The Stranglers???
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=51811
Printed Date: November 29 2024 at 17:48 Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: The Stranglers???
Posted By: Ripples
Subject: The Stranglers???
Date Posted: September 15 2008 at 16:16
Calling all Stranglers fans, in the era 77-84, Peak times.
|
Replies:
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: September 15 2008 at 16:20
I'm not familiar with The Stranglers but I did a search and see that they have been suggested numerous times for inclusion. If this link works right http://www.progarchives.com/forum/search_results_posts.asp?SearchID=20080915161844&KW=stranglers - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/search_results_posts.asp?SearchID=20080915161844&KW=stranglers you might want to check out some of these threads and for those that haven't been closed add your 2 cents.
-------------
|
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: September 15 2008 at 18:29
Before Ultravox, Magazine, This Mortal Coil or John Foxx , among a few others? Let us not confuse keyboardist Dave Greenfield with Dave Greenslade, OK? Burnel had a rumbling bass, the drumming okay but Cornwell was not exactly a masterful guitarist IMHO. Love them though, Feline and Aural Sculpture were great albums.
------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth.
|
Posted By: Dr. Occulator
Date Posted: September 15 2008 at 20:10
Absolutely great new wave/punk band....great musicians...great songwriting but not prog...they may have been influenced by prog or classical music but not a prog band. Still one of my favorite new wave/punk bands of all time though.
------------- My Doc Told Me I Have Doggie Head.
|
Posted By: peskypesky
Date Posted: September 15 2008 at 20:18
I'm a huge Stranglers fan...but why here?
------------- Prog fan since 1974.
|
Posted By: Valdez
Date Posted: September 15 2008 at 21:34
One only need listen to "Aural Sculpture" to feel the prog... This was a very clever band.
------------- https://bakullama1.bandcamp.com/album/sleepers-2024
|
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: September 15 2008 at 22:46
Same old sh*t -- different pile.
(Old topic -- buried but regrettably not laid to rest.)
I'm a big, long-term Stranglers fan, (I have 6 albums) but they're not even close to (what I consider) a prog band.
"Clever" does not mean prog rock, nor does making good, "above-average" (IMO) music.
A little rock history for those who weren't there: The Stranglers were part of the music scene that reacted against prog (and thankfully, booted disco off the radio). They were part of something new (notice I didn't say "progressive," as prog is not defined by the dictionary) -- they were not a continuation of the old prog scene.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, If they were included here, it would open up a huge can of worms, and there would soon be (very hard to resist) calls for the inclusion of many more punk/new wave acts from that era.
********************************************************************************************************************
I'm sorry to say this, and I mean no offense, but the root of the problem with these never-ending calls for unusual, controversial, polarizing additions is that many of those making such calls are too young to have been music fans when prog rock emerged, are driven by a mere strong liking for a particular band, and/or are hung up on a literal, dictionary definition of "progressive." (You want to review Stranglers albums? Do it elsewhere.)
Yet again, we see just how inadequate, outdated and all but downright useless "prog" and "progressive" are as meaningful terms to classify living music. "Prog" is not a genre -- it was basically a relatively brief musical movement, when some rock acts, for the first time, incorporated huge influences from classical and jazz. (As such, it's over.) In terms of describing more recent music, it best applies to bands which hearken back to the sound of those old prog rock originators -- in other words, to bands which are not "progressive," per se, but regressive, in that they are not making a new sound.
The problem is our word -- it means too little, but also way too much -- by ever widening the umbrella of inclusion, we have stretched it beyond the breaking point, beyond all credibility, beyond all easy understanding, beyond all utility, to the point that none of us knows what the other means when we say "prog."
Call me narrow minded, conservative, exclusionary, or some sort of elitist, but I just don't think Yes, Genesis, VDGG, Gentle Giant and ELP, etc, belong on the same playlist as Steely Dan, Fairport Convention, Iron Maiden and the Stranglers.
(Nor do those latter-named diverse acts belong together -- unless the common link is merely "music.")
This site has basically made "prog" mean "good" or "stuff some of us like."
It never ends, and never will end because we need a new word.
Or several of them....
So that's a huge NO!!! from me.
------------- "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: BroSpence
Date Posted: September 15 2008 at 22:51
Was a good band, but not a prog band.
|
Posted By: Valdez
Date Posted: September 15 2008 at 23:00
Peter wrote:
Once again, we see just how inadequate, outdated and all but useless "prog" and "progressive" are as meaningful terms to classify music.
It never ends, and never will end because we need a new word.
|
I nominate the word CLEVER.
------------- https://bakullama1.bandcamp.com/album/sleepers-2024
|
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: September 15 2008 at 23:25
Valdez wrote:
Peter wrote:
Once again, we see just how inadequate, outdated and all but useless "prog" and "progressive" are as meaningful terms to classify music.
It never ends, and never will end because we need a new word.
|
I nominate the word CLEVER. |
^ Which basically equates to "good," "above average" or simply "stuff I like" -- very subjective (personal) concepts.
Beyond its historical context, does "prog rock" even exist, as something defined or delineated which we can point to, or even come close to agreeing upon?
I don't see this identity problem with rock, disco, country, classical, jazz, reggae, ska, hip hop, metal, folk, etc, because those are actual genres, which you'll find in radio stations, magazines and record stores. They aren't simply subjective value judgements, or a means for misty-eyed, wishful fans who seek to "reward" their favourite bands via inclusion in some amorphous, elitist "club" -- thereby validating their own diverse musical tastes.
It's the old "Hmmmm... I'm a prog fan, so if I like it, it must be prog'" line of (invalid) reasoning. It does not follow!
Let's see... I like the Ramones, and Lyle Lovett and Dwight Yoakam , I think they're better than most of their ilk, therefore "clever" (clever me), ergo they must be "prog punk" and "prog country" and ripe for inclusion 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: chopper
Date Posted: September 16 2008 at 07:53
What Peter said.
I like them, but I've never heard them described as a prog band.
|
Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: September 16 2008 at 08:16
Personally - alway liked them, never saw them as a punk band; I've said it before & I'll say it again, they struck me more like The Doors with attitude & I maintain they hung on to 'Punk' (hawk, spit) as a flag of commercial convenience.
There is in my opinion a very small argument for their inclusion, but not enough.
Love them as I do - a "no" from me too.
-------------
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012
|
Posted By: Ripples
Date Posted: September 16 2008 at 10:22
The album "The Raven" has numerous songs on it that take Genesis Prog to the next level. A good argument to vote them in.
I would say the keyboards through out the 77-84 period are extremely proggy a la Genesis, Yes, etc.. Besides Split Enz and Bowie are on the sight here!
|
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: September 16 2008 at 11:25
Where's the connection between Split Enz, David Bowie and The Stranglers on this site?
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: September 16 2008 at 13:04
"Golden Brown" is in 11/4 and features a harpsichord. QED.
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 16 2008 at 14:18
The Stranglers - wonderfully inventive and clever tunes, great instrumentation and intelligent song-writing. The whole suite of albums from No More Heroes through to Dreamtime reveal a band who never stood still and were unafraid to enter new territory, showing the world how far you could go with Rock without crossing over into Prog. (Which I believe they purposely avoided)
I love them for what they are - a brilliant rock band, great on album and even better seen live.
The General Music Discussion section in the forum is a great place for listing, discussing and reviewing non-Prog bands that we like without getting embroiled in 'Are they Prog' debates.
------------- What?
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 16 2008 at 14:21
Certif1ed wrote:
"Golden Brown" is in 11/4 and features a harpsichord. QED. |
I thought it was 13/4 (waltz, waltz, waltz, common-time...), but I'm crap at counting beats.
------------- What?
|
Posted By: febus
Date Posted: September 16 2008 at 14:33
Metallica the other day,,,,,the Stranglers now...................maybe the Sex Pistols tomorrow
Where is the ''prog'' with the stranglers??/
I think it's time for Progarchives to decide if they want keep the prog route or become ''rockarchives'' ''metalarchives'' or i don' t know what else.
A lot of the last inclusions don't even border on ''prog'' but as it seems everybody has their own definition of the prog word, debates will never end.
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=85883473">
.
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: September 17 2008 at 04:11
It is and you're obviously not - that was a typo...
Did you know that John Lydon is a Hammill fan (and was at the time of the Pistols), and the musicians on the Pistol's first album were Prog session musicians?
febus wrote:
Where is the ''prog'' with the stranglers??/
|
I suggest listening to all their albums, one after the other - there are a lot of them, so it will take you a while, but then you'll be better informed
febus wrote:
I think it's time for Progarchives to decide if they want keep the prog route or become ''rockarchives'' ''metalarchives'' or i don' t know what else.
|
Why? Because you don't agree with some of the decisions - or discussions?
febus wrote:
A lot of the last inclusions don't even border on ''prog'' but as it seems everybody has their own definition of the prog word, debates will never end.
|
Everybody has their own definition - they always have done and always will do.
That is part of the irreconcilable nature of Prog, I'm afraid - you can't say that it can be anything, then turn around and say "But not that..." (as some do - I'm not suggesting that this is your definition, which is probably different to mine, which... yaddayaddayadda).
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: September 17 2008 at 10:11
For Jean and me it is no question at all that the Stranglers are prog; we suggested them long ago. They often use real polyphony for their compositions, a very advanced composing technique which is rare even among prog bands. They had been branded "punk" by the music industry for business reasons, but anyone who has ears and listens closely will quickly realize that this was plain nonsense. An album like "Black and White" definitely is a prog album. Professor Tibor Kneif, who is (or more likely was) a musicologist at the FU (Freie Universität) Berlin mentions them in his book "Sachlexikon der Rockmusik" ("Lexicon of rock music terms") and is also of the opinion that the label "Punk" was put on them wrongly because their music is by far too complex for that.
-------------
BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
|
Posted By: Ripples
Date Posted: September 17 2008 at 15:25
The long keyboard and synth solos don't hurt either.
I would say "The Raven" could be their Progiest. Those songs "Duchess" and "Ice" off the top of my head.
The album "Men in Black" has many prog moments including the very first tune.
The last tune on their debut album even has prog structures, similar to Foxtrot!
When listening to the discogagraphy I hear an abundance of Genesis and Roxy Music moments but always with a fresh spin on them, that take the creativity to the next level: clever, clever with an incredible aresenal of keyboards and "Yes" prog baselines.
|
Posted By: akin
Date Posted: September 19 2008 at 08:30
For Stranglers addition, depends on the people in charge to evaluate it. If they want to be very flexible, like they are with some additions (citing the site policies), Stranglers may even appear on full-blown prog genres, like Crossover. If they want to be strict, like they are with some additions (citing the site policies), Stranglers will never be added to the site, not even in Prog Related.
|
Posted By: Ripples
Date Posted: September 19 2008 at 12:11
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: September 29 2008 at 18:21
akin wrote:
For Stranglers addition, depends on the people in charge to evaluate it. If they want to be very flexible, like they are with some additions (citing the site policies), Stranglers may even appear on full-blown prog genres, like Crossover. If they want to be strict, like they are with some additions (citing the site policies), Stranglers will never be added to the site, not even in Prog Related.
|
I disagree, for the reasons already mentioned. If true polyphony is NOT a sign of prog then nothing is!
-------------
BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
|
Posted By: Ripples
Date Posted: October 02 2008 at 14:07
At least 8 classic albums loaded with all kinds of prog moments and tunes!
At minimum prog related..?
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: October 02 2008 at 14:53
Although not overly familiar with the band what I've heard never struck me as progressive. Experimental perhaps, complex at times, but not progressive.
But those who know the band better than me can probably (or not?) point out stuff like:
- Multilayered melody lines, with either disharmonic or harmonic tendencies to an extent that separates them from mainstream rock, and used as a common element in their music. - Influences from jazz, classical or folk. - Compositional complexities; not following a structure or approach commonly found in mainstream rock bands . - Or (although I doubt this applies in this case) a highly minimalistic approach to music; combined with psychedelic or spacey tendencies.
------------- Websites I work with:
http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com
My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/
|
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: October 02 2008 at 15:41
BaldFriede wrote:
akin wrote:
For Stranglers addition, depends on the people in charge to evaluate it. If they want to be very flexible, like they are with some additions (citing the site policies), Stranglers may even appear on full-blown prog genres, like Crossover. If they want to be strict, like they are with some additions (citing the site policies), Stranglers will never be added to the site, not even in Prog Related.
|
I disagree, for the reasons already mentioned. If true polyphony is NOT a sign of prog then nothing is!
|
Can you explain what you mean by "true polyphony"?
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 02 2008 at 17:08
I will explain instead of Friede. true polyphony (in contrast to pseudo-polyphony) in music is a texture made of two or more INDEPENDENT melodic voices. the stress is on "independent"; if those two different melodic lines both just follow the chord progression they are NOT independent. in that case you speak of pseudo-polyphony. examples for true polyphony can be heard in several songs of Gentle Giant like "Knots" or "On Reflection" for example, "Walking Down Their Outlook" by High Tide or the beginning of "Meurglys III - the Songtwriter's Guild" by Van der Graaf Generator. a Strangler's song with true polyphony is "Toiler on the Sea", for example
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: October 02 2008 at 22:08
For the 60 millionth time, the word "Progressive rock" appeared much later (post 1977) , it was originally called symphonic-rock, flash-rock, techno-rock or even classical-rock (as opposed to the REO Speedwagon, Boston , the Cras , Eagles connotation) . Weather Report was called jazz-rock , along with RTF, Mahavishnu Orchestra etc... Hey, back then , anyhthing with bass and drums was just Rock . Why not include everybody in PA as long as there is arhythm section? After all, everything is progressive , even silence !
------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth.
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 07:05
Windhawk wrote:
Although not overly familiar with the band what I've heard never struck me as progressive. Experimental perhaps, complex at times, but not progressive.
But those who know the band better than me can probably (or not?) point out stuff like:
- Multilayered melody lines, with either disharmonic or harmonic tendencies to an extent that separates them from mainstream rock, and used as a common element in their music.
Pretty much exists in everything the Stranglers wrote, to a lesser or greater degree.
- Influences from jazz, classical or folk.
Off hand, there's the 13/4 harpsichord part in "Golden Brown" (so there are odd time signatures too ), but every album has experimentations that hint at those sort of areas, or that you could draw the same kind of simple parallel that a huge number of Prog bands enjoy without being questioned.
- Compositional complexities; not following a structure or approach commonly found in mainstream rock bands .
This one's easy - almost any of their albums will give you this, but try "Aural Sculpture" - the name is a giveaway as to their approach.
- Or (although I doubt this applies in this case) a highly minimalistic approach to music; combined with psychedelic or spacey tendencies.
There is a strong psychedelic tendency - think of the Doors, then listen to their early material - "No More Heroes" is a good example. Listen to the keyboard lead and the independent bass line, and the ascending musical interjections - the piece is not as simple as the chorus would have you believe, and lyrically, we're at an intellectual level comparable with surprising amount of Prog.
|
All of this really proves that you can't just Prog by elements alone.
My gut feel has always been that the Stranglers are very closely related to Prog, if not the full-blown stuff in the sense of Classic Prog. But Classic Prog seems to be seen as just a yardstick these days - the Stranglers are certainly leagues ahead of many Modern Prog bands, such as Porcupine Tree, for example, in terms of Prog elements - yet few seem to dispute PT's credentials, which I've always found a bit mystifying.
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 07:12
I totally agree, Certif1ed
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 07:37
BaldJean wrote:
I will explain instead of Friede. true polyphony (in contrast to pseudo-polyphony) in music is a texture made of two ore more INDEPENDENT melodic voices. the stress is on "independent"; if those two different melodic lines both just follow the chord progression they are NOT independent. in that case you speak of pseudo-polyphony. examples for true polyphony can be heard in several songs of Gentle Giant like "Knots" or "On Reflection" for example, "Walking Down Their Outlook" by High Tide or the beginning of "Meurglys III - the Songtwriter's Guild" by Van der Graaf Generator. a Strangler's song with true polyphony is "Toiler on the Sea", for example
|
I get the example of Knots but I dont know the other songs. Isn't this just multi-part vocals which I don't think is enough to classify it as "prog"? I don't hear anything like that in "Toiler on the Sea".
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 07:52
tszirmay wrote:
For the 60 millionth time, the word "Progressive rock" appeared much later (post 1977) , it was originally called symphonic-rock, flash-rock, techno-rock or even classical-rock (as opposed to the REO Speedwagon, Boston , the Cras , Eagles connotation) . Weather Report was called jazz-rock , along with RTF, Mahavishnu Orchestra etc... Hey, back then , anyhthing with bass and drums was just Rock . Why not include everybody in PA as long as there is arhythm section? After all, everything is progressive , even silence ! |
I can't speak for the rest of the world, but certainly in the UK the term Progressive Rock was used in the early 70s, as you can see from this press cutting from 1970:
------------- What?
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 07:53
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 08:10
Oh okay, I was listening out for the vocals. I'll have another listen.
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 08:58
Certif1ed wrote:
Windhawk wrote:
Although not overly familiar with the band what I've heard never struck me as progressive. Experimental perhaps, complex at times, but not progressive.
But those who know the band better than me can probably (or not?) point out stuff like:
- Multilayered melody lines, with either disharmonic or harmonic tendencies to an extent that separates them from mainstream rock, and used as a common element in their music.
Pretty much exists in everything the Stranglers wrote, to a lesser or greater degree.
- Influences from jazz, classical or folk.
Off hand, there's the 13/4 harpsichord part in "Golden Brown" (so there are odd time signatures too ), but every album has experimentations that hint at those sort of areas, or that you could draw the same kind of simple parallel that a huge number of Prog bands enjoy without being questioned.
- Compositional complexities; not following a structure or approach commonly found in mainstream rock bands .
This one's easy - almost any of their albums will give you this, but try "Aural Sculpture" - the name is a giveaway as to their approach.
- Or (although I doubt this applies in this case) a highly minimalistic approach to music; combined with psychedelic or spacey tendencies.
There is a strong psychedelic tendency - think of the Doors, then listen to their early material - "No More Heroes" is a good example. Listen to the keyboard lead and the independent bass line, and the ascending musical interjections - the piece is not as simple as the chorus would have you believe, and lyrically, we're at an intellectual level comparable with surprising amount of Prog.
|
All of this really proves that you can't just Prog by elements alone.
My gut feel has always been that the Stranglers are very closely related to Prog, if not the full-blown stuff in the sense of Classic Prog. But Classic Prog seems to be seen as just a yardstick these days - the Stranglers are certainly leagues ahead of many Modern Prog bands, such as Porcupine Tree, for example, in terms of Prog elements - yet few seem to dispute PT's credentials, which I've always found a bit mystifying. |
The Stranglers were rejected for Prog Related earlier in the year and there isn't another sub in which they could be seriously placed. Although I voted in favour of addition, I can accept and understand the reasons for exclusion.
Even though the Prog Related definition identifies three possible reasons for including a band, we have to consider more than just the compositional techniques and musical experimentation (ie "bravery"), for the Stranglers do not appear to be influenced by, or influenced on, Prog Rock per-sey "...the inclusion of a band is exceptional and only after verifying that it’s a contribution for the better understanding of Prog among the members and visitors instead of a source of confusion for the community."
...which may (or may not) be mere weasel-words, but it has value with regard to the nature of this site and its perception from the outside looking in. This discussion-thread illustrates this point perfectly.
The Stranglers may have more Prog elements than PT, but their effect on the Prog community and on other Prog bands that came after them is minimal by comparison - not that that is a reason for exclusion in itself, but highlights the drastic difference between the two bands from a Prog (fan) perspective - PT forged their early career with one foot firmly planted in Prog territory, (and then extrapolated into other areas), whereas The Stranglers purposely avoided it.
The Stranglers appear to be more related to Proto Prog rather than Classic Prog, (with Classical Music input from Greenfield & Burnel, Blues from Cornwell and Jazz from Black), which for a band formed in 1974 that hit their creative peak in the early 80s is unusual, to me this suggests they went off on a tangent to Progressive Rock down some musical cul-de-sac that no other band followed.
------------- What?
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 09:19
another good example where you can find polyphony is the instrumental part of "Ripples" by Genesis
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 09:37
Dean wrote:
Certif1ed wrote:
Windhawk wrote:
Although not overly familiar with the band what I've heard never struck me as progressive. Experimental perhaps, complex at times, but not progressive.
But those who know the band better than me can probably (or not?) point out stuff like:
- Multilayered melody lines, with either disharmonic or harmonic tendencies to an extent that separates them from mainstream rock, and used as a common element in their music.
Pretty much exists in everything the Stranglers wrote, to a lesser or greater degree.
- Influences from jazz, classical or folk.
Off hand, there's the 13/4 harpsichord part in "Golden Brown" (so there are odd time signatures too ), but every album has experimentations that hint at those sort of areas, or that you could draw the same kind of simple parallel that a huge number of Prog bands enjoy without being questioned.
- Compositional complexities; not following a structure or approach commonly found in mainstream rock bands .
This one's easy - almost any of their albums will give you this, but try "Aural Sculpture" - the name is a giveaway as to their approach.
- Or (although I doubt this applies in this case) a highly minimalistic approach to music; combined with psychedelic or spacey tendencies.
There is a strong psychedelic tendency - think of the Doors, then listen to their early material - "No More Heroes" is a good example. Listen to the keyboard lead and the independent bass line, and the ascending musical interjections - the piece is not as simple as the chorus would have you believe, and lyrically, we're at an intellectual level comparable with surprising amount of Prog.
|
All of this really proves that you can't just Prog by elements alone.
My gut feel has always been that the Stranglers are very closely related to Prog, if not the full-blown stuff in the sense of Classic Prog. But Classic Prog seems to be seen as just a yardstick these days - the Stranglers are certainly leagues ahead of many Modern Prog bands, such as Porcupine Tree, for example, in terms of Prog elements - yet few seem to dispute PT's credentials, which I've always found a bit mystifying. |
The Stranglers were rejected for Prog Related earlier in the year and there isn't another sub in which they could be seriously placed. Although I voted in favour of addition, I can accept and understand the reasons for exclusion.
Even though the Prog Related definition identifies three possible reasons for including a band, we have to consider more than just the compositional techniques and musical experimentation (ie "bravery"), for the Stranglers do not appear to be influenced by, or influenced on, Prog Rock per-sey "...the inclusion of a band is exceptional and only after verifying that it’s a contribution for the better understanding of Prog among the members and visitors instead of a source of confusion for the community."
...which may (or may not) be mere weasel-words, but it has value with regard to the nature of this site and its perception from the outside looking in. This discussion-thread illustrates this point perfectly.
The Stranglers may have more Prog elements than PT, but their effect on the Prog community and on other Prog bands that came after them is minimal by comparison - not that that is a reason for exclusion in itself, but highlights the drastic difference between the two bands from a Prog (fan) perspective - PT forged their early career with one foot firmly planted in Prog territory, (and then extrapolated into other areas), whereas The Stranglers purposely avoided it.
The Stranglers appear to be more related to Proto Prog rather than Classic Prog, (with Classical Music input from Greenfield & Burnel, Blues from Cornwell and Jazz from Black), which for a band formed in 1974 that hit their creative peak in the early 80s is unusual, to me this suggests they went off on a tangent to Progressive Rock down some musical cul-de-sac that no other band followed.
|
I completely disagree, Dean. the sole reason the Stranglers are not generally seen as prog is that when they came into existence their record company branded them "punk" for business reasons, because prog was out at that time. but anyone who keeps his mind free of prejudices and listens to the music instead can come to no other conclusion than that the Stranglers are obviously prog. make a blind test with people who don't know them and play "Black and White" to them; 10 will get you 1 that they will identify the music as "prog". and that is the reason why I think they definitely belong. it is the music that counts, not any projected image!
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 10:27
Dean wrote:
The Stranglers were rejected for Prog Related earlier in the year and there isn't another sub in which they could be seriously placed. Although I voted in favour of addition, I can accept and understand the reasons for exclusion.
|
Which are?
Dean wrote:
Even though the Prog Related definition identifies three possible reasons for including a band, we have to consider more than just the compositional techniques and musical experimentation (ie "bravery"), for the Stranglers do not appear to be influenced by, or influenced on, Prog Rock per-sey "...the inclusion of a band is exceptional and only after verifying that it’s a contribution for the better understanding of Prog among the members and visitors instead of a source of confusion for the community."
...which may (or may not) be mere weasel-words, but it has value with regard to the nature of this site and its perception from the outside looking in. This discussion-thread illustrates this point perfectly.
|
Image over music - I get it.
Dean wrote:
The Stranglers may have more Prog elements than PT, but their effect on the Prog community and on other Prog bands that came after them is minimal by comparison - not that that is a reason for exclusion in itself, but highlights the drastic difference between the two bands from a Prog (fan) perspective - PT forged their early career with one foot firmly planted in Prog territory, (and then extrapolated into other areas), whereas The Stranglers purposely avoided it.
|
No they didn't purposefully avoid it - they came to embrace the more experimental side of their music which was there all along. They were never a 3-chord punk band and knew it.
Dean wrote:
The Stranglers appear to be more related to Proto Prog rather than Classic Prog, (with Classical Music input from Greenfield & Burnel, Blues from Cornwell and Jazz from Black), which for a band formed in 1974 that hit their creative peak in the early 80s is unusual, to me this suggests they went off on a tangent to Progressive Rock down some musical cul-de-sac that no other band followed.
|
And that is EXACTLY why they belong in Prog Archives.
There are hundreds of "Prog" bands that bear almost no relation to "Classic Prog" (whatever that is), and most have a kind of generic sound, and a verse/chorus approach to songwriting which seems to me to be the antithesis of Prog.
Prog is not a style or an image, and cannot easily be described in terms of elements. It is more about doing your own thing musically than anything else - and that, as you rightly point out, is precisely what the Stranglers did. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 10:41
BaldJean wrote:
Dean wrote:
The Stranglers were rejected for Prog Related earlier in the year and there isn't another sub in which they could be seriously placed. Although I voted in favour of addition, I can accept and understand the reasons for exclusion.
Even though the Prog Related definition identifies three possible reasons for including a band, we have to consider more than just the compositional techniques and musical experimentation (ie "bravery"), for the Stranglers do not appear to be influenced by, or influenced on, Prog Rock per-sey "...the inclusion of a band is exceptional and only after verifying that it’s a contribution for the better understanding of Prog among the members and visitors instead of a source of confusion for the community."
...which may (or may not) be mere weasel-words, but it has value with regard to the nature of this site and its perception from the outside looking in. This discussion-thread illustrates this point perfectly.
The Stranglers may have more Prog elements than PT, but their effect on the Prog community and on other Prog bands that came after them is minimal by comparison - not that that is a reason for exclusion in itself, but highlights the drastic difference between the two bands from a Prog (fan) perspective - PT forged their early career with one foot firmly planted in Prog territory, (and then extrapolated into other areas), whereas The Stranglers purposely avoided it.
The Stranglers appear to be more related to Proto Prog rather than Classic Prog, (with Classical Music input from Greenfield & Burnel, Blues from Cornwell and Jazz from Black), which for a band formed in 1974 that hit their creative peak in the early 80s is unusual, to me this suggests they went off on a tangent to Progressive Rock down some musical cul-de-sac that no other band followed.
|
I completely disagree, Dean. the sole reason the Stranglers are not generally seen as prog is that when they came into existence their record company branded them "punk" for business reasons, because prog was out at that time. but anyone who keeps his mind free of prejudices and listens to the music instead can come to no other conclusion that the Stranglers are obviously prog. make a blind test with people who don't know them and play "Black and White" to them; 10 will get you 1 that they will identify the music as "prog". and that is the reason why I think they definitely belong. it is the music that counts, not any projected image!
|
Yes/no - I agree/disagree - I never saw them as Punk, even in 1977 when I bought Rattus Norvegicus - no Punk band at that time could ever have pulled-off the Down In The Sewer medley and that the branding was pure marketing. And everyone in 1977 saw that too, including the Punks and the Muso-journalists - their musicianship alone was the antithesis of the Punk ethos - it also has little to do with projected image - both Dave Greenfield and Jet Black where the diametric opposites of any idealised punk imagery .
They came out of the UK Pub Rock scene (another "reaction" to the perceived overblown nature Prog rock that often gets overshadowed by the higher profile Punk reaction) that later blended into the New Wave movement after Punk's demise, along with Brinsley Schwarz, The 101'ers, Ducks Deluxe, Kilburn and The High Roads and a plethora of other blues-related bands of the late 70s. That's more (from a UK perspective at least) why they were never considered Prog or having any connection to Prog (unlike other bands who were (obliquely) associated with Punk at the time like Be Bop Deluxe and Wire)
------------- What?
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 11:26
Certif1ed wrote:
Dean wrote:
The Stranglers were rejected for Prog Related earlier in the year and there isn't another sub in which they could be seriously placed. Although I voted in favour of addition, I can accept and understand the reasons for exclusion.
|
Which are? |
You'll have to ask the other PR team members
Certif1ed wrote:
Dean wrote:
Even though the Prog Related definition identifies three possible reasons for including a band, we have to consider more than just the compositional techniques and musical experimentation (ie "bravery"), for the Stranglers do not appear to be influenced by, or influenced on, Prog Rock per-sey "...the inclusion of a band is exceptional and only after verifying that it’s a contribution for the better understanding of Prog among the members and visitors instead of a source of confusion for the community."
...which may (or may not) be mere weasel-words, but it has value with regard to the nature of this site and its perception from the outside looking in. This discussion-thread illustrates this point perfectly.
|
Image over music - I get it. |
No, not image as such, that's an over simplification (see my previous post) and not one I generally adhere to when assessing bands.
However, "perception" and the degree of explanation required to change a mind-set (see recent Steely Dan and Metallica discussions) are major factors that cannot be ignored or dismissed.
Certif1ed wrote:
Dean wrote:
The Stranglers may have more Prog elements than PT, but their effect on the Prog community and on other Prog bands that came after them is minimal by comparison - not that that is a reason for exclusion in itself, but highlights the drastic difference between the two bands from a Prog (fan) perspective - PT forged their early career with one foot firmly planted in Prog territory, (and then extrapolated into other areas), whereas The Stranglers purposely avoided it.
|
No they didn't purposefully avoid it - they came to embrace the more experimental side of their music which was there all along. They were never a 3-chord punk band and knew it. |
Experimentation and finding the 4th.5th, ...nth chord is not unique to Prog - many New Wave bands developed in those areas, I meant they avoided Prog Rock as a genre, rather than avoiding experimentation, which I wholeheartedly accept they not only embraced, but revelled in.
Certif1ed wrote:
Dean wrote:
The Stranglers appear to be more related to Proto Prog rather than Classic Prog, (with Classical Music input from Greenfield & Burnel, Blues from Cornwell and Jazz from Black), which for a band formed in 1974 that hit their creative peak in the early 80s is unusual, to me this suggests they went off on a tangent to Progressive Rock down some musical cul-de-sac that no other band followed.
|
And that is EXACTLY why they belong in Prog Archives.
There are hundreds of "Prog" bands that bear almost no relation to "Classic Prog" (whatever that is), and most have a kind of generic sound, and a verse/chorus approach to songwriting which seems to me to be the antithesis of Prog.
Prog is not a style or an image, and cannot easily be described in terms of elements. It is more about doing your own thing musically than anything else - and that, as you rightly point out, is precisely what the Stranglers did. |
Our "hundreds of other Prog bands" fit into non-Classic Prog subs, all be it as octagonal pegs in round holes in some cases, but when looked at in relation to other bands in that sub do make some kind of sense.
Then I ask, where in the pantheon of Prog would they fit? http://www.progressiveears.com/asp/reviews.asp?albumID=2226 - Prog Ears has them as Post Rock ( !?!!) - an utter misfitt if I ever saw one. ------------- What?
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 16:12
Dean wrote:
Our "hundreds of other Prog bands" fit into non-Classic Prog subs, all be it as octagonal pegs in round holes in some cases, but when looked at in relation to other bands in that sub do make some kind of sense.
|
We'll have to agree to disagree.
Besides, sub/genrising Prog Rock is a nonsense, IMO. It's simply a way to try to fit all manner of shaped pegs into moving holes. Steely Dan is possibly the worst crowbar attempt I've yet heard.
Dean wrote:
Then I ask, where in the pantheon of Prog would they fit? http://www.progressiveears.com/asp/reviews.asp?albumID=2226 - Prog Ears has them as Post Rock ( !?!!) - an utter misfitt if I ever saw one. |
Here and Now are both rooted in the punk scene and music, so the precedent is already set. I doubt very much that H&N set out to write Progressive Rock. At least one of their albums is mainly a kind of punk reggae.
Never mind the number of chords, that wasn't what I was getting at; The chord progressions swing from rock to blues to jazz-influenced to hints of Classical.
The Doors connection in their early music is easy to hear, the instrumentation is not that of regular New Wave bands, which tended to go for the two-fingered approach to keyboards and single-note bass lines.
The music is related to Prog, ergo Prog-related. Simple. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
Posted By: Ripples
Date Posted: October 03 2008 at 16:35
Certif1ed wrote:
Dean wrote:
Our "hundreds of other Prog bands" fit into non-Classic Prog subs, all be it as octagonal pegs in round holes in some cases, but when looked at in relation to other bands in that sub do make some kind of sense.
|
We'll have to agree to disagree.
Besides, sub/genrising Prog Rock is a nonsense, IMO. It's simply a way to try to fit all manner of shaped pegs into moving holes. Steely Dan is possibly the worst crowbar attempt I've yet heard.
Dean wrote:
Then I ask, where in the pantheon of Prog would they fit? http://www.progressiveears.com/asp/reviews.asp?albumID=2226 - Prog Ears has them as Post Rock ( !?!!) - an utter misfitt if I ever saw one. |
Here and Now are both rooted in the punk scene and music, so the precedent is already set. I doubt very much that H&N set out to write Progressive Rock. At least one of their albums is mainly a kind of punk reggae.
Never mind the number of chords, that wasn't what I was getting at; The chord progressions swing from rock to blues to jazz-influenced to hints of Classical.
The Doors connection in their early music is easy to hear, the instrumentation is not that of regular New Wave bands, which tended to go for the two-fingered approach to keyboards and single-note bass lines.
The music is related to Prog, ergo Prog-related. Simple. |
I concur, it's plain and simple, there's no mystery, no intrigue.
Way too convoluted here, Prog-related, case closed!
|
Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: October 04 2008 at 12:56
And I guaranteed if you asked the band for their opinion, they would wet themselves laughing. When the Stranglers formed they were the antithesis of prog. Why not Police who cames out of the UK punk period- at least you has two ex-prog musicians and a bassist/vocalist who played jazzrock and fan of Jack Bruce.
------------- 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: BaldFriede
Date Posted: October 04 2008 at 14:34
Dick Heath wrote:
And I guaranteed if you asked the band for their opinion, they would wet themselves laughing. When the Stranglers formed they were the antithesis of prog. Why not Police who cames out of the UK punk period- at least you has two ex-prog musicians and a bassist/vocalist who played jazzrock and fan of Jack Bruce.
|
So what? VdGG laughed about the prog sticker too. It is not the intention with which you play that counts, it is the resulting music. The Police, on the other hand, never made any music that could be recognized as prog, although all three members played with artists that are prog. Copeland played with Curved Air, Summers with Fripp, and Sting with Eberhard Schoener (who is long overdue to be added to the archives). But the resulting music is not prog at all. But that's not the case with the Stranglers. I concur with Jean who challenged you to make a blind test and play, for example, "Black and White" to someone who does not know the Stranglers without telling him or her what it is.
-------------
BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
|
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: October 04 2008 at 21:46
Dean wrote:
tszirmay wrote:
For the 60 millionth time, the word "Progressive rock" appeared much later (post 1977) , it was originally called symphonic-rock, flash-rock, techno-rock or even classical-rock (as opposed to the REO Speedwagon, Boston , the Cras , Eagles connotation) . Weather Report was called jazz-rock , along with RTF, Mahavishnu Orchestra etc... Hey, back then , anyhthing with bass and drums was just Rock . Why not include everybody in PA as long as there is arhythm section? After all, everything is progressive , even silence ! |
I can't speak for the rest of the world, but certainly in the UK the term Progressive Rock was used in the early 70s, as you can see from this press cutting from 1970:
| The term may have been used on occasion but NOT AS A MUSICAL GENRE , at least not in North America! I guess the Brits were always alittel ahead of the game
------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth.
|
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: October 05 2008 at 04:52
BaldFriede wrote:
Dick Heath wrote:
And I guaranteed if you asked the band for their opinion, they would wet themselves laughing. When the Stranglers formed they were the antithesis of prog. Why not Police who cames out of the UK punk period- at least you has two ex-prog musicians and a bassist/vocalist who played jazzrock and fan of Jack Bruce.
|
So what? VdGG laughed about the prog sticker too. It is not the intention with which you play that counts, it is the resulting music. The Police, on the other hand, never made any music that could be recognized as prog, although all three members played with artists that are prog. Copeland played with Curved Air, Summers with Fripp, and Sting with Eberhard Schoener (who is long overdue to be added to the archives). But the resulting music is not prog at all. But that's not the case with the Stranglers. I concur with Jean who challenged you to make a blind test and play, for example, "Black and White" to someone who does not know the Stranglers without telling him or her what it is.
|
I'm not sure that test would work if you played them Shut Up or TITS (from the expanded version)!
|
Posted By: npjnpj
Date Posted: October 06 2008 at 03:54
From what I've heard of them, I'd be OK with it.
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: October 06 2008 at 04:15
Dick Heath wrote:
And I guaranteed if you asked the band for their opinion, they would wet themselves laughing. When the Stranglers formed they were the antithesis of prog. Why not Police who cames out of the UK punk period- at least you has two ex-prog musicians and a bassist/vocalist who played jazzrock and fan of Jack Bruce. |
I understand that Robert Fripp hates the term "Progressive Rock" to describe his music too.
The Police are an interesting case, as some of their music is quite similar to Here and Now - not sure I'd support them, though.
chopper wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
. But that's not the case with the Stranglers. I concur with Jean who challenged you to make a blind test and play, for example, "Black and White" to someone who does not know the Stranglers without telling him or her what it is.
|
I'm not sure that test would work if you played them Shut Up or TITS (from the expanded version)!
|
But it would probably work if you played them "The Gospel according to the Meninblack" (a concept album, drawn from ideas laid down on its predecessor, "The Raven") - and probably not if you played someone the album "Love Beach" (for example).
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
Posted By: Mandrakeroot
Date Posted: October 06 2008 at 06:08
Certif1ed wrote:
I understand that Robert Fripp hates the term "Progressive Rock" to describe his music too.
|
Yes, Robert Fripp Hate that his music be described as "Progressive Rock".
But I think because Fripp's music is ART!!!
In every case The Stranglers is a good band for Prog Related music section!
-------------
|
Posted By: Ripples
Date Posted: October 08 2008 at 13:25
I hear elements of of Prog, Punk, and New Wave. They take from the past and yet manage to predict the future!
The way they put all the sounds and styles together does sound like interesting modern prog at times, hence, prog related terminology being utilized as the descriptor.
As mentioned by someone earlier I do not believe the bonus tracks in the expanded version should have anything to with this debate but instead stick to the original albums.
Someone had mentioned the "Police" which was very inappropriate since they do not have a shred of the creativity of the Stranglers or the prog for that matter and should never find a home here.
|
Posted By: Takeshi Kovacs
Date Posted: October 11 2008 at 11:28
Personally, I do not see them as prog related and have voted accordingly...more punk / new wave to my ears.
------------- Open the gates of the city wide....
Check out my music taste: http://www.last.fm/user/TakeshiKovacs/
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 11 2008 at 11:54
can't understand how or where anyone hears "punk" in the music of the Stranglers. this is not 3-chords music at all
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Jon The Impaler
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 02:59
Well . Its been a time since I've been on here , but I have to say "no " . The Stranglers are my all time favourite band , and they are still going for anyone that interested - on tour in October , released their 16th studio album a couple of years ago , and have just released ANOTHER greatest hits album (4240 its called ). Supposedly the best and definitive greatest hits one , but thats what they've said about the last 8 greatest hits albums , and to be honest the greatest hits haven't changed much since 1990 - just the addition of "Big Thing Coming " in 2004 I think .
Someone mentioned that they didn't sound like typical punk - true - they had keyboards which most punk bands didn't . Apparently Dave Greenfield was quite unaware of Doors sounds in the early days , he was just similar in style to the Doors keyboard player , hence the comparrisons .
I said no to the band being included as I don't really think they would be sounding anything like the majority of bands on this forum . The eraly years they weer very raw and doing things that many of the early punk bands copied , they were around 2 years before punk really started - similar to The Vibrators , they got tagged in with a movement ( punk ) which had similar styles , though The Stranglers were far advanced in musicianship.
The Clash started out as a punk band but progressed to other styles - I wouldn't call them prog though .I didn't like the direction The Clash took , but thats just personal taste .
------------- Its expensive being poor
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 03:51
Jon The Impaler wrote:
Well . Its been a time since I've been on here , but I have to say "no " . The Stranglers are my all time favourite band , and they are still going for anyone that interested - on tour in October , released their 16th studio album a couple of years ago , and have just released ANOTHER greatest hits album (4240 its called ). Supposedly the best and definitive greatest hits one , but thats what they've said about the last 8 greatest hits albums , and to be honest the greatest hits haven't changed much since 1990 - just the addition of "Big Thing Coming " in 2004 I think .
Someone mentioned that they didn't sound like typical punk - true - they had keyboards which most punk bands didn't . Apparently Dave Greenfield was quite unaware of Doors sounds in the early days , he was just similar in style to the Doors keyboard player , hence the comparrisons .
I said no to the band being included as I don't really think they would be sounding anything like the majority of bands on this forum . The eraly years they weer very raw and doing things that many of the early punk bands copied , they were around 2 years before punk really started - similar to The Vibrators , they got tagged in with a movement ( punk ) which had similar styles , though The Stranglers were far advanced in musicianship.
The Clash started out as a punk band but progressed to other styles - I wouldn't call them prog though .I didn't like the direction The Clash took , but thats just personal taste . |
there are a lot of very raw bands in the archives. just listen to High Tide - you can hardly get any rawer than that. it is also not important at all to sound like the majority of the bands in here. where the heck do for example bands like VdGG, Magma or Gong sound like the majority of bands ? the Stranglers perfectly fit the bill to be added from an analytical point of view. that they are being rejected by most is only due to their "punk" image. which is one of the reasons I opened my thread about preconceived notions. anyone who listens to the Stranglers without those preconceived notions can only come to one conclusion: that they fully belong into the archives
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 04:02
BaldJean wrote:
can't understand how or where anyone hears "punk" in the music of the Stranglers. this is not 3-chords music at all
|
since this popped up... been checking this group out over the last week or two....
based on what I've heard.... nope... don't hear ANYTHING of punk in that. Makes you wonder just people are actually listening to.. or more bluntly... if they have at all.. and are just parroting tags and labels.
want to hear more before giving my two cents... but to dismiss them as preposterous is ..well... preposterous hahahha
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 06:43
Why don't we include Hootie And The Blowfish as well. Can't believe this has gone three pages.
-------------
|
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 06:58
Vibrationbaby wrote:
Why don't we include Hootie And The Blowfish as well. Can't believe this has gone three pages. |
I can't believe it either, but for different reasons. For me the Stranglers always were clearly prog. There are other bands which are included in the archives that I would NOT have included, by the way. But I won't go into that.
-------------
BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
|
Posted By: Takeshi Kovacs
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 07:06
BaldFriede wrote:
Vibrationbaby wrote:
Why don't we include Hootie And The Blowfish as well. Can't believe this has gone three pages. |
I can't believe it either, but for different reasons. For me the Stranglers always were clearly prog. There are other bands which are included in the archives that I would NOT have included, by the way. But I won't go into that.
|
BaldFriede - which Stranglers albums do you think are most 'progressive'. I must admit to have said 'no' to the suggestion that they are Prog, that being largely based on my early experiences of them. For example, Stranglers means to me: Peaches, No More Heroes, Golden Brown (bought the single). Whilst good songs, none of them would strike me as being progressive in nature.
Not really listened to their later albums, thought I went on to a site that had some clips of their songs, and whilst I noticed a slight similarity to the Doors in their keyboard style on some of the songs I heard, they just seemed like short, slightly dark poppy tracks to me.
I guess people hear different things in different bands. At the moment, I'd say no, but am open to persuasion. For example, early Talk Tak was in no way Prog. If I had never heard their later stuff, I'd have dismissed out of hand the suggestion that they be included here. Maybe that's similar to The Stranglers, and that in the albums I've missed, they have changed direction.................
------------- Open the gates of the city wide....
Check out my music taste: http://www.last.fm/user/TakeshiKovacs/
|
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 07:13
"The Raven" and "Black and White" are clear progressive albums to me. Just listen to the polyphony in them. ANY band that uses polyphony for their songs should be considered prog; it is in my opinion a decisive criterion.
-------------
BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 07:31
BaldFriede wrote:
ANY band that uses polyphony for their songs should be considered prog; it is in my opinion a decisive criterion.
|
absolutely. if that is not a clear criterion, then what is?
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Takeshi Kovacs
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 08:25
Is that the single critierion that defines an artist as prog?
In other words, is the suggestion that any band using polyphony can be considered prog, and worthy of inclusion here?
------------- Open the gates of the city wide....
Check out my music taste: http://www.last.fm/user/TakeshiKovacs/
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 09:46
Takeshi Kovacs wrote:
Is that the single critierion that defines an artist as prog?
In other words, is the suggestion that any band using polyphony can be considered prog, and worthy of inclusion here?
|
indeed, if a band uses polyphony, it can in my opinion be considered as prog. that is by far not the single criterion for a prog band though; most prog bands don't use polyphony; it is a very advanced technique. but a band that uses it definitely is a prog band. anyway, that's by far not the only criterion why the Stranglers belong. on the contrary, please name a criterion why they should NOT belong. and a musical criterion please, not just some definitely untrue statement like "the Stranglers are punk" (nonsense) or "they did not feel as part of the progressive movement" (neither did King Crimson or Van der Graaf Generator). their musical structures are of a very advanced nature, and we should consider them prog for that but let us cite our own criteria:
-
Long compositions, sometimes running over 20 minutes, with intricate
melodies and harmonies that require repeated listening to grasp. These
are often described as epics and are the genre's clearest nod to
classical music. An early example is the 23-minute "Echoes" by Pink
Floyd. Other famous examples include Jethro Tull's "Thick as a Brick"
(43 minutes), Yes' "Close to the Edge" (18 minutes) and Genesis'
"Supper's Ready" (23 minutes). More recent extreme examples are the
60-minute "Light of Day, Day of Darkness" by Green Carnation and
"Garden of Dreams" by The Flower Kings. check, at least on the intricate melodies and harmonies. no 20-minute compositions, but a seminal band like Gentle Giant didn't have them either
- Lyrics that convey intricate and sometimes impenetrable narratives,
covering such themes as science fiction, fantasy, history, religion,
war, love, and madness. Many early 1970s progressive rock bands
(especially German ones) featured lyrics concerned with left-wing
politics and social issues. check
-
Concept albums, in which a theme or storyline is explored throughout an
entire album in a manner similar to a film or a play. In the days of
vinyl, these were usually two-record sets with strikingly designed
gatefold sleeves. Famous examples include The Lamb Lies Down on
Broadway by Genesis, Tales from Topographic Oceans by Yes, 2112 by
Rush, Dark Side of the Moon and The Wall by Pink Floyd, and the more
recent Metropolis Part II: Scenes from a Memory by Dream Theater and
Snow by Spock's Beard. Aqualung, perhaps the best-known record by
Jethro Tull, is often regarded as a concept album due to its recurring
themes, but songwriter Ian Anderson has always claimed that the album
is just "a bunch of songs". "Black and White" is a concept album of sorts, though the concept is a loose one
-
Unusual vocal styles and use of multi-part vocal harmonies. See Magma, Robert Wyatt, and Gentle Giant. not really, but very few prog bands do
-
Prominent use of electronic instrumentation — particularly keyboard
instruments such as the organ, piano, Mellotron, and Moog synthesizer,
in addition to the usual rock combination of electric guitar, bass and
drums. check
-
Use of unusual time signatures, scales, or tunings. Many pieces use
multiple time signatures and/or tempi, sometimes concurrently. Solo
passages for virtually every instrument, designed to showcase the
virtuosity of the player. This is the sort of thing that contributed to
the fame of such performers as keyboardist Rick Wakeman and drummer
Neil Peart. check. use of polyphony should be named here too
-
Inclusion of classical pieces on albums. For example, Yes start their
concerts with a taped extract of Stravinsky's Firebird suite, and
Emerson Lake and Palmer have performed arrangements of pieces by
Copland, Bartók, Moussorgsky, Prokofiev, Janacek, Alberto Ginastera,
and often feature quotes from J. S. Bach in lead breaks. Jethro Tull
recorded a famous cover of J. S. Bach's "Bouree", in which they turned
the classical piece into a "sleazy jazzy night-club song", according to
Ian Anderson. Marillion started concerts with Rossini's La Gazza Ladra
(The Thieving Magpie). Symphony X has included parts by, or inspired
by, Beethoven, Holst and Mozart. no check, but this part is a bit cheesy anyway
- An aesthetic linking the music with visual art, a trend started by
The Beatles with Sgt. Pepper's and enthusiastically embraced during the
prog heyday. Some bands became as well-known for the art direction of
their albums as for their sound, with the "look" integrated into the
band's overall musical identity. This led to fame for particular
artists and design studios, most notably Roger Dean, whose paintings
and logo design for Yes are so essential to the band's identity they
could be said to serve the same function as corporate branding.
Hipgnosis became equally famous for their unusual sleeves for Pink
Floyd, often featuring experimental photography quite innovative for
the time (two men shaking hands, one of whom is in flames, on the cover
of Wish You Were Here). H.R. Giger's painting for Emerson Lake and
Palmer's Brain Salad Surgery is one of the most famous album sleeves
ever produced. check
conclusion? draw it yourself
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Takeshi Kovacs
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 10:06
From the Prog Archives section: A definition of Progressive Rock Music1 'Progressive rock artists sought to move away from the limitations of radio formatted rock and pop'
The Stranglers in my opinion did the opposite of this embracing the 3 minute 'pop' tracks such as No More Heroes / Golden Brown.
2 'Long compositions, sometimes
running over 20 minutes, with intricate melodies and harmonies that
require repeated listening to grasp.....often described as epics....'.
Do The Stranglers have any?
I realise that these are only two areas in a much wider definition of the term Prog.
Perhaps you might suggest which sub-genre they might fall into, and why, as you will have a much better knowledge of their music than I do. To be honest, if they are included or not, I'm not bothered either way..I just don't think I'll ever associate them with being related to the progressive rock movement.
Edit - just noticed you pre-empted some of these issues with your edited post - let me have a read.
------------- Open the gates of the city wide....
Check out my music taste: http://www.last.fm/user/TakeshiKovacs/
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 10:07
Takeshi Kovacs wrote:
From the Prog Archives section: A definition of Progressive Rock Music1 'Progressive rock artists sought to move away from the limitations of radio formatted rock and pop'
The Stranglers in my opinion did the opposite of this embracing the 3 minute 'pop' tracks such as No More Heroes / Golden Brown.
2 'Long compositions, sometimes
running over 20 minutes, with intricate melodies and harmonies that
require repeated listening to grasp.....often described as epics....'.
Do The Stranglers have any?
I realise that these are only two areas in a much wider definition of the term Prog.
Perhaps you might suggest which sub-genre they might fall into, and why, as you will have a much better knowledge of their music than I do. To be honest, if they are included or not, I'm not bothered either way..I just don't think I'll ever associate them with being related to the progressive rock movement.
Edit - just noticed you pre-empted some of these issues with your edited post - let me have a read.
|
read my previous post
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 10:13
very nice Jean...as I said... still digesting the band in case this comes our way, and seems it might, and have no opinion on this... yet at least. First impression is though, the main and prevalent argument AGAINST them is bullsh*t
but nice rebuttal.
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
Posted By: Takeshi Kovacs
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 10:28
BaldJean wrote:
Takeshi Kovacs wrote:
Is that the single critierion that defines an artist as prog?
In other words, is the suggestion that any band using polyphony can be considered prog, and worthy of inclusion here?
|
indeed, if a band uses polyphony, it can in my opinion be considered as prog. that is by far not the single criterion for a prog band though; most prog bands don't use polyphony; it is a very advanced technique. but a band that uses it definitely is a prog band. anyway, that's by far not the only criterion why the Stranglers belong. on the contrary, please name a criterion why they should NOT belong. and a musical criterion please, not just some definitely untrue statement like "the Stranglers are punk" (nonsense) or "they did not feel as part of the progressive movement" (neither did King Crimson or Van der Graaf Generator). their musical structures are of a very advanced nature, and we should consider them prog for that but let us cite our own criteria:
-
Long compositions, sometimes running over 20 minutes, with intricate
melodies and harmonies that require repeated listening to grasp. These
are often described as epics and are the genre's clearest nod to
classical music. An early example is the 23-minute "Echoes" by Pink
Floyd. Other famous examples include Jethro Tull's "Thick as a Brick"
(43 minutes), Yes' "Close to the Edge" (18 minutes) and Genesis'
"Supper's Ready" (23 minutes). More recent extreme examples are the
60-minute "Light of Day, Day of Darkness" by Green Carnation and
"Garden of Dreams" by The Flower Kings. check, at least on the intricate melodies and harmonies. no 20-minute compositions, but a seminal band like Gentle Giant didn't have them either
- Lyrics that convey intricate and sometimes impenetrable narratives,
covering such themes as science fiction, fantasy, history, religion,
war, love, and madness. Many early 1970s progressive rock bands
(especially German ones) featured lyrics concerned with left-wing
politics and social issues. check
-
Concept albums, in which a theme or storyline is explored throughout an
entire album in a manner similar to a film or a play. In the days of
vinyl, these were usually two-record sets with strikingly designed
gatefold sleeves. Famous examples include The Lamb Lies Down on
Broadway by Genesis, Tales from Topographic Oceans by Yes, 2112 by
Rush, Dark Side of the Moon and The Wall by Pink Floyd, and the more
recent Metropolis Part II: Scenes from a Memory by Dream Theater and
Snow by Spock's Beard. Aqualung, perhaps the best-known record by
Jethro Tull, is often regarded as a concept album due to its recurring
themes, but songwriter Ian Anderson has always claimed that the album
is just "a bunch of songs". "Black and White" is a concept album of sorts, though the concept is a loose one
-
Unusual vocal styles and use of multi-part vocal harmonies. See Magma, Robert Wyatt, and Gentle Giant. not really, but very few prog bands do
-
Prominent use of electronic instrumentation — particularly keyboard
instruments such as the organ, piano, Mellotron, and Moog synthesizer,
in addition to the usual rock combination of electric guitar, bass and
drums. check
-
Use of unusual time signatures, scales, or tunings. Many pieces use
multiple time signatures and/or tempi, sometimes concurrently. Solo
passages for virtually every instrument, designed to showcase the
virtuosity of the player. This is the sort of thing that contributed to
the fame of such performers as keyboardist Rick Wakeman and drummer
Neil Peart. check
-
Inclusion of classical pieces on albums. For example, Yes start their
concerts with a taped extract of Stravinsky's Firebird suite, and
Emerson Lake and Palmer have performed arrangements of pieces by
Copland, Bartók, Moussorgsky, Prokofiev, Janacek, Alberto Ginastera,
and often feature quotes from J. S. Bach in lead breaks. Jethro Tull
recorded a famous cover of J. S. Bach's "Bouree", in which they turned
the classical piece into a "sleazy jazzy night-club song", according to
Ian Anderson. Marillion started concerts with Rossini's La Gazza Ladra
(The Thieving Magpie). Symphony X has included parts by, or inspired
by, Beethoven, Holst and Mozart. no check, but this part is a bit cheesy anyway
- An aesthetic linking the music with visual art, a trend started by
The Beatles with Sgt. Pepper's and enthusiastically embraced during the
prog heyday. Some bands became as well-known for the art direction of
their albums as for their sound, with the "look" integrated into the
band's overall musical identity. This led to fame for particular
artists and design studios, most notably Roger Dean, whose paintings
and logo design for Yes are so essential to the band's identity they
could be said to serve the same function as corporate branding.
Hipgnosis became equally famous for their unusual sleeves for Pink
Floyd, often featuring experimental photography quite innovative for
the time (two men shaking hands, one of whom is in flames, on the cover
of Wish You Were Here). H.R. Giger's painting for Emerson Lake and
Palmer's Brain Salad Surgery is one of the most famous album sleeves
ever produced. check
conclusion? draw it yourself
|
OK - so we're saying they don't have an epic type tracks, or long tracks that typically characterise progressive rock music (they do have a proliferation of short songs, some of which seemed tailored towards being popular chart hits), they have an album that can be 'loosely', described as a concept album (of sorts), and they haven't used the unusual vocal styles / multi part harmonies or shown the inclusion of classical works (dismissed as 'cheesy').
The above items are areas where the don't fulfil (some of the) requirements of being a progressive rock band. You asked for some of these to be identified.
On the other hand, you pointed out a few areas where they might well be considered progressive: time signatures, link with art, electronic instrumentation etc.
Let the jury decide. As I said earlier, good music is good music, so I'm not too concerned about whether the Archives are opened up to bands like this (others may be)...it's just my personal opinion that their music has never suggested 'progressive rock' to me.
------------- Open the gates of the city wide....
Check out my music taste: http://www.last.fm/user/TakeshiKovacs/
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 10:32
and now I await the arguments for NOT including them
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 10:33
Guys, guys, take it easy, you still have 630 posts to go before all the arguments will be exhausted, and the Admins will conclude that "though admittingly not prog, it is justified to relate them to prog".
-------------
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 10:38
Takeshi Kovacs wrote:
BaldJean wrote:
Takeshi Kovacs wrote:
Is that the single critierion that defines an artist as prog?
In other words, is the suggestion that any band using polyphony can be considered prog, and worthy of inclusion here?
|
indeed, if a band uses polyphony, it can in my opinion be considered as prog. that is by far not the single criterion for a prog band though; most prog bands don't use polyphony; it is a very advanced technique. but a band that uses it definitely is a prog band. anyway, that's by far not the only criterion why the Stranglers belong. on the contrary, please name a criterion why they should NOT belong. and a musical criterion please, not just some definitely untrue statement like "the Stranglers are punk" (nonsense) or "they did not feel as part of the progressive movement" (neither did King Crimson or Van der Graaf Generator). their musical structures are of a very advanced nature, and we should consider them prog for that but let us cite our own criteria:
-
Long compositions, sometimes running over 20 minutes, with intricate
melodies and harmonies that require repeated listening to grasp. These
are often described as epics and are the genre's clearest nod to
classical music. An early example is the 23-minute "Echoes" by Pink
Floyd. Other famous examples include Jethro Tull's "Thick as a Brick"
(43 minutes), Yes' "Close to the Edge" (18 minutes) and Genesis'
"Supper's Ready" (23 minutes). More recent extreme examples are the
60-minute "Light of Day, Day of Darkness" by Green Carnation and
"Garden of Dreams" by The Flower Kings. check, at least on the intricate melodies and harmonies. no 20-minute compositions, but a seminal band like Gentle Giant didn't have them either
- Lyrics that convey intricate and sometimes impenetrable narratives,
covering such themes as science fiction, fantasy, history, religion,
war, love, and madness. Many early 1970s progressive rock bands
(especially German ones) featured lyrics concerned with left-wing
politics and social issues. check
-
Concept albums, in which a theme or storyline is explored throughout an
entire album in a manner similar to a film or a play. In the days of
vinyl, these were usually two-record sets with strikingly designed
gatefold sleeves. Famous examples include The Lamb Lies Down on
Broadway by Genesis, Tales from Topographic Oceans by Yes, 2112 by
Rush, Dark Side of the Moon and The Wall by Pink Floyd, and the more
recent Metropolis Part II: Scenes from a Memory by Dream Theater and
Snow by Spock's Beard. Aqualung, perhaps the best-known record by
Jethro Tull, is often regarded as a concept album due to its recurring
themes, but songwriter Ian Anderson has always claimed that the album
is just "a bunch of songs". "Black and White" is a concept album of sorts, though the concept is a loose one
-
Unusual vocal styles and use of multi-part vocal harmonies. See Magma, Robert Wyatt, and Gentle Giant. not really, but very few prog bands do
-
Prominent use of electronic instrumentation — particularly keyboard
instruments such as the organ, piano, Mellotron, and Moog synthesizer,
in addition to the usual rock combination of electric guitar, bass and
drums. check
-
Use of unusual time signatures, scales, or tunings. Many pieces use
multiple time signatures and/or tempi, sometimes concurrently. Solo
passages for virtually every instrument, designed to showcase the
virtuosity of the player. This is the sort of thing that contributed to
the fame of such performers as keyboardist Rick Wakeman and drummer
Neil Peart. check
-
Inclusion of classical pieces on albums. For example, Yes start their
concerts with a taped extract of Stravinsky's Firebird suite, and
Emerson Lake and Palmer have performed arrangements of pieces by
Copland, Bartók, Moussorgsky, Prokofiev, Janacek, Alberto Ginastera,
and often feature quotes from J. S. Bach in lead breaks. Jethro Tull
recorded a famous cover of J. S. Bach's "Bouree", in which they turned
the classical piece into a "sleazy jazzy night-club song", according to
Ian Anderson. Marillion started concerts with Rossini's La Gazza Ladra
(The Thieving Magpie). Symphony X has included parts by, or inspired
by, Beethoven, Holst and Mozart. no check, but this part is a bit cheesy anyway
- An aesthetic linking the music with visual art, a trend started by
The Beatles with Sgt. Pepper's and enthusiastically embraced during the
prog heyday. Some bands became as well-known for the art direction of
their albums as for their sound, with the "look" integrated into the
band's overall musical identity. This led to fame for particular
artists and design studios, most notably Roger Dean, whose paintings
and logo design for Yes are so essential to the band's identity they
could be said to serve the same function as corporate branding.
Hipgnosis became equally famous for their unusual sleeves for Pink
Floyd, often featuring experimental photography quite innovative for
the time (two men shaking hands, one of whom is in flames, on the cover
of Wish You Were Here). H.R. Giger's painting for Emerson Lake and
Palmer's Brain Salad Surgery is one of the most famous album sleeves
ever produced. check
conclusion? draw it yourself
|
OK - so we're saying they don't have an epic type tracks, or long tracks that typically characterise progressive rock music (they do have a proliferation of short songs, some of which seemed tailored towards being popular chart hits), they have an album that can be 'loosely', described as a concept album (of sorts), and they haven't used the unusual vocal styles / multi part harmonies or shown the inclusion of classical works (dismissed as 'cheesy').
The above items are areas where the don't fulfil (some of the) requirements of being a progressive rock band. You asked for some of these to be identified.
On the other hand, you pointed out a few areas where they might well be considered progressive: time signatures, link with art, electronic instrumentation etc.
Let the jury decide. As I said earlier, good music is good music, so I'm not too concerned about whether the Archives are opened up to bands like this (others may be)...it's just my personal opinion that their music has never suggested 'progressive rock' to me.
|
you are wrong about the "multi-part harmonies"; that's what polyphony is all about. it is in fact one of the main criteria of the music of the Stranglers. if you don't believe me listen to a "simple" song like "Toiler on the Sea" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVgxFcARXI4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVgxFcARXI4 the interplay between guitar and keyboards is EXACTLY that, as is the interplay between keyboards and vocals
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Takeshi Kovacs
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 10:53
Regarding the multi-part harmonies issue ...I was merely referencing your earlier concession that this didn't really characterise the music of the Stranglers. I'm not saying that it's not within your rights to change your mind within this short space of time however.
------------- Open the gates of the city wide....
Check out my music taste: http://www.last.fm/user/TakeshiKovacs/
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 10:55
Takeshi Kovacs wrote:
Regarding the multi-part harmonies issue ...I was merely referencing your earlier concession that this didn't really characterise the music of the Stranglers. I'm not saying that it's not within your rights to change your mind within this short space of time however.
|
I never said that. I said it is not that alone which marks them as prog. but it is one of the main characteristics of their music. you must have misunderstood me there. you have my list
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Jon The Impaler
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 10:57
These aren't probably long songs by many people's standards on here but :
Down in the sewer ( Rattus Norvegicus album ) - runs at over 7 minutes and has 4 distinct parts to it.
Walk on By - though not their own composition , the single ran at well over 6 minutes including a huge instrumental bit in the middle.
Concept albums - someone mentioned Black & White - The Stranglers certainly didn't go into that one with intentions of it being a concept album ......... but........
The Meninblack - this wholly investigated the alien/UFO theme throughout ( SciFi concept as well )
La Folie - investigated the idea of love , including a song about cannibalism in which ( true story apparently ) a Frenchman ate his girlfriend and argued it was because he loved her so much .
Meninblack also contained two instrumental songs on it ( unheard of generally in punk circles ) .
I argued AGAINST inclusion here , but possibly there is a case for , though I know little about prog - I'm arguing against my own thoughts here .
The Stranglers certainly are hard to pigeon hole , JJ says he was a punk these days , the band play many punk conventions ..... yet at the same time JJ also says the band were better than the punk bands of the time.
The Stranglers are really , to me , just The Stranglers . My favourite band , doesn't really matter what they are or who likes them . I like much punk music - a lot is a lot better than people imagine , but there's also some dire stuff too .
Its all down to what the individual thinks really and at the end of the day , does it matter that much anyway ?
Just enjoy the music .
------------- Its expensive being poor
|
Posted By: Takeshi Kovacs
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 11:20
BaldJean wrote:
Takeshi Kovacs wrote:
Regarding the multi-part harmonies issue ...I was merely referencing your earlier concession that this didn't really characterise the music of the Stranglers. I'm not saying that it's not within your rights to change your mind within this short space of time however.
|
I never said that. I said it is not that alone which marks them as prog. but it is one of the main characteristics of their music. you must have misunderstood me there. you have my list
|
Unusual vocal styles and use of multi-part vocal harmonies. See Magma, Robert Wyatt, and Gentle Giant. not really, but very few prog bands do
I was referring to the above.
Anyway - let's leave it at that, and see what happens eh.
Interestingly, I went to look out some info on the band, and came up with this article that supports some of the things you've been saying:
'Rattus Norvegicus doesn’t have a huge audience in America. It’s a record passed over by a lot of rock aficionados, and swarms of gob spitting punk purists haven’t heard a note of its snarl. How did this happen? It’s got all the right ingredients - songs of alienation, angst, attitude and anarchy archetypes. Hell, it’s even oozing with pre-punk psychedelic rock influences like The Doors, with a Manzarek like organ carrying its melodies along in a drunken stupor. The problem may be that (despite its influences) the album, like The Stranglers themselves, was a little too British. It’s an ethnocentric disease that’s paralyzed American music lovers from the ears down for decades. Groups like The Kinks, The Jam and The Stranglers never amassed the amount of attention from U.S. audiences that they rightfully deserved. Shame. They were talented, hungry and damn fine rock stars. The record (which is named after the scientific labeling of a type of Norway rodent) is hard to pin down. It has the edge of an expletive laden punk EP and the long sweeping takes of your standard prog-rock concept album. The opening lyrics on their debut track “Sometimes” cuts in on the heavy organ crutch and grinding Peter Gunn style bass with a lip curled, “Someday I’m gonna smack your face. Somebody’s gonna call your bluff. Somebody’s gonna treat you rough.” The beauty of Rattus Norvegicus can be found here, with its ability to simultaneously affront and appease. The band’s sweet and sour take on the burgeoning punk movement would become a calling card for subsequent albums and would set them apart from the cookie-cutter one act groups forming at the time. The star of the show is easily “Peaches”, a song that drips attitude with a schoolboy’s playful demeanor. The track may have confused some audiences into thinking that, lyrically speaking, The Stranglers were a sexist group of misanthropes who were quick to criticize any and every race, creed and belief structure. In actuality Hugh Cromwell, Jet Black, Jean-Jacques Burnel and crew were amateur satirists commenting on society at a confusing time in England’s history. Had it not been for the run ins with the law and being acquaintances of the notorious Finchley Boys street gang, people might have seen the lyrics for a song like “Ugly” as observant or hilarious. But when you hear the lyrics “I guess I shouldn’t have strangled her to death, but I had to go to work and she laced my coffee with acid” out of context, you can’t be blamed for your assumptions. Rattus Norvegicus doesn’t follow a straight and uncompromising journey into the abyss, a point of view that most punks initially adopted at that time. Instead the record is a cornucopia of surprising solos and swells of melody. “Princess of the Streets” seems completely disjointed from entries like “Goodbye Toulouse”, a song that hints at the future sound of the band and a lot of the brilliance they already had as songwriters. Punk was something that can be nailed to a particular style, a particular time and a certain type of attitude. Well in The Stranglers’ defense, Cromwell has been cited as saying that they never considered themselves punks. Their later albums delving into more pop friendly waters (as well as the production of a few concept albums) should come as no surprise then. Why should they be nailed to the punk rock cross when they never considered themselves its apostles to begin with?'
------------- Open the gates of the city wide....
Check out my music taste: http://www.last.fm/user/TakeshiKovacs/
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 11:33
Takeshi Kovacs wrote:
BaldJean wrote:
Takeshi Kovacs wrote:
Regarding the multi-part harmonies issue ...I was merely referencing your earlier concession that this didn't really characterise the music of the Stranglers. I'm not saying that it's not within your rights to change your mind within this short space of time however.
|
I never said that. I said it is not that alone which marks them as prog. but it is one of the main characteristics of their music. you must have misunderstood me there. you have my list
|
Unusual vocal styles and use of multi-part vocal harmonies. See Magma, Robert Wyatt, and Gentle Giant. not really, but very few prog bands do
I was referring to the above.
Anyway - let's leave it at that, and see what happens eh.
Interestingly, I went to look out some info on the band, and came up with this article that supports some of the things you've been saying:
'Rattus Norvegicus doesn’t have a huge audience in America. It’s a record passed over by a lot of rock aficionados, and swarms of gob spitting punk purists haven’t heard a note of its snarl. How did this happen? It’s got all the right ingredients - songs of alienation, angst, attitude and anarchy archetypes. Hell, it’s even oozing with pre-punk psychedelic rock influences like The Doors, with a Manzarek like organ carrying its melodies along in a drunken stupor. The problem may be that (despite its influences) the album, like The Stranglers themselves, was a little too British. It’s an ethnocentric disease that’s paralyzed American music lovers from the ears down for decades. Groups like The Kinks, The Jam and The Stranglers never amassed the amount of attention from U.S. audiences that they rightfully deserved. Shame. They were talented, hungry and damn fine rock stars. The record (which is named after the scientific labeling of a type of Norway rodent) is hard to pin down. It has the edge of an expletive laden punk EP and the long sweeping takes of your standard prog-rock concept album. The opening lyrics on their debut track “Sometimes” cuts in on the heavy organ crutch and grinding Peter Gunn style bass with a lip curled, “Someday I’m gonna smack your face. Somebody’s gonna call your bluff. Somebody’s gonna treat you rough.” The beauty of Rattus Norvegicus can be found here, with its ability to simultaneously affront and appease. The band’s sweet and sour take on the burgeoning punk movement would become a calling card for subsequent albums and would set them apart from the cookie-cutter one act groups forming at the time. The star of the show is easily “Peaches”, a song that drips attitude with a schoolboy’s playful demeanor. The track may have confused some audiences into thinking that, lyrically speaking, The Stranglers were a sexist group of misanthropes who were quick to criticize any and every race, creed and belief structure. In actuality Hugh Cromwell, Jet Black, Jean-Jacques Burnel and crew were amateur satirists commenting on society at a confusing time in England’s history. Had it not been for the run ins with the law and being acquaintances of the notorious Finchley Boys street gang, people might have seen the lyrics for a song like “Ugly” as observant or hilarious. But when you hear the lyrics “I guess I shouldn’t have strangled her to death, but I had to go to work and she laced my coffee with acid” out of context, you can’t be blamed for your assumptions. Rattus Norvegicus doesn’t follow a straight and uncompromising journey into the abyss, a point of view that most punks initially adopted at that time. Instead the record is a cornucopia of surprising solos and swells of melody. “Princess of the Streets” seems completely disjointed from entries like “Goodbye Toulouse”, a song that hints at the future sound of the band and a lot of the brilliance they already had as songwriters. Punk was something that can be nailed to a particular style, a particular time and a certain type of attitude. Well in The Stranglers’ defense, Cromwell has been cited as saying that they never considered themselves punks. Their later albums delving into more pop friendly waters (as well as the production of a few concept albums) should come as no surprise then. Why should they be nailed to the punk rock cross when they never considered themselves its apostles to begin with?' |
that refers to vocals only. but they have intricate instrumental harmonies. "voice" is a musical term that does not refer to vocals only. "polyphony" means "many voices" (instrumental or vocal ones). and I especially pointed out their polyphony
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Takeshi Kovacs
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 11:39
Yes my reference was intended to relate to the lack of multi part vocal harmonies, not instrumental harmonies, as you had asked me to identify how they might not be considered progressive, and this was one of the things I raised. Just been reading more about them, and I've heard them described as (a) pop, (b) dance-punk, and the best prog band you've never heard of. Going to give Aural Sculpture a listen.
------------- Open the gates of the city wide....
Check out my music taste: http://www.last.fm/user/TakeshiKovacs/
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 11:43
Takeshi Kovacs wrote:
Yes my reference was intended to relate to the lack of multi part vocal harmonies, not instrumental harmonies
|
as I said; very few bands have that. VdGG and especially Hammill solo does. Gentle Giant and sometimes Yes do. but it is very rare that you have polyphony there, even with many different vocals; mostly it is only pseudo-polyphony. very often it is just parallel quints (a technique which is considered a definite no-no in classical music, by the way). if you like complex multiple-vocal compositions there is nothing better than Peter Hammill's opera "The Fall of the House of Usher". Gentle Giant's "Knots" is simple compared to the vocals on that album
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Takeshi Kovacs
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 13:23
BaldJean - could you recommend the best 2 or 3 albums to listen to that you consider have the greatest proggish tendencies?
I just listened to Aural Sculpture, and there was very little there to suggest prog. I got bits of OMD type keyboards, 80s style drum machines, reminded me a bit of Simple Minds in parts & a little of Talking Heads, short poppy compositions. Nothing seemed particularly complex.
Keen to try some of their other stuff to see if that changes my opinion.
------------- Open the gates of the city wide....
Check out my music taste: http://www.last.fm/user/TakeshiKovacs/
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 14:32
the 80s were a bad time for many bands, not only the Stranglers. "The Raven" and "Black and White" are excellent examples of prog though. but don't expect prog rock a la Genesis there. these ARE pop songs. but hey, most of prog is; anyone who thinks something else is only deluding him- or herself. there is only very little music in prog that I would NOT consider to be pop. the songs of the Stranglers rarely exceed the 5 minute mark. but we have several precedences for that in prog too. take for example the Amon Düül II album "Vive la Trance", which is a full blown prog album, and yet most songs on it are like that too. that album of Amon Düül 2 has an average rating of 3.30, so while it is not exactly a masterpiece it is considered to be pretty good. and no-one doubts it is a prog album. another example are some of the solo albums of Robert Calvert, likey "Hype" or "Test-Tube Conceived"; the latter has an average rating of 3.82. but these "pop" songs of the Stranglers are not "simple" pop songs at all. there is a high level of complexity in them, most notably the polyphony I mentioned many times before. and believe me, you will very rarely find polyphony in a mere pop song. it is a very advanced technique that very few bands we consider as "prog" master; there are a lot of prg songs that many would consider to be more "complex" than those of the Stranglers which actually are NOT from a music theoretical point of view. a few tempo changes don't make a song complex at all. and of course we do have longer compositions of the Stranglers too. but prog definitely IS pop music, like it or not. enough of my rant. but when analyzing music it definitely helps to have some knowledge of musical theory. Certif1ed has an excellent knowledge of it; trust me, he definitely will agree with me
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 14:39
BaldJean wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
ANY band that uses polyphony for their songs should be considered prog; it is in my opinion a decisive criterion. |
absolutely. if that is not a clear criterion, then what is?
|
Are you sure?
