| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
lordoflight 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 24 2005
Location: Malta
Status: Offline
Points: 105
|
 Posted: March 15 2006 at 09:27 |
 moonlapse wrote:
lordoflight wrote:
People should complain when their favourite bands are not included on this site, not when a band whcih they do not consider prog is added. So what if a non-prog band is added ? Are you so narrow minded and limited by genres and titles ? Just dont click on the link to the bands you dont consider prog and that's it.
This site provides useful information about bands - discography, line ups, reviews, etc and the more bands it has and the more the people it helps, the better. So from now on, when a band which is not prog is added, just remember that other people may find it useful and stop being a narrow minded arse hole genre fanatic. |
Not again.
Speaking of narrow-minded, you are telling people when they should complain and when they shouldn't. Did someone die and leave you boss?
If somebody doesn't agree with Iron Butterfly being added, or any other band for that matter, seems there's always someone who'll come on and label them narrow-minded.
Or, someone else comes on and says it must be hard to run a site like this, so you shouldn't disagree with anything.
If people want to disagree and state their opinion why is that such a big issue? Makes for interesting discussion as far as I'm concerned.
Just for the record, I'm not arguing one way or the other for IB's inclusion as I'm not familiar enough with their music.
|
i meant narrow minded in the sense that since they do not consider prog or even prog-related, they want to leave them out just for the sake of not including them as they may be not prog. Isn't that narrow minded?
The inclusions of bands they have no interest in should not annoy them. There are many bands which i do not like on this site - some prog and some which i do not consider as prog - yet i dont want them to be removed just because i dont like them or because they should not be here, because anybody who is interested in them is able to look them up here.
|
 |
Peter
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 31 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9669
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 09:38 |
erik neuteboom wrote:
I am pleased with the Iron Butterfly addition because this band has more to do with the development of progressvie rock than the overrated The Beatles, this band was a media hype from the Sixties. Now let's wait for more justice like Jefferson Airplane, The Doors and Jeff Beck  ! |
As the owners and the majority of the mods have decided we must have "prog related" and "proto prog" categories here because of the site's "evangelical" mission to spread prog to all and sundry classic rock fans, and "lure" the youngsters into trying classic prog (thus ensuring the music's "survival into the next millennium" -- wonder how they'll know), I have no problem with the inclusion of Iron Butterfly, or others. The music and artists that I consider "prog" (a subjective concept) are still here in their place of prominence, and this site remains a valuable and thorough progressive music resource.
I am, however, shocked and confused to discover the the Beatles -- arguably the most important & influential band in the history of rock/pop -- were "overrated" and a product of "media hype." There was I (in company with many other folks whom I consider intelligent and independent-minded), for the last 38 years or so, thoroughly enjoying their well-crafted and very catchy songs, wholly unaware that I (and, it seems, the numerous fine, respected musicians like Jeff Beck -- to name but one; there have been hundreds -- who've seen fit to cover the Beatles' music over the years) have been a sheep-like victim of "media hype," "overrating" and brainwashing all along! How could I, and half of the world, have been so blind, deceived and naive?
Thank you, Erik, oh infallible arbiter of taste, for finally setting me (and everyone else) straight on this clearly sub-par band. I'll stop liking them forthwith! (Too bad you couldn't have revealed THE TRUTH before we bought so many of their albums and made them the most successful band of the 20th Century, though! )
Shall I ditch the Stones, CCR, or the Doors -- no wait, they're still good, right? -- next?
Seriously, why attack one beloved band to praise another? 
The words "snobbish arrogance" come to mind....
BTW, I don't really give a damn about the Fab Four's supposed influence on prog. I just enjoy their songs -- which will doubtlessly continue to be loved, covered and played long after you, I -- and yes, even Jefferson Airplane -- are long gone and forgotten.....
Edited by Peter
|
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
|
|
Chicapah
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 14 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8238
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 09:39 |
|
From one who was there when Iron Butterfly came onto the music scene, they belong on this site. Allow me to say this. There was no progressive rock scene going on at that time! Psychedelic music was the closest we got. Listen to "Piper at the Gates of Dawn" and tell me that it is more progressive than Inagaddadavida. NOT! It is pure psychedelia! If you have a site that features nothing but symphonic prog I'll show you a very narrow and limited target audience that would want to participate.
|
|
"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
|
|
Easy Livin
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 09:45 |
Peter wrote:
As the owners and the majority of the mods have decided we must have "prog related" and "proto prog" categories here because of the site's "evangelical" mission to spread prog to all and sundry classic rock fans, and "lure" the youngsters into trying classic prog (thus ensuring the music's "survival into the next milenium" -- wonder how they'll know), I have no problem with the inclusion of Iron Butterfly, or others. The music and artists that I consider "prog" (a subjective concept) are still here in their place of prominence, and this site remains a valuable and thorough progressive music resource.
|
Just to pick you up on one thing Peter, the decision was that of the owners, the "mods" simply communicated it and facilitated its implementation.
