Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Proto-Prog and Prog-Related Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Queen as progressive band?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedQueen as progressive band?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 8>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 05 2012 at 14:05
Originally posted by octopus-4 octopus-4 wrote:

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Originally posted by octopus-4 octopus-4 wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

I think that any album which includes their hits is a great album. Unfortunately, for me, I found that every single album they did also contained some atrocious rubbish.
I was about to write something similar. I don't think there's any Queen album without at least one rubbish track or skippable fillers.

Interesting. I have never found it so.
Well, I've been quoted Big smile.  just to say it more clearly...I love Jazz but it has "More of That Jazz"....A Kind of Magic has "Don't Loose Your Head"...Innuendo has "Delilah" ....and so on

More Of That Jazz is brilliant. I thought yiou were talking about all the albums though.

Don't Lose your Head is Ok too.

Not keen on cat songs either But it isn't a bad song just because I don't like it. Or you. Or Laz.


Edited by Snow Dog - February 05 2012 at 14:06
Back to Top
octopus-4 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
RIO/Avant/Zeuhl,Neo & Post/Math Teams

Joined: October 31 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 14209
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 05 2012 at 13:59
Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Originally posted by octopus-4 octopus-4 wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

I think that any album which includes their hits is a great album. Unfortunately, for me, I found that every single album they did also contained some atrocious rubbish.
I was about to write something similar. I don't think there's any Queen album without at least one rubbish track or skippable fillers.

Interesting. I have never found it so.
Well, I've been quoted Big smile.  just to say it more clearly...I love Jazz but it has "More of That Jazz"....A Kind of Magic has "Don't Loose Your Head"...Innuendo has "Delilah" ....and so on
I stand with Roger Waters, I stand with Joan Baez, I stand with Victor Jara, I stand with Woody Guthrie. Music is revolution
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 05 2012 at 13:56
Originally posted by octopus-4 octopus-4 wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

I think that any album which includes their hits is a great album. Unfortunately, for me, I found that every single album they did also contained some atrocious rubbish.
I was about to write something similar. I don't think there's any Queen album without at least one rubbish track or skippable fillers.

Interesting. I have never found it so.
Back to Top
Lizzy View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: March 15 2010
Location: Schnitzelland
Status: Offline
Points: 4675
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 05 2012 at 13:40
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

http://ultimateclassicrock.com/queen-tap-american-idol-singer-adam-lambert-for-summer-tour/

Dead

Adam Bolton (inside joke) denied this on his Twitter, but it would not surprise me if this is just testing the public's reaction and we'll eventually get to see such an abomination materialise.

Also, Greatest Hits 3 yesterday's most popular album on PA? Ermm
Property of Queen Productions...
Back to Top
Guzzman View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 21 2004
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 3563
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 05 2012 at 11:04
Originally posted by Brolloks Brolloks wrote:

But let me make it clear - Queen's debut album is better than any album Led Zeppelin ever made.
No. As much as I like Queen's debut, it will never be in the same league as Led Zeppelin IV. Plus - in my humble opinion - Led Zep I, II, and III are much better than Queen's first album. Saying this, I - of course - try to reflect on the years they were recorded.
But back to the question: Is Queen a progressive band? No.


"We've got to get in to get out"
Back to Top
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17869
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 04 2012 at 12:20
Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32536
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 04 2012 at 07:31
Back to Top
progistoomainstream View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 07 2011
Location: Willow Farm
Status: Offline
Points: 220
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 31 2012 at 17:52
I am a fan of Queen until Day at the Races. Anything passed that is quite bad. Even though I feel Queen and Queen II have large gap where emotion and passion should be placed, they are very solid musical albums. Sheer Heart Attack is good. A Night at the Opera is one of my favourite albums and A Day at the Races is very good. News of the World is quite bland, Jazz is just bad except for having 2 entertaining songs (Big Bottom Girls, Bicycle Race). And everybody knows about 80s queen. Overall, queen is like every band from the 70s era that survived into the 90s: They were good until the 80s, then they sucked.
Back to Top
ole-the-first View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 03 2012
Location: Russia
Status: Offline
Points: 1534
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 26 2012 at 04:41
Originally posted by octopus-4 octopus-4 wrote:

Originally posted by ole-the-first ole-the-first wrote:

First five Queen albums are definitely prog. If not 'pure' prog, but heavy or crossover prog.

But after that they started to write more pop-oriented music, so their albums from 1977 to 1986 are even not 'prog-related', just pop/rock. 1989 album 'The Miracle' is a pop album too, but that's where Queen started to return to their prog roots, and following album 'Innuendo' have a very strong prog feeling.
And Steve Howe as guest, too


Surprisingly or not, Queen had a lot of connections with prog bands at all.

In early 1970's they were an opening act for Genesis and Yes. And in 1986 Fish joined Queen on their show in Mannheim, Germany.
Back to Top
octopus-4 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
RIO/Avant/Zeuhl,Neo & Post/Math Teams

Joined: October 31 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 14209
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 26 2012 at 04:29
Originally posted by ole-the-first ole-the-first wrote:

First five Queen albums are definitely prog. If not 'pure' prog, but heavy or crossover prog.

But after that they started to write more pop-oriented music, so their albums from 1977 to 1986 are even not 'prog-related', just pop/rock. 1989 album 'The Miracle' is a pop album too, but that's where Queen started to return to their prog roots, and following album 'Innuendo' have a very strong prog feeling.
And Steve Howe as guest, too
I stand with Roger Waters, I stand with Joan Baez, I stand with Victor Jara, I stand with Woody Guthrie. Music is revolution
Back to Top
ole-the-first View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 03 2012
Location: Russia
Status: Offline
Points: 1534
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 26 2012 at 04:27
First five Queen albums are definitely prog. If not 'pure' prog, but heavy or crossover prog.

But after that they started to write more pop-oriented music, so their albums from 1977 to 1986 are even not 'prog-related', just pop/rock. 1989 album 'The Miracle' is a pop album too, but that's where Queen started to return to their prog roots, and following album 'Innuendo' have a very strong prog feeling.


Edited by ole-the-first - January 26 2012 at 04:28
Back to Top
geneyesontle View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 14 2012
Location: Quebec
Status: Offline
Points: 1266
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 25 2012 at 19:35
Originally posted by Manuel Manuel wrote:

I liked and found Queen to be a very progressive band, up until "A Day At The Races". After that, some magic was lost, at least for me, and I lost interest in their music. I think they are all fantastic musicians and composers, but they took a more commercial approach after a great, promising beginning.
 
I agree with you.
Back to Top
areyouxp View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: December 27 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 27 2011 at 01:57
agree with Was It All Worth It and Innuendo being Queen's 'later' proggy tracks.  definitely worth a listen to, if you're into their early stuff.
Back to Top
tamijo View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 06 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 4287
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 28 2011 at 17:01
Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by tamijo tamijo wrote:

 
Frankie Goes To Hollywood had a bit of a prog thing going mainly thanks to Trevor Horn who more or less moulded their sound.
 
A bit of prog, Yes - but not a prog band ! ,
Stravinsky was a bit Jazzy at times (late of course) , but he is not a Jazz-Fussion artist.
 
Regarding Tubeway Army - Replicas, i think its considered Proggy Wave in some circles, but i dont know the album myself. 
Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours
Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 28377
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 28 2011 at 14:42
Originally posted by tamijo tamijo wrote:

What Dark Elf. said and.... 
 
Allmost every band from the 70's got a bit of prog, in them, as what we today call prog., was what everyone was dooing back then. A bit of wierd sound effect, some symphonic elements here and there, stereo running from one speeker to the other.
 
Would i consider Queen to be basicly a prog band overall : NO !
I consider them to be a  (hard) Rock band, as i do with Roling Stones, 10cc, Alice Cooper, Uriah Heep, Dire Straight.
Van Hales, Deep P, Led Z. ect ect.
 
Loads of great music i do not think of as prog., even if they had the "some proggy elements" in the 70's. 
And im afraid if we are not carefull, every band that was just a tiny bit "unmainsteam" in the 70's, will be considered
a classic prog. band, to the point where there is nothing proggy left about prog.
 
If Queen is prog, why is Frankie goes to Hollywood not prog ? None of them have odd times nor any real style fussion, Is it just that they was from another time, or we dont like them as much, factualy they hold as many prog elements on the Pleasure Dome, as queen does on the Opera.  
 
Frankie Goes To Hollywood had a bit of a prog thing going mainly thanks to Trevor Horn who more or less moulded their sound.
 
For me Tubeway Army - Replicas was a prog album. I still regard it as such and won't be told otherwiseTongue
 
Back to Top
tamijo View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 06 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 4287
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 28 2011 at 06:08
What Dark Elf. said and.... 
 
Allmost every band from the 70's got a bit of prog, in them, as what we today call prog., was what everyone was dooing back then. A bit of wierd sound effect, some symphonic elements here and there, stereo running from one speeker to the other.
 
Would i consider Queen to be basicly a prog band overall : NO !
I consider them to be a  (hard) Rock band, as i do with Roling Stones, 10cc, Alice Cooper, Uriah Heep, Dire Straight.
Van Hales, Deep P, Led Z. ect ect.
 
Loads of great music i do not think of as prog., even if they had the "some proggy elements" in the 70's. 
And im afraid if we are not carefull, every band that was just a tiny bit "unmainsteam" in the 70's, will be considered
a classic prog. band, to the point where there is nothing proggy left about prog.
 
If Queen is prog, why is Frankie goes to Hollywood not prog ? None of them have odd times nor any real style fussion, Is it just that they was from another time, or we dont like them as much, factualy they hold as many prog elements on the Pleasure Dome, as queen does on the Opera.  
 


Edited by tamijo - September 28 2011 at 06:12
Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours
Back to Top
harmonium.ro View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 18 2008
Location: Anna Calvi
Status: Offline
Points: 22989
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 27 2011 at 16:23
^ Indeed.
Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 28377
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 27 2011 at 14:02
^ great post
Back to Top
The Dark Elf View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13097
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 27 2011 at 08:53
I think one has to take the term "progressive band" with a grain of salt, particularly in the 1970s. Queen had their progressive albums (Queen II, certainly, and A Night at the Opera in part as well), but I don't believe the band ever strived to achieve and maintain the title of "progressive band". The title simply was not important or relevant at the time. Like Jethro Tull, Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin, each of whom had their progressive moments (or whole albums) in the 1970s, Queen and these other great rock bands did whatever the hell they wanted in that decade, unhindered by classifications and stratified genres that became more important later on.
 
The urge to label artists has become almost a mania, and I am unconvinced that this is a good idea. Pink Floyd was a psychedelic band, as well as a hard rock band, as well as a progressive band. Tull was a blues rock band, a progressive band, a hard rock band, and a folk rock band. Zeppelin was blues rock, hard rock and folk rock with a dabbling of progressive rock on Houses of the Holy and Physical Graffiti. The same can be said of Queen's approach to multi-genre albums (including British burlesque, heavy metal and one notable tune composed in rhapsodic form).
 
And this is one of the sterling examples of why rock music in the 1970s maintains its legendary status (at least among the truly innovative and important performers, throwing in the likes of David Bowie as well). Their diversity was the hallmark of their greatness. They cannot be so easily pigeon-holed into comfortable little containers with a one-size-fits-all title and an expiration date.
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
Back to Top
Neue regel View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 27 2006
Location: uk
Status: Offline
Points: 152
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 27 2011 at 03:35
Queen II is one of the finest examples of Pomp-Prog rock ever. Imo.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 8>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.232 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.