similar cases, personnel relations as well as links to the music that has the strongest relations to Prog and discussion of the albums that are most relevant to a Prog site.

EDIT: By the way, while we have been more relaxed with it in some ways, here is the Official Prog Related submissions policy: CLICK to read here

Edited by Logan - November 20 2024 at 09:00

Captain Midnight wrote: The Grateful Dead deserve a spot under prog related imo,

The Grateful Dead were not a prog-related band. Only Progarchives' psychedelic rock section could be a suitable place for the Dead if they merit inclusion.

Time is not unlimited for any of us unfortunately. Admins (in the way we use titles at PA) made it that they don't need to listen at all, but instead the process involved others knowing the material, seeking outside consensus, and then presenting the arguments to the admin. It helps when people are detailed but also streamlined and economical. The most relevant to a Prog site albums can be brought up, the most relevant music from albums, and then the most relevant info suggested (related acts, influence, similar cases etc.). Simple works best. Like they might teach in Arguments 101 (and not in the Argument sketch), a good argument is where the premises that support the conclusion are relevant, sufficient and acceptable. While it has been an expectation that a Special Collab brings a case to Admin, everybody who wants to can have part to play in the process by offering arguments for or against, providing relevant info and material....

In this particular rejected case, I would call it Dead in the water, which might make some grateful. I figure one an celebrate, discuss and enjoy a band whether it's added to PA or now. Adding band does nor make it any more Prog or better or worthy of appreciation from a global perspective.

Ahh, late preparing breakfast for my son, bad dad. he loves to compose music on the piano, by the way. He takes after my dad.

No for me. Long songs with a lot of jamming do not necessarily mean the band is progressive. If that were the case, I would suggest The Allman Brothers were far more "progressive" in how they made progressive blues, and their elongated jams were heavily jazz inflected. You are opening a can of worms here.

^ But Cream and QMS are demonstrably not progressive.   The Dead's material was less demonstrably not progressive, and because they survived long past those other bands they had the time & chance to at least expand and grow.   When I would see Cipollina playing solo, though an awesome guitar player, he was the same blues-rock artist he'd always been.   Same with Clapton, in fact they are both painfully non-progressive and they wouldn't have it any other way.

There is in fact a difference between artists who maintain their allegiance to a specific musical tradition, and those who have the opportunity to reexamine and liquidate from time to time. The Dead may not have been progressive rock, but, as I say in my Robert Plant review for Principle of Moments, they certainly were digressive rock.

I stand by my evaluation that in the end, the Dead should probably not be added.   But it doesn't change what they were.

I guess it's progressive in a   Number Nine ... Number Nine   sort of way.   To me it's more experimental than progressive.

Edited by Atavachron - Yesterday at 20:05