Deep Purple and Jon Lord

Not sure if this topic goes here, but I wanted it to be on the front page. If not appropriate, please remove!

Since I subscribed to progarchives (before then I placed some reviews with the nick "black", as no one cares....) I've been suggesting every now and then to include Jon Lord and Deep Purple in the archives, as I will state my reasons below.

Maybe I'm looking for it in the wrong place

Anyway, this is not just an insistence because I'm a great fan of Deep Purple and Lord (indeed I am), I would hardly rate most of their albums with more than 3 stars. But I believe DP, and prominently their (ex) keyboardist Lord have a strong effect on many prog bands listed here (not to mention their songs covered by DT etc.), and they were among the first ones to play (somehow) experimental music. Some other prog websites include them (in the heavy-prog category, which doesn't exist here... the same should be here, including those like Uriah Heep, Rush, and Kansas...) I even saw their self titled 3rd album in the top 100 canterbury list in Hulloder site (OK, it was among the second top 50, who cares!).

Jon Lord also has very inspiring works, apart from the Concerto, which I believe is the first of its kind (of course, he might be influenced by earlier acts such as Days of Future Passed or suites of The Nice, but as far as I know, no one had ever tried that concept as a whole before). Gemini Suite is also one of the very early examples of combining a rock band and orchestra, and in my copy (which I downloaded from the internet) the pieces are named after the particular instrument which dominates the basic structure.
Then comes Sarabande, one of the first symphonic epics I heard, and I still believe this one goes side by side with Scheherazade, Snow Goose, DoFP, Journey (wakeman), 2112, Brain Salad Surgery, Salisbury etc., and even better than ELP's imitative work Pictures at an Exhibition.
Even in 1982, when most prog acts began to turn pop, Lord delivered a classic-influenced album -including one renaissance-era piece- (which was of course influenced by pop) and at least briefly carried on with prog.

Some might argue that DP lost its prog sensibilities (to say the least) after Machine Head album. Though I believe the 3 albums after Who Do We Think... are somwhow prog, let's accept it and look at the facts: 3 albums before Gillan, 1 concerto, and 3 solid heavy-prog rock masterpieces with Gillan on the front, and one highly appreciated live album. That makes 8. And let's count Genesis' works that are (in general) considerd to be prog: 1 proto-prog album, 5 studio and 1 live album with Gabriel on the front and Collins on drums, and 2 more studio and 1 more live album before Steve Hackett leaves and the band dives into art-pop... That makes 10 and leaves my fave 2 short... and if you just count the post-Blackmore albums -including some superb live sets- (given that DP did nothing really progressive in the '80's, and Genesis did suck all the way up to '90's....) DP beats by several albums. I gave this example because Genesis is the #1 band (according to the address line!) in the archives and considered by many to be a leading figure.

Of course I wasn't to compare DP with Yes or KC! maybe it would be better if I did with Asia, Saga, or Alan Parsons Project, I could come up with more concrete reasons. Now, please make your own comparison and tell if you think this great band, and solo works of its talented keyboardist must be included in the archives or not.

P.S. some DP offshoots are already in the archives, to name two Blackmore's Night and Warhorse. I believe neither cathes up with the musical and originality level DP achieved during early '70's. Also the existence of their current guitarist Steve Morse here should be considered a pro for my case!

Jon Lord's solo works should be in no question.Bringing Deep Purple in as a band though would then mean Led Zep,Black Sabbath and perhaps even Iron Maiden having a case.Sometime down the road Motley Crue and Anthrax will then be labelled PROG..eeek!

