Stevie Wonder for Progressive Motown
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=69045
Printed Date: November 29 2024 at 17:53
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Stevie Wonder for Progressive Motown
Posted By: Alitare
Subject: Stevie Wonder for Progressive Motown
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 10:36
|
Stevie Wonder For Crossover, really. I already know for a fact no one on this site would ever support him being added, but I'll be damned if I don't see Songs in the Key of Life as a progressive "rock" album. For one, it's a double album, secondly, it's got two main concepts running through it (human suffering/political suffering), so it could be considered a concept album. Thirdly, it has an extreme amount of diversity, from soul ballads to jazz rock instrumentals, to synth rockers, to all sorts of stuff. Plus, who was more influential on music, in general, guys?! +double/conceptual album +extremely diverse +atypical song duration/format (from 2 minutes to 9 minutes, has instrumentals) +varied instrumentation, including the synth roll of Village Ghetto Land, to the jazzy rocking of contusion etc. It's not just your standard guitar, bass, drums, singer, ya dig? +Highly influential to god knows who. |
Replies:
Posted By: Adams Bolero
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 12:16
|
I propose that Marvin Gaye be added for his album ''Here, My Dear''. This is an essential album for any Progressive Motown collection ------------- ''Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be normal.'' - Albert Camus |
Posted By: lucas
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 15:21
|
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL ------------- "Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood) |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 15:35
 ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Adams Bolero wrote:Posted By: Moogtron III
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 16:19
|
Well, well, Stevie Wonder and Marvin Gaye, my two favorite soul artists. Proggish? Well, sometimes. Conceptual artists, looking beyond the 3 minute song. Prog, though, as stipulated on this site? I'm inclined to say "no".
Very interesting artists though for a lot of prog fans.
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 17:06
This. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: The Truth
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 17:36
Maybe we should move this to Just for Fun 
(Pre-recorded Laugh Track) ------------- http://blindpoetrecords.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow">  
|
Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 17:44
| what about Isaac Hayes for he's Shaft soundtrack he even use Mellotron and he plays Cheff in South Park, and was Scientolog which is a progressive religion. |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 18:17
------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 18:20
Not nearly as progressive as Appliantology. |
Posted By: DamoXt7942
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 18:23
http:///www.motownmusicarchives.com/ - http:///www.motownmusicarchives.com/  ------------- http://www.facebook.com/damoxt7942" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: UndercoverBoy
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 18:32
I don't know if you are serious or not, but
. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 18:39
|
No. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 18:49
He might be included had his name been Steviviano della Wondericco
I mean really...how can you NOT think that "Songs In the Key Of Life" does not include....jazz-fusion, symphonic, folk, rock and classical elements....
just sayin....(but it will never happen..) -------------   
|
Posted By: Alitare
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 07:06
Well aren't you just a stick in the mud. You know, that makes you a bad person. Not wanting Stevie Wonder in this place makes you a not good person. |
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 07:24
|
I hope this is a freaking joke - If Stevie W gets on here we will be laughed out of the prog convention society and our corpses will be hung up to dry as the masses throw rotten tomatoes at our emaciated frames... ------------- 
|
Posted By: Marty McFly
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 07:28
|
^ Bad thing that those who rule the site cannot do what they want because of public (internet) audience would oppose it :-D
------------- There's a point where "avant-garde" and "experimental" becomes "terrible" and "pointless," -Andyman1125 on Lulu  Even my |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 07:29
I can live with that. Crossover is Progressive Art Rock, is not the place for a R&B, soul, funk, jazz artist, even if they are "progressive" in those particular genres and "rocked" a bit - no matter how you describe him, he is not Progressive Rock. ------------- What? |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 07:32
... sorry to break it to you.. as a member of the 'prog convention society'...but it is that attitude.. not the adding of artists that is the reason why the site IS laughed at. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 07:52
|
