Alpha III - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

CCVP

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 15 2007
Location: Vitória, Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 7971

Topic: Alpha III
Posted: November 21 2008 at 21:49

Alpha III is a rather unknown brazilian progressive rock act from Campinas and i think they are in teh wrong cathegory. Currently the band is in the symphonic prog rants, but i think it would e mroe fitting if they went to the electronic prog genre for a number of reasons:

1) Almost exclusive use of keyboards and synthesizers

2) "Slow-mooving" / ambient sounding music, like lots of electronic artists, such as Brian Eno.

3) Amyr, the head of the band, is usually regarded as the most important brazilian electronic prog musician

4) His albums and the music he played in Rio Art Rock Festival 2008 (which i went to) are keyboard/synth driven, with only ocasional singing or usage of any other instruments other than the keyboards and synths.

The few reviews made for his albums are, in my opinion, made with the wrong perspective, since the perspective used was the symphonic prog perspective and not the electronic prog perspective.

Can the band be moved or do i need mroe evidence / need to feed the mods and admins with the band's music so they can make their minds?

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: November 21 2008 at 22:44

CCVP wrote:

Alpha III is a rather unknown brazilian progressive rock act from Campinas and i think they are in teh wrong cathegory. Currently the band is in the symphonic prog rants, but i think it would e mroe fitting if they went to the electronic prog genre for a number of reasons:

1) Almost exclusive use of keyboards and synthesizers

2) "Slow-mooving" / ambient sounding music, like lots of electronic artists, such as Brian Eno.

3) Amyr, the head of the band, is usually regarded as the most important brazilian electronic prog musician

The few reviews made for his albums are, in my opinion, made with the wrong perspective, since the perspective used was the symphonic prog perspective and not the electronic prog perspective.

Can the band be moved or do i need mroe evidence / need to feed the mods and admins with the band's music so they can make their minds?

Guigo and I agree with you (The rest of the actual members were not in the team yet), we tried to move the band, but nobody wanted them, so instead of sending them to Prog Related, they had to stay.

Iván

russellk

Prog Reviewer

Joined: February 28 2005
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 782

Posted: November 22 2008 at 00:20

Electronic prog seems to have a very narrow definition. I'd love to see it widened to include bands like this.

CCVP

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 15 2007
Location: Vitória, Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 7971

Posted: November 22 2008 at 09:29

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Guigo and I agree with you (The rest of the actual members were not in the team yet), we tried to move the band, but nobody wanted them, so instead of sending them to Prog Related, they had to stay.

Iván

What?

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: November 22 2008 at 10:34

CCVP wrote:

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Guigo and I agree with you (The rest of the actual members were not in the team yet), we tried to move the band, but nobody wanted them, so instead of sending them to Prog Related, they had to stay.

Iván

What?

Every team is in dependant and has autonomy, if they don't believe a band belongs in the sub-genre they are in charge, we can't force them.

Every team knows best than us which band belongs in their sub-genre, they were elected for that reason, it's the main principle of our site and we have to respect it as we want our decisions to be respected.

Now to be honest, if you read the bio HT wrote http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=14 we believe the band's (Cantusio) music lacks of depth an plays in the border of Ambient, so Electronic Team has a point there.

In those days there was no Crossover, in other case, we would had proposed Alpha III to them. because they a very watered version of Electronic meets Ambient.

Iván

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 22 2008 at 10:40

CCVP

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 15 2007
Location: Vitória, Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 7971

Posted: November 22 2008 at 12:06

Well, maybe they just add artists who played in Tangerine Dream / Kraftwerk or artists who are Brian Eno. . . Tongue

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: November 23 2008 at 10:25

CCVP wrote:

Well, maybe they just add artists who played in Tangerine Dream / Kraftwerk or artists who are Brian Eno. . . Tongue

Each team decides what bands to accept.

But to be honest, I wouldn't ask anybody to accept Alpha III except Prog Related because it's an ambient band mainly.

Iván

CCVP

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 15 2007
Location: Vitória, Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 7971

Posted: November 24 2008 at 07:05

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

CCVP wrote:

Well, maybe they just add artists who played in Tangerine Dream / Kraftwerk or artists who are Brian Eno. . . Tongue

Each team decides what bands to accept.

But to be honest, I wouldn't ask anybody to accept Alpha III except Prog Related because it's an ambient band mainly.

Iván

OK, it is a ambiant band mainly, but many electronic prog album / artists are also. The only electronic artist i know with some depth is Klaus Schulze and his albums (at least the ones i got) are pretty much ambient to me. Besides him there is obviously Brian Eno: the guy who INVENTED ambient music as we know today. As i have red in some reviews of his albums, MOST of his discography is ambient or ambient related, even in recent times (the DVD 77 million paintings is a good example of that) and that is why i think Alpha III would fit very well in progressive electronic: because some of the genre's main artists share quite a few similarities with the said band.

Edited by CCVP - November 24 2008 at 07:07

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: November 24 2008 at 15:09

CCVP wrote:

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

CCVP wrote:

Well, maybe they just add artists who played in Tangerine Dream / Kraftwerk or artists who are Brian Eno. . . Tongue

Each team decides what bands to accept.

But to be honest, I wouldn't ask anybody to accept Alpha III except Prog Related because it's an ambient band mainly.

Iván

In first place, don't blame me, Symphonic has them because it was the only chance to have them in a Prog Sub-Genre instead of Prog Related.

OK, it is a ambiant band mainly, but many electronic prog album / artists are also.

Again, the characterostics of other bands have no relation with the Alpha III situiation, each band is judged by it's own merits and not because other similar band is accepted, we have repeated that the "If X, why not Y" argument doesn't apply to an inclusion.

The only electronic artist i know with some depth is Klaus Schulze and his albums (at least the ones i got) are pretty much ambient to me. Besides him there is obviously Brian Eno: the guy who INVENTED ambient music as we know today. As i have red in some reviews of his albums, MOST of his discography is ambient or ambient related, even in recent times (the DVD 77 million paintings is a good example of that) and that is why i think Alpha III would fit very well in progressive electronic: because some of the genre's main artists share quite a few similarities with the said band.

The lack of depth of Alpha II is well known even among the experts and fans just check:

If Alpha III wants to continue I would advise them to create interesting music around the organ, leave the psychedelic references behind and make a big effort where the rhythm is concerned. Especially in the very progressive sounding "Stone Warriors," the drum parts sound as if they were recorded for a Flock of Seagulls album!

http://www.progressiveworld.net/alphaiii.html

John "Bo Bo" Bollenberg

While being praised for his skills, the music has been criticized for lacking substance. Atmospheric and melodic are commonly used adjectives. It is also suggested that collaboration with other musicians could inject some needed creativity.

http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=14

H. T. Riekels

One of the most boring prog "bands" I have ever heard is Amir Cantusio Jr's Alpha 3. Cantusio has about seven albums out under the Alpha 3 name, and shows no sign of progress in any sense of the word. Music mostly electronic, without the aid of polyphonic synths, (a fact that hurts the music severely) Cantusio is a fine keyboard player but an average songwriter, and most of his albums are just this - average.

http://www.gepr.net/aafram.html

And I could follow, as a fact I will ask the team to request this band be moved to Prog Related or Crossover if they decide to accept the, because Alpha III as you welñl say has no business in Symphonic.

Thanks

Iván

CCVP

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 15 2007
Location: Vitória, Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 7971

Posted: November 24 2008 at 19:32

First off, i am not blaming you of anything Iván. In fact, i gotta thank you for being the only mod / admin interessed in this topic, so thanks !

Secondly, i am sorry, but i didn't knew that rule of "If x, why not y?". It's just that that rule has been used in other teams, most obviously in symphonic prog (to accept newer bands that sound like the classics, like The Flower Kings or Glass Hammer, to name just a couple of bands) and progressive metal (Wintersun's description makes that very clear, besides the expressive number of bands sounding like Dream Theater or Fates Warning or whatever).

In the third place, Yes, i know the band is kind of shallow, but depth is not exactly a rule when it comes to progressive rock. Some bands have added to the archives can be many things but deep and even the classic bands have had their dull moments without being considered another thing but prog, just bad prog.

Last, but definitely not least, i thank you for your effort to make things right the way you can.

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: November 24 2008 at 20:40

CCVP wrote:

First off, i am not blaming you of anything Iván. In fact, i gotta thank you for being the only mod / admin interessed in this topic, so thanks !

Not an Adm CCVP, only head of the Symph team and member of the Neo Prog Team.

We never used the X why not Y argument, as a fact i've been contrary to that since the start.

Each band addition Symphonic, has been done after a careful revision by the team of:

Structure
Sound
Discography
The existence or not of Symphonic elements

And we did it case by case with no reference to another band, each band is juidged gfor their albums.

We didn't accepted Glass Hammer or The Flower Kings, they were here when the team was formed, but if we had been asked we would had accepted them, because CLEARLY AND BEYOND ANY DOUBT are Symphonic bands with the Symphonic elements described in http://www.progarchives.com/subgenre.asp?style=4

The main characteristics of Symphonic are the ones that defined all Progressive Rock: (There's nothing 100% new under the sun) which among others are:

Mixture of elements from different genres.
Complex time signatures.
Lush keyboards.
Explorative and intelligent lyrics, in some cases close to fantasy literature, Sci Fi and even political issues.
Non commercial approach
Longer format of songs

In this specific case the main characteristic is the influence of Classical music (understood as Orchestral works created from the late Gothic to Modern Classical)

We don't care if a band sounds as Yes or Genesis, if they do is obviously BECAUSE YES, GENESIS, GLASS HAMMER AND THE FLOWER KINGS ARE SYMPHONIC BANDS WITH SYMPHONIC ELEMENTS.

We never compare them to any other band, if two animals are yellow, have feathers and say quack...both are grouped as palmipeds, not because one is similar to the other, that's irrelevant, we group them because both are palmipeds. As a fact we would group Gooses and Swans because they share the characteristics of a palmiped, even when they are different to our original ducks.

On the other hand we accepted bands like After crying or Aphrodite's Child that have very little in common with the Classic Symphonic bands and for some are closer to Fiolk, but we agreed with the Folk Prog Team that both bands have more Symphonic elements.

So please, if we add Yes and Glass Hammer, is not because the similarities between them, but becausde they both have copmmon influences and structure, if they sound alike, is a natural xconsequence of being part of a same sub-genre.

But having diluted Prog elements and strong blend with mainstream is a characteristic of Prog Related.

If some non Prog band has been accepted by any other sub-genre or even is on Symphonic, it's not excuse to add another band with similar characteristics.

If you have an accident and get a purple left eye, you don't knock your head against the door to get a right purple eye and be even...If a non Prog band or shallow band is added, I won't use it as an excuse to adda similar band.

Last, but definitely not least, i thank you for your effort to make things right the way you can.

Believe me,. all the teams do it, some have a more purist approach (as i do), while others are more inclusive, but there's always some member in the team to balance the opinions.

Iván

CCVP

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 15 2007
Location: Vitória, Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 7971

Posted: November 24 2008 at 21:28

OK Iván, the similarities are not a decisive feature to be used in this case, but i can guarantee you that it has its importance as a good measuring stick, as a way to compare bands or as a way to stablish guidelines to define a genre, as you eagerly presented to me concerning the symphonic prog genre. I can bet that those guidelines had a great deal of inspiration drawn from the founding / important bands of symphonic prog.

Like it or not, in some degree you have to use the founding / important bands of the genre as a pattern to draw a line of what is, let's say, symphonic or not because, if you don't use any kind of parameter, its like making things out of thin air. If you don't use the overall resemblance (a band that sounds like another) you will use other kinds of more specific resemblance that, in the end, will be drawn from the important / founding bands / artist of any genre in music as a whole.

Besides, i'm pretty sure that none or at least one or two members of all prog teams together have any kind of formal music education. i had (studied music for 10 years of my life in a music school and droped it to focus on my Law College) and, to be frank, we only have advanced studies in musical structure halfway through the music college. Since i only had basic/middle music knolege i can only "poorly" analyze music the way it should propperly be analyzed with the specific "scientific" method and based on the sheets, something that increases my convictions that those parameters came to life using the important / founding bands music and not propperly analyzing the sheets and creating parameters based on the sheets. So, because of that, i strongly believe that the importan / founding bands DO have, in some degree, influence if a band is or isn't accepted in a genre.

Just one more thing, Alpha III, in my opinion, does not have mainstream characteristic blended to its music. Au contraire, their music is far from mainstream and has probably none mainstream influence at all. The fact is that they are DEFINITELY prog, they are just NOT THE BEST prog band around and i think it's pretty unfair to keep them in an unfitting genre just because people don't like 'em. Even crossover and prog-related wold be unfitting, because, as i said, the band has practically none mainstream influnece.

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: November 24 2008 at 22:29

CCVP wrote:

OK Iván, the similarities are not a decisive feature to be used in this case, but i can guarantee you that it has its importance as a good measuring stick, as a way to compare bands or as a way to stablish guidelines to define a genre, as you eagerly presented to me concerning the symphonic prog genre. I can bet that those guidelines had a great deal of inspiration drawn from the founding / important bands of symphonic prog.

