Should Tangerine Dream Be In The Archive?

I think they should be included because they were one of the original synth pioneers in the seventies and were seen by many as being 'progressive'.Maybe they went a bit too New Age after 1986 when I have to admit to finding just about everything they did after that date a bit tedious but nevertheless they should be considered I feel.

Perhaps there could be a partial discography ie 1970-1983 (encompassing the Virgin years up to and including 'Hyperborea'). That would be my suggestion.Anyone agree?

Yes. As I mentioned in richardh's thread in the Featured CD forum, I'd very much like to see Tangerine Dream in the ProgArchives database.

Their very first album is not "synthetic", it's rather experimental, acid, very dark.

James Lee wrote: if Tangerine Dream is in, does that mean Jarre and Kraftwerk are in too?

One thing at a time, matey....

TD all the way.

Looks like the "ayes" have it.

I'd suggest the whole catalogue for a band be listed though, not just a partial one. Otherwise, we'd have endless debates about which of a band's output was prog enough for the site, and which wasn't. There's enough of that with bands, let alone individual albums!

Not sure if there's some confusion on the Aqua reference. I'm assuming it refers to the name of Froese's album, not a suggestion that the makers of "Barbie doll" be listed on the site!

Yeah, why not? There are less 'progressive' bands listed here. Anything TD released in the seventies is recommended to those who like their music MIND-BENDING. Well, I like 'em...

You mean TD aren't in the archives already...???

I don't think Jarre should be here, as his music is too poppy generally - if we allow Jarre, then we'll be letting in the likes of Sky (not a bad band at all, but not really prog!).

Kraftwerk are definite possibilities tho - and Tim Blake's two solo efforts are surely missing.

Talking of solo efforts, Pete Bardens appears to be absent as well.

Certif1ed wrote:  if we allow Jarre, then we'll be letting in the likes of Sky (not a bad band at all, but not really prog!).

I'm with you on Jarre, ('though I loved "Zoolookology" (sp?) when it came out, just before we all got fairlited to death.) but I must say a word in the defence of Sky's proggyness. They were the first band I ever saw live (aged 12) and at the time I had no problem calling them progressive, indeed, at the time they were the only new band with which myself and my fellow young prog mates (all 4 of them) could identify. I listened to "Sky II" last week and, frankly, if it's not prog then I don't know what criteria it fails on! Classical arrangements, Far Eastern melodies, dainty folk like dances, traditional, classical, and self penned music played on a mix of antiquated and contempary instruments, by highly trained musicians. Prog!

Fortunately (and justly), Sky are in the Archives, and so are Kayak, The Alan parsons Project,... what's the problem if Sky's sound is at times poppy? There's lots of tunes by them that go for sophisticated jazz pop, moder narrangements of classica lcompositions, etehrea lsymphonic stuff, even some dissonant stuff, too (how poppy can a drum-xylophone-vibes-marimba-tympani solo number be?). The poppy stuff is plain minority in their general repetoire.

I find many Jarre's compositions more catchy than poppy. Even the two tracks he plays with his fellow synthetist ensmeble and the beijing Symphony Orchestra in 'The Concerts in China'... is it poppy? It couldn't be poppy if it tried...