Everyone seems to have their own definition of prog

 

The powers that be within P A have slotted Mr. Plant into the Crossover Prog genre.

If the artist is here, he is here, that's it. Take it easy. Everybody can express his/her opinion on how prog or non-prog his albums are in reviews.

Why not discuss whether an artist is prog or not?

 

Although Robert Plant will always be inextricably linked with the biggest band in the history of rock music, Led Zeppelin, his solo career, which now spans more than 30 years, has been immensely varied and fascinating. Plant's musical loves and influences include Rock, Blues, West Coast Psychedelic Rock, Indian, and a deep love of North African, especially Arabic, music. ""Robert Plant's Jukebox"" traces the singer's ongoing quest of discovery by selecting some of the music that has informed and inspired one of the most remarkable and multi-faceted artist of his generation.

 

I think that it is these many influences that attributed to the votes from the Crossover team.  The rock, the blues, the psychedelic, and some world music flavors all mixed together. 

 

 

Actually, this is the place to discuss  it, not the reviews.  See reviews guidelines #5 from the Admin team

 

5 - Do not voice general opinions on matters such as whether a band/album/sub-genre should be included in the site, whether you agree with the star rating system, etc.. Such matters should be discussed in the forum. Keep the review pertinent to the specific album concerned. The reviews section is NOT the place for initiating or prolonging a debate.

Jim, I did not mean arguing about the artist's inclusion on PA. Reviewers can write how prog or non-prog the particular album is. 

Such matters should be discussed in the forum.

pretty definite there
 

When I consider the discussion in the neo prog team forum regarding Zazen, who were rejected by Crossover, I really do wonder.

Nonono you dummy, Eclectic.

 

If I may be frank, it is one of the worst additions to the site.

Led Zep are here as Prog Related, so not Prog anyway. I was against their inclusion but I understand why they are here.

But I have to say that working in a somewhat beleaguered sub-genre myself (though nowhere near Crossover), I would not second guess a team that has worked very hard to evaluate and add artists to the site.  I don't agree with every decision, but a team's decision is theirs and I support them.

I'll second this rant.   I used to argue that ALL rock & roll was "progressive" by definition, since it evolved from blues, jazz and other forms, incorporated increasingly modern/complex instrumentation, and continued to change. 

However, in the way that "prog" is defined on this site, I don't see anything that Plant has done as meeting the strict definition of the term.   He's played with a few progressive instrumentalists like John Paul Jones, and done some interesting rock music, but I believe he's still firmly planted in the blues.  

Wot the hell, throw the gates open!!  Humble Pie?  Why not, Clem Clemson recorded with Jon Anderson!

Cheap Trick?  Yeah, they used synth once or twice!  Sheesh!

Same here

Justin Bieber belongs here. 

I have about five of his albums, including his collaboration with Allison Kraus, and like them all.  I prefer his later work, which is where he does stretch out more than in earlier releases.  I voted "Not at all," but I intend to listen a little more closely next time.  I can see Prog Related right now with some reservations, but not Crossover.

 

No disrespect to the admins.  They know their stuff better than I do.  Maybe I have missed something in the music, or something in applying the definitions of categories.  One thing I remember from the description is that it is pointless to nit-pick over fine points of defining.  I agree with this, but sometimes we do need to dwell on fine points for greater clarity.  This may just be one of those times - certainly some of us here think so.

 

It was though a decision made by one of our specialist teams, and we must respect their right to make those decisions and acknowledge that they do so with integrity. I am sure the Xover team will wish to stand by their decision now.

 

I would be very resistant though to him now being moved to prog related. I cannot speak for the rest of the admin team (who are custodians of PR), but I do not think he would have been approved for prog related at the time.

 

If the admins wish to move Plant to related, and want us to discuss that, we will discuss it.  Until then, all this is pointless to me.

Like I said earlier, I very much enjoy his music.  Some of it is wonderful and different,  but it does not fit my definition of 'prog'  at all

I was mostly curious to hear why some people think he is prog

I wasn't really trying to start a movement  to have him ejected

Agreed. Also Jethro Tull is more "Eclectic" than folk, but I guess it would be a great deal of work for the site administrators to put up with all our opinions.

I know he was...I agree about Jarre. Anyway this is just a forum. I don't think anybody is really requesting movements, additions or deletions of artists. 

I don't think Mr Plant should be upset. Nobody is saying that his music is not good. Somebody says that it doesn't belong to a specific genre. I don't listen to prog only so even though I don't think he's prog I really like his blues and rock as I think most of us do.

Jim's already addressed this - reviews are not the place to express these views per site guidelines.

Fair enough, though I wouldn't shut these types of discussions down.  Just don't participate if you think it's pointless.

 

I find this a very confusing statement. This site is about progressive rock. If an artist doesn't fit one or the other they shouldn't be here. I hate to be so absoluteist about that point, I'm generally not, but clearly lines are drawn. We don't want the entire 70s here (well, maybe some of us do, but I'm certainly not in that category).

 

Of course, if I read the rest of your post correctly you seem ok with non prog rock bands being here, so perhaps that answers my own confusion about the Plant issue.

No, in its best it's like erotica and like masturbation in the worst cases.  

Iván

Don't misunderstand me, I love Neo Prog, I consider Pendragon and Fish Marillion two of my top ten bands even over Yes and ELP while  Magenta is a top 20..

As a fact I've been part of the Neo Team, but let's be honest, in the polls, the last 2 are always Tech Extreme Prog Metal and  Neo Prog.

For example in   http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=75226&PN=1&RN=3" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=75226&PN=1&RN=3  the last one is Tech Extreme Priog Metal with 27 votes followed by Neoi Prog with 17, this is sad, but common.

But the central point is that IMO the more we dilute Prog with mainstream, the less fans we will have, mnany Prog Related bands were added with the hope of pulling more people, but the result was inverse, the members protested and some left, but very few that came for a specific band stayed.

Prog has survived as a cult genre, and cult genres create real fanatics, we've seen genres like Disco enter massively and soon vanish, but Prog has survived because the fans always return to the roots.

Iván.

I don't want this thread to continue to be terribly off-topic but i have to add my opinion right here. 

I disagree about neo-prog representing true prog the best. True prog evolves and progresses past the barriers of the genre.

...and i don't feel neo-prog expresses this, i feel it's sound is too familiar and doesn't show innovation.

I'll stop there.  

I guess that makes sense.

Though i still think the bands are boring for many reasons.

 

The two examples of Neo Prog and Tech/Extreme are in effect exceptions that prove the rule, or at least polar opposites in the subset of music we call Prog. Their relative unpopularity can mean whatever you want it to mean so can be used to illustrate whatever you want it to illustrate, however no one could every accuse Tech/Ext with "melting with mainstream"

Iván.

Not in the beginning it wasn't. While it eschewed commercialism, it wasn't a cult genre by any means and it certainly was not totally independant of mainstream music. There is this strange mysticism that's grown-up around 70s Prog (mainly by people who weren't there) that simply isn't true.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: IMO Tech/Extr PM is clearly melted with mainstream Metal, Thrash and whatever metal, as a fact is a hybrid between Prog and Metal (At least in my opinion).

-------------
What?

But the loss of identity destroys in a relatively short term.

I said this many times and many disagree (what is OK), Punk vanished soon, today you don't see a pure Punk band, call it alternative, Indie, Emo or whatever, but it's no longer Punk and is miles away from the original genre. The day artists like Blondie and The Go Go's called themselves Punk, the genre had no true identity.

Disco Music was totally ephemerous, blended with all existing Pop and died lets say in six years, today doesn't exist, and it was a monster.

Prog remained more or less faithful to it's roots, and survived, despite it was ignored by mainstream radios and even attacked as pedantic and pompous, but if we keep adding every rock and Pop artist of the 70's as if it was Prog,we will soon don't know where Proig ends and Pop starts, we would have lost all the identity that kept us alive.

I heard many times "Let's add X band because it will bring more people"...That's a fallacy, I don¿t believe many people came here for Tori Amos to stay...For God's sake, her most popular album has 16 reviews.

People who come here knowing more or less what prog is, with knowledge of the basic bands, are the ones who stay.

I may be wrong, but that's my opinion.

Iván

 

Let me add a trivia, years ago in Italy on a musical TV channel prior to MTV, a guy was going to introduce Robert Plant who was guesting the show to present his new album. Well, the man said "Now the moment that we all were waiting for. Ladies and Gentleman: Peter Gabriel!!!" so Robert Plant laughed and said "Hey what did it happen to my hair?" 

Your comment makes sense to me Ivan about the people who stay being the ones who are already into Prog. I used to think that maybe with ZEPPELIN,SABBATH and MAIDEN being on here that it would possibly attract new fans to Prog if they happened upon this site but i now i think that's a long shot at best and it's certainly not a reason to add an artist because they might draw new fans to Prog.I'm sure artists like Amos and Bjork weren't added because of this but some would use that reasoning as an excuse for them being here.

I'm not sure if i'm "getting" this idea that Neo-Prog is the purest form of Prog.I always considered it to be the more commercial aspect of GENESIS and YES.And don't get me wrong i love MARILLION and a lot of Neo-Prog but to me Symphonic Prog is what i think of when i think of Prog in it's original form.And sure it took it's cues from Classical,Folk and on and on but when you mention Prog to a music fan i think GENESIS,KING CRIMSON,ELP and YES would be the bands that would come to their mind if they are familiar with the term Progressive Rock.

(Patronising so early in the discussion, how sweet ). Many people just don't like Metal so will never see a Prog connection - I don't see the Prog connection in many Jazz Rock/Fusion additions, then I don't know much about Jazz (or care for it very much) so I'm not going to make a big case about it - people who are into Jazz do see the connection and that's good enough for me, however I do know folk, metal, classical and pop so I can see the connection in Prog bands that infuse those elements into their music.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: I believe there are lots of Prog Metal bands in the three related genres, but when i listen some, don't find the Prog element, just metal bands with a lot of keys.

The same case can be made for many bands in non-Metal subgenres... in many of those they even lack the "lots of keys" element too.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Maybe not mainstream, but you can't tell where the metal ends, if you take Genesis, Shadow Circus, or Jethro Tull, you know where the Classical or Folk component ends and where the Prog Rock starts, so IMO most PM bands are hybrids.

That's the least convincing argument (and most contrived) I've ever read on this subject - To say that you can tell where the Classical or Folk component ends and where the Prog Rock starts on Genesis or Jethro Tull is not apparent on any Genesis or Tull track I've ever heard - that they hybridise those elements seamlessly is what defines them - the pastoral English folk of Genesis is so melded into the Rock element that it is impossible to "see the join".

 

All Prog bands are hybrids - that's the point.

 

Ivan...you have made the best posts in this thread.

 

Time to remove Robbie from PA !!!

Though I prefer all this energy to be directed to something more productive. Mr. Plant is here, people who included him are not idiots. Relax and take things easy.

Pardon? Which bit would people agree with? That you can tell  where the Classical or Folk component ends and where the Prog Rock starts in Genesis and Jethro Tull tracks? And while I'm in a questioning mood - when did I say anything sounded lame? When you said Tech/Extreme Prog Metal was clearly melted with mainstream Metal then the clearly part was clearly evident to you that Tech /Extreme Prog Metal was clearly melded with mainstream Metal - this wasn't an ambiguous statement and there is no ambiguity within it. It was there to illustrate that in your opinion dilution of the Prog with mainstream is unpopular here in the PA, but as it is not melded with mainstream metal at all you then contrived a statement where to saying not mainsteam, but you can't tell where the metal ends, which is surely an example of a well crafted fusion of any two styles of music - whether that is Prog and Metal or Prog and Raga or Prog and Folk or Folk and Metal or Jazz and Rock etc etc ad infinitum until the cows come home to roost and Gabriel once again dons the flower costume and therefore and thus it is perfectly illustrated by the fine melding of two disparate genres of music such as that perpetrated by the likes of Jethro Tull, Yes, Genesis and every other Progressive Rock (and Metal) band listed in the Progressive Archives (and many more that are not). Because if I am wrong (and many may agree with someone at some point or other about something on some point or other), and you really can tell where the Classical ends and the Prog begins then the genre of music called Prog is a sham that never did progress very far beyond Days Of Future Passed, and that would be a shame.

Can you give an example of this as I don't understand.