Where's The Who?
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=39152
Printed Date: December 01 2024 at 22:54
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Where's The Who?
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Subject: Where's The Who?
Date Posted: June 18 2007 at 16:33
| I was looking through the proto prog section today, and I noticed that, while hard rock bands like The Doors and Deep Purple are given plenty of space, there was no mention at all of The Who, Am I crazy here? I would have thought you could have made at least as good a case for The Who being proto-prog as you could have made for The Doors. |
Replies:
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: June 18 2007 at 16:37
|
Proto prog would probably require some prog groups as citing the Who as an influence. Prog-related would be a stretch, but they certainly did contribute to the "enlargement" of possibilities in rock music.
------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: June 18 2007 at 16:40
|
Well said. I don`t even know what Purple and The Doors are doing here.
------------- |
Posted By: paolo.beenees
Date Posted: June 18 2007 at 16:44
|
I TOTALLY AGREE. Baba 'O Riley or The Song is Over alone would be enough to admit them here ------------- 
|
Posted By: Philéas
Date Posted: June 18 2007 at 17:54
|
Vibrationbaby wrote:Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 03:43
|
I waw watching Tommy again the other week. What a fantastic soundtrack.
For me The Who have far greater prog credentials than Deep Purple or the Doors, not that I've anything against either, but I think The Who should be here, under Prog Related. There are moments on the Quadrophenia album which come close to sounding like Gabriel era Genesis. The section of 'Cut my Hair' where Pete Townsend sings sounds like something off the Lamb! Complete with strings, synths, lengthy compositions, fusing of styles and conceptualising, The Who were, for a while at least virtually prog in my opinion. BTW, I think 'Who's Next' is one of the greatest rock albums of all time. |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 04:29
|
I guess that looking at the groups included in Prog Related, The Who would not be an outrageous addition, by now. (Zep, Wishbone, Queen, Roxy, 10CC etc...)
They've had mini-suites (as far back as 68), rock operas and concept albums, they've toyed around with Terry Riley's ideas etc... And they were very dynamic and tempos changed quite often.
They get my vote for inclusion ------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Posted By: mystic fred
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 04:48
|
me too! Prog-related would suitable for the Who, but many members feel there shouldn't be a PR section at all. The Who's music and ideas were hugely influential to the development of Prog, i believe PR is useful guide to its development .
-------------  Prog Archives Tour Van 
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:08
I've always been against the Who's addition. But I guess its that X is here argument again. Yep, they shouild be included if The Doors, Purple etc are here.
No, not really....Purple are Proto Prog and who cites them as an influence? (A prog influence I mean) ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 12:24
|
Where's Who?
What's Who?
Who's Who?
The wisdom of the teams will decide if The Who is added...Let it be...And I think this thread should be in the "suggest bands" lounge....
------------- 
|
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 13:39
I believe that a couple members of Yes have mentioned the influence of The Who (most notably Squire.)
|
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 13:46
|
First...this is in the wrong section,it should be in Suggest New Bands/Artists. There was a thread there already about The Who,but I can't find it,so I will leave this one open.-------------  |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 13:55
Influenced by the music? Or maybe by the bass playing, which is different. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 17:57
Listen to Who's Next, then Mirage by Camel, they borrowed some of who's ideas on that album.
Also the Rush album Farewell to Kings has some influence from the Who, especially the frst two tracks Geddy at times sings like Roger Daltery.
Chris Squire has cited John Entwistle as a major influence.
I can also here elements of the Who in Genesis, when I first heard Harold the Barrel by Genesis I thought it was a Who song!!!
So yep Proto/related. ------------- |
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 20:53
How old are you, anyway? Squire's bass playing was considered both innovative and definitive during the early phase of the prog movement, I think you have to consider that his influences are also influences on prog.
And yet still The Who have more credible than the claims that The Doors or Led Zeppelin have towards being considered proto prog or prog related.
I'm not really arguing that The Who should be included. I don't think they should. But they have more solid proto prog and prog related credentials than other bands that have been included. Maybe I'm arguing that other bands should be excluded instead.