Well, Stevie Wonder would be a more "serious" candidate for the PA than, let's say, Michael Jackson, the Four Tops or even Jaaaaaames Brown and Aretha Franklin. Yet, I won't champion him on this site. I don't really know his career and I doubt he kept the same direction from Innervisions to his more recent albums or songs. I will try to listen some of his records, but I have the feeling that Stevie Wonder was somewhat progressive some decades ago and for a short time (three, maybe four LPs?). Not the most relevant suggestion. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 07:57
Envy is a terrible thing. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:04
hah... you know what is worse.. seeing what was once a great site.. and still the home of many great people laughed at.. and regularly trashed. It isn't envy Ian.. would be easy to laugh it off and call it that. Envy? of what??? ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:15
|
my point... and how it pertains to discussion such as this. It isn't envy... people here have been living in the fishbowl here too long... where the site loses credibility... and when people and the dude I quoted earlier start moaning about loosing credibility for adding this artist or that. when I have heard ...bands are starting the notice the broken additions policies here.. the months to add... pingponging. The criticism I have heard is not coming from rival sites.. but those within the prog establishment. envy? hahhaha. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:21
|
That's a shame Micky. I beg to differ on that front without offering reams of evidence to support my opinion. ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:24
You are telling me members of Prog bands are laughing at this site? Seems like strange behaviiour. What is "broken additions poliicies"? I don't know about this. Look, I've been away a while, but my perception was that this was the leading Prog site. being the biggest and best will always attract criticism from a wider field.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:27
only passing on what I hear Chris... for whatever it's worth. People can get defensive and sure some keyboard warriors will take issue what I am saying and flame me hard.. or people can look long and hard at what can be done to improve the site. Lord knows I've put my time and effort into the site to still care how the site is seen and perceived. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:28
|
^ Let's see if Mr. Octopus is right eh? Ona side note.... ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:29
| You want evidence? OK. I am in touch with a number of musicians from bands that have been waiting MONTHS (when not years) to be added to the database - when their albums have been extensively reviewed and covered by other prog websites. I was talking about that with one of them a couple of days ago. No addition means no reviews, so much less exposure for people who, in most cases, have to hold a day job in order to be able to play and record their music. PA's mission should be to support those people, not to discuss whether to add Stevie Wonder, Tom Waits or whatever. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:31
broken it that bands have not been added.. whether forgotten... ping-ponged.. or just held off for so long because so few have the work of so many. When bands notice that... you.. the site.. has a very real problem. If there are not enough people to deal with the workload.. you either get more... or make it easier to get bands added. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:32
|
^ Don't you think that is a manpower issue Raff? I mean we all have lives outside PA and the eval/addition process is time consuming. So what's your solution? ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:32
May i ask why they have not been added? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:33
------------- What? |
Posted By: Alitare
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:35
As much as my feelings resonate with yours, I find that "improvement" is too subjective to ever be set in stone, and at the end of the day the majority is what determines what an "improvement" actually pertains to. I didn't make this suggestion thinking it had a solid chance. I just wanted to present the ideas, and see where it went. I feel that his early 1970's output is easily as complex, influential, and 'progressive' as 75% of the bands on this site, but many disagree. I think it could make the site more colorful to have such a controversial artist to the prog community on this site. So what if we are mocked? At least it would be interesting! |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:35
Trouble is that once a band is added it can't be removed. If a band could be added easier then it should be made available to remove if the band were later decided not to qualify for whatever reason. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:36
|
The Prog Establishment? What, did the Grand High Wizard of Prog pass a formal denunciation of PA? This is just silly. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:38
| Just for the record: it's PROGRESSION Magazine, not Progressor. Progressor is the 12-year-old website, based in Uzbekistan, with which both Olav and I collaborate. As far as I know, no one on ProgressoR has ever laughed at PA. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:44
------------- What? |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:49
