PROCOL HARUM AIN’T PROG ROCK!!!

landberkdoten wrote: Storm but still haven't get the point of what I meant to say in here. Nevermind replying to this post anymore, it'd be like "falling on deaf ears" to me. Stay loose!

Oh I think I'll continue to reply if I feel like it Landberkdoten.

And MY point is that you didn't make a point.  You posted a screed.

I'd certainly be interested in seeing WHY you don't think that the band should be included in the archives.  As I said before I could understand it if you just didn't like the band, as you've admitted.  There are bands in the archive that I don't particularly care for either.  But not liking a band is hardly reason enough to demand that it be deleted.  I'm just one voice, just as you are and if the personal opinion of one person were to hold ultimate sway here, this wouldn't be a very interesting place at all.

I just read LBD's Procol Harum review to see what all the fuss was about. I'm not throwing stones here, just clarifying the argument. The only comment made regarding the music of Procol Harum is: " this is a reactive kind of music that came up the music scene as a response to the other genres" and even that does not say anything about why the music should not be considered "progressive."

The rest of the review talks about other bands of the era which may or may not be similar to Procol Harum (I think that's the point) and something about an Australian band which is not in the Archive (we do have a "Suggestions for the Archive" section).

LBD, please give some supporting "facts" so we can understand why Procol Harum is not PROG. Song structure, instrumentation, lyrical content ..... anything that we can base an observation on.

No hard feelings, I, for one, want to understand your point of view. What do you think of The Moody Blues, I find them similar to Procol Harum (another thread, perhaps). 

although i am not a big fan of the band, PROCOL HARUM is a little bit progressive rock. And they are not the poblem, as you can find another bands in the site that are not "fit" in here, i found the band "ANATHEMA" in the site in the genre of prog metal, and i dont think they have anything to do with progressive, in their early years they were death metal, changed to doom metal with a little bit slower music, and now i think they are kinda gothic doom metal, although i love the band i dunnu why are they in the site  and savatage too they are in the site but i dont think they are progressive either

well that is only what i think, i dont mean to remove them or something

There have many other times where I have agreed with Mr. Peter Rideout and this one won't be an exception. You right when you say the word is really undefined, and subjective in any case and that gives us the power somehow to be aware that not always we'll be heard or payed attention to, and that's mostly the thing here.

Thanx for the pointers, I would definitely rely on them next time I write another review!

Peace!

Hey Certif1ed!

I support your proposition about uploading something from DIAMOND HEAD to the site! But you know, there are still way too many prog bands out there and that at some point it would be impossible to take care of them all. But I totally hear you, I've been trying to get RAGNAROK in here, but no one listens    hahaha

Peace!

Storm:

First of all, I’d like to thank you for taking your time to read this and reply to it.

I definitely want to clear the air once and for all. You are right when you say I don’t like Procol Harum, because I don’t, and since this is a social forum I feel free to speak up my mind to talk about what I hate or embrace, without offending anyone’s intelligence, likes or dislikes, musical preferences or judgment. What I’m trying to explain (again) is that no matter what, I just cannot conceit Procol Harum as prog rock and I dared to make reference to Creedence or even Springsteen to compare their genre that’s way so alike, and I’m talking about “pop” music and even if would’ve pointed out any other bands, at least one of the readers to this topic would’ve disagreed anyway. Also, no matter how many records, songs or productions of Procol Harum you may name out, I’ll still won’t consider it part of anything related to a genre that’s got a reason to be called progressive, you know, transition, continuous change, that genre that’s constantly renewing and remaking all those music little formulas that impact the listener. Progressive rock is challenging, enticing, provocative… Procol Harum and the rest of the “popular” music is not. And I just don’t want this to be taken as something personal to the band, because it’s not and it ain’t some sort of “pop VS prog” debate…

Also, I just set “that obscure Austrian” band as an example of what’s left out in here, and by that I mean what’s a priority to be taken care of instead of what is “almost” considered prog.

I agree that PH are not really prog - I was most surprised to see PH appear on this site - but then again, not. PH are from the same kinda time as prog came to pass - a bit earlier, in my estimation. Bands are kinda voted onto this site via the suggestions forum - was there a poll on this recently? If not, why not start one!

My main problem with PH is that one or two tracks doth not a prog band make - otherwise the Beatles would be in the archives! Setting a pop song to the opening part of Bach's "Air on a G String" is novel, but hardly prog. Progressive is different!

Now we've allowed PH, weren't LOVE extremely proggy - and Shocking Blue, Chocolate Watch Band, Leafhound...

Nothing to get upset about though - just give objective reviews hinting why they might not be considered prog; put across your point of view and others will have theirs.

I've been trying for ages to get DIAMOND HEAD considered for the archives...

Easy:

I'm definitely a fexible yet understanding man but this time I must stand up for what I think related to this topic. What I'm trying to explain, is that despite a little dash of prog music within Procol Harum's work or whether they are worthy to listen to or not, the point is they just don't belong in here. I know tons of non-prog bands are clearly influenced by prog rockers, and nowadays we can behold that with the "Scissor Sisters" band and their PF's "Comfortably Numb" cover or even "The Mars Volta" if you wish, but that ain't not enough reason to consider their work prog worthy or even so, excellent. What I'm saying is that instead of considering yourselves experts in the topic, and being nothing but narrow-minded when it comes to negative critics that expose your total disregard of the subject, you shoud dig up a lil more and find out there's more to listen to than "prog leanings" bands.

Peace out.

Most of the times when it comes to review an album, I set my eyes first on some other prog reviewers’ work to get an idea of what I actually wanna talk about and then I come with my own stuff, you know, to criticize within a critic; but this time that ain’t that kind of situation. More than a review, this is a call for all of those reviewers, prog experts and webmasters of Prog Archives to be more careful about what you upload to the site in order to give a pure, clear info to all prog starters and for all of those prog devoted fans as well. I know I’m gonna be bombed away and gonna get criticized as well for this, but I’m aware of that and I’ll take it as the prog fan I am now! For what I know and heard during all these years within the prog world, PROCOL HARUM ain’t no progressive music; this is neither art nor prog rock, this is a reactive kind of music that came up to the music scene as a response to the other genres. Don’t tell me you PROCOL HARUM fans that you aren’t appealed to JOE COCKER’s music or CREEDENCE CLEAR WATER REVIVAL even BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN? Well, PROCOL HARUM’s gotta go in there with those guys… Let’s put things sparkling clear so we don’t get mixed up or confused at the time we give each group a space or a category. I’m not saying I hate their music, not that I love it in the other hand; but, it’s imperative to be realistic in order to be able to compare and judge, because this is a matter that should be pointed out. The fact of this band appearing during the early 70’s (late 60’s) doesn’t determine that they must be progressive rock musicians or anything related to it, they have a style of their own that goes hand in hand with other contemporary bands; but this is certainly not prog rock, that’s for sure.

Think of KYRIE ELEISON for instance, an Austrian band formed first in 1974 by three school friends Gerald Krampl - Keyboards, Felix Rausch - Guitars and Karl Novotny - Drums, together with Wolfgarng Wessely - Vocals and Gerhard Frank - Bass that by the year 1976 went into an in fact very cheap studio, and began to record nearly under live conditions with only 2-track recording machines. The release of the album in January 1977 was quite a sensation, as if was one of the first independent releases in Austria and therefore highly acclaimed by the press and music magazines. They played in all major cities in Austria, as well as on same big open on festivals together with bands like VAN DER GRAAF GENERATOR, COLLOSSEUM, AMON DÜÜL, EELA CRAIG, OPUS, etc. They played and produced great music, they are indeed huge prog rockers, they are one of the European top most memorable prog rock bands and still, they just didn’t make it to qualify for a spot in this site due the standards of the reviewers yet the experts. Instead we can log on to PROCOL HARUM and THE MARS VOLTA’s page and think of them as Progressive music…