Grateful Dead- Not Even Prog-Related? Really?
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=64755
Printed Date: December 01 2024 at 23:00
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Grateful Dead- Not Even Prog-Related? Really?
Posted By: Textbook
Subject: Grateful Dead- Not Even Prog-Related? Really?
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 01:05
|
Their fusion of genres and heavy leaning on improvised space and psychedelic rock, plus a tendency to jump wildly between different sounds would seem to make them a shoo-in. And yet there seems to be a consensus that they don't belong here. Can someone explain why? Come on guys, Chicago before the Dead?
|
Replies:
Posted By: mrcozdude
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 01:20
|
I'd love to see them here.But if they don't I wouldn't be to bothered either.They definitely have progressive tendencys but southern rock couldn't be further from progressive.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/cozfunkel/" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 01:33
|
^ southern rock? only to the extent that they sometimes dabbled in country music I love the Dead, especially their progressive period [Blues for Allah, Terrapin, etc.] and they probably deserve a spot in PR for those albums (at least)-- on the other hand, the bulk of their career was not progressive .. it's a hard call |
Posted By: mrcozdude
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 01:39
|
yeah not a term I'm fond off with the dead.But they've always been lumped with lynyrd skynyrd and The Allman bros.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/cozfunkel/" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 01:50
|
^ -- they're a west coast acid rock band, always have been |
Posted By: Marty McFly
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 02:07
|
Finally something familiar. Famous Jam bands could be thought about a little bit more.
------------- There's a point where "avant-garde" and "experimental" becomes "terrible" and "pointless," -Andyman1125 on Lulu  Even my |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 02:42
|
^
yes but credibility for the site for putting them in prog related or not for ommitting them. Personally I think PA would be far better off with them on board. ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 02:49
|
A case for them as prog related was sent to the admins a year ago or so, and they weren't convinced that the band's progressive credentials warranted an inclusion. Which means that the only way this band may get added to the database here is if one of the teams wants to add them as a full fledged progressive act. The entire team will have to vouch for such a decision then, and it will need admin approval. And I guess we all know just what team would be the only possibility then, eh? ;-) ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 20:17
^ Psych? Folk? Eclectic? |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 20:20
|
I am really surprised Wishbone Ash cuts it while the Dead don't. I think many of the Dead's live works and studio albums give them more relevance than WA. I'd vote for the Dead given how far we've opened things up now. Still think we should just do a rock section and get it over with. |
Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 20:25
| I know many of you hate the "if x got in then how come y doesn't get in" argument but it's hard to avoid when dealing with a major voice in American alternative music like the Grateful Dead. "Kamelot, no problem, but Grateful Dead, uh-uh" is a little absurd in my opinion. |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 20:46
|
I think in this case there's probably enough reservation to not add them, at least for now. What the Dead would need around here is a passionate argument by someone who really knows the catalog (and the live experience too wouldn't hurt) |
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 23:01
|
First of all mrcozdude, the Grateful Dead are not, nor ever were a southern rock band, as far as I know there are 5 criteria for being a southern rock band.
1) be a rock band from the southern US. 2) fans bring confederate flags to your concert. 3) guitar players in the band outnumber the non-guitar players. 4) lead singer drinks a lot and can kick your ass, big time. 5) the road crew should be in jail. As you know, The Grateful Dead only meet criteria 5. Otherwise they are a bunch of California hacky sack hugging, doctor's permit holding, patchouli snorting paisley heads who can not beat up anybody, not even the members of their own band. Now ... Re Textbook's proposal. I am sure you read our definition of PR and know what it entails for an artist to meet the rigorous standards of a PR PA artist. (Most people have proposed the Dead for proto-prog, but you don't play that). In case there was any doubt, here are some guidelines: 1) be a big influence on the development of prog in some corner of the globe, without being a total prog band. 2) have a career that parallels and intersects with the development of prog. 3) be a favorite band of somebody who works hard for the site and has gathered a lot of friends on here. (kidding .. sort of) There is a case for The Dead as an influential band as they were one of the first rock bands to indulge in lengthy improvs, but there are also so many other artists who have not made PR or proto that need a serious look too: Beach Boys, Velvet Underground, Quicksilver Messenger Service, Cream, Joe Satriani, Yngwie Malmsteen and some others I'm not thinking of right now. Two influential artists on prog who are not here and probably never will be are Eddie Van Halen and Bob Dylan. Likewise, James Brown and Bootsy Collins (while in James' band) liberated the bass guitar from support status and gave it an individual voice which was a big influence on prog, but I bet you never see them here either. It all depends on how wide we want to cast the net for bands that were influential on prog, but not entirely prog. Right now I'd say the net is stretched the furthest at Jefferson Airplane, but that's just my opinion. |
Posted By: mrcozdude
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 03:42
Just saying I've always seen them being put in with those guys. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/cozfunkel/" rel="nofollow">
|
mrcozdude wrote:Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 05:55
Having been here longer than John, I can say that the main problem (the one that causes people to get mad and start bashing other additions) is that the criteria you listed above have not always been as rigorous as they are now. This is proved by the presence of some slightly odd names in the PR section (like Super Furry Animals), as well as some bands or artists that were added in the early days of the site, without any kind of quality control. Seen the level of controversy accompanying some of the additions (complete with personal attacks  ), the standards have been tightened - but those dubious additions are still there, and some are even in genres that are considered fully prog (as in the case of Nightwish). Now, Prog-Related could probably use a 'cleanup session' of the kind we had in Symphonic, but, since entries can only be deleted in very special circumstances, it would probably not be much use. |
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 07:41
|
Hey Raff, I think the standards for JR have gotten tighter too. I think a lot of this is my fault as I am more about quality than quantity. I don't know of any high-profile bands in PR that seem terribly out of place, and a recent cleanup of JR only yielded one band that had to be deleted.
The tightening of PR was inevitable as we were getting more and more hard rock/metal suggestions trying to push the boundries of PR, and yet no suggestions of other music that has influenced prog, for instance Morricone, The Shadows, Sun Ra or Les Baxter. I'm not saying those guys should be in PR, but if the site is going to expand, let's do it uniformally. Personally I would support more proggy artists from an RnB background, but that's just me. I think the site must expand to stay alive and relevant, but always doing it through PR seems like a weak way to go to me, just my opinion. Overall though, I don't really have a problem with anyone in PR, I just give up on trying to move Metallica to prog metal, ha ha, but as the site expands and developes, genres are going to be seen in different ways. P.S. the third criteria is a joke about me finally getting Hendrix in proto, ha ha. |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 07:58
|
John, I'd be all too glad to suggest Morricone... I can hear his influence in a lot of rock music, prog or otherwise, and I know for sure he's considered one of the most influential living composers. Anyway, I was not trying to contradict you, but only to add to what you had already said, based on what I have seen in the almost five years I have been a member here. As to the third criteria, we have all been accused of adding our favourite bands to Prog-Related... Just look at my avatar, and check who added Blue Oyster Cult  . |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 08:35
|
Some weird aliens from your Avatar? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 08:37
|
A fire of unknown origin took my baby away!
|
Posted By: earlyprog
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 09:21
For a moment I thought the above would allow someone like Morricone to enter PA, but a further look at PA's definition is not in agreement with your guidlines:
Prog Related is the category that groups bands and artists that:
- Without being 100% Prog, received clear MUSICAL influence of this genre, AND - Are widely accepted as MUSICALLY influential to the development of Progressive Rock by the community, AND - Blend characteristics of Progressive Rock with mainstream elements creating a final product that despite not being part of the genre is evident that are close to Prog. Morricone would only fit if the first AND is replaced with OR. Actually I think it ought to be an OR in the definition. In this manner PR include artists that either influenced prog OR were influenced by prog.
I cannot see how Grateful Dead will fit the definition of PR.
I agree if you mean stretched beyond the limits of proto prog
 With respect to Hendrix: I knew it
|
Posted By: clarke2001
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 09:24
 ------------- |
Posted By: Marty McFly
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 12:45
|
I'm relatively new here, so I can't compare. Maybe because of this, that I'm both young and new here makes me want "everything" slightly" prog here, which mostly means rock acts from 60-70's. I don't know why. Many important thoughts in this thread, Raff & Easy Money, your comments are most valued. But thanks for information that in past, criteria were lower than now. It explains a lot of things and breaks final argument, when this, then this :-D ------------- There's a point where "avant-garde" and "experimental" becomes "terrible" and "pointless," -Andyman1125 on Lulu Even my |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 13:03
I'd like to see all of those names in. I don't really support The Grateful Dead, but understand why others would call for it. Re. Sun Ra, I would have thought he had a pretty good case for Jazz Rock Fusion rather than just a related category. EDIT: Inbcidentally, regarding Morricone, I love these: Re Sun Ra: not my favourite album of his, though I like it a lot, but the album Languidity is very apt for PA: ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 14:13
| I'm a huge Super Furry Animals fan but I don't know what the hell they're doing on this site. |
Posted By: Marty McFly
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 15:51
|
Prog related are handicaped, because you cannot search for them with custom search (genre - year - country search) and they do not appear in any other related listings, such as top200 albums. Uncertain is also, how we, reviewers should rate them, or even how to treat them (if like prog, or if like prog-related, which means advantage). The only way how to seek for prog related bands is to go upwards and select "prog related" subgenre page. Do you want to create progressive soundtrack (classical) genre ? We can have also category for classical music composers, this would cut these discussion how much Mozart was progressive in half. Oh and before I forget, this whole situation seems to me like this: We should decide whether to stay strict and be very careful what gets here and what not, to be like old virgin (joke of course), or to open gates, at least partially. I'm for latter choice, but I don't want to see Tokio Hotel, Blink 182, or Linkin Park (no, just shout big nooo) here. ------------- There's a point where "avant-garde" and "experimental" becomes "terrible" and "pointless," -Andyman1125 on Lulu Even my |
Posted By: lucas
Date Posted: February 02 2010 at 16:00
|
Grateful Dead : a band difficult to categorize. If Phish are in PA, I don't see the reason why their influence would not be there as well.
------------- "Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood) |
Posted By: ko
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 04:12
|
Aoxomoxoa, Live Dead, Wake of the Flood,Mars Hotel, Blues for Allah, Terrapin Station are the masterpieces of american progressive rock, in my opinion. |
Posted By: ko
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 13:23
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 13:30
|
Not being overly familiar with their catalog, Terrapin Station had some good prog stuff on it , but then they had a Terrapin Station Part 1 song and as far as I know never did a part 2 on any subsequent album. By the way if any fans know that isn't correct, let me know what album it showed up on.
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 13:42
|
I have a better idea....let's remove the Prog-Related category from PA. These arguments about non-prog bands that are already widely known are pointless!!!!
STOP IT!!! ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 13:54
What he said  - even if I would lose some 40 reviews. |
Posted By: ko
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 16:46
|
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 17:02
We all agree but it's not the way things are done here for some reason. There are logistical issues to reviewing each single album but even though Miles Davis' _Kind of Blue_ and _Birth of the Cool_ are absolute masterpiece albums, they have no place here.
I guess Invisible Touch doesn't either, but that's another can of worms.
In any case, the decisions are made by artist rather than album. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: snobb
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 17:06
Are you sure about Miles albums?
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 17:06
|
I like Progrelated, always have, and it has little to do with seeing favorite non-prog bands on the site but rather the idea that some bands were indeed, among other things, related to Prog. I mean, why not? Does anyone deny prog's huge impact on the music scene in general or the incestuous connections between prog and non-prog groups? Would we rather pretend Prog did not once briefly rule the world or was not cutting edge popular music that started showing up in everything from TV theme songs to, yes, records by hippie acid bands? |
Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 17:20
Whole-heartedly agree. These kind of bands lured me to the site and functioned as the gateway to proper ( ) progressive music. They (those bands) play an important part for the site, both historically and stylistically. It's all part of being the best resource on the web. About Grateful Dead: based on what I've heard - perhaps. But I'll gladly leave that discussion to those more knowledgeable about the band. |
Posted By: ko
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 17:55
|
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 18:15
|
Oh Miles belongs here if we're going to have a jazz-fusion category, which we should. He basically invented the genre with the Bitches' Brew era albums. But that was the point. Then what do you rate "Birth of the Cool?" It's a masterpiece, just not of prog.
For my part I doubt I'll review either. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 18:18
|
I do think they deserve to be here, but can we please calm down with the prog related bands? Look at the all of the prog metal bands that are cleared for addition: http://progfreak.com/go/home/progarchives?path=pm/cleared - http://progfreak.com/go/home/progarchives?path=pm/cleared These bands are all full-blown prog metal, and yet they're not even on the archives - yet we're arguing about Grateful Dead? Here's 11 more pages of bands we're still undecided about: http://progfreak.com/home/progarchives?path=pm/nw - http://progfreak.com/home/progarchives?path=pm/nw I'm not trying to be a jerk, but there are so many bands that are actually progressive rock out there that need to be added. We've already discussed Grateful Dead in the past, and they have not been approved. -Jeff ------------- 
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 18:26
| You are right, Jeff, but I would be careful in saying that out loud... The last time I did, it didn't end up well. |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 18:29
| but Jeff those artists will be added to the archives if I know your hard-working team (I mean isn't that a good thing?), and a discussion about some other band won't affect that |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 18:32
|
If we have a PR category, and the plan is for the site to retain it, then having discussions about acts to add to are perfectly legit and should not be stifled by anyone. Now, if Admin has already reviewed the Dead, and rejected them after review, then I agree.....as with Judas Priest, let it go for a while. Can anyone tell us if Admin has reviewed the Dead formally? |
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 18:54
|
The Dead were voted on very recently and I believe it was 5 no and 1 yes, or something like that, all the same, I will check out the samples provided anyway and keep an open mind about it.
Re Hendrix: just for the record, I WAS TOTALLY JOKING. I like Jimi OK, but he's not even close to one of my favorites. As I have mentioned many times before, my interest in him increased a lot when I saw he was missing from the site. After doing the research and listening to the music, my appreciation for him and his pre-prog credentials increased greatly, the rest is history, ha ha. |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: February 03 2010 at 19:07
|
Oh cool, well, I'm glad they got the official review and I'll respect the decision. Thanks John. I love them, think they are actually more progressive than many of our bands on the site, but I'm perfectly happy to be my own personal deadhead
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 02:29
That's the Dead, alright.
The GD (or Warlocks) were one of the very first psych bands - they're not just A psych band!
Prog arose from Psych.
I don't like the GD at all - boring, boring boring - and no, not progressive.
But their influence on Prog as a global phenomenon, and particularly Prog as it arose in England (a country always quick to pinch musical ideas from the Americans and play with them, as with Rock and Roll, Skiffle, the blues, Bob Dylan and the Beach Boys) is elemental and undeniable.
Prog-Related certainly - on a par with Bob Dylan and the Beach Boys, ie if one, then all three. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: ko
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 03:36
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 03:47
How you can be so scrupulously objective about a band (notwithstanding their credentials for inclusion on PA) who are capable of sucking the very fruit out of home-made jam beggars belief. I salute you. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 08:01
|
Sorry to divert the conversation for a bit, but Bitches Brew isn't even close to the first JR or fusion record.
This is revisionist history pushed by a massive publicity campaign by Columbia records. You can read the PA definition of JR to learn about the first JR releases, the structure of the article needs to be fixed  but the info is there.
|
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 08:21
Thanks for the endorsement, I just added all three. Next comes Cream, Velvet Underground and Quicksilver Messenger Service. |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 09:25
Lonnie Donegan next?
 Actually, the GD make as much sense as Jefferson Airplane.
...still looking for Spooky Tooth and Graham Bond Organisation in the archives... ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 09:31
Is it possible that said essential property extraction capability could be considered progressive?
I didn't think at the time that my observations were objective in any way... but now you bring it to my attention, I can see you're right  ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 09:39
Personally I think GD makes more sense than JA. I totally missed out on the JA addition and not sure how they got here. In the words of our esteemed Ivan though, once an artist is here, not much point in arguing anymore, not that you were. As I said before, I think there is a valid case for GD, there just aren't enough yes votes for them on the current PR or proto team. That could change later. I haven't listened to all of the above samples, but Unbroken Chain is prog-rock, nice stuff. Another band that I think deserves a serious look, and I know Dick Heath has said this too, is Simon and Garfunkel. Bookends could qualify as proto, and as Heath has pointed out, Save the Life of my Child is probably one of the first recorded prog songs. |
Posted By: earlyprog
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 09:42
Same meaning I suppose
|
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 10:30
|
While the point that some one got into prog from prog-related groups makes sense, I don't think anyone will find this site because of prog-related groups, and then discover actual prog. I really don't think the PR category serves any purpose other than allowing members to discuss non-prog bands they like. Obviously, if the majority of members want to do that, then it goes, but I am so sick of discussions about the merits of Metallica, the Dead, etc. who are already popular. NO ONE is going to discover those bands because of this site.
And it also seems that if someone makes a big stink, eventually the band ends up accepted regardless of merit anyway. Except SOAD for some reason.
 I guess I've stirred enough caca. Do go on. I await the Dead reviews coming soon to a front page near you. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 11:33
| I'm surprised to see so little credit given to Jefferson Airplane. They were way ahead of their time. For example, in their 1967 album "After Bathing At Baxter's" they have a 9 minute + "avant" jam. Nobody did that! |
Posted By: earlyprog
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 13:36
PInk Floyd Interstellar Overdrive
Doors When the Music's Over
Soft Machine Lullaby Letter + Hope for Happiness + I've Should Have Known
Fifty Foot Hose Fantasy
Spirit Elijah (first Jazz Rock/Fusion?)
Procol Harum In Held Twas in I
Collectors What Love
I wouldn't even call JA's "Spare Chaynge" proto-prog. It's an example of how US Psyche developed into Space Rock and they didn't even do it very well.
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 14:06
| ^ That's how you see it; to me it's the most ambitious thing created by a proto prog band in 1967 (Interstellar Overdrive is pure, mature prog so I don't find it relevant in this discussion; and there's also Sgt. Pepper who is also something completely different, having achieved the same goal of prog, the rock album as a work of art, by different means - no instrumentals, no jams, no avantgarde, no mini-epics, just... their own thing, which I don't know how to define). What makes it different to the other examples is that is has such a "theoretical" nature, visibly developed in as a technical experiment of construction and dissolution of musical form. Not just an intuitive, unwanted accomplishment, but a conscious "treatise" on the problem. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 14:16
| So I'm listening to Anthem Of The Sun (1968) right now and what I can say is that though it lacks the "avantgarde" edge that JA's After Bathing At Baxter's has, I still think it would suit Proto-Prog. |
Posted By: himtroy
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 15:26
| Don't really see how they're not prog related. They couldn't have influenced the psychedelic rock scene much more, and the psych scene to me seems like the prog scene before it became "prog" |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 15:48
All I'm trying to get across is that there are hundreds of actual progressive rock bands out there that aren't on the archives. I am completely in support of Grateful Dead being added to PR, but it's already been discussed (and rejected) before. I think once that happens, it's time to forget about adding a band that's not even full-blown prog anyway. -Jeff -------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 17:41
what about Steppenwolf are not they prog related 
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 19:09
lack of consistency... nothing more .. nothing less. One gets added.. the other rejected. It does amaze me that onecould find the Airplane worthy of being on the site.. yet find the more progressive of the two (by any objective reasoning).. not worthy of inclusion. that is in large part why I have given up on the site as anything more than a place where people I like hang out. One is popular.. another apparently has a stigma... due to it's fans as that boogyman to some here...as a 'jam band'. If so...then what the hell was the Airplane.. anyone ever listen to a live album from them? They never played the same song the same way twice ... in Grace's words.. they lifted off into the atmosphere every night.. never knowing the flight-plan.. or where they were landing haha. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: February 04 2010 at 20:06
Spooky Tooth not here- WTF   ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 03:29
My sentiments entirely!
Not only were they at the core of the Progressive Music scene, but also produced a full-blown Prog album with composer Pierre Henry - "Ceremony".
"Spooky Two" influenced just about every first generation heavy metal / proto prog metal band under the sun - Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Deep Purple, Judas Priest - and I even heard Spooky Tooth influences on Blue Oyster Cult.
Not only that, but they produced one of the earliest psycehdelic "freak out" albums in 1967, were the first band to use the term "Heavy Metal", and were the band that Jimi Hendrix got his first UK exposure through, when he joined them on stage at one of their gigs and taught them "Hey Joe" on the spot.
Not a lot of people know that.
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Marty McFly
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 03:46
Hey, can we two discuss something. I can pay some, um, easy money for example to get some bands here secretly. Once they'll be here, I'll write review for them all and they can't be deleted. :-) The question is How Much. ------------- There's a point where "avant-garde" and "experimental" becomes "terrible" and "pointless," -Andyman1125 on Lulu Even my |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 05:56
| Re Spooky Tooth: I've always heard them defined as Progressive Rock, and not seeing them here - while bands like Budgie have been included without too much of an effort - looks a bit odd. But then, I've also learned enough in my years here to keep out of debate when it gets too heated. |
Posted By: earlyprog
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 06:25
|
As a consequence of this thread I have been listening to live recordings of Grateful Dead at Wolfgang's Vault. These versions of St. Stephen, Eleven, Caution (Do Not Step On Tracks) and Dark Star are pretty prog (the former are prog folk and bluesy heavy prog, the latter space rock): http://www.wolfgangsvault.com/grateful-dead/concerts/fillmore-east-february-11-1969-late-show.html - http://www.wolfgangsvault.com/grateful-dead/concerts/fillmore-east-february-11-1969-late-show.html
Perhaps worth considering for proto-prog after all.
|
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 06:26
|
In fairness to ST, Maybe we have not petitioned PA with them enough....As for GD I think this needs to go to the panel of Admin again and possibly Max for decision. ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 06:33
|
Just for the record, I cannot claim to be an expert on Spooky Tooth, but I know I've very often heard them referred to as prog. Anyway, a search in the forum database yielded a number of general discussion (i.e. not formal suggestion), and the following suggestion thread - almost four years old: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=30899&KW=Spooky+Tooth&PID=2265101#2265101 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=30899&KW=Spooky+Tooth&PID=2265101#2265101 |
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 08:23
Chris, I'm not opposed to or in support of GD, just paying attention and seeing if I can learn something new, but having another PR/proto vote right after we just had one about 3 months ago is kind of pointless, they would still not make it. Feel free to contact M@x if you want, it could help. After discussing Hendrix for months I finally found he had been approved by M@x long ago, they were just waiting for someone who would do the research and present the solid argument for his inclusion. I spent a lot of time on it and you can read all my arguments in the Hendrix bio. As I have stated many times, I'm not a Hendrix fan boy, but I do love musicology and I like to see it done right. Because of the work I put into preparing his addition and anticipating any expected arguments, M@x thanked for the smoothest controversial artist addition yet P.S. For another example on how to get this done, check Mike and Cert's arguments in favor of Metallica, they did change people's minds, it can be done. Re Spooky Tooth, give me a couple days here and I will take them to the proto team for a vote. P.S. Re Dead, You could also PM various admins and have them visit this thread for further education or persuasions, but just having another vote without someone producing the defining arguments that help change people's minds would probably not change much. |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 09:40
|
^
True your handling off the Hendrix inclusion was exemplary!
 As for GD someone else will need to take on that role as I do not know them enough to wade in deep enough
Thanks for your move on Spooky Tooth  ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: earlyprog
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 11:52
|
^^Yeah, shows you can accomplish anything on this site just you put the effort into it (bear with me Easy Money, I will continue haunting you for that one ).
Anyway, I think GD will be an appropriate (though not immediately obvious) addition to proto-prog that shows the link between blues, R&B and folk and how it evolved into (psychedelic/)space rock, prog folk and heavy prog (typical mix of genres for proto-prog). But this doesn't show until '68 and especially '69 in GD's case.
I don't know them well enough to contribute further but I recommend someone with the sufficient knowledge carries on the message in these posts.
|
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 12:16
No problemo Dan, I take your ribbing in good fun. If you read between the lines I obviously had some emotional attachment to his addition. What may seem like personal enjoyment of his music was really something else, as my little sister once said, if I sense an injustice I am relentless, ha ha. I will admit though, after going back and listening to Ladyland, that is one hell of an album and beats the crap out of 'Dr Peppers' cutesy sachrine sweetness. Here's the deal guys, If you want to get a borderline artist on PA, DO THE WORK! For example: Check the Metallica threads for Cert's and Mike's thorough arguments. Checks Cert's Metallica reviews where he continues the argument. Check the Hendrix bio, check the countless threads where I tested the waters to see what people's arguments were against him so I could prepare for the big showdown at the PA corral. As I recall, someone made a very thorough blog/journal thread for JA that broke down very thoroughly album by album their contributions to the world of early prog. That thread is probably still around somewhere. If you really want to see GD or Spooky Tooth on PA, do what the rednecks in the south say, "Get er Done!!!" I will submit Tooth for a vote, but if you really want to see them on here, Get er done. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 12:24
|
I wish the music could speak for itself.
------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 12:35
It can, but you have to present it to people. I'm sorry, but the proto/PR team is not aware of all the music in recorded history. Find the music that will speak for itself and present it with some kind of knowledgable timeline with what else was happening in the world of prog. In many cases the music alone may not be too borderline to be convincing enough, that's where an ability to show how prog was developing and how this band contributed is important. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 12:58
I know. When it comes to controversial additions, there's often a good counter-argument for every argument (hopefully the more passionate person doesn't win through sheer persistence). Often the naysayers are not sufficiently familiar with the music or are thinking along narrow lines (and sometimes those who are persistent just don't understand the expectations). Of course one has to direct to the appropriate music and provide sufficient samples for evaluation, and one should try to provide sufficient information when suggesting something. PR/PP works differently from other categories, and you have criteria which should be met so I recognise that a case must be made for it. The music itself (the examples used for evaluation) should be compelling. I think when you have 40 pages of arguments and counter-arguments on whether a band should be included, then it's probably best not to include it (though it might be considerable later when PA's parameters have changed -- though those change after some additions). One can argue 'til one's blue in the face, but after (or before such consideration) providing a basic framework for why something should be included (keep it simple, else it gets too convoluted), it is the qualities of the music that one has directed people to (those who decide are familiar with) that are paramount. Discussion between the suggester and evaluator is sometimes warranted to pick each-other's brains -- figure it out if a difficult case.... EDIT: Every addition, no matter what category requires analysis based on the music available to one (which requires direction). A well-prepared suggestion is a good guide for the evaluators (where to start, what to expect, provides samples etc.) With some, it requires less thought to determine category and appropriateness (some are no-brainers) so it's really just wishful thinking that the music one directs people to can always speak for itself. There will always be disagreements since we all have different opinions and even disagreement about where we want to see the site go. Sometimes I'm very indecisive when it comes to suggestions so seek out more opinions. Personally, though I have no opinion on Grateful Dead, I'm of a more inclusive mindset (though I have my biases against more AOR/ Prog-lite bands coming in and would rather see more experimental and genre-bending ones that wouldn't necessarily be typically associated with Prog proper). Personally, if this were my site, I think I'd scrap the influence part of the equation as it's the music itself that is more important (can it be described as a form of progressive rock, or rock-related music in some cases, if not an established form of Progressive Rock) but that's not to say that your parameters are wrong -- just personal preference and that I think it would help broaden the database to include more bands/artists that were delving into, imo, interesting avenues of rock, or rocky music (many of which never became popular, but if they had, they might have been influential). It's easier now thanks to the internet to find out about obscure projects and sample interesting music. I think there's a lot out there that never received a wide release, but from a compositional standpoint could fit PR or PP -- some have little info available as they are obscure. Luckily for the Prog categories, we don't have to worry about influence -- if enough of the team agree that a sufficient amount of the music the team is familiar with fits the parameters of a "prog" category, it's accepted (unless deemed controversial in which case there are some different expectations, and of course a PR/PP band is more likely to be "controversial" -- so can understand tighter measures that help to justify the case, and help people to understand the significance). Actually, influence can always play a part, and maybe is important in considering many acts for Proto-Prog (for instance, not saying he should be here, but if Stockhausen were included due to his influence). ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 18:11
Conversely I'm a huge fan and was against adding Jimi, though I was very pleased with EasyMoney's addition and his argument. I think that speaks well of the integrity level around here. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: February 05 2010 at 19:46
|
I, on the other hand, am a Hendrix fan, wanted him here, and appreciated Easy Money's arguments. The addition of Hendrix was monumental, and I don't remember any backlash. Great job on that.
------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |