Sparks would be a good addition
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=38579
Printed Date: March 03 2025 at 17:53
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Sparks would be a good addition
Posted By: madgo2
Subject: Sparks would be a good addition
Date Posted: June 01 2007 at 23:23
|
Considering some of the bands that are covered here by Prog Archives I would think that the California band originating in the seventies and still around today, Sparks the creation of the Mael Brothers(Ron and Russell) would fall under Art Rock. I am sure that albums like Kimona My House, Propaganda, Indiscreet, No 1 in Heaven and even there two most recent Li'l Beethoven, and Hello Young Lovers all qualify as progressive. These guys absolutely stretch the boundaries of rock and have been doing it for four decades now. Does anyone have an intelligent opion on them as an addition? ------------- He whom life can no longer surprise |
Replies:
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: June 02 2007 at 04:13
|
They made some fine music, but I don't think they ever even dabbled in prog. Their music was very much aimed at the singles charts, later moving into dance/trance territory.
Can you highlight anyhting specific by them which you think demonstrates their prog credentials.
|
Posted By: Man Erg
Date Posted: June 02 2007 at 04:17
|
The first three albums,'A Woofer in Tweeters Clothing','Half Nelson/Sparks' and 'Kimono My House' are prog related I suppose but after that they became a clever pop band in a 10cc kind of way...Then again 10cc are in PAs ------------- 
Do 'The Stanley' otherwise I'll thrash you with some rhubarb. |
Posted By: madgo2
Date Posted: June 02 2007 at 20:39
|
In the most fundamental sense they are not a prog band but neither are quite a few on this site. They would be characterized under "prog related" or "art rock". For instance they are credited with influencing Queen's early sound and besides their first three albums being prog related the two that followed also would be considered just as strongly. Really there last two albums both released in the last few years are very progressive, In fact quite a bit more so than anything they had done in between. When you mention highlightng anything specific that demonstrates prog credentials I would say that if you can check out the song "At Home, At Work, At Play" off of Propaganda as that song is reflective of the whole album. From "Kimona MY house" check out "This Town A'int Big Enough for the Both of Us". or "Hasta Manana Monsieur" Heres a review of "Kimona My House" off another site:
Arguably one of Sparks' best albums, 1974's Kimono My House finds the brothers Mael ( http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:0ifexq9gldfe - Ron wrote most the songs and played keyboards, while http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:aifexq9gldfe - Russell was the singing frontman) ingeniously playing their guitar- and keyboard-heavy pop mix on 12 consistently fine tracks. Adding a touch of bubblegum, and even some of http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:kbfoxqe5ldde - Zappa 's own song-centric experimentalism to the menu, the Maels spruce up a sleazy Sunset Strip with a bevy of Broadway-worthy performances here: as the band expertly revs up the glam rock-meets- http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:wifqxql5ldje - Andrew Lloyd Webber backdrops, http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:aifexq9gldfe - Russell sends things into space with his operatic vocals and ever-clever lyrics. And besides two of their breakthrough hits (the English chart-toppers "This Town Ain't Big Enough for Both of Us" and "Amateur Hour"), the album features one of their often-overlooked stunners, "Here in Heaven." Essential. Here is a review of thier most recent release(2006)which has been critically acclaimed:
------------- He whom life can no longer surprise |
||||
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 02 2007 at 21:19
I saw them as an album band with several songs good enough for single release.
Things were very different in the seventies, even Focus hda a top ten single. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Easy Livin wrote:Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 02 2007 at 21:27
|
First two (Todd Rundgren produced) albums Sparks and A Woofer In A Tweeter's Clothing are without doubt Art Rock and by the third, Kimono My House, I would say they were on a par with Roxy Music in pushing Pop music into unknown territory. Admittedly Propaganda and Indiscreet were more power-pop and less experimental bur easily equal to anything 10 c.c. were doing.
The Giorgio Moroder years are best left forgotten.
 Their last two albums (Lil' Beethoven and Hello Young Lovers) are a return to (progressive) Art Rock, but in an updated form, incorporating some of the song structures from dance/trance but without the 4 to the floor dance thump. Imagine Neurosis without the sludge.
------------- What? |
Posted By: mystic fred
Date Posted: June 07 2007 at 01:55
I remember this group, very popular in the 70's - they had chart hits with"this town ain't big enough for the both of us" and "amateur hour", they were compared to Queen and T Rex at the time but they were strictly glam pop not Prog, will ask the Art rock team what they think..