Of course they have, because they were the pioneers uiusing this structure, every musical genre appeared before on reality than in theory. Presley, Little Richard, Berry, etc created a genre called Rock that later was studied and fiormalized.

But this doesn't mean that to consider a band part of Rock, we have to find similarities with Chuck Berry.

We use the INFLUENCES and STRUCTURE to judge bands

In most bands there are members with formal musical education, I studied Piano for 5 years, then abandoned and became a drummer for more than ten years, which I abandoned when I started to work as a lawyer.

But you don't need a formal musical education to find influences and even structures, as a fact Keith Emerson doesn't have a formal musical education, but nobody can deny his abbility to work structures.

Emerson was born in 1945, in Todmorden, Lancashire, England. He began his study of piano at the age of eight. His accordion, both being musically inclined, thought that music would be a nice sideline for Keith to make some extra money with in later life. Surprisingly, Keith never had any formal training in music. All of his teachers were local "little old ladies".

http://www.7171.org/electrons/frap/emerson/index.html

Vangelis wrote most of the Aphrodite's Child music incorporating Symphonic and Classical elements without being able to even read music.

Everything you hear has been done by me. "In my way I can play every instrument, but I have never been to music school. I couldn't take that. People ask how I can compose if I can't read or write music. I can't understand how they can teach composition in music school. It is impossible. You can't teach someone to be a composer - either he is, or he isn't, Great musicians are not great because they study. They are great because they are great. Everything I do is condemned to he done only by me. My score is the 2in. recording tape".

http://vangeliscollector.com/telegraph112182.htm

This proves beyond any doubt you don't need to have formal musical education to understand it, of course it's better, much better, but not absolutely necessary.

So if Vangelis can write complete works since his Aphrodite's Child days without even being able to read music, we can appreciate and understand music with little or none studies.

Ambient is mainstream, so any ambient band as Alpha III has clear and preeminent Ambient sound plus they have AORISH and even New Agey leanings, that's also mainstream...Mainstream is not equal to POP, there are different mainstream genres.

I'm not alone in this, every site that talks about Alpha III repeats this same argument, because it's more than obvious.

Iván

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 25 2008 at 11:11

CCVP

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 15 2007
Location: Vitória, Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 7971

Posted: November 25 2008 at 05:04

Iván, in the first place, i gotta admit that prog rock does not share many similarities with Chuck Berry, not with Presley and Little Richard, but that is because progressive rock has attached to it a great number of influences and maybe, because of that great number of influences, some of them may be kept underground or, in the "subconcient" of the genre, but they are still there. The instruments prog rock uses (guitar, bass and drums) are probably the most noticeable part of the influence of the founding father of rock, as i all rock-derivated genre, but the influence is still there.

In the second place, yes, i know you guys from the symphonic team, as in all teams, use the band's influences and structures to judge if it is or if it is not fitting to the genre, but those standards, both the influence and the structure needed for a band to be classified as a progressive rock band come from somewhere, and they usually come from the founding / important bands and artists of each genre. As you specifically pointed (But you don't need a formal musical education to find influences and even structures), you from each prog team, when discussing if a band is or is not worthy of joining the Archives, look to find in that band INFLUENCES and STRUCTURES. OK, but where do the INFLUENCES and STRUCTURES come from? They come from the founding / important bands, and not the other way around.

In the third place, i may have been a bit unprecise when i said formal music education. When i said formal music education i meant the full education, ranging from learning to play an instrument (something that, after all, does not need any formal anything, as many musicians through the ages were self-taught) to knolwege over musical theory (something that does need formal training because it is a complex and highly specific knowlege). Though Keith Emerson don't have a diploma, he sure do have a considerable deal of knowlege over musical theory, because he wrote down in sheets the music as he composed it and was able to make ELP's own adaptations of rather complex contemporary composers, such as Ginestera.

I gotta go back to work, so i will end my post later

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: November 25 2008 at 11:10

CCVP wrote:

I was talking exclusively about ROCK , not about Prog Rock.

In other worrds, your theory is that there's a first band of every genre and all of the later bands are judged and compared with that original band.

FALSE, there's a band, (in the case of Symphonic I believe is King Criimson), who set BASIC PARAMETERS OF A GENRE, sothing more than basic parameters or in other words the idea that Classical and rock could be blended.

