| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
sleeper 
Prog Reviewer
Joined: October 09 2005
Location: Entropia
Status: Offline
Points: 16449
|
 Posted: February 16 2006 at 12:59 |
Is this thread still going?
I dont get why everyone is so worked up about it and makeing stupid coments about the Rolling Stone etc getting added. Shall we PLEASE leave it here and either ignore there inclusion or embrace it. There are 2276 other bands to talk about on this site.
|
Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005
|
 |
Littlewashu5
Forum Groupie
Joined: March 26 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 84
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 12:58 |
 Snow Dog wrote:
Flip_Stone wrote:
There ought to be some kind of vote where every member of this site says whether or not The Beatles belong here. That might be the only fair way to solve this stupid matter.
|
Sorry...you must be under the impression that we run some sort of democracy here. We don't. The decision is FINAL! |
Yeah.. LET'S HAVE THIS WEBISTE BE GOVERNED BY MOB RULE! (which is what pure Democracy is) And didn't we already have a vote to decide if Coheed and Cambria were Prog? If I recall the Purists ended up losing that one.......
Edited by Littlewashu5
|
|
Littlewashu5
Forum Groupie
Joined: March 26 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 84
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 12:57 |
|
Personally, if the Collaborators want to have fun with sub-genres, I've got one they could create:
Alt-Prog
Bands like Porcupine Tree, Dredg, Oceansize, RPWL, Coheed and Cambria, Mars Volta, Radiohead, Pure Reason Revolution, Mute Math, Secret Machines, Amplifier, Mercury Rev, Muse, Anathema, The Gathering, Flaming Lips, etc.
These bands owe just as much to the 90's Alternative/indie scene as they do 70's progressive. I just listed more bands who play this style than there are in some of the sub-genres already acknowledged in this site (Post-rock and Zeuhl come to mind). And wether or not some 50 year old with every Gabriel-era Genesis album on vinyl wants to admit it, the bands I just listed are the modern representatives of the style and probably will be for the next 15 or 20 years. It's also the fastest growing "sub-genre" in Prog as opposed to say a sub-genre in stasis like the aforementioned Zeuhl or a completely dead genre which has lost all meaning like Post-rock
Speaking of modern Prog representation, I think the Progressive Metal section needs some re-organization. Not in the sense that any bands need to be removed, but in the fact that it's the most vague and all-reaching sub-genre of Prog. Both Fates Warning and Between the Buried and Me are listed as Progressive Metal. What do these two bands have in common? Aside from sharing a rather distant set of common ancestors, nothing I remember at one point the Collabs were talking about dividing Prog metal into different sections. I think the idea evantually fell through. But of all the conrtoversial decisions to come along the pipeline of this site, I thought dividing Prog metal into multiple sections was not only one of the smartest, but one of the most vital in understanding one of this sites largest and most-popular sub-genres.......
Edited by Littlewashu5
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 12:38 |
Flip_Stone wrote:
There ought to be some kind of vote where every member of this site says whether or not The Beatles belong here. That might be the only fair way to solve this stupid matter.
|
Sorry...you must be under the impression that we run some sort of democracy here. We don't. The decision is FINAL!
|
|
|
|
Littlewashu5
Forum Groupie
Joined: March 26 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 84
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 12:36 |
|
I find the inclusion of The Beatles to be amusing. For the longest time, a lot of people have been complaining about newer "Modern Prog" bands being included because they don't sound like Yes, Genesis, Crimson, etc. The Beatles are the exact opposite. They are the most influential rock band EVER that all rock music, including prog can traced back to. In the truest sense of the term, The Beatles were the most progresssive band EVER.
That said, the whole Proto-prog sub-genre is a bit unneccessary. If you think about it, most of the popualr bands in the 60's had SOME influence on Prog. If you wanted to be thorough in listing all the bands that inluenced the genre we all love, you'd have to start including bands/artists that make up the various component sounds. Are Jazz musicians going to end up on Prog Archives? Is Beethoven going to be inserted into the Proto-Prog Section? All of them were influential in making Prog what it is today
I'm sure all I just said was mentioned at some point in this thread. I just didn't want to go through 13 pages of whining and flaming......
Edited by Littlewashu5
|
|
Flip_Stone
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 388
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 12:35 |
There ought to be some kind of vote where every member of this site says whether or not The Beatles belong here. That might be the only fair way to solve this stupid matter.
Besides whether or not The Beatles or prog. or prog-related (they aren't), hasn't there already been enough press, reviews, publicity, etc. already written about them?!?!?! I mean, they are the most written-about pop/rock band in history. There certainly isn't a shortage of reviews of their albums. At worse, putting them on this site just dilutes it to the point of confusing what prog. really is.
Arguing that The Beatles should be here would also support the opinion that other similar popular groups of that era should be here too (Rolling Stones, Beach Boys, Mama and Papas, The Who, etc.). The door has been opened to that, so it's probably only a matter of time before they show up too...
Edited by Flip_Stone
|
|
RoyalJelly
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 29 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 582
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 12:30 |
Someone should start a special web site for prog geeks who want to be
part of an exclusive club for a narrowly defined genre with no sense of its
history or origins...where any band with songs under 9 minutes with no
Mellotrons are mercilessly excluded! 
|
|
John Gargo
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 26 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 450
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:57 |
I am of the opinion that the site should be inclusive rather than exclusive. Now with that out of the way...
I think people need to relax... this is a website meant for your personal entertainment. The very fabric of progressive rock will not tear due to the addition of The Beatles in this site. Take a look at this statistic...
2,277
That's the number of bands in the database. I'm sure there are others here that you wouldn't consider prog as well, but the vast majority of them are. Some people don't think bands like Supertramp should be included... Well OK, then don't visit that section of the forum. Hell, I've heard people argue that Kansas shouldn't be here as well, and others who say that prog metal is rubbish and shouldn't be here either.
Bottom line - everyone has their own definitons of prog rock and they will obviously be different than this site. It reflects the opinion of the founding members. You don't agree with it? Well then go start your own website and pay the hosting fees. All of you people who are saying stuff like "RIP PROG ARCHIVES" are real dicks in my eyes... The owners of this site are providing you with this archive and this is the thanks you give them? A site with this much traffic cannot be very cheap to maintain, not to mention the effort that goes into building and moderating it.
ProgLucky and m@X , I feel sorry for you guys. Then again, you probably would have guessed that you would be eventually be dealing with such thankless dicks when starting a progressive rock website. Keep up the good work.
|
|
Greg W
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 24 2004
Location: Chicago
Status: Offline
Points: 3904
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:54 |
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:48 |
^ you can come over to my website if you like - where prog is just one of many genres. Compared to that, the archives are still quite "prog-snobby". 
|
|
|
|
Guests
Forum Guest Group
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:43 |
|
|
|
Chicapah
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 14 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8238
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:29 |
My overriding thought is this: The Beatles belong because they were the innovators that opened the door to progressive rock. None of their lps can be considered totally prog because they weren't and there was no such category in existence, anyway. Without them it may have been years before prog came into being. They stand alone, therefore bands like the stones and who shouldn't be considered even though at times they "experimented" on the fringes of progressive music. I think there would be few prog musicians who were there at the beginning who wouldn't tip their hat to the fab 4 for influencing them. And that's all I've got to say about that. 
|
|
"Literature is well enough, as a time-passer, and for the improvement and general elevation and purification of mankind, but it has no practical value" - Mark Twain
|
|
philippe
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 14 2004
Location: noosphere
Status: Offline
Points: 3597
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:28 |
|
...unfortunately
|
|
|
|
TheProgtologist
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: May 23 2005
Location: Baltimore,Md US
Status: Offline
Points: 27802
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:25 |
The site founders have stated that they want to be inclusive,not exclusive.
Everybody can whine and moan and complain all they want,it's not going to change anything.
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:21 |
|
|
|
|
|
philippe
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 14 2004
Location: noosphere
Status: Offline
Points: 3597
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:19 |
|
I fully support our friend gdub411 who brought real arguments in order to explain why the Beatles addition is seriously controversial...I´m a bit scared by this orientation, for me it´s a shame for the credibility of the site...we must remain strict towards the content, progarchives is a site exclusively orientated to progressive rock , this is not an encyclopedie of rock music
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:19 |
Trouserpress wrote:
Oh f**k. Oh f**kitty f**kitty f**k. This is wrong, chaps. Please don't blame this on the collabs at large - I had no idea this had happened. This "proto-prog" category is turning into a complete disaster! How on earth are newcomers meant to get a good idea of what prog is now?  |
I know what you mean. I really like the inclusiveness, but I also think that there needs to be a better separation of prog-related/proto-prog bands and the real prog bands. I also think that reviews for prog-related/proto-prog bands should not be listed on the front page, or at least there should be a clear visual separation - like using gray color for the review text, gray background color etc..
|
|
|
|
chopper
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 13 2005
Location: Essex, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 20030
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:18 |
Snow Dog wrote:
Certifiable wrote:
]
Snow Dog wrote:
| I see that many consider Sgt Pepper to be a concept album......it isn't. | | |
Er... yes it is!
The entire thing is one huge concept/package, including the rumours that surrounded it.
|
We'll have to disagree on this one then.
|
Sorry, Snow Dog is correct here. Sgt Pepper was originally conceived as being a concert by a Beatles "alter-ego" band, hence it starts off with sounds of an orchestra warming up and the title track flows straight into "With a little help from my friends". After that, as Lennon has said, they got fed up with the idea and it became an normal album of songs. There is a half-hearted attempt to complete the concept with the reprise of the title track but there is no continuing theme linking the songs.
|
|
The Hemulen
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 31 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 5964
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:13 |
Oh f**k. Oh f**kitty f**kitty f**k. This is wrong, chaps. Please don't blame this on the collabs at large - I had no idea this had happened. This "proto-prog" category is turning into a complete disaster! How on earth are newcomers meant to get a good idea of what prog is now?
|
|
RoyalJelly
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 29 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 582
|
Posted: February 16 2006 at 11:08 |
|
I did just listen to "I Want You (She's So Heavy)", and it certainly does
sound like proto-Crimson...add to that the fact that Yes did Beatle's cover
early on (Every Little Thing), Gabriel covered "Strawberry Fields Forever"...the
Beatles were simply the point of reference for the early progressive bands.
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
The Beatles. Here. Why?
REALLY REST IN PEACE