And to the guy who posted before me, when you mentioned Camel, you were spot on with what you said.
|
Posted By: rileydog22
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 22:59
|
I consider Quadrophenia to be a prog album, but aside from a few songs here and there (The Song Is Over is the first to mind), they didn't have anything to do with the genre.
-------------   |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 23:46
This issue has been discussed ad nauseam and sttill the opposition (including myself) is strong.
Even when the IF X then why not Y? Argument is absolutely not valid, because every band is evaluated by it's own merits I must say that:
The Doors are a OPesychedelic band and there's a section for Psyche bands
Deep Purple played in the borderline of Hard Rock and Prog
The Who are a symbol of Classic Rock, they have a site of priviledge there, here they will be lumped with Super Furry Animals and Kate Bush, so I believe even The Who wouldn't want to be included as almnost Prog.
As a fan, I don't want to see them lumped with bands that ere not remotely in their level and in a secondary sub-genre.
Iván
:
------------- 
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 20 2007 at 04:45
I have no clue what you are talking about. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 20 2007 at 05:59
|
hahha.. still going on I see... strong opposition or not. The Who will come to PA's.. You all know it and I do. They as much as the Beatles were responsible for creating the atmosphere that made Progressive Rock possible. You all can focus in the image that those who don't know music like we are supposed to focus on. As a 70's hard rock group... or you can pull your heads out of your asses and recognize that that along with the Beatles... the catagory of Proto Prog was ready made for the Who and their real importance to rock music... not the popular notion as decadent rock stars. |
Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: June 20 2007 at 06:14
It was over a year old anyways...I checked and revived it a few months ago.
|
Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: June 20 2007 at 06:16
 |
Posted By: Man Erg
Date Posted: June 20 2007 at 06:20
Dig out Trespass and Who's Next. Play Stagnation and Behind Blue Eyes back to back.The melody is almost identical. ------------- 
Do 'The Stanley' otherwise I'll thrash you with some rhubarb. |
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: June 20 2007 at 06:30
|
'ere we go again....
------------- 
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: June 20 2007 at 07:50
Thats true, they are similar, but generally was some of the moods on the Quadrophenia album that got me interested in the Who, and that was because I thought they sounded 'proggy' and in the Genesis vein.. There is no reason whatsoever why they can't be on PA, under 'Prog Related' I cant accept that Iron Maiden have stronger links to prog than The Who. In fact it's obvious they haven't. imo |
Posted By: Zargus
Date Posted: June 20 2007 at 19:31
|
2 double album rock opera's, and 1 that never got finished but turned out as the best classic rock album ever made, what more do you need? How many rock opera's or consept albums did deep purple, the doors and queen write? And then lisen to the first who album and up to quadrophenia, now thats progresion for you. After that one they dident have much more to prove. ------------- 
|
Posted By: rileydog22
Date Posted: June 20 2007 at 21:41
Ugggggg. Concept albums don't make you prog. The Beach Boys supposedly made the first concept album, and there's no way in hell that they could be considered in any way to be prog. For that matter, progression doesn't make you prog either. Listen to early R'n'B influenced Rolling Stones and then later disco-influenced Rolling Stones, and there's a big "progression," but the Stones aren't remotely prog either. ------------- |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: June 20 2007 at 21:41
Would ONE PROG ALBUM be too much?
Remember, this is PROG ARCHIVES, not Rock Opera Archives or Classic Rock Archives.
Zargus, we're tallking about PROGRESSIVE ROCK, not about how much a band progressed during their career.
