Queen?Prog Related? |
Post Reply | Page 123> |
Certif1ed wrote:
No - it's not a standard rock track by any stretch of the imagination, as my analysis shows.
Standard no way, I agree with you and never said it Cert, it's complex, but still IMO it's mainly Rock with an Operatic interlude.
Iván
|
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Honestly I like Bohemian Rhapsody more than Gentle Giant, but stoill I believe it's a rock track with operatic stravaganza that ends into a power ballad. |
Certif1ed wrote:
You know, I would say that about almost every rock band filed under symphonic - except The Enid. Potato, Patata...at the end is the same, we both agreed many times that the words Symphonic and classical have different meanings than the ones we use them for, but all the Prog community gets them and it's enough.}
Don't forget Opera, early 1900s popular music idioms, and, of course, please don't forget Prog Rock itself - even their very first album shows more than just signs of being influenced by the overblown pomposity of Prog Rock - and the varied influences, richly complex harmonies, time changes etc all add up to music well within Prog Rock's remit.
If youcheck out my previous pósts, probably the word that I repeated more in this thread is OPERA and if you read the first line of my quote which I have bolded, the PROG genre is the first one I mention.
Glam is what they looked like, Rock is what they sounded like, but Prog Rock is what they played - even though it upsets a lot of ostriches to think that. Never mentioned Glam, they sounded as Rock, but they played Prog, Rock, Blues, Musical, Vaudeville or Music Hall style, etc.
They're not my favourite band - but it beggars belief that there are still people who question the status of Queen, who blatantly - even cheekily - out-progged many prog bands. Queen outprogged many bands, but this is not a conytest, IMO they don't fit in any other sub-genre other than Prog Related, because they had some Prog moments but not a 100% Prog band.
/rant (not aimed at you personally, of course, Ivan - it just developed like that in this post!). I know, I never asked to remove them from Prog Related, but I insist they are not remotely Symphonic.
Actually, Bohemian Rhapsody goes many miles beyond the standard rock song - it is, indeed, a true Rhapsody. Going beyond doesn't necesarilly mean Progressive Rock, and much less Symphonic
Yes, it's got an intro - but a very intricate one with a cappella harmonies in a blend of simple classical and barbershop, but it breaks down almost instantly. When the piano line joins, it is playing something completely different to the vocals, and then when Freddie takes a lead line, it's not the first verse, but a continuation of the multi-threaded introduction. Agree totally
The "first verse" is completely different in structure to the "second" - if separate verses can truly be marked out - and where is the chorus? Answer: There isn't one. Just unfolding material that develops crazily with new ideas being thrown into the mix all the time. I''l save the rest for a review - but standard Rock Song BH most definitely ain't. It's more elegant a composition than almost anything else a rock band produced in 1975, and both structurally and musically it's way beyond the capabilities of most Prog Rock bands - in terms of composition. I'd bet that Gentle Giant wish they'd written it - it's in the same league. Honestly I like Bohemian Rhapsody more than Gentle Giant, but stoill I believe it's a rock track with operatic stravaganza that ends into a power ballad. But I agree - I would never call it symphonic. Neither do I.
Iván
|
maani wrote: Hmm.... As the person who argued most vociferously not include Queen on PA
(and in fact all but left the site over that debate), I will say
only this:
If Queen is re-categorized as Symphonic Prog, I will create and
introduce into PA a powerful virus that will change the
Yes page into the Barry Manilow page, the Genesis page into
the Lionel Ritchie page, the King Crimson page into the George
Michael page, the Dream Theater page into the Britney Spears page, and
the Pink Floyd page into the Kenny G page - just to name a few!
Peace. (or maybe not...) |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Queen Symphonic????? |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: They have some relation with Prog as they have with Blues, Pop and Classic Rock, |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: they are outstanding but they never released a Symphonic track, not even Bohemian Rhapsody which is a Rock song with some stravaganzas. |
richardh wrote: I would put Queen into a new sub genre 'glam prog' (..or preferably out the site altogether...even The Sweet were proggier) |
maani wrote: Ivan and Sean: [IMG]height=17 alt=Hug src="http://www.progarchives.com/forum/smileys/smiley31.gif" width=45 align=absMiddle>
Peace. |
toolis wrote: i'm afraid i'm going to need a stronger arguement my friend... |
toolis wrote: i mean, their sound is unique, they all are excellent players, they have all these different styles from track to track, they really progressed from album to album, and, let's face it, the essence of their music, the diathesis their music emits, if you like, is absolutely progressive.... apart from that, it's really unfair for Queen to be under the 'prog related' category, given that IMHO, their music is far more progressive and really closer to other bands considered prog... and i'm pretty sure that all of you agree that compared to many of the bands/artists that you oppose being in the PA, Queen are more progressive... |
Philéas wrote:
I'm sorry but, like Ivan says, you have no case. But then again, if you have no case, of course he can't argue it. |
Post Reply | Page 123> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |