Grateful Dead for psych/space rock
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=90155
Printed Date: February 22 2025 at 10:04
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Grateful Dead for psych/space rock
Posted By: Prog_Traveller
Subject: Grateful Dead for psych/space rock
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 13:48
|
OK. I'll probably get poo pooed by some for suggesting this but the fact is the Dead were very psychedelic and had a lot of spacey segments and improvs in their music especially their live shows. Then there's "Terripin Station" which is is more prog than what some prog bands were doing in the late seventies. I'm sure some on here will agree with me that they should be included somewhere on this site. If not psych/space then maybe crossover prog or prog related or even proto prog. Hey if the Beatles, Who, Doors, Jefferson Airplane, Jimi Hendrix and Deep Purple can be on here then why not the Grateful Dead. I think most are familiar enough with them that I don't need to provide any youtube videos or whatever but if anyone else wants to please don't hesitate to do so(my youtube links haven't been working anyway). |
Replies:
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 13:54
|
I certainly will not "poo poo' you, but without even doing a search, I can say with confidence that they have been suggested on more than one occasion. My opinion, for what it is worth, is that they were instrumental in that West American hippy culture of the time, but never ever regarded as a progressive rock band. ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: Andy Webb
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 13:57
------------- http://ow.ly/8ymqg" rel="nofollow">  
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 13:59
Quite a few then! ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: Andy Webb
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 14:00
|
Yea, it's not a new subject. It's never had support before, so I can't imagine why it would now. ------------- http://ow.ly/8ymqg" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 14:12
|
Grateful Dead have been rejected by all the appropriate full teams. They have also been suggested, considered and rejected for prog-related. In short: This is a dead horse. Have some mercy and stop whipping it ;-)
------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: Prog_Traveller
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 15:19
And the Jefferson Airplane, The Who and Jim Hendrix have?  There are plenty of bands and artists on here(Tori AMos anyone?)who are not exactly prog but are either experimental(as are the Dead)who are at least prog related and let's not forget that the Grateful Dead put out at least one very proggy album in Terrapin Station(the title track is pure prog imo and many others think so too; it sounds like an outtake from a PF or early Alan Parson's Project album for cyring out loud). Btw, I wasn't aware of all the other threads in regards to this topic but I don't regret and stand by my opinion that they should be included in either prog related, proto prog or psych/space. If my suggestion falls dead like all the others than so be it. I can live with that. |
lazland wrote:Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 15:22
|
Previous suggestions have led to some pretty bloody battles with many casualties taken on both sides of the aisle. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Prog_Traveller
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 15:25
|
Well I am only now starting to warm up to the GD. I've never been much of a fan and I don't even consider them a full blown prog band but neither are many other bands on this site which is my point. I just feel they are just as qualified as some of the others on here. That's all. If they don't get voted in then it can be no more than a political decision from a a few elite members on here. The higher ups rule the land and they probably won't agree or allow it but like I said it's political(bloody or not). |
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 15:36
|
Personally, I'm not familiar enough with The Dead to provide a true opinion. Using the unusable argument that since Phish are here in Prog Related and Umphrey's McGee are here in Crossover Prog, I would think that there is a legitimate case for The Dead in at least Proto Prog or Prog-related. That being said, I can understand the "they're psychedelic but not prog psychedelic". In regards to criticizing the "higher ups", the band went through the process and the Admins decided that in their collective opinions the Dead did not meet the criteria that they felt was necessary to add them to the site. Agree or disagree their decision should be respected for what it is. Now, their decision to exclude Judas Priest on the other hand... -------------
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 16:03
------------- What? |
Posted By: Einsetumadur
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 16:08
|
By far more important and instrumental in defining progressive rock were The Byrds. But that's a different story - they've been rejected manifold times as well. :)
------------- All in all each man in all men |
Posted By: Prog_Traveller
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 17:57
|
[/QUOTE]Nothing political about that.[/QUOTE] It is when you have TOri Amos, Jefferson Airplane, The Doors and the Who. That said, I do respect the collaborators and higher ups opinion and decisions. |
Posted By: AEProgman
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 18:22
|
I followed them at one time for a couple of years, mainly after I heard Terrapin Station (as mentioned above) as the title track suite was very good and used some symphony (I believe) in production, as a lot of bands did back then. Also, From the Mars Hotel, Unbroken Chain had some psych moments in the instrumental part. There are a few albums by a combo of artists who called themselves "Jazz is Dead" which did some very lively instrumentals in a Jazzy/Rock style of all Grateful Dead songs. Quite good, I did not see them listed anywhere.
I understand and It does not bother me that they are not listed here, but it does not mean you can't have a thread about them...although some anti dead heads may drop by..  ------------- 
|
Posted By: yam yam
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 20:00
I'm assuming you are using the 'Insert Movie' feature of the full reply editor (8th icon from the left on the top row - looks a bit like a ladder). This sometimes plays up for me too - the link just won't paste into the 'YouTube File Name' box for some reason...but you can always add Youtube videos manually. To do this just paste [TUBE] at the point in your post where you want the video to appear, followed immediately by the 11-digit code of the particular video (ie, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CO5eg7TBmy8" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CO5eg7TBmy8 you would just need CO5eg7TBmy8) - then follow that with another [TUBE], but in this case add a forward slash between the first square bracket and the letter 'T' of the word [TUBE] (I can't actually enter it here exactly as it should appear, or it will try to interpret everything I have written since the first [TUBE] as the instruction and code for a video, and heaven knows what would actually end up in the post! A quick way of doing it manually is to use the 'Insert Movie' feature of the full reply editor, but not to paste anything in the 'YouTube File Name' box - just hit OK straight away, and you'll get your two sets of brackets instantly. Now you just need to pop the 11-digit code in between them, and hey presto, you're done!! That method never fails for me.
 |
Posted By: javier0889
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 22:05
|
If Phish is allowed here, I can't see why the Dead aren't. Hairy men with glasses who play ridiculously strange riffs is the definition of prog. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/javier0889 |
Posted By: Sheavy
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 23:30
|
i laughed. ^ ------------- 
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: October 18 2012 at 00:46
|
the best category for the Grateful Dead would be Protoprog-- the question is not "if Airplane and Phish are here why not the Dead?" but rather "Did the Dead progress rock in a significant way?". It's a matter of interpretation, and a higher bar. |
Posted By: javier0889
Date Posted: October 18 2012 at 07:31
|
Well if we only take studio albums, the Dead may seem a good, but not particularly groundbreaking, folk rock band. But the real magic was found in live shows. I think the Dead changed the notion of live shows in all senses. We can say that improvs were a big thing in the 70's but I'm pretty sure nobody ever did it like them. Still, in their early records, they used a lot of experimental elements. The way they recorded their albums defied normal conceptions about production, exploiting any element they could in the way they wanted to. Plus Jerry Garcia is a badass, Nuff said. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/javier0889 |
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: October 18 2012 at 08:06
|
Oh not these old geysers again! Ok one good album American Beauty ( I have it) and tinges of prog - but nothing worth adding them here. ------------- 
|
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: October 18 2012 at 08:08
 -------------
|
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: October 18 2012 at 08:18
-------------
|
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: October 18 2012 at 13:21
IF the Dead are added under a prog sub-genre, then Phish NEEDS to be moved from Prog-Related to an actual Prog sub-genre.
 Actually, no matter what, Phish NEEDS to be moved from Prog-Related to an actual Prog sub-genre. They're 100x times proggier than The Grateful Dead.------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm 
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: October 18 2012 at 13:46
|
Since this thread didn't die, might as well add a related issue to it that might interest some of the people discussing. ------------- 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: October 18 2012 at 17:49
|
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: October 19 2012 at 05:05
Worth pursuing further? -------------
|
Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: October 19 2012 at 06:34
As a sure fire cure for insomnia, sure!
Grateful Dead suggested again? I remember the last time: 
I for one am not clearing up the garden again! ------------- 
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012 |
Posted By: octopus-4
Date Posted: October 19 2012 at 08:14
|
I think they're considered "west coast psych" by all the literature. That genre is psychedelic but not prog. I don't think that proto-prog for them would be a scandal. I don't know what to think of Phish, honestly. However things like if "a" is there than "b" should, have never worked here. I often insist about Vangelis deserving to be in a full prog category. ------------- I stand with Roger Waters, I stand with Joan Baez, I stand with Victor Jara, I stand with Woody Guthrie. Music is revolution |
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: October 19 2012 at 13:02
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=74363&KW=Mickey+Hart&PID=3994712#3994712" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=74363&KW=Mickey+Hart&PID=3994712#3994712
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: October 19 2012 at 20:49
|
Posted By: Adams Bolero
Date Posted: October 19 2012 at 22:31
|
The 23 minute psychedelic masterpiece that is Dark Star should be enough to justify their inclusion here. I can clearly hear the influence of the Grateful Dead in prog bands like Agitation Free. ------------- ''Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be normal.'' - Albert Camus |
Posted By: javier0889
Date Posted: October 20 2012 at 00:05
I think this is part of the problem. Dark Star was in fact a 2 min b side that transformed into this larger-than-life thing only live. Tons of bands did that sort of thing live in the 70s and they aren't prog. I think the prog aspect of GD was more present in their live gigs. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/javier0889 |
Posted By: ChickenNugget
Date Posted: January 24 2013 at 15:33
|
Forget about the Dead being Prog rock, I'm a massive Deadhead and I would not think for a second that they are, BUT what I find absolutely sickening is that these guys are not even listed under Psychedelic / space rock. Oh really? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NtvoM6Sh_Q http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d55FciHtM9w http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgXO4mVTa5g http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72iVSo6iXz8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wz4W4YThKOc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvRKsyAF-h8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJIS97uuSWY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuR5IEfbJcI The requirements should not have to deal only with Studio albums. Live Dead is exceeds all requirements and Anthem of the Sun as well. What blows my mind is that there is not ONE SINGLE MENTION of The Dead on this whole entire website. Kinda hard to listen to the above examples and not use the words psychedelic or space. The above examples don't even scratch the surface either!!! I don't get it... "Grateful Dead were an American http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_band" rel="nofollow - rock band formed in 1965 in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Alto,_California" rel="nofollow - Palo Alto, California . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grateful_Dead#cite_note-1" rel="nofollow - [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grateful_Dead#cite_note-musicbox-2" rel="nofollow - [2] The band was known for its unique and eclectic style, which fused elements of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_music" rel="nofollow - rock , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folk_music" rel="nofollow - folk , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluegrass_music" rel="nofollow - bluegrass , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blues" rel="nofollow - blues , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reggae" rel="nofollow - reggae , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Country_music" rel="nofollow - country , improvisational http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazz" rel="nofollow - jazz , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychedelic_rock" rel="nofollow - psychedelia , and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_rock" rel="nofollow - space rock , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grateful_Dead#cite_note-3" rel="nofollow - [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grateful_Dead#cite_note-4" rel="nofollow - [4] and for live performances of long http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_improvisation" rel="nofollow - musical improvisation . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grateful_Dead#cite_note-encyclobrit1-5" rel="nofollow - [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grateful_Dead#cite_note-rockhallgd1-6" rel="nofollow - [6] "Their music," writes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenny_Kaye" rel="nofollow - Lenny Kaye , "touches on ground that most other groups don't even know exists." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grateful_Dead#cite_note-livedeadrs1-7" rel="nofollow - [7] These various influences were distilled into a diverse and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychedelic" rel="nofollow - psychedelic whole that made the Grateful Dead "the pioneering Godfathers of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jam_band" rel="nofollow - jam band world." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grateful_Dead#cite_note-8" rel="nofollow - [8] "Often (both in performance and on recording) the Dead left room for exploratory, spacey soundscapes." "purveyors of freely improvised space music," -- http://www.blender.com/guide/articles.aspx?id=932" rel="nofollow - Blender Magazine, May 2003 ""Dark Star," both in its title and in its structure (designed to incorporate improvisational exploration), is the perfect example of the kind of "space music" that the Dead are famous for. This is THE band that helped pioneer this genre in the U.S. Put em on the f**kin' list. |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: January 24 2013 at 21:15
|
^ I have argued both for and against the inclusion of the Dead, but remember our Space/Psych section is for progressive S/P, not just any. If you don't believe the Grateful Dead are progressive (as you stated up front) you can't logically request their inclusion on PA. IMO the best place for the Dead would be Protoprog. |
Posted By: Sumdeus
Date Posted: January 24 2013 at 21:24
|
they have studio songs that are definitely progressive such as Terrapin Station... I do agree that they fit best in protoprog, or maybe prog related. either way they definitely deserve mention somewhere considering some other bands that have their own pages on the site.. edit:posted before i read the whole thread and now before anyone else responds i would like to say yes i understand this post is literally what the other Dead heads have already stated... ------------- http://sumdeus.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - Sumdeus - surreal space/psych/prog journeys |
Posted By: Eria Tarka
Date Posted: January 24 2013 at 21:28
| I think they would fit great in Proto. |
Posted By: DamoXt7942
Date Posted: January 24 2013 at 21:32
|
Sadly they've been rejected again and again even for Prog-Related. "Anthem Of The Sun" and "Terrapin Station" are the most progressive album of all their creations but I have no idea to add them. ------------- http://www.facebook.com/damoxt7942" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 24 2013 at 22:05
Not a fan of GD but I'm with you David, Greatful Dead and the Bonzo Dog Doh Dah Band should be here in PROTO Iván ------------- 
|
Posted By: octopus-4
Date Posted: January 25 2013 at 01:19
|
Proto makes sense at least from a hystorical point of view, but there's plenty of less famous bands rejected for the same reasons ------------- I stand with Roger Waters, I stand with Joan Baez, I stand with Victor Jara, I stand with Woody Guthrie. Music is revolution |
Posted By: HarbouringTheSoul
Date Posted: January 25 2013 at 02:54
| I am of the opinion that just about any 60s band worth a damn could be added to proto-prog or prog-related, but that doesn't mean all of them should. Reserve them for bands who either had a notable influence on prog artists or were regarded as part of the "progressive" scene at the time. |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: January 25 2013 at 02:59
|
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: January 25 2013 at 04:13
|
As a huge fan I must admit to feeling a tad confused, when I first learned that GD weren't on PA. I then proceeded to get involved with the site - got to learn up front the distinctions between progressive and prog, even if it was a complete mindf*ck at times, and then finally realising why they weren't here.
It's the same sort of discussion we've been having about Philip Glass, even if he is miles away from The Dead. Either way, it boils down to what this particular site focuses on, and that is prog - not progressive music. GD will never stand a chance in psych space here, and rightfully so too, because they're not a prog band. They were a progressive blues outfit, who then took things way out there and beyond, especially in a live setting(I loooove Dick's Picks) - yet I can't see them included on PA other than in proto and related. I feel much the same about Edgar Broughton Band actually... ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: Evolver
Date Posted: January 25 2013 at 06:43
|
Yes, the Dead had a few prog albums. "Blues For Allah" is one that I haven't seen mentioned here.
But of their (now) masssive catalog, only a few albums truly qualify.
For the same reason that a jazz artists with many albums, but one ore two fusion albums, is also not listed here.
Phish, although heavily Dead influenced, has many other references. For instance, they also incorporated Zappa into their sound. ------------- Trust me. I know what I'm doing. |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: January 25 2013 at 20:22
| ^ there was a time around here when one full prog album was enough to get you a spot somewhere on PA |
Posted By: octopus-4
Date Posted: January 26 2013 at 01:50
|
I think the rule is the same ------------- I stand with Roger Waters, I stand with Joan Baez, I stand with Victor Jara, I stand with Woody Guthrie. Music is revolution |
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: January 26 2013 at 06:22
So do I, although it is so convoluted these days that I don't think anybody knows. Good example I can think of off the top of my head is Miles Davis, whose extensive discography is on the site, but, out of those, how many are prog? Three, four at best? For what it is worth, I do not think that GD belong here, for the simple matter they were never a prog or progressive rock band, were never a part of that "scene", even to the point that they were never art rock in the sense we used to use the word. Dean is also correct in that the prog related badge could, in theory, extend to so many acts that it would overtake the prog section itself. I am, in writing this, fully aware before people reply that this argument could be extended very widely. The Who are a very good example. A great band, yes. One of my favourite bands. Progressive in the sense that they pushed quite a few barriers and Townsend experimented with new sounds, yes. But a progressive rock band, even prog related? No, IMO. They were a rock band, born out of an explosion of blues based music in the 1960's. And before people come back with Tommy, yes it was a concept album, I know, but it was not a progressive rock album. The phrase hadn't even been invented at the time of release. Townsend used the phrase rock opera. ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: Rivertree
Date Posted: January 26 2013 at 06:43
THIS!!  ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Rivertree" rel="nofollow">  |
Posted By: Jonathan
Date Posted: January 26 2013 at 06:49
|
I think Prog-Related would be a better place for GD.
They belong here more than most Bands in the Proto-Prog Section, IMHO.
(After 1967, There was no more Proto-Prog in America or England to me)
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: January 26 2013 at 07:04
Perceptive post certainly. I'm also a big Who fan and just like Steve, I can point to their innovation and experimentation with longer forms, subject matter and structures etc but cannot defend their inclusion in PA (they're here because presumably some collab(s) succeeded in getting their favourite rock bands admitted, which applies for Sabbath to boot - who I also adore) Unfortunately I'm completely biased re the Grateful Dead, and care not a jot for their progressive credentials as for me, they represent a war crime against silence. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Jonathan
Date Posted: January 26 2013 at 07:12
|
I agree with you on "The Who", They maybe put out ONE Album before the Prog Movement Started in England.
(I think Procol Harum started over there. That's just me though.)
But they don't belong in Proto-Prog.
|