Beatles Prog?
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=18699
Printed Date: March 03 2025 at 18:10
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Beatles Prog?
Posted By: TheCrimsonKing
Subject: Beatles Prog?
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 01:11
|
I was listening to Sgt. Peppers the other day and I thought to myself, "Why is this not on Prog Archives?" Now, I'm sure there's been a topic about this before so please excuse my 'noob'-ness. Obviously the beatles early albums are not prog, but their later stuff was rather progressive for it's time. |
Replies:
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 01:16
|
Beatles are NOT! prog...
------------- 
|
Posted By: Thufir Hawat
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 01:19
|
Overall they are not prog enough to be included On the site but I agree that some of their stuff is At least prog- related. ------------- "I can't see through my eye lids" |
Posted By: TheCrimsonKing
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 01:20
|
Proto-Prog? Pop-Prog |
?Posted By: SirPsycho388
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 01:43
|
def Proto-Prog ------------- 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: Oxygen Waster
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 01:43
Proto for sure
|
TheCrimsonKing wrote:Posted By: Hierophant
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 01:46
|
Didn't we discuss this several thousand times? ------------- 
|
Posted By: martinprog77
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 03:18
|
SORRY BUT THE BEATLESWERE A''BOYS POP BAND''
|
Posted By: video vertigo
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 03:32
|
The original boy band, in the likes of Hansen and N'Sync hmmm, are they prog-rock, I'm not even sure if they were Rock. More of R&B music than rock or somewhere in between the two. Definitely pop music definitely good. Progressed music most certainly but in the opposite direction of Prog artists in the late 60s. Proto-Prog I have no objections. ------------- "The rock and roll business is pretty absurd, but the world of serious music is much worse." - Zappa |
Posted By: D.Noisserger
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 03:53
Yeah it was... but Sgt Pepper and "revolver" are also very prog anyway. The song are short, but I think we can said it prog... ------------- [IMG]http://www.painofsalvation.com/news/images/a-collage-change.jpg"> |
Posted By: ryba
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 03:59
|
it has no sense to discuss whether beatles were prog or not. their music is great and timeless. Abbey road is one of the magnum opuses in rock music and is definetely more progressive than a lot of bands included in the forum. i think, it should be space enough in archives when the music is as good as the beatles. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 04:16
Ommmmmmm! I predict that The Beatles will be included in PA! Any takers! ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: chamberry
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 05:25
|
well, they helped start the progressive rock with Sgt.
Peppers... but i don't think that they will be in here, at least
I don't
------------- 
|
Posted By: pero
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 05:48
| Only some rare songs on their albums can be prog (White album - Revolution 89 |
Posted By: Phil
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 05:48
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 05:50
Unfortunately,I predict that also...another big mistake if It'll happen...  -------------
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 05:53
|
You might as well get used to the idea! ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 05:58
Yeah  In fact,I am eagerly waiting for the adition of Pet Shop Boys,Nirvana and,not to mention,Duran Duran... -------------
|
Posted By: PROGMAN
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 06:02
|
"Revolution 9" is a Prog song from "The White Album"
------------- CYMRU AM BYTH 
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 06:05
BUT YOU CAN'T ADD A WHOLE BAND JUST FOR ONE PIECE!IT'S ABSURD.OR EVEN ONE ALBUM! (aka Deep Purple and his concerto)   -------------
|
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 06:14
|
Yawn, we've been through this so many times that I can't even be bothered to comment. Except that to call The Beatles "a boys pop band" is the biggest load of nonsense ever. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 06:24
Absolutely agree with you 100%. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Timsan
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 09:03
| ok lets get this right, if the beatles wouldnt have existed, i dont think any of you could listen to pro rock at all, and its not a boy band. the band itself is as much a boy band as every other band in history that plays its own instruments and write their own songs, is genesis, yes and king crimson boy bands? no way, but they are boys that plays rock, just as beatles is!!! |
Posted By: Legoman
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 09:20
| We really can't add The Beatles into the archieves, guys. If this is done we will pre-date most of the other stuff that we consider to be the foundation of prog; Moody Blues, King Crimson, etc. And, yes. Even though a lot of people agree that The Beatles did maybe a total of 3 or 4 prog things in their life that is certainly not enough to justifiy this quite MAJOR addition. |
Posted By: DoubleD
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 09:22
| Boy Bands don't develope their talents playing 6 hour sets in dingy Hamburg bars. Anyway, I am new here and I am learning alot about prog, one thing I learned is that The Beatles were a MAJOR influence on Genesis, Yes and King Crimson. All of them masters of progressive rock. |
Posted By: DoubleD
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 09:25
| Not to mention Pink Floyd, the Moody Blues, and Queen! |
Posted By: Lord Qwerty
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 09:30
|
Lord Qwerty indicates his intense respect for the Beatles and comments on everything they've pioneered and perfected in only 7 years of existence when the prog genre genre has barely scratched the surface of new and inventive music in 37 (!) years of existence. Lord Qwerty therefore proclaims the Beatles the prime archetype and the perfect model for the progressive band. However, Lord Qwerty does not feel that they would be adequately suited to be considered to be a prog band in the 'genre' sense (He would like to spend some time commenting on the idiocy and f**king absurdity of genre-specific prog standards, but reserves his scorn and derision for a different day altogether.) He will however request that the establishment of Prog Archives at least display one of their albums in the proto-prog section, as a marker of respect for what they have achieved. Otherwise, you will continue to have discussions like this every week and you will forever be plagued with petty arguments over how 'prog' the Beatles are. ------------- Lord Qwerty is remarkably pretentious. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 09:33
^ Are you OK? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: viperjr98
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 09:34
|
The point of PA is to learn about new bands, bands you don't know about, and to discuss bands that aren't discussed anywhere else. While I happen to think that a lot of the Beatles later work was very proggy, I don't think they should be included here because a) what's to be said about them that hasn't already been said elsewhere and b) does anyone really not know about the Beatles??? There are plenty of sites devoted exclusively to the Beatles. If you feel the need to connect with other Beatlemaniacs, go to one of them and chat your little head off. As for PA, why can't we just say that the Beatles were proto-proto-prog, incredibly influencial to the genre and to the history of those who invented the genre. But they won't be included here. That's it. Nothing more needs to be said.
|
Posted By: RoyalJelly
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 09:49
| Exactly...the forerunners of prog, without whom none of us would be reading this website. |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 12:21
Well said m'Lord. |
Posted By: akin
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 12:36
It is not what the people from the inclusion teams say. They say the site is album based and if a band has at least one progressive rock album, it can be here. |
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 13:55
|
so then what about the beegees album odessa so then what about spirit 12 dreams of dr sardonicus on and on in a circle at the forum |
Posted By: TheCrimsonKing
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 14:20
I'd say this guy put it best. I mean, you can't say they were "a pop boys band". that's just incredibly ignorant, but you certainly call them a 'prog' band, so to say. The fact is that they were extremely PROGRESSIVE. On the song Rain there is the first backwards tracking EVER. A lot of Prog-Musicians would site Sgt. Peppers as an early prog album, Mike portnoy being one |
Posted By: lunaticviolist
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 14:27
|
I think with all these discussions we've realized how bad a term progressive rock is.
------------- My recent purchases: 
|
Posted By: Lord Qwerty
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 14:37
|
Lord Qwerty agrees and feels we should hold an assembly to decide on a new term. Like 'progcore' or 'Bach rock' or 'moog funk'. ------------- Lord Qwerty is remarkably pretentious. |
Posted By: Figglesnout
Date Posted: February 09 2006 at 15:11
|
i have to say that beatles had a very progressive career and a nice niche of progressive albums (The White album is probably my favorite album of all time, and also Abbey Road, Sgt. peppers, Revolver, and to a lesser extent Let It Be). And while this is true in respect I do not consider the Beatles to be what we commonly consider to be a "progressive" band, while I would not object if they were added to the archives. The Beatles were THE milestone in rock in general which includes "progressive" rock, therefore I do think they deserve a spot in "prog-related" if anywhere at all. Where I stand I wouldn't object if they were added, nor would I object if they weren't. ------------- I'm a reasonable man, get off my case |
Posted By: akin
Date Posted: February 10 2006 at 14:33
Well, for me ok, because they are progressive rock albuns. I don't consider Bee Gees a progressive rock band. Spirit I don't consider a progressive rock band either. But I suggested people from the prog metal team to wait the bands to release more progressive rock (in case, progressive metal) albuns to make us sure that the bands are really progressive metal and not a plain metal band that made one progressive rock album just because of the success achieved by bands like Dream Theater. The answer was that if a band has at least one album that can be considered progressive rock, it should be added. So I'm waiting to see here Bee Gees, Spirit, The Beatles, The Guess Who, Cat Stevens, The Rolling Stones, David Bowie and so on.. |
Posted By: bruin69
Date Posted: March 15 2006 at 20:37
| Well, unfortunately they HAVE been added to this otherwise excellent site... Who's now taking bets on the Bay City Rollers being next?? |