Petition for Muse to be in progarchives!!

MikeEnRegalia wrote: The only point against their being prog IMHO is that they're not complex enough. They keep their music simple, and that is a violation of the "rules" defining "Progressive Rock" music.

1) Complexity is an attribute of prog, not a prerequisite - e.g. DSOTM.

2) Depends who you're comparing Muse with as to whether they're "complex" or "simple".

Even Keane and Coldplay have a degree of sophistication to their writing that belies the surface simplicity - but I maintain that the answer is in the structuring. Keane and Coldplay, of course, write rock songs - nothing else.

Muse use the rock song format and play around with it, so I'd argue that they're definitely progressive - as to whether they're prog or not, I'd say give them another two or three albums. They've got the potential - especially in "Absolution", where more of the experimentation works:

I feel that "Hulabaloo" and "Origin of Symmetry" both contain too much material that does not seem to be properly considered in context, which generates a feeling of almost revulsion in me that is diametrically opposed to the excitement they give when they "get it right". I'd get technical if I could be bothered, but neither are prog, IMO.

Man, I haven't seen much arguments for Muse on this forum about other than 'They are like Radiohead'. Everyone always says that. First, Radiohead are a lot more experimental than Muse could try to be, and they are hardly accepted on ProgArchives. I also believe Radiohead are here for one reason, Kid A. Muse doesn't have an album like that, I mean, an original one. If it wasn't of Kid A, Radiohead might not be here.

And your poll doesn't help you. You can't add a band here if more than half of those who voted are against it. You should win hands down to expect the band being added.

Sorry I just don't see or hear it.  I've listened to quite a few Muse albums and I just fail to see where you guys are coming from.

Seems to me like you're clinging to straws.

Captain Fudge wrote: It would have been wiser to have abstained- you are right. The only band I know of that became even better after signing witha major label was Nirvana.

Most of my favorite prog bands are signed with major labels.

Inside Out, Magna Carta, Limb Music, ...

Oh, and I voted yes, no other alternative. If you look around and see what other bands are already listed, you find Zappa, Mars Volta, Fantomas, Radiohead ... and that's a very good thing. It shows that the definition of prog is at least a little bit flexable here. But all these bands are far less obviously prog than Muse (Zappa himself stated at various occasions that he didn't even like Progressive Rock), so please come on ...

Captain Fudge wrote: Good lordie whoadie, this message board is going overboard. But seriously, how could this teenybopper trash sit next to Urah Heep, no matter the genre differences?

Muse out-prog and out-class Uriah Heep easily - but I still don't think that Muse are really prog. Nor are any of the UH albums I've heard - and I've only got Salisbury left to hear before I finally realise they're a great rock band in the Spinal Tap sense, but not prog. No. Prog? Nope. Nicht. NOT.

But I don't care! UH can play in the Archives too!