| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Dick Heath 
Special Collaborator
Jazz-Rock Specialist
Joined: April 19 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 12818
|
 Posted: April 03 2006 at 17:25 |
|
Prog-related could be any time
since the 60's. And if people care to simply check what the Oxford
English Dictionary states what "proto" means (to summarised a lot of
technical details: "the first" or "primitive"), then we restrict
yourselves to music of the 60's (no, the 70's don't come into it). As
ever, it is debatable whether ITCOCK was the first - I'm still waiting for somebody to give definitive release dates by Island Records of Renaissance's eponymous LP and Krimson's first, which I remember were close together. Then the debate is whether Moody Blues Days of Future Past is the first (and perhaps because it is considered by some the first proto-prog. Nice (especially after their first British psychedelic album Thoughts of Emerlist Davjack)
were called prog music/prog rock from the earliest days and I
can't see a reason why viewed from the 21st century we should call them
proto-prog - we are not here to change history. Touch
I've always declared as having produced one the most obvious original
American prog albums - and when it is sampled for the first
progressive music album Wowie Zowie, (as is Nights In White Satin)
what the f*** are we pissing about with their pigeonholing some 40
years later. More effort should made to research these things and not
wild arse guess without due acknowlwedgment to the past.
Some suggestions of proto-prog groups:
Electric Prunes (if only for Mass)
The Doors (The End is a seminal prog track)
Great Society
Country Joe & The Fish
Jefferson Airplane
The Beatles for only some of their later albums (e.g. Revolver onwards)
Spirit's classic album 12 Dreams of Dr Sardonicus released 1970 or 71 - is not proto-prog becasue it post dates the 60's , but prog related. Deep Purple and (if some want) Black Sabbath are prog related.
|
 |
Dick Heath
Special Collaborator
Jazz-Rock Specialist
Joined: April 19 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 12818
|
Posted: April 03 2006 at 17:38 |
|
ITKOCK (Island Records) cat no ILPS 9111
Renaissance: ILPS 9114
Catalogue numbers are too close together, to make a sensible guess of the first to be released by Island
|
|
White Queen
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 28 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 218
|
Posted: April 03 2006 at 17:48 |
[/QUOTE]
Deep Purple are not here because of the 70s albums like Machine Head
or in Rock or the later albums, but because of the psychedelic stuff
from the 60s and their collaboration with a symphonic orchestra. [/QUOTE]
Metallica also worked with an orchestra, and if they come here, I'm leaving.
...so did Meat Loaf and Elton John (I think)
|
|
Garion81
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 22 2004
Location: So Cal, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4338
|
Posted: April 04 2006 at 13:04 |
To be honest when we debated the definition of these categories a long time ago it seems to me Proto-Prog was defined a time period between 1965-69. I do think it is a restrictive category to that time line. Here is what the collaborators agreed on:
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
So really I understand Dick Heaths arguments but under this definition The Nice and The Moody Blues could fit in this label comfortably because of the last sentence. If and when the site gets to the point of labeling albums instead of bands then we can be more specific.
I also think if you are going to debate these things you should start with the definition that is already listed in the archives. By all means if there is a better way to say it or if it needs redefining go for it but at least start with what is the standard. 
Edited by Garion81
|
"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?"
|
|
salmacis
Forum Senior Member
Content Addition
Joined: April 10 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 3928
|
Posted: April 04 2006 at 15:32 |
I don't see for a second how on earth 'proto prog' can include 70s bands, as by then it was a fully fledged genre and didn't have a foot in the psychedelic camp. I'd cut off 'proto prog' at around 1969, when the first wave of prog bands like King Crimson etc. were starting to emerge.
As for prog related, I think this could really be from all decades to be honest.
Edited by salmacis
|
|
Peter
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 31 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9669
|
Posted: April 04 2006 at 17:56 |
 Perhaps -- so I chose the 1st option.