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 01:33
| We aren't talking about progressive rock really, are we? We are talking about being related to or being an influence upon progressive rock. I've been listening to Rainbow's Rising tonight and I can't hear anything that I would call progressive on it at all. It's just good, intelligent, well crafted metal. (One could argue that metal being intelligent is progressive, I suppose.) I just don't get why there is such die-hard opposition to including The Who when so many other bands are included that have much weaker cases for being here. |
Posted By: Floydoid
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 09:40
An analogy that springs to mind is if you were creating the 'heavy metal archives'. In a 'metal related' category you would have to include The Yardbirds, even though they were not heavy metal themselves, their influence in the evolution of the genre is incalculable, much the same as The Beatles' influence on prog. The Who would appear to straddle both genres and a case could be made for including them in either prog or metal archives, as being a major innovative influence ------------- 'We're going to need a bigger swear jar.' |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 09:58
easy... like in numerous cases here at PA's.... people focus in on parts of a groups history and forget or underplay other parts. Instead of trying to educate... they fall in with the unwashed musical masses hahhaha instead of seeing the bigger picture about it's relation to prog. You can't really get into comparison games... that was blown open by several dubious PR additions... going by that... any group influenced by prog in the 70's and having a couple of prog or prog-like tracks can be added here IF they were to do the 'if x then y' routine. By the way...that would include a HELL of a lot of groups that would cause some people's head to explode here hahhaha. For the record... I asked the admins some time ago to consider The Who. NOT as PR but as PP. That is why I am convinced they will indeed be inducted when the time is right... it is simply a no-brainer. There were several groups that were no brainers for that category... the Beatles are in.... the Who should be... along with several others that I simply don't see happening for assorted reasons. |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 10:34
------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 10:54
|
Yet again: "prog" rock is a 99.9% SUBJECTIVE notion.
The Who were good, original, and creative -- add 'em, I guess.
 Add all the "good" classic rock bands. Make 'em fit -- make up some more categories with that pesky, elusive "prog" word tacked onto them, if necessary.
All The Music We See Fit To List Archives ------------- "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: micky
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 11:01
oh jeepers Peter.... I hate those categories as much as anyone here... but since the damn owners want them shouldn't we quit bitching about them, accept them, and make them work. There were plenty of good,good, creative bands out there...and that ones that don't have any relation to prog...simply don't get added. Those that do.. for the most part hahha...do. You for one are the age and knowledge to add your thoughts on whether or not the Who are worthy of being added NOT as a Prog Related group... but as a Proto Prog group. Prog Related, I hate with a particular venom... but Proto Prog does serve a purpose here. |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 11:06
|
i know Micky, I know.
I stiil think prog is an outdated, near-meaningless, increasingly useless way to categorise music, and I see this site as less and less driven by a love of good music, as by the lure of the marketplace.
I like the overwhelmingly friendly, smart folks here, though.  ------------- "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 21 2007 at 11:11
|
I still think a new name, to reflect the site's increasingly inclusive reality, such as "Progcetera," might be warrented. Truth in advertising.
Such a move might forestall much of the perpetual bickering re inclusions, too. ------------- "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: micky
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 11:13
hahahha I know Peter, I know..   |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 11:17
shhhh!!!!!!!!! don't give M@X any ideas.... though I do have my bio for Duran Duran's inclusion ready though ....... |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 11:21
|
Anyway, Mick, let's face it: progholes like us will ALWAYS argue about music, because each one of us KNOWS the TRUTH about superior music. (Not that we agree on just what that 'truth" is, though.)
'Tis our very nature as prog fans, methinks....  ------------- "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: Dick Heath
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 12:40
It did get finished ....eventually, however, it was less 'rock opera' as 'theatre with music' There was a 'rough' draft performance at London's Old Vic Theatre in 70's, a 'finished project' played on BBC Radio 3 in 1999. The recording of the latter is available with all the demos and the subsequent later 90's live performances of some significant rearrangements of very familar tunes, will be found on the 6 CD set The Lifehouse Project:
http://www.eelpie.com/ - http://www.eelpie.com/
Also just discovered (and therefore purchased) the DVD Music From Lifehouse at Amazon.UK for a reasonable (i.e. cheap) price.
 ------------- The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS. CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php - http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php Host by PA's Dick Heath. |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 13:46
|
I will use revolutionary red.
-------------
|
Posted By: akin
Date Posted: June 21 2007 at 16:25
|
There is The Who and hundreds of bands in the same situation. The "prog" aspect of their music was all around the late sixties and early seventies and is around since mid-nineties. The influences of The Who in prog rock bands are the same influences of Chuck Berry, John Coltrane, Beethoven and Robert Johnson |
Posted By: The Whistler
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 02:48
|
Here are my personal reasonings, presented WITHOUT the aid of "if they're here, why aren't X?" strategies.
The Who should totally be in the 'chives. Proto-prog would be acceptable I suppose, but I think prog-related would be better (art rock might be a bit too far). The band has several things that classify them as "prog or prog related."