my stance? No.. not my stance. Dean... I am only pointing out what I have heard. I sure don't have an axe to grind. Only a sense in that I saw this happening some years back when I saw collabs disappear... genre teams empty.. or with barely anyone at home. Figured it was only a matter of time before enough bands didn't get added for people to notice. Take it for what it's worth. As Raff noted.. people.. bands are noticing that bands fall through the cracks... take months to get added because people can not agree on a subgenre... or can't agree if they are prog or not. If the site doesn't think that is a problem... or wants to think there is no problem at all... then it is what it is. Not taking anything away from the people who work their asses off... but shouldn't the site be trying to make their job easier. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 08:57
problem is Ian... this site is a archival resource on prog.. why should any band be removed once they are added. No two people see prog the same way.. nor will agree on what is prog.. or not prog. Sure... how much credibility should any site have that can't stand by it's additions.. or can be swayed in it's additions because a few get upset. It's like I posted long ago.. if a SC believes a band is prog... most likely other will.. thus the band should be added. A archival site loses credibility not in what is added... but what is NOT added. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 09:01
|
^ I concur this point on a specific artist/s in general ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 09:02
------------- What? |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 09:17
|
You know, we've had this argument before, and I am all too aware that we're not going to win it. If you all want to prove that we are the bad guys for criticizing the site (for whatever reason), please be my guests. However, if we really wanted PA to fail, we would not come here and try to offer advice - the fact that we still do so, even after we were told that we have destroyed the site's atmosphere, means we still care for PA, in one way or the other. In any case, I'm out of here. |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 09:39
Hey.....you seem to be overlooking the fact that Stevie Wonder played keyboards on Jeff Beck's
'Blow by Blow'. That must make him as much of a progger as JB, surely !!
and, re: 'Songs in the Key of Life'.......if 'Contusion' is'nt one of the Jazz-rock classics of the 70s, then I'll eat 'Man with a Hat's hat.
I'm not advocating his inclusion on the 'Prog Archives' site, tho...... I know where most members are coming from.
'Scatterbrain' is a fine progressive track.
'Ebony & Ivory' isn't
 ------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 10:20
|
As always, let me tell a little story that might provide some perspective here.
'Round about 1972, my roommates and I were about as rabid progressive listeners as it could get. ELP, Yes, Arthur Brown, KC, etc. That's what was playing in the house. When those weren't on the stereo, well the guitar player was practicing Bach. When Bach, after time, was too tame, we dragged out Rite of Spring.
So one roomie shows up one day with Music of My Mind. We nearly laugh him out of the house. Stevie Wonder? Ya gotta be kidding. But no, he insists we listen, sez it ain't that Motown crap anymore. (Tangent, I have since come to appreciate that Motown crap, but that's another thread.) In any case, the album comes to grow on us. I've been a Stevie Wonder fan ever since. Said roomie later worked with Stevie extensively, doing synth programming for him.
Said roomie also showed up one day with an album by Chick Corea, Light As a Feather. We laughed at that one too, at first.
I'll not argue whether or not Stevie belongs here. Obviously, we can find pure jazz fusion on most of his albums. But hell, I can find pure psychedelic prog on a Joe Walsh album.
Whatever. Stevie, Elton. Realistically these were some of the most successful and influential musicians of the '70s, who, whether we'll admit it or not publically, were making some of the most 'progressive' music of the time. Note that I did not say 'progressive rock'.
------------- Can you tell me where we're headin'? Lincoln County Road or Armageddon. |
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 10:25
|
Micky, lighten up, this was never supposed to be a serious discussion in any stretch of the imagination. But we who care about this site enough will voice our opinions at the risk of being flamed. I will continue to post reviews here and haunt the sites forum as long as I care about the site. Flaming respective members here is not going to win any favours from anyone. We are entitled to our opinion. I likek what Dean said here that it is really impossible to add every suggestion, this would be simply not feasible and it will never happen. As a case inpoint Stevie W is an OUTLANDISH SUGGESTION - furthermore if a prog website were adding ridiculous suggestions as this, it would lose any credibility. And who are these so-called bands who are waiting months to get on here? Name one! -------------
|
Posted By: Alitare
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 10:31
Prove to me that Stevie Wonder is such an outlandish suggestion. What makes it so outlandish and crazy? What makes him less prog than Nine Inch Nails, Nightwish, Radiohead, etc? |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 10:38
 Stravinsky......ALWAYS a pleasure !!   'rabid progressive' ..... I like the sound of that !  ------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 10:56
He's not from a 'strictly progressive' background. The others are.