We do of course each have our own opinions on such matters.
(is that how you spell milenium by the way?  )
|
|
moonlapse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 15 2005
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 464
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 09:46 |
lordoflight wrote:
i meant narrow minded in the sense that since they
do not consider prog or even prog-related, they want to leave them out
just for the sake of not including them as they may be not prog. Isn't
that narrow minded?
The inclusions of bands they have no interest in should not annoy
them. There are many bands which i do not like on this site - some prog
and some which i do not consider as prog - yet i dont want them to be
removed just because i dont like them or because they should not be
here, because anybody who is interested in them is able to look them up
here. |
It's not narrow-minded. Those proto-prog bands also had
influences - could you say it's narrow-minded to exclude those
also? A line must be drawn somewhere. Your line might be at
proto-prog, while others prefer to draw the line at prog. Their
opinion vs. yours on what the site should be.
The site gets diluted with what a lot of us agree are some questionable
additions, so it's natural for people to express concern about the
overall direction of the site.
Also, Atkingani's stats about it being only 1% of bands on the site are
meaningless, because proto-prog is a relatively new category. So
of course this number will be low at this point.
|
|
lordoflight
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 24 2005
Location: Malta
Status: Offline
Points: 105
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 09:52 |
moonlapse wrote:
lordoflight wrote:
i meant narrow minded in the sense that since they do not consider prog or even prog-related, they want to leave them out just for the sake of not including them as they may be not prog. Isn't that narrow minded?
The inclusions of bands they have no interest in should not annoy them. There are many bands which i do not like on this site - some prog and some which i do not consider as prog - yet i dont want them to be removed just because i dont like them or because they should not be here, because anybody who is interested in them is able to look them up here.
|
It's not narrow-minded. Those proto-prog bands also had influences - could you say it's narrow-minded to exclude those also? A line must be drawn somewhere. Your line might be at proto-prog, while others prefer to draw the line at prog. Their opinion vs. yours on what the site should be.
The site gets diluted with what a lot of us agree are some questionable additions, so it's natural for people to express concern about the overall direction of the site.
Also, Atkingani's stats about it being only 1% of bands on the site are meaningless, because proto-prog is a relatively new category. So of course this number will be low at this point.
|
]
That's exactly my point. Why should there be a limit?
|
|
Guests
Forum Guest Group
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 09:57 |
 to OFUR:: YOU CAN ALWAY LEAVE THIS SITE, THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST PROGG/ROCK SITES OUT THERE . IRON BUTTERFLY WAS A GREART BAND WHICH NEVER REALLY GOT THE CREDIT THEY DESERVED..CHECK THEM OUT DONT BE SO QUICK TO JUDGE,IM SURE THERE ARE PEOPLE ON THIS SITE THAT DONT CARE FOR SOME OF YOUR TASTE.... 
|
|
Peter
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 31 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9669
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 09:57 |
Easy Livin wrote:
Peter wrote:
As the owners and the majority of the mods have decided we must have "prog related" and "proto prog" categories here because of the site's "evangelical" mission to spread prog to all and sundry classic rock fans, and "lure" the youngsters into trying classic prog (thus ensuring the music's "survival into the next milenium" -- wonder how they'll know), I have no problem with the inclusion of Iron Butterfly, or others. The music and artists that I consider "prog" (a subjective concept) are still here in their place of prominence, and this site remains a valuable and thorough progressive music resource.
|
Just to pick you up on one thing Peter, the decision was that of the owners, the "mods" simply communicated it and facilitated its implementation.
We do of course each have our own opinions on such matters.
(is that how you spell milenium by the way?)
|
Jeez -- I meant to look it up! (Yes, I still do that, and frequently! )
Thus: M-I-L-L-E-N-N-I-U-M
(Thanks, Webster's....)
|
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
|
|
A'swepe
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 08 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 590
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 10:02 |
robertplantowns wrote:
I bet none of you have listened to every Iron Butterfly album, so you really have no ability to judge their entrance based solely on In-a-Gadda-da-Vida. They're just as proto-prog as any other proto-prog group on this site, and even more prog than Deep Purple (which is one of my favorite groups) Iron Butterfly did more to develop a metal sound (dare I say it) before Led Zeppelin and they are completely overlooked for their achievement. I guarantee none of you have listened to all their albums from 1968-1970 so I don't think any of you are qualified to speak on this. Go listen to their discography from the first line up, then come back and tell me that you think they deserve to be on this site as much as any other proto-prog group, I dare you. |
Pretty steep guarantee there Rob. At a 52 year old Prog fan, I was in high school in 1968 when In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida came out. It got a lot of airplay & turned me on to a fresh style previously unexperienced. I went out & bought Ball & then Heavy. I have Iron Butterfly Live & Metamorphosis (a wonderful transition album IMO). I even have copies of the terrible (compared to their late 60's output) Sun and Steel & Scorching Beauty.
IMO the only band that sounded remotely like IB was The Doors, mainly due to their keyboard-oriented sound - I don't think the two bands styles are the same - they were both Progressive at the time, doing stuff few others were doing.
I think I am "qualified to speak on this". I'm not disagreeing with you at all, I simply object to you assumption that noone here has heard the majority of their output.
BTW, Deep Purple is one of my favorites as well, & no, they aren't prog.
No, Iron Butterfly is NOT Prog - but I don't have a problem with them being here as Proto-Prog. They were progressive & groundbreaking in 1968. They deserve to be here.
Edited by A'swepe
|
|
David - Never doubt in the dark that which you believe to be true in the light.
http://www.myspace.com/aardvarktxusa - Instrumental rock
http://www.soundclick.com/aardvarktxusa
|
|
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator
Prog Folk
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20239
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 10:14 |
Peter wrote:
Jeez -- I meant to look it up! (Yes, I still do that, and frequently!)
Thus: M-I-L-L-E-N-N-I-U-M
(Thanks, Webster's....)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I suppose soon you will be thank MAX Webster since the next provocating inclusion is likely to be the Sarnia boys (getting closer to Timmins by the minute)
And then CANO (who where from Sudbury and North Bay if I remember well)
but you'd better find something from your area before we include Winnipeg's Guess Who and Regina's Streetheart (just joking on these last ones )
Any prog-related groups from Thunder Bay ??? |
Edited by Sean Trane
|
|
let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
|
|
erik neuteboom
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 27 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 7659
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 10:21 |
Hello Peter.
If many reviewers take the possibility to hail all the music made by The Beatles, I take the right to nail The Beatles, just as I see them. The fact that The Doors, Santana and Jefferson Airplane are still not included while The Beatles flood this site, for me it is clear that music has become too subjective on this site.
Let you venom and sarcasm flow, Peter, allow yourself to call me snobish or arrogant, I don't mind at all! For me the most important thing is that I feel supported on this site by many progheads who love my reviews about symphonic rock/progressive rock, that's where this site is about, informing progheads about the wonderful world of progrock/symphonic rock. And at some moments I am a bit unpleasant towards The Beatles or Eighties Yes and Genesis, then it's me who needs to let flow some venom ... oh, no, not again that arrogant snob Erik ... !
|
|
erlenst
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 17 2005
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 387
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 10:33 |
Ofur wrote:
Nobody agrees on what prog is? Well then I demand that Elvis and The Sex Pistols be put on the archives. |
Are you pretending to be stupid or are you just an ass ?
|
|
Peter
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 31 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9669
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 10:34 |
erik neuteboom wrote:
Hello Peter.
If many reviewers take the possibility to hail all the music made by The Beatles, I take the right to nail The Beatles, just as I see them. The fact that The Doors, Santana and Jefferson Airplane are still not included while The Beatles flood this site, for me it is clear that music has become too subjective on this site.
Let you venom and sarcasm flow, Peter, allow yourself to call me snobish or arrogant, I don't mind at all! For me the most important thing is that I feel supported on this site by many progheads who love my reviews about symphonic rock/progressive rock, that's where this site is about, informing progheads about the wonderful world of progrock/symphonic rock. And at some moments I am a bit unpleasant towards The Beatles or Eighties Yes and Genesis, then it's me who needs to let flow some venom ... oh, no, not again that arrogant snob Erik ... !
|
Sorry Erik, that was a tad aggressive, I'll admit, but the inclusion of "IMO" would have helped soften the blow you delivered to all us Beatles fans.
And I really don't like that ubiquitous "overrated' word that so many toss around so casually here. Taste in music is individual -- just because I (and Jeff Beck -- ever hear his great instrumental cover of "A day in the Life?") like the Beatles, doesn't mean I'm a victim of "media hype."
I made my point, so I'm done.
Peace, bud!
|
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
|
|
rockandrail
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 22 2005
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 310
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 10:39 |
I had the chance to see Iron Butterfly in concert in Brussels in 1970. Guess who was the supporting act? a young band called "Yes" who had just released "Time and a Word"
What does it means? It means that back in 1970, for the concert organizers, Iron Butterfly and Yes were playing in the same vein and deserved to be associated. Why should Iron Butterfly be banned from the site today just because they did not developped more into "pure" prog. Would prog be an eugenic genre?
