The Who: progressive band
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Suggest New Bands and Artists
Forum Description: Suggest, create polls, and classify new bands you would like included on Prog Archives
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12369
Printed Date: March 03 2025 at 05:41
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: The Who: progressive band
Posted By: The Wizard
Subject: The Who: progressive band
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 18:03
|
Theres nothing new about people trying to get The Who added to the prog archives. These request have have been countered by people saying that the Who are hard rock, They weren't called progressive back then so they sholdn't be today, Roger Daltrey vocals aren't wierd enough, blah, blah blah.................. Lets just look at there credentials:
The only reason the who may not qualify is they (as far as I know) didn't use wierd time signatures. They may have, but I don't know of any. So, should the who be added? Yes. But they belong in the same category Queen, Deep Purple, and Roxy Music and there likes belong in. A new category for bands that are progressive but don't belong in the genre. I don't care what you call it. P.s.: I know there have been similar topics. P.s.s: I went to far with Led Zeppelin. They have don't nearly have the creindtials these guys have. P.s.s.s: I know they started with r'n'b roots. So did Jethro Tull.
|
Replies:
Posted By: Arnold Layne
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 18:58
|
i completely agree with you but im only the first to respond ------------- HELP! |
Posted By: eugene
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 19:00
|
I would agree with above too ------------- carefulwiththataxe |
Posted By: Vingatondooda
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 19:03
|
Along with the credentials you so aptly cite Wizard, if Deep purple, Queen and Uriah Heep are here, it is only logical and consistent that The Who be here as well.
Who is Prog? No, Yes is Prog.  ------------- if you are listening in the moon’s shadow is a rock glistening? Have your fields gone fallow? |
Posted By: goochnhell
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 19:28
|
You should add the Rolling Stones, DOORS also. Stones recorded the epic 11 minute jam on Aftermath,"going home" a full three years before Tommy. Doors idebut in 1966 was a masterpiece, and definitly pushed the boundries in a new direction. I agree that the WHO or at least Townsend took to the synth in a way that not many other blues rockers did. But had Brian Jones stayed as a vital member of the Stones, you would have seen a whole different group then what we have now. The WHO are a great old band,but I do not believe they belong in the archives, of course I do not think Queen does either. Deep Purple is quite a stretch also. |
Posted By: Don Quito
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 19:34
|
I suggest that it is most important to focus on progressive bands that are not in the archives, instead of considering non-progressive bands like Metallica, Iron Maiden, Led Zeppelin, etc. I know it's interesting to discuss about it and to make clear the nature of their music, but there are many bands out there that are really prog and are not included here. Let me mention a few of them: Jan Akkerman / Martin Barre / Jeff Beck / Chick Corea Electric Band / Colonel Les Claypool's Fearless Flying Frog Brigade / Colonel Claypool's Bucket Of Bernie Brains / Larry Coryell / Garage A Trois / Jacob's Dream / Jing Chi / King's X / Pat Metheny / Doug Pinnick (from King's X) / Jean Luc Ponty / Racer X / Rare Blend / John Scofield / Steve Smith & Vital Information / Mike Stern / Ty Tabor / Tribal Tech / etc. Think about that....
------------- KEEP THE PROMISE YOU MADE |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 19:40
|
Prog Related Thats what its there for.. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Vingatondooda
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 19:42
amazing list!  ------------- if you are listening in the moon’s shadow is a rock glistening? Have your fields gone fallow? |
Don Quito wrote:Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 20:08
It's were we should put the who. We just need someone brave enough. |
Posted By: GatesOfDelirium
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 20:41
|
Well, given that The Who were the first ones to make a popular concept album, they probably should at least be under prog-related. I'd say they were Proto-Prog, but that's a bit of a stretch.
------------- 
|
Posted By: peter townsend
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 20:59
|
WE MUST ADD THE WHO TO THE PROG ARCHIVES!!!!!!!!!! if it weren't for them prog wouldn't exist. |
Posted By: horza
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 21:01
In a band and lived within a ten mile radius of a guy who once lived next to somebody who was in a prog band ? welcome to prog archives ....... who next,thats right,its the who next  ------------- Originally posted by darkshade: Calling Mike Portnoy a bad drummer is like calling Stephen Hawking an idiot. |
Posted By: peter townsend
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 21:08
|
Please explain to me why the Who aren't prog in a sensible way. You people need to more liberal in what you consider progressive music. |
Posted By: horza
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 21:12
|
if i went into my local record store in the 60s 70s 80 90s or whever THE WHO WOULD NOT BE IN THE PROGRESSIVE SECTION THATS WHY - they are ROCK as in R-O-C-K ------------- Originally posted by darkshade: Calling Mike Portnoy a bad drummer is like calling Stephen Hawking an idiot. |
Posted By: horza
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 21:13
|
You people
i ain't "You people" i am ME ------------- Originally posted by darkshade: Calling Mike Portnoy a bad drummer is like calling Stephen Hawking an idiot. |
Posted By: Hemispheres
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 21:46
|
Add Them ------------- [IMG]http://www.wheresthatfrom.com/avatars/miguelsanchez.gif">[IMG]http://www.rockphiles.com/all_images/Act_Images/TheMothersOfInvention/mothers300.jpg"> |
Posted By: transend
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 21:49
| Hard to say....'Quadrophenia' is without doubt a masterpiece concept album, so THAT album alone should be in here. |
Posted By: Cygnus X-2
Date Posted: October 01 2005 at 23:24
|
They would be categorized under Prog Related if they even get on here. ------------- 
|
Posted By: acheron
Date Posted: October 02 2005 at 00:47
|
Zeppelin is far better than The Who... in every way but The Who is pretty progressive |
Posted By: GoldenSpiral
Date Posted: October 02 2005 at 01:28
|
progressive, yes. prog rock? perhaps. but not definitely. quadrophenia is definitely prog, tho. ------------- http://www.myspace.com/altaic" rel="nofollow - http://www.myspace.com/altaic ALTAIC "Oceans Down You'll Lie" coming soon |
Posted By: SirPsycho388
Date Posted: October 02 2005 at 02:47
|
You get my vote... definately "proto-prog" as the archives calls it ------------- Strangers passing in the street by chance two separate glances meet and I am you and what I see is me. And do I take you by the hand and lead you through the land and help me understand the best I can |
Posted By: Eetu Pellonpaa
Date Posted: October 02 2005 at 03:51
|
They could be in prog related or proto-prog. But I think these proto-prog/prog related artists should not have an open feature to add albums. First the admis / collaboratots should get a consensus, that which albums of them are prog related, add those and block the others. This would keep the site more on focus, and the non-prog items of those bands wouldn't take the resources of the site upkeepers. |
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: October 02 2005 at 09:03
|
Shouldn't we classify a band by its music, not where it is in a store? They made progressive music. Just face it. They may not be classifyed as a progressive band, but they could be. There records are popular and they wouldn't sell as well if they were in the progressive section. Seriously, you need to be more liberal in what you define as progressive. |
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: October 02 2005 at 09:07
I agree with you on that. The Who's first album is certainly not progressive. Neither is Live at Leeds (excellent album by the way) or the Who By Numbers (underrated gem). But Tommy, Quadrophenia, Who's Next, and Who Are You are certainly progressive. A Quick One also has the tiltle track, which qualifies that album as progressive. |
Posted By: Pr@gmatic
Date Posted: October 12 2005 at 17:37
Same thing here.
|
Posted By: Lindsay Lohan
Date Posted: October 13 2005 at 10:24
|
not proto-prog as the who has not inspired any progressive bands...anyways the who got some albums that is progressive but the rest is standard rock ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Fjuffe/?chartstyle=sideRed - [IMG - http://imagegen.last.fm/sideRed/recenttracks/Fjuffe.gif - |
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: October 13 2005 at 22:52
|
Any band that released a concept album or made a song longer than 10 minutes was inspired by The Who. How many prog bands have made concept albums or songs longer than 10 minutes? Exactly. The Who in a influenced the genre itself, meaning every prog band. It may sound radical, but you in a way have to admit its true. -------------  
|
Posted By: Lindsay Lohan
Date Posted: October 14 2005 at 07:09
oh please the who was not the first to release something above 10 minutes nor was they the first to release a concept album...i would only belivied that the who had an influence on some bands if they said that the who was influencal to their music becoming prog...the only ones that i have seen that have been influenced by the who have been rock bands and punk bands ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Fjuffe/?chartstyle=sideRed - [IMG - http://imagegen.last.fm/sideRed/recenttracks/Fjuffe.gif - |
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: October 14 2005 at 11:18
Name one rock group before The Who that made a 10 minute long suite. I challenge you. If you can I will be suprised. Sure, there were other genres that made long songs, but a rock band? As far as concept albums, the first concept album was Pet Sounds (The Beach Boys). What the Who did was bring the concept albums to new levels with storytelling and form. Before The Who concept albums just albums with ideas like linking songs (Pet Sounds) and posing as a fake band (Seargent Peppers). The Who changed this. -------------
|
Posted By: pepolo
Date Posted: October 14 2005 at 11:36
|
The Who - Kings of proto prog |
I'm on your side!Posted By: Lindsay Lohan
Date Posted: October 14 2005 at 15:50
the first rock n roll band that released a long song was really the rolling stones wich released a b-side for a single in 1964 that was pushing 9 minutes...but regardless on how long the songs are they are not prog at all...take for example wont get fooled again wich is about 8 and half minutes...you cant say it is prog just because it is a long song ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Fjuffe/?chartstyle=sideRed - [IMG - http://imagegen.last.fm/sideRed/recenttracks/Fjuffe.gif - |