 Still, I find these categories to be even more vague than "prog" itself, and potentially so broad (especially "prog related") as to be almost meaningless. If we can't even agree on "prog," how in the heck can we decide what influenced it (beyond the generic "rock," and, of course jazz, classical and psychedelic), or what is "related" to it? 
Edited by Peter Rideout
|
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
|
|
Peter
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 31 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9669
|
Posted: April 04 2006 at 17:59 |
Perhaps -- so I chose the 1st option.
Still, I find these categories to be even more vague than "prog" itself, and potentially so broad (especially "prog related") as to be almost meaningless. If we can't even agree on "prog," how in the heck can we decide what influenced it (beyond the generic "rock," and, of course jazz, classical and psychedelic), or what is "related" to it?
Edited by Peter Rideout
|
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
|
|
Peter
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 31 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9669
|
Posted: April 04 2006 at 18:00 |
Damn! Hit the "quote" instead of the "edit" button again!
Carry on....
Edited by Peter Rideout
|
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
|
|
terramystic
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 02 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 781
|
Posted: April 04 2006 at 18:33 |
 earlyprog wrote:
No, proto-prog is not early prog as such. The Beatles
is proto-prog but not prog - not even a single song may be categorized
as prog (well, perhaps A Day In The Life). Nonetheless they influenced
the early prog music. The Nice is not a prog band, but they did have
individual songs (not entire albums) that were prog - hence they are
also proto-prog. The first full-blown prog album was In The Court Of
The Crimson King, therefore King Crimson is prog, not proto-prog.
Moreover, "prog related" is NOT prog because only very few segments of individual songs may be categorized as prog. |
Not in my book. "Proto" as the name tells isn't something different.
It's just indicating that the genre at the time isn't fully mature yet.
It's in infancy, childhood, early stage... So it is an essential part
of prog not something different or separated e.g. ELP is a next natural
stage of Nice, if you see what I mean.
|
|
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator
Prog Folk
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20414
|
Posted: April 06 2006 at 05:34 |
I think the idea about proto prog is quite clear: it should concern groups that were around before the 70's , and I chose to include two spanish bands from 70 and 71 in proto-prog because their sound was typical psych/prog in a way that no other possible solution was correct. But most psych groups of the era should have accessibility to that category>>> after all we included Iron Butterfly which has very few elements of prog (>>> see my reviews)
As for prog-related, I have not seen why this should be reserved to 70's groups as well and 80's, 90's groups are welcome in the category: BUT one should wait until the group has a few albums out before including it in prog related>>> the reason is that if a band has only two albums and should be included, than it is obviously that they are at least worthy of art rock
|
|
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
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21596
|
Posted: April 06 2006 at 05:52 |
Sean Trane wrote:
I think the idea about proto prog is quite clear: it should concern groups that were around before the 70's , and I chose to include two spanish bands from 70 and 71 in proto-prog because their sound was typical psych/prog in a way that no other possible solution was correct. But most psych groups of the era should have accessibility to that category>>> after all we included Iron Butterfly which has very few elements of prog (>>> see my reviews)
|
What about the newer genres like Neo-Prog or Prog Metal?
|
|
|
|
Trickster F.
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2006
Location: Belize
Status: Offline
Points: 5308
|
Posted: April 06 2006 at 12:59 |
Mike, will Katatonia ever come back to the archives?
-- Ivan
|
|
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator
Prog Folk
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20414
|
Posted: April 07 2006 at 05:34 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Sean Trane wrote:
I think the idea about proto prog is quite clear: it should concern groups that were around before the 70's , and I chose to include two spanish bands from 70 and 71 in proto-prog because their sound was typical psych/prog in a way that no other possible solution was correct. But most psych groups of the era should have accessibility to that category>>> after all we included Iron Butterfly which has very few elements of prog (>>> see my reviews)
|
What about the newer genres like Neo-Prog or Prog Metal?
|
Not sure I follow your drift regarding my comments on proto prog, but I'll give it a shot
neo-prog clearly states a period (such as proto-prog does too) as well as a style of music and it is clearly about 80's and later groups>> therefore there should be a time limit as for the debut of this era
Although I am certainly no expert (and I couldbe wrong about this) Progmetal starts IMHO opinion with Queensryche's Operation Mindcrime which has 88 as a release year, I think. Therefore, I think no groups that did metal albums before should be included in progmetal >> Imust say I have not checked up on this whether this is the case on this site
Of course exceptions are to be made if a band started out as a plain metal group in the 80's and veered prog-metal in the 90's
Hope i answered the way you were hoping for
|
|
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
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21596
|
Posted: April 07 2006 at 05:40 |
^ I meant that if we take "Proto" literally, also metal bands of the 80s could be accepted as "Proto-Prog-Metal", just like 60s Psychedelic Rock bands can be accepted as "Proto-Prog-Rock".
Examples for Proto-Prog-Metal:
- Diamond Head
- Metallica (Master of Puppets/... And Justice For All)
- Megadeth (Peace Sells/Rust in Peace)
But these would be difficult additions, and that's why I asked the question whether we want to allow this or not. The consequence of taking Proto-Prog/Prog-Related literally would be that we would have to accept a lot more bands than we currently do.
|
|
|
|
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator
Prog Folk
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20414
|
Posted: April 07 2006 at 05:45 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
^ I meant that if we take "Proto" literally, also metal bands of the 80s could be accepted as "Proto-Prog-Metal", just like 60s Psychedelic Rock bands can be accepted as "Proto-Prog-Rock".
Examples for Proto-Prog-Metal:
- Diamond Head
- Metallica (Master of Puppets/... And Justice For All)
- Megadeth (Peace Sells/Rust in Peace)
But these would be difficult additions, and that's why I asked the question whether we want to allow this or not. The consequence of taking Proto-Prog/Prog-Related literally would be that we would have to accept a lot more bands than we currently do.
|
I amost headed in that direction , but thought I'd let you come in expressing this idea
Yes I think that wa could talk about proto-progmetal in a way and this could head backto Blue Cheer, High tide and Zeppelin or Sabbath as far back into history
|
|
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
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21596
|
Posted: April 07 2006 at 05:49 |
^ And that's exactly the problem. Either we take it literally and ahve to accept many non-prog bands in order to be consistent ... or we restrict the inclusion to Proto-Classic-Prog-Rock and Prog-Related from the 70s (1st wave of prog rock). Or something completely different ...
|
|
|
|
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator
Prog Folk
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20414
|
Posted: April 07 2006 at 05:59 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
^ And that's exactly the problem. Either we take it literally and ahve to accept many non-prog bands in order to be consistent ... or we restrict the inclusion to Proto-Classic-Prog-Rock and Prog-Related from the 70s (1st wave of prog rock). Or something completely different ... |
I could sense youcoming out with that, and I agree partly with that, but a line shopuld be drawn somewhere or else soon or later, the Bee Gees and Slade will be in the Archives
Got a solution?
|
|
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
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21596
|
Posted: April 07 2006 at 06:05 |
|
^ try to limit the proto-prog/prog-related category to classic bands ... maybe also some from the 80s which are related to neo-prog, or proto-prog-metal.
|
|
|
|
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator
Prog Folk
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20414
|
Posted: April 07 2006 at 06:22 |
This is a very subjective criteria, but I am not opposed to it
but those hundreds of possibilities of entries would certainly dilute the content of the database
I would say that if proto-prog is a necessary evil (given the date resrictions) , the prog-related or proto-progmetal (do ypu think that we could apply this proto prefix to RIO or Cantyerbury then?) shopuld be limited in numbers
the problem is that we always think that since X and Y are in , why not Z?
|
|
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
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21596
|
Posted: April 07 2006 at 06:45 |
|
Maybe the key is only to list the most important bands. WE could mention in the "genre" description that we only list a selection of artists here, as opposed to the prog genres where we try to list all artists. Which artist makes it into the artists is a subjective (but collective) decision ...
|
|
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Proto/Related ... only for 70s?
