Should Miles Davis be in the archives

With bands included like "Iron Maiden" and "The Doors" I don't think ti would hurt at all.

there's no doubt he is fusion.... although I admit that it's in a different vein from many other fusion bands listed here (taking more from funk rhythms and such)... I still have to listen to many of his albums but there's no doubt that Miles did fusion... and people should know there are no preconceived sounds in fusion

Atavachron wrote: Cheesecakemouse wrote: The T wrote: Let's not forget the ROCK part of the term progressive-rock. Even though Miles Davis' music is excellent, I think this is not an all-genre music website, it's a prog-rock website. I think, even though he may have done some work with rock elements, his music should not be part of the archives.   According to your logic then neither should Univers Zero, Art Zoyd Jean Michel Jarre, Mike Oldfield and Tangerine Dream be allowed on this website. Actually there is an excellent argument to be made for just that. None of the artists you mention are rock except for maybe UZ. The exclusion of Jarre, Oldfield and Tangerine Dream would be entire logical and appropriate. I like all of them and am glad they are here, they made huge impacts. But if they were not here it would also make sense.

I agree completely with this last comment. It makes some sense for them to be inlcuded here (stretching it a little bit, specially with master Jarre whose music I love but it's not too "rocky")... but it would make even more sense not to have them on PA.
    

Atavachron wrote: Cheesecakemouse wrote: Atavachron wrote: I love Miles and he did *bring together* the players that later invented jazz-rock fusion, but none of his records in the 60s present whole-heartedly the direction and sound that it would shortly take. Essentially I agree with Dick and in fact the first true jazz-rock band leader was Tony Williams, in particular the 'Emergency' LP. Sometimes it feels as if many have not thoroughly listened to these records in order to make the connections and comparisons so important to musical history. Miles Davis Proto-prog or Prog-related? No, I don't think so. When carefully examined, the music in context with the time it was recorded shows Miles did not create fusion though he did create an environment in which it later flourished. We owe him a great deal, but more as an *instigator* of jazz rock not a participant. Perhaps an honorary position with a bio and discog but no album reviews by members. Miles Davis was progressive jazz, not jazz-rock. There is a huge difference.             Sorry but yo're the first person I've heard state Davis fusion  was not fusion, all the magazines, films websites state his fusion as fusion, so in my eyes your argument carries very little weight. You take your cues from magazines, films and websites? Much information about these artists is gathered by people who are not musicologists or players in an effort to archive them with the best of intentions but questionable conclusions. An *independant* analysis is what is important, make up your *own* mind based on all available evidence, not on some writer or filmmaker.

Atavachron wrote: Cheesecakemouse wrote: The T wrote: Let's not forget the ROCK part of the term progressive-rock. Even though Miles Davis' music is excellent, I think this is not an all-genre music website, it's a prog-rock website. I think, even though he may have done some work with rock elements, his music should not be part of the archives.   According to your logic then neither should Univers Zero, Art Zoyd Jean Michel Jarre, Mike Oldfield and Tangerine Dream be allowed on this website. Actually there is an excellent argument to be made for just that. None of the artists you mention are rock except for maybe UZ. The exclusion of Jarre, Oldfield and Tangerine Dream would be entire logical and appropriate. I like all of them and am glad they are here, they made huge impacts. But if they were not here it would also make sense.

Cheesecakemouse wrote: The T wrote: Let's not forget the ROCK part of the term progressive-rock. Even though Miles Davis' music is excellent, I think this is not an all-genre music website, it's a prog-rock website. I think, even though he may have done some work with rock elements, his music should not be part of the archives.   According to your logic then neither should Univers Zero, Art Zoyd Jean Michel Jarre, Mike Oldfield and Tangerine Dream be allowed on this website.

Actually there is an excellent argument to be made for just that. None of the artists you mention are rock except for maybe UZ. The exclusion of Jarre, Oldfield and Tangerine Dream would be entire logical and appropriate. I like all of them and am glad they are here, they made huge impacts. But if they were not here it would also make sense.
    

^^or Gryphon

I love Miles and he did *bring together* the players that later invented jazz-rock fusion, but none of his records in the 60s present whole-heartedly the direction and sound that it would shortly take. Essentially I agree with Dick and in fact the first true jazz-rock band leader was Tony Williams, in particular the 'Emergency' LP. Sometimes it feels as if many have not thoroughly listened to these records in order to make the connections and comparisons so important to musical history. Miles Davis Proto-prog or Prog-related? No, I don't think so. When carefully examined, the music in context with the time it was recorded shows Miles did not create fusion though he did create an environment in which it later flourished. We owe him a great deal, but more as an *instigator* of jazz rock not a participant. Perhaps an honorary position with a bio and discog but no album reviews by members.

Miles Davis was progressive jazz, not jazz-rock. There is a huge difference.


    
    

Edited by Atavachron - January 04 2007 at 21:16

^^I forgot to mention that... good that you did