First off, the things that have been mentioned already. They didn't invent the concept album, but gosh, they perfected it. They DID invent rock opera. Long songs, songs that flow together on an album, rock operas that range from ten minutes to two discs...these do not, of course, make one prog, but gosh, we'd live in a poorer world without 'em. And of course, musical progression has been cited. For me, prog rock is less a sound, and more an ideal, and musical progression is an important part of it.
Hinted upon: song length and use of synths. When I say use of synths, I mean USE OF SYNTHS. The way they're utilized in the almighty Quad? To, uh, recreate the sound of an orchestra? What's that called again? Oh yeah, "symphonic prog." And this was in the early 70's. I don't know a hell a lot about the period, but was that a really popular thing to be doing outside of prog?
What no one has said is virtuoso playing. Townshead is not the greatest guitarist, but Entwhistle is a God among bass players, easily as good (I'd say better) than yer Squires and yer Lees. And Moon? Holy crap, the world's best drummer ever. EVER. And not just in a bash the skins sorta way, in a very intelligent way, drumming along lyrically with songs rather than keeping 4-by-4 beat, and amazingly inventive too; dig the way he mimics a train slowing down on "5:15."
These things on their own aren't that impressive, but taken as a whole, I think that they should have some kind of standing in the 'chives. I mean, if Led Zep is here... ------------- "There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 03:47
nice post and an intelligent one .... though exactly for many of the reasons you said.. they should be proto. Much was made of the 'rivalry' between the Stones and Beatles. That was something dreamed up by the press as a good boys/bad boys thing... what is more interesting is the rivalry creatively and artisticaly (though probably a bit one sided in Townshend's case) between the Beatles and the Who. as far as the whole PP or PR question.... my two cents and observations. Proto-Prog - prog before the era of prog, or groups or music that influenced prog. Prog Related - groups influenced by prog OR (the one that has a bee up my ass) those who did prog albums but are overshadowed by 'popular' notions of the group or it's music. (best example ELO). pretty damn obvious that by that... which I think most would agree is how those categories have shaken out.... the Who if added, should be in Proto. |
Posted By: The Whistler
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 04:10
|
Proto prog is an area of mental conflict for me--does it still count if you continue doing stuff into the progressive "golden age?" The Moody Blues are "art rock," but Procol Harum is "proto." Oh well, what matters is getting 'em into the archives first, then dicking around with sub-genre. ------------- "There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 04:20
obviously that's up the big cheeses to decide hahahha.. Proto seems to me to be as much conceptual as much as musical. That is where the Who really are important to Prog.. the music itself... as always is questionable/subjective... but like the Beatles, The Who's importance to creating the environment for which Prog could exist, really is beyond doubting. I have always looked to this site as much an educational tool, and like Tony R said to me one time... serving the site users. If site users think of the Who as many do ....crashed cars..destroyed hotel rooms, and power chords galore.. then we should drill it into their heads that the Who were much more than the gods of hard rock they were in the 70's. |
Posted By: The Whistler
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 04:32
|
If there's anything that ought to convince poeple of the Who's progginess, it's Quad. I just spun that thing. Easily as good as Thick. And I'd forgotten that, on top of sound effects and album flow and all that, it's structured like a real opera; overture and specific themes for specific characters (or personalities I guess).
People gotta remember that Pete Townshead has that same good ole pretention we find Emerson, Lake AND Palmer. Wasn't "Barbara O'Reilly" some kind of feeding of a human signature into a synth tape? And whatever happened to that Lifehouse thing? ------------- "There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson |
Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 04:45
As a London west end band to come to the fore during the UK's Mod period, then I would suggest reference points given here are imprecise. Try John Lee Hooker, Chess label recording artists (and don't mean Chuck Berry), Tamla. Subsequently minimalist composer Terry Riley. ------------- The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS. CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php - http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php Host by PA's Dick Heath. |
Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 04:46
------------- The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS. CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php - http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php Host by PA's Dick Heath. |
Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 04:53
Worth checking the earlier part of the thread! Originally posted by Zargus 2 double album rock opera's, and 1 that never got finished but turned out as the best classic rock album ever made, what more do you need? How many rock opera's or consept albums did deep purple, the doors and queen write? And then lisen to the first who album and up to quadrophenia, now thats progresion for you. After that one they didnt have much more to prove. It did get finished ....eventually, however, it was less 'rock
opera' as 'theatre with music' There was a 'rough' draft performance at
London's Old Vic Theatre in 70's, a 'finished project' played on BBC
Radio 3 in 1999. The recording of the latter is available with all the
demos and the subsequent later 90's live performances of some
significant rearrangements of very familar tunes, will be found on the
6 CD set The Lifehouse Project:
http://www.eelpie.com/ - http://www.eelpie.com/
Also just discovered (and therefore purchased) the DVD Music From Lifehouse at Amazon.UK for a reasonable (i.e. cheap) price.