This doesn't mean we have to take a band and say: "If it sounds as ITCOTCK is Symphonic, if doesn't sound like ITCOTCK, it's not symphonic"

No, that would be absurd, limitative and mediocre, each band tthat has certain characteristics that may or may not sound as ITCOTCK, is judged BY THEIR OWN MUSIC, and if we believe is Progressive, then they are added.

As you specifically pointed (But you don't need a formal musical education to find influences and even structures), you from each prog team, when discussing if a band is or is not worthy of joining the Archives, look to find in that band INFLUENCES and STRUCTURES. OK, but where do the INFLUENCES and STRUCTURES come from? They come from the founding / important bands, and not the other way around.

Of course somebody played every genre before the others, but again tt doesn't mean that band is our source of comparison, because many Prog bands ahave no relation with King Crimson.

In that case, when the experts consider Wagner a Romantic artist is because Beethoven did it before and they had to compare both artists....If they do, they are lost, because Wagner has verty little musical relation with Beethoven.

No, the fact that somebody played a genre before, doesn't mean we compare a new artist with that one, Symphonic genre has cetain parameters, probably formalized by King Crimson in ITCOTCK or by The Nice in their debbut, but this doesn't imply we compare the artists with them

What about Vangelis, who can't even read or write music, he isn't able to write a single sheet of music ?

I can read and write music, have a decent theoric background, but not even in my wildest dreams would be able to write a work like Heaven & Hell.

But that's not the main point, I believe that a musician needs to read and write music as well as full studies of music (Well not needs, but surely is very much better), including theory and practice, but if somebody is author of complex musical works without even being able to write or read music, being part of ateam is not hard.

I gotta go back to work, so i will end my post later

I'm in my lunch time.

Iván

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 25 2008 at 14:04

CCVP

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 15 2007
Location: Vitória, Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 7971

Posted: November 25 2008 at 16:56

OK Iván, i will finish my halp-post now and respond the part you responded.

In the fourth place, music is one of many "scientific art forms" that does not obligate the person behind it to have any formal learning whatsoever. So, for example, you need a degree to be an architecture but does not need one to be a musician and that is because msic does not have any responsibility attached to it (i mean, people will not die if you make a band song / album / whatever; you, for example is a Genesis fan and you are still here after all the albums after Wind and Wuthering, aren't you

?). So, because of that, one can practice its music composing abilities untill that person become a great composer, using whatever method that person finds more fitting with his composing style. That was the case of Yes and Vangelis: they trained untill their compositions became top notch. In fact, Vangelis cannot understand how they teach composition is music schools because he does not knows the classical way of composing and his own way of composig is probably impossible to learn in a music school, but still they teach composition there (Kerry Minear, from Gentle Giant is a good exaple of that: he has a degree in composition). BESIDES, you canoot compare a genious with the rest: some people, like Vangelis, are just born gifted, special and, as time passes, they will uncover their true abilites.

In the fifth place, yes i know that there are other genres except POP in the mainstream. But the fact is that, at least in Brazil, new age was not quite mainstream like it was in other places of the world. Even prog was not exactly mainstream here during the 70's. Sure SOME bands were famous, but just a couple (in Brazil's prog scene case, O Terço and Os Mutantes were those 2 famous bands / reasonably selling bands in the late 70's) of bands of famous bands / reasonabling selling bands do not make a scene and the same thing happened with New Age. As far as AOR goes, i don't really know any famous or reasonably sellign AOR band from Brazil. The fact is that, during the 80's, the rock that really sold-out here was the punk-inspired rock from bands like RPM, Barão Vermelho, Cazuza, among other bands alike and local music, like the PAGODE and the FUNK MELÓDICO in the late 80's / early 90s.

The bottomline is that here New Age was probably not a very successful genre. Besides, i just can't really see AOR in Alpha III music (at least not in the albums i have), despite having some New Age influence. Maybe Guigo can help us in that matter.

Now, about your responses in my half post.

Well Iván, i was not talkig about the founding band of progressive rock, but the founding / important bands of progressive rock for each respective genre. I will not expect King Crimson to be a parameter for symphonic prog, as well as i will not expect Magma to be a parameter for krautrock.

And about Beethoven and Wagner, their music is differe nt because they are from very different periods of classical music: Beethoven is a trasitional composer, and was one of the most important figures in the trasition between the Classical and the Romantic periods in western music, as Wagner was fully placed in the Romantic period. Besides that, both composers had a quite different style of composing and probably one had none influence over the other whatsoever. Besides, Wagner was a bloody proto-nazi.

As i said before in teh completion of my original post, people can be composers without formal studies, though the tecniques they use may not be practical nor exactly correct, but they still may work because of that person's experience, but that usually take years of self teaching, learning and experiencing.

