Alan Parsons Project Prog?

I say prog... and a great fit for Xover.  You know the music Mike..  do you think it fits this definition.
It is currently under consideration to be moved from prog related to Xover.



Crossover Prog contains progressive rock music that, though 100% progressive, may have a musical connection to popular music-- whether it be the lack of emphasis on extended compositions, or an influence from mainstream music in addition to classical, jazz and folk. Compositions, however, still exhibit a high degree of sophistication, sometimes outright complexity, and the musicianship and virtuosity is often on a par with established Prog acts. Much like their kin in the established prog sub-genres, these groups will incorporate many major parts of what defines prog rock: the fusing of rock with the structures and discipline of more traditional musics, the use of syntheisizers and new technologies, intelligent thematics, and the expansion of the form.

The defining characteristics of Crossover Prog are a pop music influence that is largely vacant in typical prog rock. Songs tend toward shorter, more concise presentations though still reach beyond the typical verse, bridge, chorus pattern. The harmonic, melodic, and rhythmic structures may be more easily digested in Crossover while not losing the musical integrity that a prog listener expects. Whereas Prog Related bands are generally commercial groups with certain prog elements or players that were involved in prog acts, Crossover Prog artists are predominantly progressive with elements of popular music.

I would like to see APP in Xover.  I've long thought of APP as considerably Prog (for Tales and I Robot particularly but also for other material like "Lucifer") and was a little surprised to find it in Prog-Related.  In a way, I don't think of Pink Floyd as that Prog either (I'll mention it because of Alan Parsons involvement).

Dr. Evil unveils the Alan Parson's Project: CLICK

Logan wrote: I would like to see APP in Xover.  I've long thought of APP as considerably Prog (for Tales and I Robot particularly but also for other material like "Lucifer") and was a little surprised to find it in Prog-Related.  In a way, I don't think of Pink Floyd as that Prog either (I'll mention it because of Alan Parsons involvement). Dr. Evil unveils the Alan Parson's Project: CLICK

Yes, and forgive me if I may be wrong, but in my opinion, it seems that their is nothing particular about The Dark Side of the Moon that makes it overley "commercial" and around 1973 Dark Side would certiantly be more likely put on the radio than today, but when you compair it to Tails or I robot, there is no doupt APP tried for a more commercial approach.

MikeDupont wrote: Logan wrote: I would like to see APP in Xover.  I've long thought of APP as considerably Prog (for Tales and I Robot particularly but also for other material like "Lucifer") and was a little surprised to find it in Prog-Related.  In a way, I don't think of Pink Floyd as that Prog either (I'll mention it because of Alan Parsons involvement). Dr. Evil unveils the Alan Parson's Project: CLICK Yes, and forgive me if I may be wrong, but in my opinion, it seems that their is nothing particular about The Dark Side of the Moon that makes it overley "commercial" and around 1973 Dark Side would certiantly be more likely put on the radio than today, but when you compair it to Tails or I robot, there is no doupt APP tried for a more commercial approach.

I don't mean to imply that Alan Parsons Project is as deserving of Pink Floyd for Prog status, just that like APP, Pink Floyd is missing some elements that make it full-on, hardcore Prog for me.  I think Dark Side was pretty commercial/ radio friendly ("Money" springs to mind), and well polished in production like APP albums, but APP definitely took a commercial approach (I imagine that Alan Parsons was trying to capitalise on music such as Dark Side of the Moon).  Actually, Tales didn't do that well commercially (unlike Dark Side...) and I think something like "The Fall of the House of Usher" is pretty adventurous.  With I Robot, which did much better, you have obvious radio friendly, commercial tunes ("I wouldn't Want to be like You" but less pop ones like "I Robot").  Alan Parsons Project is well-produced art rock/ pop.  Both Pink Floyd and Alan Parsons Project albums did well on album-oriented radio, I believe (well I know Pink Floyd has) and had very successful tracks that got much airplay, and still do on classic rock stations (especially Pink Floyd).

Bottom line, though, is that I do think APP is right for Xover (and Pink Floyd is just fine where it is). 

I think they're Prog. Nevertheless Crossover Prog but still it's Prog.

I hadn't been all that familiar with their albums since I only had the debut but as I went through (and reviewed) my wife's collection of about six of their subsequent offerings I found them to be considerably less and less prog as the years went on to the point where they were about as prog as Wham!  I don't mind them being included on this site but it makes it harder and harder to accept that the innovative Steely Dan doesn't have a place here if they do.  I'm just sayin'. 

Logan wrote: Ricochet wrote: I don't think they're prog, that's why I really prefer them in Prog Related, which is basically a non-prog genre. They're debut is fine, smashing, progressive, but immediately after that, I can't name a single album that is progressive by nature. The 70s act OK and naturally, the 80s are pop and AOR all the way, while the 90s have a miserable twist in many ways. APP are not my favorites, but I do mention them in my collections. However, as entering a fully prog category (or being seen, by most albums, as prog) is not an idea I would support. Well, just one Prog album is supposed to be enough for Prog inclusion, and since I believe that I Robot has strong Prog elements (might call it Pop/ Prog) and subsequent albums have proggy material...  It's more of an art rock/ symphonic pop/ melodic rock album with elements similar to New Age music, funk and disco.  The instrumentals (and instrumental parts of songs such as The Voice) are particularly Prog-like to me.  It's well-constructed pop music.  Commercial, hell yeah, though it doesn't fit the most popular music of the time (sure it incorporates disco elements...).  I might call it Pop/ Prog Fusion.  I sometimes don't consciously think so much about whether something is Prog per se, but if it fits a category. I really believe that APP would fit Crossover very well.

regarding the statement in bold, it's all about the policy, but I would normally not agree with it. It's not the time to develop on the idea, but let's just say we have artists being pumped just because a piece or a hint of sound would be progressive, what to mention an album.

Nevertheless, we aren't talking an "inclusion", even if APP is in PR, so, technically, he isn't in "prog".
Then again, if right now APP would be proposed for addition, my answer would be 'he has two progressive albums at most, then makes a lot of pop/AOR/Fusion/non-prog stuff. Prog Related fits like a glove"

Really, I can take even I Robot as progressive, but there still are at least 10 albums that make it awkward to even think of Prog Rock.

I know ELO, Supertramp or something likewise has been accepted by Crossover, I personally don't know their music, so neither they're inclusion attitude, but for APP, I know all the official music, I'm not having any favorite feelings about think about their entire career, I don't even have second doubts: not enough material, and not a fascinating evolution (actual a recoil into mainstream I've rarely heard done so good, yet so bad) for them to be in a full-prog genre. Prog Related...uhm...fits like a glove.

 Yes... I have listened to the album, and lets consider one thing first. We are talking the 70's, not today, which already gives Tails a much better chance of being played on the radio. And I do understand wear your coming from, I mean AAP were more strange than most stuff played on the radio.... but.... just limiting it down to Prog. standards, APP is more accessible than about anything else, or at least a lot. CAN, Amon Duul, Gentle Giant, (early) Genesis, etc. etc. etc. I need not go on. So yes, Tails would fit the radio a lot better.

As for is there anything wrong with airplay? No not at all, I love it when deserving songs find their way onto the radio. (Roundabout was a big one) But lets be realistic, most Prog. that we absolutely love, is not loved by most of the world. Unfortunate yes, but it justs makes us the chosen ones  So to conclude my point, when you compare APP to several other Prog. bands, it quite clear that maybe they tried for more commercial approach. But forget just radio airplay, they could just want a broader fan base, which in turn, could turn more people on to more prog.

    

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: MikeDupont wrote:  The question i've always pondered at was if the Alan Parsons Project are really indeed a proggresive rock band. Several people and websites will claim they are, however, I myself am not sure.   I believe that Alan Parsons Project is a band that released 3 prog albums (More than many bands that are here ), several Prog Related and others not related with Prog or with a very distant relation.   I'm known and admit being a purist, but Alan Parsons Project deserves to be here at least for those three first albums.   They certaintly are a band of the later 70's, with their first (and best) album recorded in 1975.  While their first few albums tried to be experimental, they never were compeltey original off the bat, I mean, Tails of Mystery and Imagination acctually has radio airplay written all over it.   Have you heard the album? At least more than The Raven and Dr Tarr & Proffesor Feather?   Do you honestly believe any commercial radio in the world will ever play "The fall of the House of the Usher",  "The Cask of Amontillado" or "The Tell - Tale Heart" with the weird sounds created by Arthur Brown?   BTW: What's wrong with airplay "per se", wouldn't it be great if all Prog artists had airplay?     And almost any other Parsons album can be seen as "Commercial" Also I'de like to point out now they i dont dislike this band, infact I listen to them quite often. But maybe more as a slight guilty pleasure, for in the back of my head I think this is prog.   I'm known to be a purist and I'm proud of admiting it, but your vision of APP albums is very limitative: ToMaI: Is a 100% Prog album that combines some Symphonic elements with Asome dark Avant garde souns and much more. I Robot: Combines Eclectic with Electronibc Prog Pyramids: A Prog album witha more commercial approach, probably Crossover Three Prog albums is more than what some bands that are here have, so iF it was only for this three albums, they would deserve to be here. But that's not all, Eye in the Sky and Turn of a Friendly Card are at least Prog Related,...For God's sake, even the terrible EVE has Lucifer and the outstanding "Damn if I Do".   So what do you guys/gals think, prog. or not prog.   APP deserves to be here and not in PR.   Iván

I'll  spare all the red font.. and just say I agree with Ivan 100%. I'm sure they will be moved from PR.. in due time. This is PA's .. nothing happens quickly. Especially when traversing a mindfield here known as Crossoever prog.

not since Raff and I took over AR... I sure as hell wouldn't have signed off on moving them.