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: October 15 2005 at 10:33
I'm not saying that any long song is prog. I'm saying that the Who revolutioized the idea longer songs with different movements aka the rock suite. This was essential for the development of art rock, thus giving the Who credit in the development of art rock. -------------
|
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: October 15 2005 at 10:35
Can you tell me more about this Stones song? Whats it called and were can I find it? I'm quite intrested in how it works, and if it is a suite like A Quick One. -------------
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: October 16 2005 at 20:53
|
oh look... beethoven made songs over 10 minutes.. why not put HIM on prog archives! and i strongly disagree. many bands in 1969 played songs over 10 minutes... you just dont know them |
Posted By: Cygnus X-2
Date Posted: October 16 2005 at 23:29
SF Sorrow anyone? -------------
|
Posted By: Cygnus X-2
Date Posted: October 16 2005 at 23:31
He's referring to A Quick one from 1966. -------------
|
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: October 17 2005 at 22:43
Yes, it is true that S.F. Sorrow by the Pretty Things was the first rock opera. But it wasn't nearly as muture or developed as Tommy. -------------
|
Posted By: Cygnus X-2
Date Posted: October 17 2005 at 22:55
Tommy may be more mature, but Pete Townshend will always regard SF Sorrow as the first Rock Opera. -------------
|
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: October 18 2005 at 18:52
But it all comes down to this: do prog bands cite S.F. Sorrow or Tommy as influences? -------------
|
Posted By: Cygnus X-2
Date Posted: October 18 2005 at 22:08
|
Of course the Who will be cited more often, they were more popular and Tommy was released at the perfect time and received rave reviews, so more often than not prog bands (name a few, besides Rush) influenced by the Who will state Tommy as a bigger influence. -------------
|
Posted By: Bilek
Date Posted: October 19 2005 at 05:44
|
The Who gets my vote, along with, and even more than The Doors. Both bands have strong proggy characteristics, but nevertheless should be included in proto-prog section, with limitation features as Eetu Pellonpää suggested. I agree with all albums/tracks you suggested, The Wizard. I think younger generation who thinks prog is made up of bands like Sigur Ros, Dream Theater, Pain of Salvation, or worse, ------------- Listen to Turkish psych/prog; you won't regret: Baris Manco,Erkin Koray,Cem Karaca,Mogollar,3 Hürel,Selda,Edip Akbayram,Fikret Kizilok,Ersen (and Dadaslar) (but stick with the '70's, and 'early 80's!) |
RadioheadPosted By: Andrea Cortese
Date Posted: October 19 2005 at 06:01
(totally agreed) |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: October 20 2005 at 20:41
| NO! the who are not progressive they were the standard blues rock band of the era who realeased a few concept albums, get over it. Nobody is saying they are a bad band you can listen to them if they arent prog you know but there is no basis to say they are prog WHATSOEVER. |
Posted By: bluetailfly
Date Posted: October 20 2005 at 23:33
|
God no. Pete Townsend is not a prog rocker, and he's not a proto-prog rocker. He's a great rock artist. Let him alone. Don't bend the definition of prog or proto-prog to fit his stuff. Just because a rock artist creates a concept album that includes a few horns and strings doesn't mean all of a sudden he's done some prog. He just a fantastic rock artist who refuses to always stay within a limited rock context. ------------- "The red polygon's only desire / is to get to the blue triangle." |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: October 20 2005 at 23:42
|
I love The Who, I have all their albums and DVD's but no, they are not a Progressive Rock Band, I could give 10 reasons, but the most important is that they are already an icon of another genre, they are probably among the 5 most representative Classic Rock bands, why should we lump them in a second rate category as Prog related? They deserve more than that, as a Who fan I would feel insuted to read they are considered related to something, almost Prog' or third class prog' in this case. The Who must be N° 1 in their category, not N° 1,956 band in Prog Archives. Please, are The Who in the same lvel of Asia and Super Furry Animals? I already feel bad fopr Gabriel, Waters, Gilmour, and Jon Anderson being there, all of them deserve more credit. Keith Moon and John Entwistle would not rest in peace if this crime is done. Iván
------------- 
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: October 21 2005 at 01:08
|
I have a nice idea, lets include The Who as Prog related, then somebody go to Pete Townsend's house and tell him: "Hey buddy, congratulations, we tried to include you as a Prog' band, sadly you don't fit in any sub-genre, but we have to honor The Who, so we are considering you as Prog related, this means you are almost Prog'!!!!!. Of course your band is not good enough to be considered 100% Prog. but you will have the priviledge to be side by side with Rock legends such as STYX, Super Furry Animals, Asia, Be Bop Deluxe, etc. Not many bands achieve this success, hope you're proud, imagine Foreigner and Boston couldn't achieve this honor" Then run as fast as you can before he breaks his guitar on your head. Iván -------------
|
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: October 22 2005 at 15:18
Actually, Townsend was always trying to get recognition as an artist, so he probably wouldn't go postal. Plus, I said he should be proto prog or prog related. Either way, he would among the likes of queen, the moody blues, some of rocks most respected acts. -------------
|
Posted By: dr_shoganai
Date Posted: October 22 2005 at 15:38
they should be added ------------- Air, fire, earth and water Balance of change World on the scales On the scales. |
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: October 26 2005 at 16:28
|
How many standard blues rok bands had songs featuring influences by avant garde composers? How many standard blues rock bands made groundbreaking concept albums? -------------
|
Posted By: Philrod
Date Posted: November 26 2005 at 01:58
HAHAHA nice joke ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Philrod/?chartstyle=Geldropdown-small"> 
|