------------- The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS. CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php - http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php Host by PA's Dick Heath. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 05:02
Can they reallly be Proto Prog? Tommy 1969, Whos Next 1971, Quadrophenia 1973? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: The Whistler
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 05:04
|
Right then. So what's Endless Wire? ------------- "There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 05:05
|
^^Its their latest album? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 05:07
...and their utmost disaster of music? -------------
|
Posted By: The Whistler
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 05:10
|
Oh. Uh oh. Remind me to never buy it...until it goes on sale. ------------- "There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson |
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 05:11
|
My vote still stays no, regardless of the details that go from "some pieces that are prog" to "some other non-prog bands that, illicitly, stumbled upon being wrongly added in PA" (the classic "X is here, though it shouldn't, let's add Y too" - don't we just love it?!)and "key albums that have influenced the entire rock movements, but particularly it seems like progressive rock benefited the most". They have one album with some kind of progressiveness, the first years are pure rock 'n' stuff, the later years are pop. I simply wouldn't even dream of presenting Who towards a Prog Archives addition. -------------
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 05:41
Hey Ian... I think the Whistler and I have touched upon this already... and the thread in the collab section and gone further into depth on this. Note though that the Who have been around since what... '64. In '66 they recreated THE prototype for what became THE prog standard.. the 'cut and paste' epic. You can argue if it was the first rock opera but you have to be smoking dope to think for a second that any of those that may have been the first had anywhere near the importance or the timelessness of A Quick One. that is but one example... others have been mentioned ad nauseum. Hell that one ^ may have as well hahhahah. |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 05:47
------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 05:59
exactly Hugues... it is a priority for few to none here. I suggested them months ago... and trust me... I'm not bothering the damn admins to get around to deciding this hahahha. When they do... if they add them... they know I want to and will add them. And I will make it VERY clear as to why they are here at a prog site. |
Posted By: gong
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 11:05
are you mean The Who are readdy to going to represent England at EUROSONG next year, and win?
 I dont know why they werent giving that chance to The Who about 30 yrs ago cause that competition is pretty huge today, isnt? but seriosly man, tell me the title of some "pop" song of The Who, from these "later years", please? Thanks in advance!
rgds!
|
Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 11:13
| ^ I think he'd be talking about the albums after Moon died. But as I've never heard them I can't say for certain.... |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 11:50
|
Again, I think the crux of this ongoing additions problem is the vague, subjective nature of "prog" or "progressive" as a would-be means to classify widely diverse music forms and artists.
Despite what many here continue to post about 'true" or "actual" prog, we have no such broad agreement on the term's parameters. Thus, this issue will always bedevil the so-called "Prog" Archives, as long as such a vague term is used to (supposedly) say what we have here.