Sorry but  to Deep Purple ( to Jon Lord)

richardh wrote: Jon Lord's solo works should be in no question.Bringing Deep Purple in as a band though would then mean Led Zep,Black Sabbath and perhaps even Iron Maiden having a case.Sometime down the road Motley Crue and Anthrax will then be labelled PROG..eeek! Sorry but  to Deep Purple ( to Jon Lord)

At least you're 50% on the same opinion with me

I don't agree bringing DP would lead the way to the groups you mentioned. Only yesterday people were arguing about including Metallica here...
I do think Sabbath and Maiden have a case, but comparing their proggish numbers to DP's (or other even less proggy bands') renders this unlikely. Just listen to Fireball once more (and 25th anniversary edition if possible!) and tell: is this more prog, or Asia's Alpha, Sabbath's Sabbath Bloody Sabbath, or, Maiden's Seventh Son etc.?!? I mentioned the least prog album from DP's '70-'73 period, and the most proggish ones of the other bands... Besides, Asia is already in the archives.
Zeppelin has no case IMHO, because they were always more bluesy than prog, besides, they have only a handful of proggy numbers.
Not to mention hard rock - heavy metal bands like Motley and Athrax!! I don' even understand how you can compare them with DP!! Including rap passages in heavy albums doesn't make them prog, not even innovative!

well, then, at least let's have our beloved brother Lord here!!!

P.S.: I still have one more pro, DP is already listed (albeit briefly) in some other prog web sites!!!

P.a. should start 2 new categories;prog-metal and pomp-rock.So many bands who do fall in either categories are already in the archives;Asia,Styx,Uriah Heep ect...Jerry Lucky in his famous book considers pomp-rock to be an offshoot of prog,sort of an americanized version of prog.I got to agree with him.He even mention that pomp-rock paved the way to prog-metal,still agree with him.So that leaves us with Deep Purple,IMO the instigator of both those styles.The 70-73 era was the band's most heavy and brutal priod while what came after(Hughes/coverdale era) was more of an evolution,paving the way to pomp-rock.Even their offshoots Rainbow and early Whitesnake were of the pomp rock persuation,especially Rainbow.So yes they get my vote.Jon Lord,well I only got his Sarabande album,sort of a dance/medieval kind of thing,quite good AND prog too,so he gets my vote to.

I don't acutlly think that an agrumentation should be based totaly on analogies. You cannot argue that Genesis has "two more prog albums than my fav band" and say that's the reason why do you think DP should be on the page. You cannot mention agruments but trying to put DP and Genesis in the same level, because they belong to different dimentions (not that one is "better" or "worse" than the other, but they almost don't have any comparison point).

What do you think about when you listen to the word "Genesis"? Prog rock. And "Deep Purple"? Hard rock. They may have all the prog songs and moments you want, and all the hard rock phases you like, but finally, that is what they are.

Coya wrote: I don't acutlly think that an agrumentation should be based totaly on analogies. You cannot argue that Genesis has "two more prog albums than my fav band" and say that's the reason why do you think DP should be on the page. You cannot mention agruments but trying to put DP and Genesis in the same level, because they belong to different dimentions (not that one is "better" or "worse" than the other, but they almost don't have any comparison point). What do you think about when you listen to the word "Genesis"? Prog rock. And "Deep Purple"? Hard rock. They may have all the prog songs and moments you want, and all the hard rock phases you like, but finally, that is what they are.

The one thing you missed here is that I didn't compare DP's and Genesis' styles, but their number of so called "proggy" albums. I specifically gave the example of Genesis because it is listed as #1 (in the address line) and produced lots of s**t after the '70's period.

(Deep Purple is not my fave band, either!)

My analogy is not based upon being "better or worse" or "more proggy or less proggy". It just reflects my opinion on how many albums they have that could be considered prog. I have an average muical taste as most of the reviewers here, and I'm sure many will approve my ideas (unless they are so stubborn to label DP hard-rock, in spite of the innovations, long compositions and jams, and usage of the keyboards that are found in ABSOLUTELY no other hard rock band)

I am definitely aware of the fact that DP and Genesis belong to different paths, but if you just check 25 bands in random (say, from the latest 50 reviews) from progarchives, you will see at least some of them will be in the same situaiton. To name a few, put these bands side by side: Yes, Tangerine Dream, Dream Theater, Procol Harum, Focus, Klaus Schulze, Kansas, Aphrodite's Child, Ashra (not Tempel!), Asia, Caravan, Can, Jethro Tull... How many of them make similar styles of music?!?!? and this is only 13...