Should I add that, IMHO (very humble), I feel a much more progressive attitude in bands like Iron Butterfly or in the early Deep Purple albums than in some Metal records that find themselves qualified as "Prog" just because there is a 10 seconds organ break in the middle of 60 minutes of noise.
Edited by rockandrail
|
|
Pierre R, the man who lost his signature
|
|
erik neuteboom
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 27 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 7659
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 10:43 |
OK, Peter, it is not my intention to hurt people by using words like 'overrated' and 'media-hype' but I am deadly serious about my point of view about The Beatles: I really don't understand why this music is so hailed? Recently I have borrowed Revolver and Sgt Pepper (see my reviews from last week) and I can heardly trace any interesting song, for it's a bunch of entertaining poprock, nothing less or more. I felt disappointed when so many collaborators decided to reject The Doors, I can't understand this because their blend of jazz, rock, blues an dsome flamenco is so progressive.
You feel not pleasant by the words I used about The Beatles but I feel unpleasant by all the attention for The Beatles while there is so much more interesting to explore than the Fab Four ..
So I am glad with Iron Butterfly, these bands belong to the history of the development of the progressive rock movement, like Vanilla Fudge, this band is underrated!
|
|
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator
Prog Folk
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20239
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 10:49 |
erlenst wrote:
Ofur wrote:
Nobody agrees on what prog is? Well then I demand that Elvis and The Sex Pistols be put on the archives. |
Are you pretending to be stupid or are you just an ass ?
|
I think the man is well past pretending so
he is 100% pure juice (made from concentrated but with added pulp)
|
|
let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
|
|
Peter
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 31 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9669
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 11:15 |
erik neuteboom wrote:
OK, Peter, it is not my intention to hurt people by using words like 'overrated' and 'media-hype' but I am deadly serious about my point of view about The Beatles: I really don't understand why this music is so hailed? Recently I have borrowed Revolver and Sgt Pepper (see my reviews from last week) and I can heardly trace any interesting song, for it's a bunch of entertaining poprock, nothing less or more. I felt disappointed when so many collaborators decided to reject The Doors, I can't understand this because their blend of jazz, rock, blues an dsome flamenco is so progressive.
You feel not pleasant by the words I used about The Beatles but I feel unpleasant by all the attention for The Beatles while there is so much more interesting to explore than the Fab Four ..
So I am glad with Iron Butterfly, these bands belong to the history of the development of the progressive rock movement, like Vanilla Fudge, this band is underrated!
|
I've largely given up fretting about which bands are added here, Erik -- most of the artists I lobbied against (Fairport Convention, Queen, etc) were included anyway.
For the record, I don't plan to review any Beatles (or Purple, etc.) albums. I have a long list of (almost certainly) "real" prog albums here that I've yet to review, and I continue to discover fine new prog acts via my friends and associates here (Umphrey's McGee, Mind Sky, Steve Unruh, etc.).
So many prog albums, so little time -- and, it seems, motivation!
PS: I advise you not to be too "deadly serious" about this stuff -- it's just music we're discussing, after all, and music should be a source of unity, entertainment and pleasure -- not discord, peevishness or pain!
Cheers! 
P.
PPS: How 'bout them mellotrons, eh?
Edited by Peter
|
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
|
|
Ofur
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 17 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 11:15 |
rockandrail wrote:
I had the chance to see Iron Butterfly in concert in Brussels in 1970. Guess who was the supporting act? a young band called "Yes" who had just released "Time and a Word"
What does it means? It means that back in 1970, for the concert organizers, Iron Butterfly and Yes were playing in the same vein and deserved to be associated. Why should Iron Butterfly be banned from the site today just because they did not developped more into "pure" prog. Would prog be an eugenic genre?
Should I add that, IMHO (very humble), I feel a much more progressive attitude in bands like Iron Butterfly or in the early Deep Purple albums than in some Metal records that find themselves qualified as "Prog" just because there is a 10 seconds organ break in the middle of 60 minutes of noise.
|
Iron Butterfly supported Yes? That is totally meaningless. Hendrix supported The Monkees on a tour.
|
|
Ofur
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 17 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 11:18 |
|
|
|
Ofur
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 17 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: March 15 2006 at 11:22 |
Sean Trane wrote:
erlenst wrote:
Ofur wrote:
Nobody agrees on what prog is? Well then I demand that Elvis and The Sex Pistols be put on the archives. |
Are you pretending to be stupid or are you just an ass ?
|
I think the man is well past pretending so
he is 100% pure juice (made from concentrated but with added pulp)
|
Stop pretending to be stupid yourself, you know very well what I mean when I say that Elvis and The Sex Pistols should be on this site.
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Iron Butterfly? This site is ridiculous