Joe Walsh - Prog or not?!
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: General Music Discussions
Forum Description: Discuss and create polls about all types of music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=7020
Printed Date: November 30 2024 at 04:44
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Joe Walsh - Prog or not?!
Posted By: Progger
Subject: Joe Walsh - Prog or not?!
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 14:55
Not a big fan of 'The Eagles' but I like Joe Walsh. His early albums like 'Barnstorm', 'The Smoker You Get....' & 'So What' have some wonderful proggy moments for me
|
Replies:
Posted By: Fantômas
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 14:59
I like The Eagles... I like his career... 
------------- And above all, is punk 
|
Posted By: DallasBryan
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 15:46
|
I think Joe Walsh's So What album is his classic
over Smoker ! |
Posted By: MorgothSunshine
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 15:52
|
He is great, i love his work with James Gang, great music...but absolutely not prog! ------------- For every truth even the contrary is true... 
|
Posted By: Moogtron III
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 16:14
|
Original and fast guitarplayer. He could play the guitarsolo on And Your Bird Can Sing (Beatles). He heard later that George Harrison couldn't play it himself. It was just mixed that way on the Beatles-album (was it Revolver?). But people would say: You know about Joe Walsh? He can play And Your Bird Can Sing! The James Gang is great, I would think The Bomber is very very close to prog... If not 100% prog. And albums like Barnstorm... County Fair is great stuff. To quote a cliche word on the forum: underrated artist. |
Posted By: bluetailfly
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 17:40
|
Joe's had his moments, but he's about as far from prog as Ted Nugent. ------------- "The red polygon's only desire / is to get to the blue triangle." |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 18:28
|
Definitely not prog. He's not nearly pretensious enough. Now Don Henley on the other hand... HE'S got the ego for it! |
Posted By: Man With Hat
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 18:56
|
Nope. Good stuff, great guitar player, but not prog. ------------- Dig me...But don't...Bury me I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect. |
Posted By: Intruder
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 19:48
|
I'm starting to wonder how we define "prog"....I've never thought Styx, Rush and Kansas were very progressive, actually just the opposite - what the music world has dubbed "arena rock". From what I've heard, Joe Walsh would fit right in with the arena rock crowd.....although definitely in the upper tier. The first two James Gang LPs and the Barnstorm trio LP Joe Walsh put together after the James Gang split are excellent rock albums.....just not very progressive beyond some extended solos....is THAT what defines prog? ------------- I like to feel the suspense when you're certain you know I am there..... |
Posted By: dropForge
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 19:49
| Joe's awesome. I wouldn't say he's prog, but he's skipped across that meadow a few times. He had no aversion to using keyboards or synthbass in his music, either. The instrumental "Theme From Boat Weirdos" from But Seriously Folks is killer. Then again, so is that whole album. The last solo album he did, Songs For A Dying Planet, is also very good. And his style of guitar-playing is instantly recognizable. I also dig the dude's voice! |
Posted By: Ankaret
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 21:15
|
He's really great, I love James Gang songs like Collage and Ashes The Rain and I. He's a great musician. ------------- Links to musical projects coming soon!!! |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 23:28
The biggest problem with progressive rock is that it's not really an objective genre. Blues is blues, jazz is jazz, pop is pop... the word 'progressive' is misleading. It creates the mindstate that something is somehow better than other styles of the same medium. Robert Fripp very often publicly denounces the day he ever coined the term. Because there is no clear description, people spend decades trying to decide whether a band is progressive, even when that band spends the majority of their tenure unaware of the prog underground in the first place. Oh, Kansas and Styx put the 'Er...' in progressivE Rock. Rush is decent though. |
Intruder wrote:Posted By: marktheshark
Date Posted: June 04 2005 at 23:57
I agree. Look at the constant debate going in this forum about whether The Beatles were prog. If you want to take the word progressive literally, you could say they were when you look at the difference between Love Me Do and Strawberry Fields. They did literally progress. I think the same thing applies to Rush. They started off as a simple hard rock trio and gradually moved right into much more complex pieces. |