To answer you the same way: What do you think when you listen to Genesis' Invisible Touch album? My answer (you're free to give yours): '80's disco s**t. and what do you think when you listen to Deep Purple's self titled 3rd album? Definitive prog rock with some Canterbury influence, and one symphonic suite (April). One more: DP In Rock: Hard oriented prog rock with long jams and guitar-keyboard interplay (just listen to Flight of the Rat...)
Some more examples: What do you think when you listen to Uriah Heep (counterpart of DP), Asia, Styx, and one more recent example, Radiohead?!?!? provide your own answers...
but please be sincere!

You might also want to check out those tracks listed by Johhny-the-Fox, and there's much more!!!

P.S. Tonny Larz, thank you for your appreciation. But be sure to check out other great works of Lord and DP. (though nothing can overshadow Sarabande IMHO)

Bliek, Paulieg,

I think you are definitely right about the "progresiveness" of Deep Purple, and I absolutely agree with you. Now, I think Paulieg didn't get me about this "Prog=Genesis/Yes" concept. Of course that new bands don't have to sound like the old monsters to be considered prog, that wasn't my point at all (actually, I think that contemporary prog bands should have their own sound by combining their influences ith their surrounding, like The Mars Volta, for example), I was just trying to say, that Deep Purple, as much prog concerts, albums, and songs they have (which they totally DO have) are in escence a hard rock band. I also have to agree that "made in japan" has all the prog qualities, but that is actually what makes it a terrific hard rock live album .

So, let's say that I don't "really" disagree with you, I just consider DP more THE hard rock band as a prog band.

Another aspect though, is this page's criteria to designate who is prog and who isn't by adding them to the list. I don't think that because Radiohead and Nightwish (yes, nightwish) are considered prog here you can say that "because of that" the band "X" should be added also. (That was actually my point by criticising your analogies). I mean, it's totally ok if you tell the reasons why your band should be added, but I really don't find the "if Y was added, then X should be added too"-argument solid enough, because you not pointing your OWN criteria, you are pointing the one of others, even if it's the page's; sorry.

Maybe the term "prog-hard rock" can fit, but the "hard rock" part of the term should be mostly emphasised.

And no, there is no other band like Deep Purple, ABSOLUTELY not.

I love Deep Purple and always found they have some prog tendencies, but as I said before about The Who, Deep Purple are considered an Icon of vlassic/hard Rock and if included in Prog Archives they would be lumped into Art Rock with Styx, Supértramp, Asia, and I believe they don't deserve this.

They are OK as a Hard Rock legend, lets leave them there.

Iván

Coya wrote: Dear Bliek, what ivan_2068 already said, is exactly the reason why i don't want DP to be includedn in the archives. Apart from that, I think everything has been already written .

Normally I wouldn't have answered this, since as you already mentioned "everything has already been written"...

But I wanted to write this because I realised the second time you misspelled my name! (I know, no one has to spell Turkish correctly, but this isn't any particularly difficult thing!!!!

As a useless info, I'll tell that my name literally means "wrist" in english, as you might see in any online dictionary! As a name (which I believe I have unique upon earth, seriously, I have never met another Bilek so far!) it comes to mean "strength", at least that's what my parents intended to mean bt naming me so!!!!

Lastly, have I mentioned my thanks to you, paulieg? If you won't see this thread within one week, I'll send you a private message! (I'll know if you answer)

THANX A LOT for your support! not just because DP is a great band and should be included here, but because backing me up in my rightful case! it seems we have lost so far  maybe some other time!

and those who object against DP: have you got any objections against Jon Lord, too?!? or do you think his solo works should not be here just because he played "hard-rock" in several parts of his musical career?!?!?!?

Keep on proggin!