-------------  Prog Archives Tour Van 
|
Posted By: madgo2
Date Posted: June 07 2007 at 23:53
|
I believe they deserve to be included under Art Rock. Certainly they should be here if bands such as "The Church" who I really like but are not Prog. How Deep Purple ever got here is beyond me as well. There are many that do not fit the prog definition...download the song "Dick Around" or if need be I wll send the mp3 of it. It is off there new album and is definitely prog. Sparks were doing Queen style operatics before Queen was around and most definitely are a unique listening experience. I am glad you guys are considering. If you need info on them let me know as I have been following them since the 70's. ------------- He whom life can no longer surprise |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: June 08 2007 at 03:17
Proof? That's a strange question, of course it's all about opinions.
Six top 30 singles in 18 months, and a further three when they returned in 1979 surely says something though.
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 08 2007 at 05:38
Sorry, its just your comment seemed somehow "definitive" to me. My mistake.
 But the fact that they had chart sucess proves nothing in my opinion. Genesis had a lot of that too. Also 10cc, ELO.....I could go on.  ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: madgo2
Date Posted: June 08 2007 at 10:25
|
You asked me to highlight anything specific which I did. Have you listened to any of these songs yet. Have you listened to "Dick Around" off there latest album. That would be an excellent example of the music they have been playing for the last seven years. As for a singles band I found that post to be very interesting. Do you happen to know which songs of theirs were in the top 30 and whose top 30 this was. I was around during that period of time and I cannot recall them having any top 30 hits in the USA. I think they were far more popular in Europe. ------------- He whom life can no longer surprise |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 08 2007 at 10:44
Cool Places, with Jane Wiedlin, nearly reached the US Top 40 (!)
(US) - Dance Chart only:
1999 The No. 1 Song In Heaven Hot Dance Music/Club Play 28
1995 (When I Kiss You) I Hear Charlie Parker Playing Hot Dance Music/Club Play 24 1989 Just Got Back From Heaven Hot Dance Music/Club Play 7 1988 So Important Hot Dance Music/Club Play 8 1986 Fingertips (Remix)/The Scene (Remix) Hot Dance Music/Club Play 38 1986 Music That You Can Dance To Hot Dance Music/Club Play 6 1984 With All My Might Hot Dance Music/Club Play 28 UK:
1974 This Town Ain't Big Enough For Both Of Us 2
1974 Amateur Hour 7 1974 Never Turn Your Back On Mother Earth 13 1975 Something For The Girl With Everything 17 1975 Get In The Swing 27 1975 Looks Looks Looks 26 1979 The Number One Song In Heaven 14 1979 Beat The Clock 10 ...but all that aside, I agree they should be considered for Art Rock on the strength of Lil' Beethoven and Hello Young Lovers (and their two Bearsville albums IMHO) ------------- What? |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: June 08 2007 at 13:32
Cheers Ian, I'll try to remember to IMO in future!
|
Posted By: madgo2
Date Posted: June 09 2007 at 18:17
Thank you for the info on the top 30 hits! Most of this is the dark era of Sparks as the 80's were for a great many bands. Of course the 70's tunes are fantastic.  ------------- He whom life can no longer surprise |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: June 11 2007 at 19:52
|
Really love them, but I just don't think they fit here, or on a classic prog compilation (one "test" that works for me).
Sparks were/are a very clever, funny, unique POP band -- but there are many other great, highly original pop artists out there.
Another can of worms.
Alt country next? Prog hip hop? ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: June 11 2007 at 20:09
|
Again, the problem is that damned vague, subjective "progressive" word.
To me at least, it implies a time and a sound, more so than a compositional attitude or "difference."
As ever, the so-called "Prog Related" is a big managerial problem. I get the "proto prog" concept -- stuff that came before classic prog, and helped shape it/pave the way. But we can't just include all good music that came after, unless the name of the site and its focus is to change, and become even MORE hopelessly subjective, ala "Good Music Archives."
 Satisfactorily categorizing music, and trying to make it all either fit within or outside one broad, over-arching (and artificial) "category" is just about impossible, and pointless, because every music fan has their own take on what they hear, and because art transcends verbal boundaries.
(As i've said about 1000 time here....
