The Beatles deserve to be here because...

Proto-Prog definition
Rock Bands in existence prior to 1969 that influenced the development of progressive rock. The late 60's was a predominately experimental period for music. These bands were moving in a stream that eventually led to prog. The influence could have come from new sophisticated forms of writing and playing music, recording techniques, new instruments and vocal harmonies to name a few. Some of these bands became progressive rock bands themselves others did not.

Please tell me how The Beatles do not fall into that description.

The Ryan wrote: Prog-rock is not everything that is original and fresh, that's not how it works. If you want to argue that Sgt. Peppers Lonely Heart Club is progressive I'm not going to stop you, but I personally disagree with most of the Beatles' work being prog-rock in the conservative sense, which is what most people are after anyways. After so many decades of these bands being thought of as 'rock n roll bands', people are now deciding Deep Purple, Queen, Styx, The Beatles and so forth are now prog-rock. Where the hell have you people been if you are really correct? After all this time!!! Prog-rock is a style of music, as is classic rock. I'll tell you what prog-rock isn't; everything experimental and never done before.

Well said! There seems to be a belief in some quarters that any music that is ground-breaking/experimental deserves to have the tag progressive and I don't share that view.

...because they don't.

sleeper wrote: Lindsay Lohan wrote: The beatles had the biggest impact because they where the most commercial of the experimental bands Alas King Crimson sounds nothing like The beatles Youve mentioned this several times but because Dream Theater sounds nothing like Yes does this mean that Yes had no influence on DT? Of course they did.

Certainly DT sounds very much like YES and they are both bands of outstanding solo musicians. I'm just saying that some prog artists where perhaps influences but many others where not.

The beatles had the biggest impact because they where the most commercial of the experimental bands

Alas King Crimson sounds nothing like The beatles

moonlapse wrote: ken4musiq wrote: There would have been no Supper’s Ready or "show that never ends" without Sergeant Pepper’s. How can you possibly know or prove that?

 

The narrative is a part of the times but The Beatles gave it its impetus. Both of these pieces reference Sgt Pepper's. The presupposition of Supper's Ready is that two peope are sitting down to eat while this cosmological event unfolds around them.  The notion that cosomological events happen in real time to real people is implicit in Sgt Pepper's. Sgt Pepper taught the band to play in one day, "twenty years ago today"  this feat evidences a type of cosmological magic associated with the band, a magic that takes place in a sense of eternal "dayness."  Within You and Without You is another example.  Many writers see it as the focal point of the album. In the song we can have something more, love peace contentment,  if we want it in the "here and now."

Sgt Peppers like KE 9 was to be a performance vehicle for the band. Karnevil 9 references Mr. Kite when Sinfield speaks of all those show people like the gypsy queen, performing amazing tricks.  This  may have satired Emerson's stage antics.

The idea of Karnevil 9 is a show that preserves a past of lost innocense. This was the innocense that Sgt Pepper spoke of that was part of the 1960s mod generation and the desire for post war youth to make sense of their world. By 1973 the innocense was fading and you can see it in the music.  Dark Side, Brain Salad Surgery and Selling England all speak to something that has been lost, maybe not to be regained.

Edited by ken4musiq

The Beatles album St. Pepper was of June, 1967. The Doors first album, containing songs like The Chrystal Ship, Light my Fire and The End was already out in January, 1967. How can you say the Beatles influenced everybody else, and so the Beatles should be here and the Doors should not? This is a total miss of the Prog Archives. The Doors produced something completely new and also influenced loads of new bands (even upto now). Listen to "The End" and tell me it's not at least "proto-prog"! I also think the Beatles should be here, mainly for St. Pepper, but to say this was the "turning point" in music history is somewhat too strong. It was the time which made this happen!

The Lost Chord wrote: ...They were pioneers.  Every other band that did ANYTHING prog related like sgt peppers or magical mystery was just copying or were inspired by the Beatles, therefore bands like The Doors, rolling stones and led zeppelin should NOT be here, they did not pioneer prog like the beatles did. Hence, Proto-Prog

bravo!!!


the point had been made by numerous posters.... the Beatles were the catalyst for what we know as prog rock and should be here.  Let's face it, their early 'pop' for lack of a better word albums aren't exactly going to be hot topics of discussion, their latter albums..the more experimental....progressive albums will be what gets discussed here... along with their impact on the prog groups that followed them.  A No brainer here.  As far as the others...

The Doors-   No way... psychedelic blues based rock with a 'poet' for a lyricist.  Hardly progressive in the year 1967.

The Stones - a group that wore their influence of American blues and R&B on their sleeve.  A GREAT...GREAT group and amoung my non-prog favs, but shouldn't even really be considered.  Satanic Majesties Request while an interesting album was a diversion into psychedelia and not represenative of the group (though I love the album ....2000 light years from home.... killed some brain cells in my young and dumb days to that one hahahah)

Zeppelin - A group that shows the impact and influence of prog in the 70's... but not prog.  A group that evolved from strictly amplified blues 'covers'  and thievery ()  to incorperating elements of prog in their music.  Not a prog group however... not by a mile.

Ha... so then should be right put Chuck Berry in the archives!

The Lost Chord wrote: ...They were pioneers.  Every other band that did ANYTHING prog related like sgt peppers or magical mystery was just copying or were inspired by the Beatles, therefore bands like The Doors, rolling stones and led zeppelin should NOT be here, they did not pioneer prog like the beatles did.

IMO The Doors and Led Zeppelin, both in their own way, were pioneers too.

Many of so called heavy prog bands were influenced by LZ. I don't think Led Zeppelin are less progressive than, for example, guitar-driven Italian acts like GARYBALDI and I TEOREMI.

Edited by NotAProghead