Should ProgArchives turn into ProgMusicAr

erik neuteboom wrote: Well Atavachron, of course music is a matter of taste but in the view of rock history, I consider Cream way more interesting than the overrated The Beatles, Cream rocks and their music was an inspiration to most of the Seventies progrock musicians,a big hand for their improvisional talents, exciting interplay and focus on extended soli, main elements of prog rock

Why does it seem like everyone here is always so melodramatic?

Edited by KeleCableII - June 21 2007 at 20:34

Nobody is being melodramatic

mystic fred wrote: one way to sort this out would be to create a sister site called "Rock Archives", and if it was successful we could create a site called "Jazz Archives", then one called "Blues Archives" , then "Classic Archives"....then......

We will take over the internet!

there are many bands here that suprise me by their inclusion, but the site's all the richer for it (as am I).
i'm all for inclusiveness, but there have been progressive bands in all genres of music, does that mean they should all be included? where do you draw the line? who were the progmetal bands of the 70s? why are they not in? sabbath influenced a generation, as did the who, and the beatles...

but I must admit that there is a synergy in the site. I felt I had an eclectic taste in music before I visited the site. I was very suprised to find that over 80% of the several hundred LPs I had accumulated arractically over the years were on this site.

since joining I've really been astounded by the number of bands of which i had no knowledge and yet i;ve really liked ... this is stark testimony that the present rules about inclusion are working.

if the choice was more catholic i think it would lose a great deal.

I believe no change is necessary   ! if there was to be a change it should be prog rock archives because of the techno conflict to its name , but after all we were prog first

I think it should stay Progarchives, but the addition of bands should be looked upon carefully.  The Who certainly have prog elements that could fit them in prog-related, but other bands that are that way too need to be looked at carefully.  If they use prog elements make sure to add them because they use them a fair amount and not just once and album or every now and then.  

chamberry wrote: Logan wrote: I'd like to see more modern progressive music on the non or quasi rock side here... There are more modern prog bands being added almost every day. Just look at the recently added thread to see for yourself.

Sorry if the context wasn't clear in my posts... By modern I don't mean very recent, I mean not of the distant past.  In this sense all rock music is modern music.  What I'm suggesting when I say that is that temporal limits may be warranted for inclusion (ergo no progressive composers such as the 16th Century Tallis which I mentioned before, or indeed much more recent) this site could expand into more progressive music (not progressive rock) from non-rock genres.  As long as it's categorised well, I can see this progressive site growing to encompass many more styles and movements in music.  Anyway, I've already gone into that in some depth.

Perhaps 1960's progressive music and up...  Though that might necessitate earlier music still (Carl Orff, early 20th Century avant garde composers etc.)  The scope gets really big and unwieldy (and then we argue if a composer is progressive enough... As I said before, the focus at this site is on bands/ artists rather than composers)...

I suggested minimalist and experimental composers before: Perhaps Nyman and Philip Glass (not rock, but suitable for a "progressive music" site perhaps).  Particularly mentioned for argumentation, really.  I won't reiterate all I wrote.

I see this as problematic, and wouldn't seriously expect this, but as I said, I like the idea of the archives progressing from Progressive Rock into other progressive kinds of music...  Progressive jazz, funk, art music etc.  They already have moved from Progressive rock to an extent... Problem is defining the boundaries (where does it end?  Does it ever end?).  Just thoughts.

I'll have a look at the recently added thread to see how many non-rock based and quasi-rock progressive bands/ artists have been added of late (I don't much care which era they are from -- the modern or classical era .  Some ancient Egyptian Prog would go down pretty well right about now.  Don't have any, The Bangles Walk Like an Egyptian it is for now -- haha.).  Okay, checked: Quite a few recent ones on the at least quasi-rock side, I believe (and maybe some that are hardly or not "rock" at all, though rock-related I would think).  Have to check more.  But I was thinking of adding many more categories of music still.

EDIT: and someone else suggested Debussy. 

Anyway, I don't know where the lines would be drawn, but I am happy for this to be a progressive music, rather than just a progressive rock, site.


Edited by Logan - June 22 2007 at 02:06

To those who would argue against diversity, exactly how many more reviews of

1. GENESIS
   Selling England By The Pound
2. YES
   Close to the Edge
3. PINK FLOYD
   Wish You Were Here
4. JETHRO TULL
   Thick As A Brick
5. GENESIS
   Foxtrot
6. PINK FLOYD
   Dark Side Of The Moon
7. KING CRIMSON
   In The Court Of The Crimson King
8. PINK FLOYD
   Animals
9. GENESIS
   Nursery Cryme
10. GENESIS
    The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway

do you need to see?  All fine albums.  There is a certain line to be drawn regarding what gets included and what doesn't, but it's better to err on the side on inclusion.

Edited by Slartibartfast - June 22 2007 at 04:15

Hey! This topic's about the Who and Cream! Awesome.