Ask yourself, tho .......how many reviews of his albums could/would be 'positive', on Prog Archives?
While he's an excellent musician, he's still 'just a dabbler' in the prog department.
------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 11:00
-------------
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 11:02
Really? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 11:09
| Truly Madly deeply |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 11:14
|
Put it this way..........I've never heard Nine Inch Nails do a Motown song.
So.....as far as I believe, then Yes.  ------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 11:18
So let me understand this. Because NIN, Radiohead and who was it? Nightwish? Din't have a motown background it means they have a progressive background? So every artist is progressive who doesn't have a motown background.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 11:21
------------- What? |
Posted By: Alitare
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 11:32
Fundamentally, I can accept any movement, anywhere, for any band. Rush for RIO/avante? Sure thing! I feel that, based on Crossover's ideal, and the substance of Radiohead's work (mainly for OK Computer/Kid A/Amnesiac), they definitely belong there. NIN, not as much, but still, the fusion between ambient and rock is fairly progressive in my feelings, so I see the relevance of both. But, Eno has been doing that sort of thing since before Before and After Science. Stevie Wonder was fusing tons of styles together, some with motown, and he was doing all sorts of sonic exploration (albeit hardly at the same capacity as sir Eno) at the same time as he was. |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 12:01
Amen brother!!!!!!!
-------------
|
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 12:51
That's not what I said. I was referring to the specific bands in question.
Listen up !!  ------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: Alitare
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 13:12
But his backgrounds were as much motown as Genesis' backgrounds were pop. Besides, there's as much motown background there as there is jazz, rock, blues, symphonic, classical (yes, classical, especially on the phrasing and composition for songs like Village Ghetto Land), and more. Speaking of the folks who say motown is not rock, and thus, barred form inclusion, I ask: What makes motown closer to rock than ambient? We do have progressive electronic, and electronic music seems farther away from rock than motown does. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 13:17
You seem very confused about what you wrote. Seems clear to me . You clearly say that Stevie Wonder doesnt have a prog background but Radiohead and NIN does. I challenge that fact. I'm not that bothered really....I'll just presume its your opinion. No worries!
 ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 13:47
Me neither ! No worries !  ------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 14:05
------------- What? |
Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 14:34
| Jean-Luc Ponty covered one of his songs |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 14:36
I have not looked...but how many "dabblers" do we have here in the PA, artists wise? I mean one rock/metal album from a band with keyboards and 2-3 songs longer than 10min and they get included. I enjoy Mind Key for example, they are here with 2 albums...prog metal....Whatever. But they are Italian...hmm
Stevie Wonder has what maybe 25 albums, albeit some might be compilation and live recordings.....but well over half are studio recordings. And I agree not all are prog....But I would say a lot have prog characteristics as already mentioned......which other artists also have which are included here in the PA.
So if there is a number of albums needed by an artist to be included lets get that out.......Because seems like some are saying that is an issue......I seriously doubt SW is a dabbler in prog...certainly not 100%..but who is??
I don't expect Mr Wonder to be added to the PA.....it'll never happen, because most have obviously not listened to his works and only know the "pop" stuff with that Beatles guy.
Why do you think there are a few here including myself who post album art in Now Listening.. by Parliament, Funkadelic, Bootsy Collins, Earth Wind & Fire and Robert Johnson, Muddy Waters....because its progressive music.
R&B differs from Rock only that R&B added soul/blues.......But I will always ask you....where did Rock originate from???