 )Enough -- add new prog bands -- the old ones are long since already here! ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 11 2007 at 20:15
|
^ If an old non-prog band starts producing progressive music today (in whatever sub-genre), would you consider them in the same light as a new prog band? ------------- What? |
Posted By: madgo2
Date Posted: June 11 2007 at 22:31
Peter, have you listened to Li'l Beethoven or Hello Young Lovers? Eithier of these albums I consider to be more progressive than half the bands that are on this site. These guys are and always have been willing to take creatvity to the next level and with the exception of the 80's stuff their music of the seventies and the last ten years or so is all very progressive. No offense but not fitting in here...I am not sure what that means. Deep Purple and the Church fit in here as does numerous mediocre Tangerine Dream releases...not to mention the Beatles and even Kate Bush...all fine bands/musicians but their is most definitley not a narrow scope of bands on this site. ------------- He whom life can no longer surprise |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: June 12 2007 at 00:25
I suppose I would -- but again, the main problem is the highly subjective nature of the "P" word.
 Classic, neo, whatever -- for me, if it sounds like prog rock, it is prog rock (regardless of whether or not it does anything truly new).
Everyone has their own take on "progressive," but the term is too often bandied about here as if it were a known, firmly fixed quantity. It's not, and through sweeping additions, and tacking it on to other genres, (prog metal, prog folk, etc) it is rapidly losing whatever little meaning it once had, until it means little more than "good," "non-commercial" or "kind of different." ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: June 12 2007 at 00:49
------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: madgo2
Date Posted: June 12 2007 at 23:04
|
I understand your argument on why you believe Sparks not to be a progressive band.. I disagree with your statement that I am making an argument based on "two wrongs don't make a right". I was only responding to your statment that "they do not belong here". My point is this: Prog Archives, whether for bad or good, is defined by who is already here. Based on that Sparks belong here as a progressive band. In the strict definition of the term I agree Deep Purple and quite a few others do not belong here. Now if they were not here would I still believe Sparks is a progressive band. Yes I do, a progressive Art band..
Also I find it interesting that you own four of Sparks albums
out of twenty two which means you have less than tweny percent of their work which absoutely should disqualify you from having any relevant opinion on their body of work. Buy the last two albums and then if you disagree I will respect that but certainly not before. By the way what is your opinion of the inclusion of Queen on Prog Archives?
------------- He whom life can no longer surprise |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: June 12 2007 at 23:11
|
^ This site is not, or should not be, defined by who is already here but rather a thorough and independent examination of the bulk and/or key work of a band. Peter's four Sparks albums are four more than I own and I very much respect his opinion, especially since it's input like his that will help a team decide on their addition.
|
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: June 13 2007 at 03:48
|
Correct Atavachron, a case needs to made for each proposed band on their own merits. |
Posted By: madgo2
Date Posted: June 13 2007 at 18:27
Did you actually read what I wrote? I do not believe that this site should be defined by who is here, however it is what it is and this site has many bands that are not progressive and I am entitled to my opinion. Let me reiterate I believe there is enough of Sparks catalogue that is progressive that they deserve to be here. As far as who decides that does not really matter to me and I certainly do not care for who you respect or what type of elitist attitude you bring to the table with your comment that truly added nothing to this debate or discussion. ------------- He whom life can no longer surprise |
Posted By: madgo2
Date Posted: June 13 2007 at 18:29
At this point I am already convinced you will not add them. Lets face it you guys already have your minds made up and have not heard anything they have done in thirty years. Instead you play the game of lets pick on the new guy. So be it. I tried...------------- He whom life can no longer surprise |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 13 2007 at 18:40
|
I think, on reflection, they would be a worthy addition. Similar to 10cc in some ways. They have a quirky style, and some surprising songs. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: June 13 2007 at 23:51
|
madgo2, I could have worded my statement in a warmer way-- don't misunderstand, Sparks has been on the Art Team table for about a week.. we currently don't have enough (or any) of their material to listen to. In time we will, or further opinions will come in from other collaborators (as above) and members. It's that simple, no decision has been made either way. If an SC who knows their material wants to add them after careful consideration, they have that right.
|
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 03:39
Sorry, perhaps i shoudl have been clear that any opinions I voice in these threads are my personal thoughts, they do not represent the views of the Admin team, the site etc.
If you can convince one of the specialist teams to add them to their genre, they will be added. If you want to add them as "prog related", ask the Admin team for a final decision. Any decisions taken by the Admin team are based on the evidence presented, plus additional research. Strange as it may sound, this can mean that our decisions are at odds with our personal opinions.
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 03:52
I think he has a point actually. Bands already in the database MUST have SOME bearing on future additions. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 04:04
|
Yes, but they should not be used on the basis of "If X is here, then Y should be too". The underlying implication of such statements is that Band X (not Brand X!) should not be here, but since they are, it opens the doors for band Y.
For me, the problem with using other bands as justification is that the wrong part of their catalogue may be cited. For example, since Genesis is here and they made catchy pop music, then Abba should be too.
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 04:07
I agree. What I'm saying is that what is here has some bearing...you can't ignore it, but the proposed band MUST have a strong case also.
I think that makes some sense.
And the Geneisis/Abba argument is a bit of a red herring. Sparks are , imo, similar in some ways to bands like 10cc or Be Bop deluxe. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Man Erg
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 04:47
Bump -------------
Do 'The Stanley' otherwise I'll thrash you with some rhubarb. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 05:04
You're not suggesting Kenny...are you?
For those unfamiliar......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1NK85Z_uiU - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1NK85Z_uiU ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Man Erg
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 05:16
 OMG! I'd forgotten about them with their Special K logoed shirts.
Somebody will be suggesting Senasational Alex Harvey Band next...tsk! I dunno  -------------
Do 'The Stanley' otherwise I'll thrash you with some rhubarb. |
Posted By: madgo2
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 07:57
------------- He whom life can no longer surprise |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 07:59
It would help a lot, thanks. |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 09:00
I think most long-term Sparks fans would agree that the four disks I currently have, (Kimono My House, Propaganda, Indiscreet, Big Beat) best represent the band in their heyday, and capture their essence. I believe those essential early albums are the ones which should weigh most heavily re the group's inclusion or exclusion.
I would hope you would "respect" my opinion on the band as "relevant," in any case. I have been a fan since about 1974, and my opinion was carefully considered and respectfully worded.
***********************************************************************************************
Re Queen, they are irrelevant to this discussion, but since you ask, I have never considered them a prog band, and voted against their inclusion here. (I think they were overwhelmingly a very commercial top-40 band, if a very clever, talented one). I disliked most of what came after their first four albums, which is to say, the vast bulk of their output. (I find only Sheer heart Attack and A Night at the Opera to be really worth my time.)
I think Queen got in mainly due to their immense popularity with many of the decision makers here, and on the (over-weighted) strength of one album (Queen II) and one song (Bohemian Rhapsody) in particular.
I try to avoid the "if X is here, then Y and Z need to be added, too" type of argument for band additions, because I don't think it is a particularly valid or logical way to make such decisions. Yes is Yes, Queen is Queen, and Sparks are Sparks.
Just because i buy apples doesn't mean I have to buy (or like) cantaloupes, or pork chops....
Every time a new controversial addition is made or proposed, however, these "if X, then Y" arguments proliferate. (I can see their allure, though. For me, it is astounding that artists like Queen, Deep Purple, Wishbone Ash, various metal acts, etc, are apparently considered to be more akin to prog than David Bowie, for example.) Again, the ongoing problem is the out-dated, near useless "progressive" word itself -- it no longer refers to any one style or period of music, and is so vague and undefined in its current, forced application as to mean little more than a subjective value judgment such as "good."
But I try not to get too concerned about it. This is not my site, the great prog bands are here, and I like the forum folks, overall. it's just music, and i can categorize my own music collection any darn way i see fit. The exclusion or inclusion of Sparks, Zeppelin or Wishbone Ash, etc, will not have the slightest impact upon how I enjoy those artists. ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: madgo2
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 21:42
I think the four albums you own certainly represent the "classic era" for Sparks. Personally I like all their albums albeit some more than others and I do respect your opinion on the band as being relevant, it's nice to hear someone who realizes that they did have the Rickenbacker bass sound early on. I think you will enjoy "Hello Young Lovers" it is really a strong album. It makes me wonder how a band can go so many years releasing "decent" material then out of nowhere start putting great stuff out again... I was on this site often a couple years ago, and then came back recently and was very surprised to see all the new additions of bands. I never thought I would see Queen, The Beatles, Led Zep, etc... ------------- He whom life can no longer surprise |
Posted By: madgo2
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 21:47
It would help a lot, thanks. [/QUOTE Where should I send the mp3's to? ------------- He whom life can no longer surprise |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: June 14 2007 at 21:48
|
just PM me with them, thanks again
|
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: June 15 2007 at 03:29
| Please do not offer to trade or supply music via the website. I appreciate the good intentions here, but it is still illegal. |