What about The Mamas & the Papas, they surely used polyphonic vocals as in Monday Monday and California Dreamin'....Should we add them?
The Beach Boys used Polyphony from their frst albums.
BTW: The Stranglers is not a pure Punk band, also a New Wave band and New Wave is the second or third stage of Punk, the genre merged with mainstream and even though they had more than 3 chords, they kept being post Punk bands.
But those who say they are not Punk have ever heard "Peasant in the Big sh*tty" or "School Mam"?
It's funny,
- The Stranglers considered themselves part of the Punk movement,
You were perceived in the press as being punk but not perhaps by your peers
JJ. I thought of myself as part of it at the time because we were inhabiting the same flora and fauna. We were going to the same The few pubs that would let us play were attracting a certain kind of public and the girls that we were shagging were young punkettes. I was definitely after girls with fishnet tights ands stilettos and leather jackets and lots of heavy makeup. Hugh was mixing with postgrad girls round Kensington. I wasn’t so fussy and I identified with that scene. I also got into a lot of fights and looked for trouble. I soon considered the punks a bit wimpy. We were a crossover. More hardcore punks definitely didn’t like us and the kids 17/18 adopted us as their punk band.
I remember Joe Strummer crying on my shoulder when Stranglers supported Patti Smith saying he wanted a band like ours. (Interestingly this recollection is also recounted by Hugh but he has 'his' shoulder as the one being cried on).
The Stranglers were more like American punk than English punk. The others in the band found it a restrictive moniker because we very eclectic in our tastes. f**ks sake I love a lot of classical music and jazz. I’m not going to restrict my influences and write a punk song. People lumped us in with it and we were playing the same venues and a lot of the audience was a crossover. Its not a thing that has kept me awake at night. I would like to think we were more punk plus and then some.
http://www.punk77.co.uk/groups/stranglersjjburnelin052.htm - http://www.punk77.co.uk/groups/stranglersjjburnelin052.htm
Interview to JJ Burnel |
Now we now more than them about their own music.
- Their own official website considers them leaders of the Punk movement:
So began the ever changing recording career of the Stranglers. The punk scene was a matter of weeks from its own genesis in Britain and indeed, many of the soon-to-be punk stars had become regulars at the Stranglers’ performances, the Stranglers being the clear leaders of an as yet un-named new style of music.
http://www.stranglers.net/b_ground.html - http://www.stranglers.net/b_ground.html
|
Now we also believe to know more than their own oficial website.
- Punk 77 also considers them Punk http://www.punk77.co.uk/groups/Stranglers.htm - http://www.punk77.co.uk/groups/Stranglers.htm , everybody considers them Punk,
- Nobody in the whole net considers them Prog, but we want to add them "because we are so open minded" (Not your case Baldies, I respect your opinion but don't agree).
People should have at least heard all their albums to give an opinion.
Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 15:08
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
BaldJean wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
ANY band that uses polyphony for their songs should be considered prog; it is in my opinion a decisive criterion. |
absolutely. if that is not a clear criterion, then what is?
|
Are you sure?
What about The Mamas & the Papas, they surely used polyphonic vocals as in Monday Monday and California Dreamin'....Should we add them?
The Beach Boys used Polyphony from their frst albums.
BTW: The Stranglers is not a pure Punk band, also a New Wave band and New Wave is the second or third stage of Punk, the genre merged with mainstream and even though they had more than 3 chords, they kept being post Punk bands.
But those who say they are not Punk have ever heard "Peasant in the Big sh*tty" or "School Mam"?
It's funny,
- The Stranglers considered themselves part of the Punk movement,
You were perceived in the press as being punk but not perhaps by your peers
JJ. I thought of myself as part of it at the time because we were inhabiting the same flora and fauna. We were going to the same The few pubs that would let us play were attracting a certain kind of public and the girls that we were shagging were young punkettes. I was definitely after girls with fishnet tights ands stilettos and leather jackets and lots of heavy makeup. Hugh was mixing with postgrad girls round Kensington. I wasn’t so fussy and I identified with that scene. I also got into a lot of fights and looked for trouble. I soon considered the punks a bit wimpy. We were a crossover. More hardcore punks definitely didn’t like us and the kids 17/18 adopted us as their punk band.
I remember Joe Strummer crying on my shoulder when Stranglers supported Patti Smith saying he wanted a band like ours. (Interestingly this recollection is also recounted by Hugh but he has 'his' shoulder as the one being cried on).
The Stranglers were more like American punk than English punk. The others in the band found it a restrictive moniker because we very eclectic in our tastes. f**ks sake I love a lot of classical music and jazz. I’m not going to restrict my influences and write a punk song. People lumped us in with it and we were playing the same venues and a lot of the audience was a crossover. Its not a thing that has kept me awake at night. I would like to think we were more punk plus and then some.
http://www.punk77.co.uk/groups/stranglersjjburnelin052.htm - http://www.punk77.co.uk/groups/stranglersjjburnelin052.htm
Interview to JJ Burnel |
Now we now more than them about their own music.
- Their own official website considers them leaders of the Punk movement:
So began the ever changing recording career of the Stranglers. The punk scene was a matter of weeks from its own genesis in Britain and indeed, many of the soon-to-be punk stars had become regulars at the Stranglers’ performances, the Stranglers being the clear leaders of an as yet un-named new style of music.
http://www.stranglers.net/b_ground.html - http://www.stranglers.net/b_ground.html
|
Now we also believe to know more than their own oficial website.
- Punk 77 also considers them Punk http://www.punk77.co.uk/groups/Stranglers.htm - http://www.punk77.co.uk/groups/Stranglers.htm , everybody considers them Punk,
- Nobody in the whole net considers them Prog, but we want to add them "because we are so open minded" (Not your case Baldies, I respect your opinion but don't agree).
People should have at least heard all their albums to give an opinion.
Iván
|
I wouldn't say "nobody in the whole world", Ivan. musicologist Tibor Kneif for example does in his "Sachlexikon der Rockmusik". anyway, It is not just the polyphony; i gave a complete list with check marks, Ivan. can you still deny they are prog after this list? or do we need to redefine what prog is? I also just checked on the Mamas and the Papas, and what we have there are some parallel quints plus some pseudo-polyphony (meaning the female vocals continue the voices of the male vocals, but don't form independent voices themselves). this is by far not comparable to what the Stranglers did
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 15:26
BaldJean wrote:
I wouldn't say "nobody in the whole world", Ivan. musicologist Tibor Kneif for example does in his "Sachlexikon der Rockmusik". anyway, It is not just the polyphony; i gave a complete list with check marks, Ivan. can you still deny they are prog after this list? or do we need to redefine what prog is?
|
That's not what you said Jean, you said
ANY band that uses polyphony for their songs should be considered prog; it is in my opinion a decisive criterion. |
This means, polyphony alone is enough, and it's clear with the examples that it's not.
And no, we don't need to redefine anything Jean.
The definition gives only guidelines as a Mediline gives guidelines about symptoms, we can have all the symptoms of a weird illness, but only a doctor can tell us if we have it or not, maybe it's just a strong cold and not a weird disease.
We may know a bit more about Prog than the average Joe, but we can't pretend to know more about Punk than the experts in the genre or to know better than the band themselves what in hell they played.
One voice is not enough, Tibor Kneif (expert musicologist but not dedicated to Prog or Punk primarily), gives an opinion that goes against every Prog and Punk site, so maybe he's not right.
At the end, The Stranglers are accepted as Punk, self defined as Punk, adopted as Punk by the fans, catalogued as Punks by their own site and the experts in issue, rejected as Prog by each and every Prog site in the net.......Aren't we being too arrogant to pretend to know more about Punk than the Punks?
Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 15:31
Interesting customer review found at Amazon - for their Laid Black album:
"If you're a fan of The Stranglers (and if you're not, shame on you)
then this album of "unplugged" music by Ian Anderson's favorite band
should be at the top of your must-haves.The Stranglers have always
been one of the most under-appreciated MELODIC masters in the so-called
"Punk/New Wave" roster, a label which does not even begin to do them
justice. This album beautifully showcases the underlying
instrumental, rhythmic and tonal strengths of The Stranglers, without
sacrificing their dark, slightly off-kilter (in a good way) take on
tonality. Listen to the seductive rhythms and harmonies of
"Southern Mountains" or the gothic/baroque arrangements (masterfully
played) of "Golden Brown" and "Strange Little Girl" and you'd almost
swear you were listening to one of the best progressive-rock bands
you'd never heard of, and yet there is no mistaking The Stranglers
unique style. One of my favorite albums of all-time."
If not for anything else, it seems that this album is a very good place to start if one wants to check out the bands credentials when it comes to inclusion or not at this site.
------------- Websites I work with:
http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com
My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 15:47
read the post I posted immediately before yours, Ivan. there is no real polyphony in the Mamas and the Papas
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Angelo
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 15:53
Five pages of ping-pong so far, but no formal proposal for a subgenre (or PR) - at least one of you should get busy, me thinks.
------------- http://www.iskcrocks.com" rel="nofollow - ISKC Rock Radio I stopped blogging and reviewing - so won't be handling requests. Promo's for ariplay can be sent to [email protected]
|
Posted By: Takeshi Kovacs
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 16:04
I'm not a musician, and know very little about musical theory...let alone polyphony..but instinctively The Stranglers would seem out of place on this website.
Similarly, Iron Maiden seem out of place here, as I don't see anything about their music that is progressive. To my mind they are a heavy metal / heavy rock band (albeit a band I like), so I'm not too upset that they are being reviewed here. I appear to be in the minority about them, as they have been included. I'm not upset about this as they are a band that fits into my rather wide spectrum of musical delights. If consulted about whether they are prog, I'd have replied with a resounding no.
I apply the same principle to The Stranglers, with the exception being that I don't like their music. I don't believe they should be here (polyphony or even monopoly aside)....and I think the Archives would be a very slightly poorer place for their inclusion.
I could live with it however...and would just choose to put the fact out of my mind.
Good luck in your quest for inclusion nonetheless.
------------- Open the gates of the city wide....
Check out my music taste: http://www.last.fm/user/TakeshiKovacs/
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 16:29
Angelo wrote:
Five pages of ping-pong so far, but no formal proposal for a subgenre (or PR) - at least one of you should get busy, me thinks.
|
"Crossover" seems to be the ideal place for them
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 16:58
Windhawk wrote:
Interesting customer review found at Amazon - for their Laid Black album:
If I'm not wrong, bedsides PA you write for
- Progressor
- Progressive Ears (Edit..My mistake, PE has them)
- GEPR
Has any of this PROGRSSIVE ROCK SITES included The Stranglers?
Have you proposed them for addition? And if you had..What had they answered?
Since when must we trust more in a store like Amazon than in Prog sites??
"If you're a fan of The Stranglers (and if you're not, shame on you) then this album of "unplugged" music by Ian Anderson's favorite band should be at the top of your must-haves.
Tha fact that Ian Anderson likes it doesn't mean a thing.
The Stranglers have always been one of the most under-appreciated MELODIC masters in the so-called "Punk/New Wave" roster, a label which does not even begin to do them justice.
Again, a solitarie that disagrees with everyone
This album beautifully showcases the underlying instrumental, rhythmic and tonal strengths of The Stranglers, without sacrificing their dark, slightly off-kilter (in a good way) take on tonality.
Listen to the seductive rhythms and harmonies of "Southern Mountains" or the gothic/baroque arrangements (masterfully played) of "Golden Brown" and "Strange Little Girl" and you'd almost swear you were listening to one of the best progressive-rock bands you'd never heard of, and yet there is no mistaking The Stranglers unique style.
You'd almost swear. doesn't mean you're before a Prog band...If you notice, he only mentions two songs for this pseudo Gothic/Baroque arrangements (Golden Brown and Strange Life).
One of my favorite albums of all-time."
Again, this means nothing except for Mr XSpace who never wrote any other review in Amazon.
If not for anything else, it seems that this album is a very good place to start if one wants to check out the bands credentials when it comes to inclusion or not at this site.
So now we must start with Amazon instread of Prog Archives, Progressor and GEPR? Isn't it cutrious than in 30 years only one Prog site has added them?
Honestly I doubt it.