James Brown, Stevie Wonder, Muddy Waters, Robert Johnson, Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis.....There are so many artists you talk to now adays that will mention one of these or a related artist as some influence or what they might have grew up listening to.
Cheers everyone!!
 -------------
|
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: July 10 2010 at 15:00
| One of the true geniuses of modern music but prog? No. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 02:04
|
I just wanted to share this excellent vid that the Pessimist posted in the Stevie Wonder Appreciation thread: ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 02:23
|
^ Was trying to make out Stevie's keys...can't pick it up amongst the other musicians' output. He's certainly keeping kinda busy though ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 02:39
| It will never happen, regardless there's more prog in Innervisions and Songs in the key of life than Radiohead, Muse or APP and plenty other artists in established categories. It may be called motown or R&B, but seriously what's not ROCK about All Day Sucker? It would walk into a Zappa album. What's not jazz fusion about Contusion? If you have heard these albums and also Talking Book and Fulfillingness's First Finale and still say he doesn't belong here, I respect your opinion. But I am pretty sure I Just Called to Say I Love You or Part Time Lover are bigger considerations for laughing his case away. Yet somehow, Mama or I can't Dance don't seem to be considerations for keeping out Genesis. Yes, Genesis are established and influential prog masters, I know that's why they are here. But how about acknowledging that there was a lot of progressive stuff going around in general in the 70s and it would not hurt the website to have them here at all. |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 02:48
And thanks for posting that link here, Logan...great performance.
|
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 02:51
Well said! It strikes me as bizarre that people sl*g off and dismiss 1970s innovators while sheepishly treating every trendhopping modern busybody with the red carpet treatment. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 02:55
------------- What? |
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 02:57
I mean... radiohead and muse? Whither progress!? |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 03:05
------------- What? |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 03:25
I am sorry I cannot share your enthusiasm for such over generalizing . My point was more that 70s music seems to be judged against the best prog rock bands of the time and deemed not prog enough whereas the same standards are not applied to modern bands (by doing which I doubt much of neo prog or prog metal would qualify at all, actually practically nothing but the Avant/RIO scene). If the idea is to be inclusive, then keeping folks who made progressive music in the 70s and then sold out in the 80s out of the umbrella seems to me to be favouring image over substance. I cannot prove it because, barring some careless comments (re Scorpions debate), people don't say it in so many words but then if there are some reasons to do purely with the music for applying stricter standards for 70s bands, I don't know what they are. I see prog more as a style of music and an approach to composition than as a flattering adjective with shifting goalposts depending on the band and era. |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 03:45
Sure, his albums contain some progressive music, and Contusion would get a positive review from anyone on the Prog Archives review team, but seeing as the next track on the album is 'Sir Duke', how positive would the review for that be? The name of the site is Prog Archives. It's described as 'your ultimate prog rock resource'.
I'm not sl*gging off Stevie Wonder at all. I recognize his contribution to modern music. I just don't think his progressive rock output is enough to justify inclusion to a site dedicated to progressive rock.
------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 03:49
But a lot of prog is not ROCK at all, this is another issue that's swept under the carpet. What's so ROCK about that Harmonium album in the top 100 (sorry I do know what it's called, can't spell it right now )? What's so ROCK about Heresie? What's ROCK about Shakti? What's ROCK about Novella? Swaddling Songs? There are many, many examples of this. I actually think one of the defining features of 70s prog (and in contradistinction with neo prog and prog metal) is that it frequently slots in a grey area that's neither rock, nor jazz, nor classical. Just some completely new monster which, for want of a better word, is called prog.  |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 04:30
Not that it is in any way relevant, but the origins/roots of progressive rock, and of those bands and albums you mention, was rock. Of course there are exceptions, for example were folk bands became folk-rock bands became progressive folk-rock bands, but that does not mean that all exceptions are valid.