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: November 25 2008 at 19:01

CCVP wrote:

OK Iván, i will finish my halp-post now and respond the part you responded.

Please CCVP. don't try to take the debate to other field, I know not having a degree in music won't hurt anybody, (except maybe the author), the point is that, you criticized the teams for not having musical degrees and questioned our abbility to place a band based on a structure because we don't have a musical formation.

I simply said that if guys as Vangelis could make masterpieces of high complexity without even knowing how to read music, we were more than able to catalogue a band without a drgree in a Conservatory.

You are a master changing all the threads.

Well, if tis was a Brazilian site, I would perobably think in a different way, but in the rest of the world, New Age is not Prog.

Even prog was not exactly mainstream here during the 70's.

Prog was not mainstream anywhere, not even in the 70's, it was a respectable minority but bnothing more.

Sure SOME bands were famous, but just a couple (in Brazil's prog scene case, O Terço and Os Mutantes were those 2 famous bands / reasonably selling bands in the late 70's) of bands of famous bands / reasonabling selling bands do not make a scene and the same thing happened with New Age.

Still I don't believe New Age is Prog in Brazil.

As far as AOR goes, i don't really know any famous or reasonably sellign AOR band from Brazil. The fact is that, during the 80's, the rock that really sold-out here was the punk-inspired rock from bands like RPM, Barão Vermelho, Cazuza, among other bands alike and local music, like the PAGODE and the FUNK MELÓDICO in the late 80's / early 90s.

I don't know why I have to insist in this, I asked Electronicv team a long time ago and they said NO WAY JOSE, I can't force them to accept them and as a fact i wouldn't ddo it, because I respect their work and know my limits.

But I also agree with them.

BTW: The matter of New Age being popular in Brazil or not is unimportant, New Age is not Prog anywhere.

Now, about your responses in my half post.

I know, only used a single band in a hope you would understand me at lest, but I'll be clear.

We don't take bands and say "This one sounds like Yes, Ok it's Symphonic....Thjis one sounds like Genesis, OK it's Symphonmic; This one dioesn't sound as any pioneer band, then it's not Symphonic.

We check each and every band by their individual merits and structure, we don't care if sounds like any existing band or not...That's all

You make my point, they have very littele in common and both are Riomantic.

BTW: I don't understand the trascendence of Wageners's anti-semitism with his music, I don't share his bnelieves and as a fact find them repulsive, but his music is amazing.

Then you can understand why people who has decades listening and breathing Progressive rock, are able to analyze a band and decide if it's Symphonic or not without the need of a degree by the Conservatoire National Supérieur de Musique et de Danse de Paris.

Iván

Ricochet

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 27 2005
Location: Nauru
Status: Offline
Points: 46301

Posted: November 26 2008 at 02:15

I've received today a PM from CCVP, I already presented the request in the Team Thread, in the Collaborator's Lounge, we'll take a look at it.

To the few snappy remarks here and there: I personally haven't listened to Alpha III, nor have rejected them for Prog Electronic; I also have no recollection of Alpha III having been discussed, dismissed, being pushed aside given the genre definitions or because its members didn't play in any of the prolific electronic bands etc.. Maybe it was an ancient discussion, but it matters more that we finally clear things up now.

Edited by Ricochet - November 26 2008 at 02:16

CCVP

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 15 2007
Location: Vitória, Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 7971

Posted: November 26 2008 at 04:33

Ricochet wrote:

I've received today a PM from CCVP, I already presented the request in the Team Thread, in the Collaborator's Lounge, we'll take a look at it.

To the few snappy remarks here and there: I personally haven't listened to Alpha III, nor have rejected them for Prog Electronic; I also have no recollection of Alpha III having been discussed, dismissed, being pushed aside given the genre definitions or because its members didn't play in any of the prolific electronic bands etc.. Maybe it was an ancient discussion, but it matters more that we finally clear things up now.

I'm glad things are finally moving aroud here

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: November 26 2008 at 10:10

Rico, in the first cleaning on 2006, Micky, Raff and Myself and myself sent this band to be checked and was rejected, something with what i agree, when the time came, HT had to make a new bio because the one that existed was totally misleaduing..

We kept them in symphionic, because the other option was Prog Related and even when it's a watered band, I believe it's barely Prog.

But CCVP has a point, it's not Symphonic, we are going to discuss it tonight.

Iván

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 26 2008 at 10:12