Cheers
Iván
BTW: We are talking about an UNPLUGGED album, tha sounds totally different to what they doone before, Have you verified if there's any review about the ORIGINAL studio albums from which this songs come? |
-------------
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 17:01
Ivan, have a look at the checklist. that should tell you all. or do we really have to redefine prog?
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 17:01
BaldJean wrote:
read the post I posted immediately before yours, Ivan. there is no real polyphony in the Mamas and the Papas
|
Yes they have POLYPHONIC vocals and choirs, as a fact, they are famous for that.
What about Early Beach Boys or REM or OMD?
BaldJean wrote:
Ivan, have a look at the checklist. that should tell you all. or do we really have to redefine prog?
|
Have answered this exact same question a few posts above
Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 17:10
Well, as stated earlier in the thread I'm not for their inclusion in here.
And yeah, it's an unplugged album - unplugged releases are good for showing off just how complex (or not) songs are, and should give some clues as to whether or not this material merits further checking ;-)
It was an interesting point of view because it came from a non-prog site - if it is indeed a correct one I can't tell. Again I stress the word interesting - it doesn't mean the same as important, valid or even a stated fact. It's interesting, no more.
As for progsites, they are listed at Prog Ears. Haven't checked the other sites, and as this matter is quite unimportant to me I don't really bother to either ;-)
------------- Websites I work with:
http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com
My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 17:12
Great, as soon as The Stranglers are mentioned
http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/iclk?sa=l&ai=BqSGAcWfySOf5JJ6cVpKPzNIO-ZDtU9WQg_MGwI23AZBOEAEYASCFsPUBOABQiNOy-wJg3dy3haQZoAGpp7__A7IBFHd3dy5wcm9nYXJjaGl2ZXMuY29tugEJNzI4eDkwX2FzyAEC2gFAaHR0cDovL3d3dy5wcm9nYXJjaGl2ZXMuY29tL2ZvcnVtL2ZvcnVtX3Bvc3RzLmFzcD9USUQ9NTE4MTEmUE49NYACAeACAeoCHXByb2dhcmNoaXZlc19mb3J1bV90b3BfNzI4eDkwkAO0UZgD8FGoAwHoA84E6AMj6ANQ6APIBPUDAAEAAIgEAZAEAZgEAA&num=1&adurl=http://www.punx.com&client=ca-pub-0447992028883143">
We got advertising from a Punk site sent by Google at the top of this page.
They are allso wrong, The Stranglers is a Prog band.
Windhawk, didn't knew about PE, but well, they also have Jerry Lee Lewis.
Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 17:23
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
Windhawk, didn't knew about PE, but well, they also have Jerry Lee Lewis.
Iván |
Well, to their defence good old Mr. Lewis is not referred to as a progressive artist on the site - they have listed some artists there due to members sending in reviews but when looking at the artist directory these are not assigned to a prog genre due to not being regarded as progressive ;-)
------------- Websites I work with:
http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com
My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/
|
Posted By: splyu
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 17:37
BaldJean wrote:
Takeshi Kovacs wrote:
Yes my reference was intended to relate to the lack of multi part vocal harmonies, not instrumental harmonies
|
as I said; very few bands have that. VdGG and especially Hammill solo does. Gentle Giant and sometimes Yes do. but it is very rare that you have polyphony there, even with many different vocals; mostly it is only pseudo-polyphony. very often it is just parallel quints (a technique which is considered a definite no-no in classical music, by the way). |
Can't help but feel that this thing about polyphony being a "very advanced technique" has been overstated in this thread. I couldn't tell you off the top of my head which prog bands do or do not use it, but seriously, it's not that hard to do. Not really at all. (And I'm not sure about it being a defining feature of prog either... if few prog bands use it, as you said, how could it be a defining feature?)
Don't get me wrong though, I'm not arguing against their inclusion. For what it's worth, I voted "perhaps"... I'm not really familiar enough with them to say for sure, but a guy I used to know quite well would name them as his favourite band, but hardly listened to any punk (some post-punk though), but was very big on Genesis, Rush and King Crimson. He used to describe them as "the only punk band that also did prog".
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 17:38
Well Olav, but again, a 1977 album by TRhe Sttraglers is added in Progressive Ears as POST ROCK
Is this possible?
Almost like talking about Neo Prog in 1968.
Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 17:45
The term dates back to 1975 actually, but has been refined somewhat before it became a popular phrase.
I suspect they see Stranglers over there as belonging into the musical segment of post rock prehistory though - as outlined like this at wiki:
--
Post-rock appears to take a heavy influence from late '60s U.S. group http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Velvet_Underground - The Velvet Underground and their "dronology" — "a term that loosely describes fifty percent of today's post rock activity." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_rock#cite_note-Audio_Culture:_Readings_in_Modern_Music-9 - [10]
The " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krautrock - Krautrock " of the 1960s and '70s would also exert a strong influence on post-rock, particularly via the " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorik - motorik ", or characteristic rhythm of much Krautrock.
British group http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Image_Ltd - Public Image Ltd (PiL) were also pioneers, described by the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NME - NME http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_rock#cite_note-Plastic_Box-10 - [11] as "[a]rguably the first post-rock group." Their second album http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_Box - Metal Box (1979) almost completely abandoned traditional rock and roll structures in favor of dense, repetitive http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dub_reggae - dub - and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krautrock - Krautrock -inspired soundscapes and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lydon - John Lydon 's cryptic, stream-of-consciousness lyrics. The year before Metal Box was released, PiL bassist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jah_Wobble - Jah Wobble declared, "rock is obsolete." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_rock#cite_note-Frieze-11 - [12] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flowers_of_Romance_%28album%29 - Flowers of Romance (1981), their third album, was an even more radical departure, emphasizing rattling percussion and abstract http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tape_music - tape music .
The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoegazing - shoegazing movement of the late 1980s and early '90s was also a predecessor of post rock, with bands like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Bloody_Valentine - My Bloody Valentine devoting as much, or more, attention to unorthodox, layered guitar textures than to traditional guitar sounds. ---------------
I'll check with Floyd if you really want to know the exact reasoning behind their inclusion of course ;-)
------------- Websites I work with:
http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com
My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 17:55
Windhawk wrote:
The term dates back to 1975 actually, but has been refined somewhat before it became a popular phrase.
I suspect they see Stranglers over there as belonging into the musical segment of post rock prehistory though - as outlined like this at wiki:
--
Post-rock appears to take a heavy influence from late '60s U.S. group http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Velvet_Underground - The Velvet Underground and their "dronology" — "a term that loosely describes fifty percent of today's post rock activity." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_rock#cite_note-Audio_Culture:_Readings_in_Modern_Music-9 - [10]
The " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krautrock - Krautrock " of the 1960s and '70s would also exert a strong influence on post-rock, particularly via the " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorik - motorik ", or characteristic rhythm of much Krautrock.
British group http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Image_Ltd - Public Image Ltd (PiL) were also pioneers, described by the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NME - NME http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_rock#cite_note-Plastic_Box-10 - [11] as "[a]rguably the first post-rock group." Their second album http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_Box - Metal Box (1979) almost completely abandoned traditional rock and roll structures in favor of dense, repetitive http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dub_reggae - dub - and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krautrock - Krautrock -inspired soundscapes and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lydon - John Lydon 's cryptic, stream-of-consciousness lyrics. The year before Metal Box was released, PiL bassist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jah_Wobble - Jah Wobble declared, "rock is obsolete." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_rock#cite_note-Frieze-11 - [12] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flowers_of_Romance_%28album%29 - Flowers of Romance (1981), their third album, was an even more radical departure, emphasizing rattling percussion and abstract http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tape_music - tape music .
The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoegazing - shoegazing movement of the late 1980s and early '90s was also a predecessor of post rock, with bands like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Bloody_Valentine - My Bloody Valentine devoting as much, or more, attention to unorthodox, layered guitar textures than to traditional guitar sounds.
---------------
I'll check with Floyd if you really want to know the exact reasoning behind their inclusion of course ;-)
|
Olave, your article talks about PREDECESORS, because at the top of the same page (Wikipedia) says clearly:
Cultural origins |
Mid-1980s, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom - United Kingdom , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States - United States , and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada - Canada |
Plus the last sentence of your quote says:
The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoegazing - shoegazing movement of the late 1980s and early '90s was also a predecessor of post rock, with bands like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Bloody_Valentine - My Bloody Valentine devoting as much, or more, attention to unorthodox, layered guitar textures than to traditional guitar sounds. |
So, if their predecesors are from the late 80's?
Plus our own definition of Post Rock says:
The term post-rock was coined by Simon Reynolds in issue 123 of The Wire (May 1994) to describe a sort of music "using rock instrumentation for non-rock purposes, using guitars as facilitators of timbres and textures rather than riffs and powerchords."
Originally used to describe the music of such bands as Stereolab, Disco Inferno, Seefeel, Bark Psychosis and Pram, it spread out to be frequently used for all sorts of jazz- and Krautrock-influenced, instrumental, electronica-added music made after 1994. Bands from the early 1990s such as Slint, or earlier, such as Talk Talk were influential on this genre. As with many musical genres, the term is arguably inadequate: it is used for the music of Tortoise as well as that of Mogwai, two bands who have very little in common besides the fact that their music is largely instrumental.
The aforementioned Tortoise was among the founders of the movement. After the second Tortoise LP Millions Now Living Will Never Die, the band became a post-rock icon. After Millions... many bands (e.g., Do Make Say Think) began to record, inspired by the "Tortoise-sound" and were often described as post-rock.
In the late nineties, Chicago, Illinois, became the home base of many different groups. John McEntire (of Tortoise) became an important producer for lots of them, as well as Jim O'Rourke (of Brice-Glace, Gastr del Sol and many more). Post-rock began to range from the slow, guitar-based ambience of Boxhead Ensemble to the up-tempo electronica of Stereolab.
Montreal, Quebec band Godspeed You Black Emperor! — later renamed 'Godspeed You! Black Emperor' — brought a political element with anti-globalization movement leanings.
By the early 2000s, the term had started to fall out of favor, while the major artists kept on making high quality recordings. The wide range of styles covered by the term had robbed it of its usefulness almost from the moment it was coined.
Closely related to post-rock is the genre known as Math rock, characterized by more percussive timbres, and more dissonant harmonic gestures
http://www.progarchives.com/subgenre.asp?style=32 - http://www.progarchives.com/subgenre.asp?style=32
|
Even mention TORTOISE (A band who released theuir debut in 1994) as FOUNDERS OF POST ROCK.
Iván
.
-------------
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 17:56
splyu wrote:
BaldJean wrote:
Takeshi Kovacs wrote:
Yes my reference was intended to relate to the lack of multi part vocal harmonies, not instrumental harmonies
|
as I said; very few bands have that. VdGG and especially Hammill solo does. Gentle Giant and sometimes Yes do. but it is very rare that you have polyphony there, even with many different vocals; mostly it is only pseudo-polyphony. very often it is just parallel quints (a technique which is considered a definite no-no in classical music, by the way). |
Can't help but feel that this thing about polyphony being a "very advanced technique" has been overstated in this thread. I couldn't tell you off the top of my head which prog bands do or do not use it, but seriously, it's not that hard to do. Not really at all. (And I'm not sure about it being a defining feature of prog either... if few prog bands use it, as you said, how could it be a defining feature?)
Don't get me wrong though, I'm not arguing against their inclusion. For what it's worth, I voted "perhaps"... I'm not really familiar enough with them to say for sure, but a guy I used to know quite well would name them as his favourite band, but hardly listened to any punk (some post-punk though), but was very big on Genesis, Rush and King Crimson. He used to describe them as "the only punk band that also did prog".
|
it is not the sole defining feature; you can be prog without using polyphony. however, it IS a difficult technique; most bands only manage to produce pseudo-polyphony (meaning 1 voice played by 2 different instruments) or playing in quint parallels. those are not examples of polyphony though. the important thing about polyphony is that the two voices have to be INDEPENDENT, and that's not so easily accomplished. the technique can however be practiced. and it is something I do on a regular basis. whenever I hear a simple pop song played somewhere I sing an improvised second voice to it. that has often given me laughs from people who think I missed the tune completely but who actually have no idea what I did
-------------
A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 18:00
If you read carefully Ivan, I did state that I guessed they saw the band as a part of post rock PREHISTORY...
------------- Websites I work with:
http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com
My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/
|
Posted By: splyu
Date Posted: October 12 2008 at 18:08
BaldJean wrote:
it is not the sole defining feature; you can be prog without using polyphony. however, it IS a difficult technique; most bands only manage to produce pseudo-polyphony (meaning 1 voice played by 2 different instruments) or playing in quint parallels. those are not examples of polyphony though. the important thing about polyphony is that the two voices have to be INDEPENDENT, and that's not so easily accomplished. |
Yes, I know what it is. I just disagree about it being difficult to accomplish.
|
|