No Longer Prog!

Proto-prog may be closer, I'm fine with that, although stylistically early DP do remind me of bands like Quatermass and their ilk.

Edited by Bosh66 - October 03 2012 at 06:58

Well Deep Purple are (rightly) on here as Prog Related already. I do understand your sentiment, but I suppose I differentiate between a band that was (for some period) a progressive rock band, and a band that incorporated progressive influences or movements into their music (Wishbone Ash, Queen, The Who etc). There were lots of the latter to varying degrees, especially as you say in the 1970s, but less of the former. I care about the former partly because I think people exploring the genre may not be aware of these progressive rock albums. I don't care enough  for it to keep me awake at night, but I think it's a gap we should and could easily close.

I appreciate that bringing this suggestion up is a little like picking at an old scab so it doesn’t heal, but there has to be some way that ProgArchives can accommodate progressive rock albums by non-prog bands without compromising the integrity of the archive. Or there has to be, in my opinion. Not doing so means that these same bands will continue to be suggested, and more importantly the archive will arguably be missing some important albums in the development of the genre.

 

As a suggestion, could we not create entries for bands limited to a time period? A similar approach has been taken for the Ian Gillan Band. Albums by Gillan after the name was changed are not included, but IGB output quite rightly is. This approach would be more difficult for a band that has a couple of prog albums spread through their discography, but some artists lend themselves nicely to this approach.

 

Here are some (possibly controversial) suggestions by way of example;

UFO (to 1973) would contain 3 albums (including UFO Live), possibly in Space or Heavy Prog. Later albums have no place in the archive.

Scorpions (to 1973) – two albums in heavy or krautrock including a live album. Later albums have no place.

Judas Priest (to 1976/7) – 2/3 albums in heavy prog. Later albums have no place. A more controversial suggestion perhaps, and would you want to include Nostradamus?

Deep Purple (to 1970) – 3 studio and some live albums in Heavy Prog. The remainder of the  discography to remain in prog-related. The first three studios are prog, not prog-related.

Journey (to 1977) – 3 albums in jr/f  with the remainder in prog-related given they are already on the site and have lots of reviews.

 

There are undoubtably a good number of other bands this approach could be applied to. It's not about opening the floodgates, rather than managing a situation that to me is currently unsatisfactory. This suggestion is only for bands who had a progressive period, rather than bands that are “proggy” without being prog. They remain in Prog-related.

 

I’ve a feeling this will get flamed, but thought I’d raise it anyway!

Edited by Bosh66 - October 03 2012 at 04:07