Prog is a "genre" in name only. It's an anachronistic, outmoded term, and currently, mostly a (hugely subjective) value judgment which basically equates to "good," "complex" or "interesting."  ------------- "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: The T
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 12:54
That's partially right, but I think we have to keep the Archives as ProgArchives; if we turn them into rockArchives (which, luckily, won't happen as the owners I'm prety sure don't intend on doing so) then we would have no way but to include EVERYTHING, from U2 to Aerosmith (
 ).... The "PROG" term, as vague and anachronistic as it is, is more helpful than, say, "Art Rock". What if we named this whole website the "Art Rock Archives"? Then an argument could be said that EVERY rock, good or not, is art as it's MUSIC, then we would end with Green Day on the Archives. As bad a term as PROG is, it's the only one that somehow redirects us to the source of all this: the prog of the 70's giants, all the genres that came after them and because of them, all the other genres of music that also tried to go beyond boundaries.... By the way, I haven't heard more than songs by The Who so I have no good opinion on the matter (the few I've heard of course are just vile pop/rock, the more popular ones)...But in keeping with the new spirit, I hope they're NOT added. -------------
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 13:26
agreed again Peter.... and again... we just do the best we can with the site we do have. If I could launch a cyber-coup and run M@X's underwear up the flagpole I would . Until the opportunity presents itself... we goosestep to his drumbeat. |
Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 16:58
I thought "Max" was a lady not a gent....hence the underwear thing takes on quite a different complexion  ------------- The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS. CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php - http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php Host by PA's Dick Heath. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 18:15
hahhahah... oh Richard... you kill me .... this pic say everything you need to know about the current state of PA's   http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=1 - http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=1 |
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: July 08 2007 at 15:23
| After reading and thinking about the response to this question, I can't understand at all why anyone would not classify The Who as proto-prog. |
Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: July 13 2007 at 13:04
|
^ It's easy...because they don't want to. I still would go for an affirmative for The Who. Chris Squire was heavily influenced by John Entwistle's bass playing. Rush were influenced by The Who's bass playing. The Who released a few concept albums before the prog-rock movement in the 70's started. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 13 2007 at 13:16
that's what I've been saying for 6 months... but the answer is the obvious one.... we all see prog...and hahhaha... proto-prog differently. Still others refuse to look at them as anything than 70's hard rock legends. To me it's a slam dunk... ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: July 13 2007 at 13:48
| Do you want me to take the Who to the admin team (and probably mailto:M@x - M@x ) for a decision? Is someone prepared to do the work of adding them if they are approved? |
Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: July 13 2007 at 13:50
| I would want you to but I don't think I have the ability to add them if they are approved. Except maybe albums |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 13 2007 at 13:51
hahahha... as you know Bob... I'd love to do the addition. I think they fit best in proto...but that would be you alls call. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: July 13 2007 at 14:04
OK, I'll take it to the team. As it's the holiday season, the decision will take a bit longer than usual.
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 13 2007 at 14:06
thanks Bob.. and no hurry... hell, I think I started this discussion in the collab area back in January hahhaha. Just let me know the verdict ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: July 18 2007 at 13:52
|
The Who have now been approved for addition as Proto Prog by mailto:M@x - M@x and the Admin team.
Micky will be coordinating the addition.
Any discussions on the Who shoudl now be in the Prog related and Proto Prog section.
|
Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: July 18 2007 at 19:23
Thanks for the great news! 
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: July 18 2007 at 19:36
|
The What? ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: July 18 2007 at 22:23
|
Well, it's done so we have to accept it.
I just hope that now they are not be used as an excuse with the usual "If the Who are here why not X"
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: July 19 2007 at 03:45
|
Definitely not Ivan!
|
Posted By: Evans
Date Posted: July 19 2007 at 03:54
|
Wowhoo! :) Not sure i would include them if it were up to me, but i won't mind, the more the merrier, and itäs always good to get new recommendations and read about new albums. ------------- 
'Let's give it another fifteen seconds..' |
Posted By: The Whistler
Date Posted: July 19 2007 at 03:55
|
f**kin' A! Er, I mean, quite nice. ------------- "There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson |
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: July 19 2007 at 04:55
Actually, I beg to differ, there will be more than enough messages of recommendations, once the Who widen yet another side of rock. Maybe not that much as we gotten used to (Zep, Maiden, Doors, Queen), and noot that everything will get accepted by that, only though that there will be hectic recommendations, of the "X is here, Y should too" type, just because that's a reasonably good fashion into it. I have to accept myself, just like Ivan, the fact that they will be added, as I still think that 70 % of their music is far from progressive (pop rock or art pop during the early albums; straightforwards pop after By Numbers) and, in rest, there are only two accordingly progressive albums, by the concept they have. right now...I guess it's next to accept and approve Metallica? -------------
|