Miles Davis proto-prog

Now about what category to put him in.  I'm looking forward to the creation of the new progressivejazzrockfunkfusionprotoprogmusic subgenre.  
For an existing category, I'd go for jazz-rock/fusion as that is his primary intersection with the progressive rock universe.

File him in a metal subgenre and confuse the hell out of everyone!

Edited by Slartibartfast - January 23 2008 at 08:30

How about making a new genre, symphonic metal, and putting Miles there?
And why hasn't Ivan chimed in on this thread yet?
He must be building up something really special.


Edited by Slartibartfast - January 23 2008 at 12:33

yeah Davis should be added for sure,not only is it blatent fusion look at the musicians in his band

I have no input or influence but what I've heard from Bitches Brew, I don't see why he shouldn't be here

Sean Trane wrote: Miles is with Trane, my fave jazz artistes.     micky wrote: those are the rules.... as I posted in a thread in the collab area one time.. for additions I handle.. I'll add the artists and maybe some essential albums but for the most part I let others (fans) add the albums when there is an large discography.  It's one of the few things non-collabs can do to get 'involved' and we have no shortage of people that want to help out.    Actually I think it is the responsability (or at least I would take it as such) of the collab that opens the entry page  to fill at least all of the major releases (studio and live)  or see to it it gets done? This in general requires teamwork, because alone...... >> In case of Miles, this could take days. This is a problem we had to face for LarrY Corryell (the collabs were three doing the work) and that we'll have to face for every jazz artistes we could include.   Theoretically Miles' inclusion is inevitable (From Miles In The Sky in 68 to Agartha in 75, everything is either jazz-rock fusion or jazz-funk) and I would favor it, but then will come Corea, Hancock , Shorter, Zawinul (may be in aleready), Vitous etc.....   So Miles' inclusion would not only be opening a can of worms, but also create an awful lot of work and plenty of straight jazz pre-68 releases in there as well. Furthermore Davis started recording in 48 (at least I think), which is completely out of the time scope of this site.

Unless I'm mistaken, Miles' first recording under his own name was Birth of the Cool, but he had already been playing and recording  for a little while.  By the way, I added a lot of Coryell titles and will be happy to do the same for Miles.  Maybe we should have a little contest to see who can add the most.

This guy's got a huge discography compared to his progressive intersection.  I'll be happy to add a lot of titles.  I have a really hard time when it comes to reviewing instrumentals though, but I'll do my part.


Edited by Slartibartfast - February 11 2008 at 12:56

Dick Heath wrote:   My past reluctance to included Miles, was with the hope that some rational thinking would kick in at PA, with the introduction of bands/artists with selective prog-valid discographies (rather the far from satisfactory 'all or nothing' policy - IMHO the 'all' approach doesn't do the site's creditability any good).   Just for example look at reviews of Queen albums that can't be truly justified as prog but get written up by those who don't know any better.>>> If this only concerned Queen I wouldn't mind too much, but there are loads of other examples

Is it possible to do a selected discography for Davis or is that to half assed?

to quote myself from another thread

i hate that this site has a sub-genre called Jazz-Rock/Fusion, yet Miles Davis is no where to be found! i thought this site was supposed to be the most comprehensive guide to progressive rock. Well that's exactly what Miles Davis did. He progressed rock by incorporating it with jazz, free jazz, funk, space, and made music that was waaay ahead of his time. He did it before anyone else did, minus Larry Coryell, but he was the first to popularize it and exploit its potential. On The Corner (1974) was not recognized immediately by some people as good music. Some thought it was garbage. It took over 20 years or so for people to realize he was doing things people didnt think of doing until the late 80's. Now it's considered to be one of his best albums. Is that not progressive or what???

"oh but he has too many jazz albums to be here"

most of the artists in the jazz section all have a number of jazz albums. so what? the description says that it includes progressive jazz (which is what jazz is anyway)

Miles Davis is nothing more than an attempt to try to cash in on his inherent coolness cache.
The rock n roll hall of fame would include him , just the same as some here would - for little more than a few albums where he kind of almost nearly played a type of music that sort of fit in with whatever genre the "wanting to be seen as cool fools" are part of.
Or for simpler reasoning - count the number of albums Davis put out. Then count how many, i.e. the percentage/ratio etc ..., actually would meet the clearly loose requirements posited by the wanna be cool by association crowd.
give it up, he's a jazz guy.