------------- What? |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 04:37
The origins and possibly the inspiration for these bands to make music may have been rock but in substance it veers a long way from rock. Those were just a few cases off the cuff, there are many many prog albums from the era that have precious little relation to rock. Even among the big bands, I would say only Yes and Jethro Tull consistently stayed close to rock territory. The rest, especially King Crimson, made large departures from rock. |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 04:52
This is the crux of the biscuit.......everyone's got their own idea of what 'progressive rock' means....that's why I posted a thread, trying to find out what a 'generally-accepted' definition actually WAS. (Don't ask me...I STILL don't know !!). I guess the best people to ask is the site owners and Admins. It's THEIR site. Presumably, they set up the site to suit THEIR idea of what 'progressive rock' means to THEM.
SO LET'S ASK THEM : SITE OWNERS AND ADMINS...WHAT DOES THE TERM 'PROGRESSIVE ROCK' MEAN , TO YOU ?
 ------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 05:00
|
Actually, if the definition of what progressive rock is should derive from the defining albums of 69/70/71 thereabouts, then we get a very clear picture of what it is....and it starts to become a very narrow zone concentrated almost completely in the Avant/RIO territory after the late 70s. There is a sea change in compositional approach from thereon which sounds gradual when heard in bands who did make prog rock to begin with but over time and with new bands, seems to be a different kind of music altogether. But it seems prog rock is defined here as both what is prog rock in the above mentioned vein and 'progressive' bands. This is what makes prog rock hard to define and makes it possible for everyone to have their own idea of what is prog , if there had been any serious attempt made to define it as style of music, it wouldn't be so confusing. I guess Cert1fied was absolutely right when he said somewhere else that Rush may have been at the root of the confusion in that their style bears passing resemblances to the prog bands before them but in substance is an entirely different approach. And because Rush are considered prog, everything that draws from Rush gets called prog too. All this is my opinion though. As you say, it is for those who run the site to decide what should be included in THEIR prog database. But I have no qualms about saying that I don't get a clear picture from that about what is prog at all. |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 05:12
Brighton
------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 05:17
Yes, reactions of outrage and amusement at his name seem to suggest strongly that these people never got beyond Ebony & Ivory (or, alternatively, that boring duet with Diana Ross). It is a reasonable stance to say Wonder cannot be added to PA but I don't see how people who have actually heard his classic 70s albums would express so much outrage at the mere suggestion of his name because they would surely hear the proggy quality of his work at that time (regardless of whether or not that makes a fit case for Crossover). |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 05:18
How is Rush's approach any different to......say........70s Genesis ? It's still stories with music, lightshow time-changes, etc.
------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 05:30
( http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=68275&PID=3689302#3689302 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=68275&PID=3689302#3689302 )------------- What? |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 05:31
So let's settle this question. Is prog just about epics and time signature changes? If that is the case, why is Sabotage not a heavy prog or prog metal album, it also has songs with different sections. As does Sabbath Bloody Sabbath for that matter. Why are Iron Maiden and Metallica then in prog related instead of prog metal? How many people who write off Metallica for Nothing Else Matters and Frantic have actually heard Call of Ktulu or Orion PROPERLY? ABBA's Intermezzo No.1 is a lot more 'dizzy' structurally than Within Temptation/Nightwish/Epica (all of these are on the site). There is a lot of wiffly-waffly going on with regard to some bands and artists who don't seem to have much snob value, for whatever reason, in prog circles which makes some inclusions and exclusions look arbitrary. It is not my site, so I can live with that. But I can never say that it aligns with my understanding of prog at all. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 05:32
They don't hold any key to enlightenment. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 05:58
Never-the-less, this is undoubtedly true. ------------- What? |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 05:59
This is exactly where I am coming from. And it is sort of confusing that modern bands get to be not so progressive to be considered prog than artists like these. |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 06:00
Nearlye besmirched my britches, laughing so muche !!!!
Nice one !!!------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 06:04
What the hell is so progressive about Radiohead's background, they were grunge/alternative when they started out. And Nightwish are a metal band with keys, so progressive indeed, even Rainbow did it only in 1976. But it's hard to explain to progheads who don't come from a metal background that prog metal is a metal genre, not a prog genre, there's a big difference. Prog metal is simply metal that's proggier than typical metal. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 06:07
Funny, I thought I was answering to a post t5hat doesn't seem to be thre now.......I'll have to go and do an edit. Done it...doesn't seem so random now.
 |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 06:11
The addition of artists and bands into the archive is not under the direct control of the Admin Team, but of the subgenre teams. The teams are autonomous and operate without interference from the Admins using their own knowledge, judgement and understanding of the subgenre descriptions. The two non-Prog categories of Proto Prog and Prog Related fall under the jurisdiction of the Admin Team who work as the subgenre team for those categories. Since PP and PR are not Progressive Rock per sey, the team works differently to other teams in that we do not go actively looking for artist to add, but only evaluate those artists proposed to us (via PM only) by a member of Special Collaborator rank, who will then be expected to handle the addition once approved.
Noting that some controversial additions were causing disquiet and controversy among the membership, the Admin team drew up a set of rules/guidelines regarding controversial artists to help alleviate this, while still leaving the decision to add said artists under the complete control of the subgenre team in question. The gist of these rules is as follows:
|
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 06:18
How is Rush's approach any different to......say........70s Genesis ? It's still stories with music, lightshow time-changes, etc.
(Just curious, that's all)
------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 06:21
Er...because Genesis is not just about those things? Because they take a theme and explore it inside out, an approach of which there's no evidence in Rush's music. |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 06:30
I voted no. I'm a Stevie Wonder fan, I have his 70s albums and have seen him live. His classic albums may be "progressive" for the time but I don't hear anything prog in them. Give us an example of something proggy on "Innervisions". |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 06:41
Living for the City, Visions and Too High. Complex chord progressions in all three, which is in general a feature of his classic output. Even Higher Ground, but I would particularly pick those three. It's not Genesis, but I never claimed it is. It is certainly a lot more proggy than Alan Parsons Project or Nightwish, so on and so forth. |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 06:53
Cygnus X-1 had no theme?
------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 06:56
I meant musical themes, not lyrical themes. That should have been clear from that I mentioned "exploring inside out". If it wasn't, then that's what I implied anyway...Cygnus X-1 is basically hard rock/heavy metal sections joined together with some (for the time) technical guitar. That defines Rush's style in general. |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 07:13
I think Rush's sound comes from the fact that they're a 3 piece. It's hard to play Bass and Keyboards at the same time, live, (maybe on the quiet bits) so what more can u expect from a 3 piece with a rock background than hard-rock, heavy-rock sections.
Which specific musical themes do you mean?
------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 07:19
And yet Red (the track) is unmistakably progressive despite that, save one cello section, it relies on guitar, bass and drums. That is because Fripp uses the heavy guitar in a manner akin to a classical composer rather than to write hard rock/heavy metal riffs. This again is a feature of the songwriting in prog at that time, they broke out of rock cliches.
It can be seen in Genesis's songs that at their heart is a motif and that the song has evolved from exploring the motif in several different ways. I find it much harder to pin it down with Genesis and don't have the theoretical acumen to articulate it even if I can but a more lucid example of this is Close to the Edge. It is simply an exploration of a pop verse-chorus in several different contexts. Rush's approach to song construction is not particularly different from Sabbath, they are just more 'technical' and 'sophisticated'. The question that I never got a satisfactory answer for in debates here is whether that is actually a sufficient test to call a band prog. If so, why aren't Megadeth here...yes, it's straight up metal in essence, but it's also very technical and sophisticated. P.S: I am not questioning Wonder's exclusion in this discussion by the way. I understand the process of accepting/rejecting bands clearly and respect that it's over. This is just a discussion out of my interest in understanding music better. |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 07:35
Dunno......I've never really seen a motif running thru any of Genesis's albums (except 'the Lamb Lies Down').......I've always just regarded it as music.
Curious, tho.......what's the motif of Close to the Edge ?
------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |