RIO Drop-In Centre

I've heard of them, but have heard nothing by them.  They do certainly sound interesting.

That reminds me about something... Cammere Zimmer Rooms!

Oops, oh well.


Edited by Geck0 - December 07 2006 at 23:42

Bj-1 wrote: Howe Protege wrote: I've actually grown to really appreciate the quirkiness that is The Residents.  I have Duck Stab / Buster & Glen and was wondering if this album is weirder or less weird than their other albums and where to go from here.     Eskimo from 1979 is probably their most inaccessible release ever, more bizarre than Duck Stab/B&G, though in a calmer way. I think "Not Available" is a great choice if want to get more "into" them.

I think Not Available is good, but quite 'normal'sounding.

For more quirkyness and weirdness: Meet the Residents, Commercial Album and Fingerprince, all fantastic! Another favorite of mine is the not so weird, almost industrial Mark of the Mole (only the first, '81 album)


Edited by Rocktopus - December 08 2006 at 04:27

listennow801 wrote: and all we need to do is search the web to learn that the descrip of the genre here is far from definitive world over. but don't worry, I get it - thinking & hyper-seriousness not encouraged here, as in most of the world [IMG]height=17 alt=Shocked src="http://www.progarchives.com/forum/smileys/smiley3.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle> ... [lighten up baby!]

    

Not encouraged?

Thanks

It's not like we had debates and discussions on it in the Team's thread in th collab zome and in PM between the team members. Yes, we definitely did not enforce our thinking power.
I don't know who wrote those definitions and I think they are partial to say the least if not at all informative. I think they need change/editing/update etc. But from here to saying we are downright stupid... There's a distance.

(really getting tired of this site and constant battles. always the negative side is shown, just like in real life. it's like having a double real life in fact. I'll rethink if I want to continue on the team, I work better alone and honestly I get enough of those battles in real life, I dont need them here).

^^^
I see. I misunderstood you, sorry. 
We are interested in te subject. If you look back in threads in the "general" forum and the collab zone you'll see many debates about the various aspects of what is prog how to define it and the different styles and sub-genres of it.
The genre definition here needs an overhaul, I said in my previous post. One elementary thing is first to mention the history of RIO. There is nothing there about 12/4/78 RIO festevial and the particiating bands, for starters. I think that you and Syzygy can be our best fitted people here to tell people about the history of this side of prog. I read about it, but it's not like actually living in those times and going to those concerts back then, listening to those vynils and experiencing it all first hand.
Then there is the matter which we discussed in the ZAT thread about which bands to include/exclude but I said there, that we managed to make the problem clear, but not the solution.
RIO has it's original bands and then the RIO sound-alike or RIO-related (for instance ZAAR). And then you have Avantgarde prog rock which is the term we need to broaden if we want to include some bands on our list (ok maybe that is the solution).

Anyway, for the coming while, I'll take a break from ZART business and only try to enjoy the music itself (and give and receive recommendations), since I seem to (like Joren) lose the joy of listening to music.

I apologize for misinterpreting your words and twisting them, Claire.



 

avestin wrote: ^^^ I see. I misunderstood you, sorry.  We are interested in te subject. If you look back in threads in the "general" forum and the collab zone you'll see many debates about the various aspects of what is prog how to define it and the different styles and sub-genres of it. The genre definition here needs an overhaul, I said in my previous post. One elementary thing is first to mention the history of RIO. There is nothing there about 12/4/78 RIO festevial and the particiating bands, for starters. I think that you and Syzygy can be our best fitted people here to tell people about the history of this side of prog. I read about it, but it's not like actually living in those times and going to those concerts back then, listening to those vynils and experiencing it all first hand. Then there is the matter which we discussed in the ZAT thread about which bands to include/exclude but I said there, that we managed to make the problem clear, but not the solution. RIO has it's original bands and then the RIO sound-alike or RIO-related (for instance ZAAR). And then you have Avantgarde prog rock which is the term we need to broaden if we want to include some bands on our list (ok maybe that is the solution). Anyway, for the coming while, I'll take a break from ZART business and only try to enjoy the music itself (and give and receive recommendations), since I seem to (like Joren) lose the joy of listening to music. I apologize for misinterpreting your words and twisting them, Claire.

Assaf, if the time comes for you depart (hopefully that won't happen), then of course, we need to discuss who is going to run the team.

Claire, the definition definitely needs changing and I am willing to help out, if and when this gets done.

I believe we need a "clear up" session in the future.  I mean a bit like what the Symphonic Team are doing.  A re-write of the definition first and foremost, needs to be done.  Then we have to decide if we need to split up the genre into smaller chunks (if we can permission to do so).

I had an idea that the genre needs to be split as thus:

RIO/RIO-related - the original RIO bands, plus off-shoots and soundalike/influenced by bands.
Avant-prog - those avant-garde prog bands that don't sound like RIO bands
Noise/noise-related - those bands that are noise orientated, but also are progressive.  Some may have changed their sound too, into a less noise orientated sound

I don't know if this idea will be accepted by the owners though.  So for the time being, we need to clearly define and break down the different styles in the description itself.

We need to first write about the history of this type of music.  We need to mention fringe bands/artists like Hugh Hopper and Robert Wyatt, who made RIO albums, but are not primarily RIO artists.  Then we need to mention the RIO concert, the bands involved, as well as the off-shoot bands by former bands members (Present, Dave Kerman bands, the offshoots of Samla Mammas Manna).

Then we need to mention other styles of avant-prog.  In particular, the US sound.

Then finally we need to mention the noise bands and mention when exactly they are here (for any doubters).

It's not an easy task, but I believe it is something that needs to be tackled soon.

I have. 

Well, I've made space for the time being.

I'm not pushing you out, Assaf.

I personally wouldn't want to run the team myself, as I don't feel I'm knowledgeable enough yet.  Joren and yourself are the perfect pair.

Oh of course I know it's not so important for there to be a leader.  There needs to be someone around to add bands and update progtology though and I cannot do that.

Seriously, I want both yourself and Joren here running the team.  I have no intentions of pushing you out.

Indeed, I feel that is quite an important milestone for the team (does that include the Zeuhl definition also?).

I also believe it should be a team effort, we shouldn't leave it to one person.  I'm happy to help out.

Something we should leave to the new year though, definitely.  We all need a break.

Thank you.

Of course it should be a team effort, that's the point of a team in the first place!  I know what RIO/Avant-Prog is when I hear it, but I don't know the complete history of it, but I am willing to help out as much as I can.

I've also just yesterday, started getting into Zeuhl seriously.  Weidorje and Eskaton are very different sounding bands too and both excellent.