| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Logan 
Forum & Site Admin Group
Site Admin
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 35951
|
 Posted: July 20 2008 at 15:15 |
 Desoc wrote:
I'd have to give my support to Greta here. While I know
that "band A is listed, then band B should be listed"-arguments are not
generally accepted in this forum, they do carry some face validity. The
accept of bands outside the prog box demands an objective definition of
the frames within which bands are accepted. This definition lacks, or
is at least completely non-consistent between different sub-genres,
hence Greta's prog metal point. |
Yes, and if band A are here, then band B should be here" arguments can
be perfectly valid. Even if I don't say it, I often think that way.
The argument is stronger, of course, when band B is similar in many
ways to band A. If a band in the archives (often of questionable
proggy status) is used to justify a very different band musically
(sometimes people going so far as to say, band A is hardly prog and
it's in, this is more prog so of course it should be here) the argument
is not so strong. And perhaps band A shouldn't even be in. An if
apple x is here, then apple y should be here" is far better than "if
apple x is here, then orange y should be here" even though one can discuss it in terms of quantity of prog traits, but it's easier when the bands are stylistically similar. Greta makes an interesting point when it comes to prog attributes.
Ideally there would be clearer frames, and more consistency. The definitions need an overhaul, in my opinion, especially since the criteria can be so different between categories. I suspect that a band that has very limited "prog credentials" that influenced prog metal (perhaps by laying the groundwork for metal more than prog, or influencing metal more directly than Prog -- Prog isn't just about progressing music) would be more readily accepted than one which has limited prog credentiuals that influenced progressive electronic etc. But different categories can work by different rules when it comes to progressiveness, so that follows through to related categories.
Desoc wrote:
Perhaps the archives should include a new category: Non-prog bands
approved by PA members, including all proto-prog and prog related, and
in which the number of endorsements decide their internal rank. After
all, I think this is what people are curious about: What other people
like the bands I like? How many people agree with me that band X rocks?
|
That would be neat, and I've wanted a category where members can input bands, and if suitable for other categories, they could be moved elsewhere, but that was intened for progressive bands as a way of getting bands in faster with more input from everyone. I like the idea, but would put more constraint on site bandwidth, and some would feel that lead to further dilution of this prog site. Perhaps it could work more as a chart/ listing feature than operate like the other categories. Back to Steely Dan -- haven't listed to the music for a long time, so for what little it's worth, based on recollection, I could see it in Prog Related, but I'm more inclusive than many others. Mention Bjork, I'll say yes. Mention Laurie Anderson, I'll say yes. Mention Talking Heads and i'll still say yes. Mention Cream for inclusion; hell yes. Mention Donovan; sure. Mention Menudo and The Spice Girls, well I do draw the line there. Sorry, pretty useless post of mine.
Edited by Logan - July 20 2008 at 15:16
|
|
|
 |
omri
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 21 2005
Location: Israel
Status: Offline
Points: 1250
|
Posted: July 21 2008 at 12:35 |
No, no Logan ! It wasn't useless at all. It made me laugh !
To the topic : I love most of Steely Dan output (not including Katy lied, I feel you just picked the wrong album Certified) and I do believe there are some less progy bands listed here (The doors !).
The truth is I don't think I realy know what prog is and the way I see it - we are messing around with definitions way too much. For me there are many bands / artists I appreciate and I want all off them to be listed here under any sub-genre you want to (I said many times that I don't understand the classification to sub-genres and don't find it very helpful to determine what kind of music lies under the deffinition).
I strongly believe in the inclusive approach since the world of what we call prog keeps expanding all the time.
So, for me, Steely Dan, Talking heads, Bjork are all welcome here.
I agree with Logan that the line should be drawn somewhere and I do hope that Spice girls will never be included here among with many others mediocre or less bands.
|
|
omri
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: July 21 2008 at 12:45 |
Logan wrote:
Desoc wrote:
I'd have to give my support to Greta here. While I know
that "band A is listed, then band B should be listed"-arguments are not
generally accepted in this forum, they do carry some face validity. The
accept of bands outside the prog box demands an objective definition of
the frames within which bands are accepted. This definition lacks, or
is at least completely non-consistent between different sub-genres,
hence Greta's prog metal point. |
Yes, and if band A are here, then band B should be here" arguments can
be perfectly valid. Even if I don't say it, I often think that way.
The argument is stronger, of course, when band B is similar in many
ways to band A. If a band in the archives (often of questionable
proggy status) is used to justify a very different band musically
(sometimes people going so far as to say, band A is hardly prog and
it's in, this is more prog so of course it should be here) the argument
is not so strong. And perhaps band A shouldn't even be in. An if
apple x is here, then apple y should be here" is far better than "if
apple x is here, then orange y should be here" even though one can discuss it in terms of quantity of prog traits, but it's easier when the bands are stylistically similar. Greta makes an interesting point when it comes to prog attributes.
Ideally there would be clearer frames, and more consistency. The definitions need an overhaul, in my opinion, especially since the criteria can be so different between categories. I suspect that a band that has very limited "prog credentials" that influenced prog metal (perhaps by laying the groundwork for metal more than prog, or influencing metal more directly than Prog -- Prog isn't just about progressing music) would be more readily accepted than one which has limited prog credentiuals that influenced progressive electronic etc. But different categories can work by different rules when it comes to progressiveness, so that follows through to related categories.
redefining ... and cleaning PR.. making more user-friendly has been proposed many times.. and shot right out of the sky. To speak plainly... what I see.. and there has been nothing shown to show otherswise. It is tolerated by the powers that be because the owner wants it... and no one wants to do anything with it. Including the most egregious of faults... having bands wanted by genre teams.. being rejected from being being moved from PR. What has never fully been understood.. that is exactly like someone saying that X team can not add a band that the team has decided fits there sub-genre. What is the difference between not being added.. and being added in PR. None. Like I say. .wasted breath Greg... PR is and will always be an eyesore on this site.. not for having it.. but because nothing is done TO it to make it a benefit to the site.
Desoc wrote:
Perhaps the archives should include a new category: Non-prog bands
approved by PA members, including all proto-prog and prog related, and
in which the number of endorsements decide their internal rank. After
all, I think this is what people are curious about: What other people
like the bands I like? How many people agree with me that band X rocks?
|
That would be neat, and I've wanted a category where members can input bands, and if suitable for other categories, they could be moved elsewhere, but that was intened for progressive bands as a way of getting bands in faster with more input from everyone.I like the idea, but would put more constraint on site bandwidth, and some would feel that lead to further dilution of this prog site. Perhaps it could work more as a chart/ listing feature than operate like the other categories. Back to Steely Dan -- haven't listed to the music for a long time, so for what little it's worth, based on recollection, I could see it in Prog Related, but I'm more inclusive than many others. Mention Bjork, I'll say yes. Mention Laurie Anderson, I'll say yes. Mention Talking Heads and i'll still say yes. Mention Cream for inclusion; hell yes. Mention Donovan; sure. Mention Menudo and The Spice Girls, well I do draw the line there. Sorry, pretty useless post of mine.
I agree completely.. and hope that idea becomes reality.. when.. or if... additions here are ever streamlined. |
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Greta007
Forum Groupie
Joined: February 20 2008
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 45
|
Posted: July 22 2008 at 08:04 |
All good comments, guys. Trouble is that a lot of non-prog bands - from the Steelies to Purple to Zep to Sabbath to Bowie to Talking Heads etc - have done some "prog-ish" stuff here and there (usually the songs of theirs I think are their best ones!). However, none are prog bands. Why Deep Purple is here and Steely Dan is not, to me, seems explainable because the Steelies use American musical idioms, especially RnB, which is generally considered very un-prog and perhaps it's historical - they did something a bit different at the time when prog started. I'm not sure they were ever part of the prog movement or influenced prog bands much. They did Child in Time, though and showed the world that singers can still perform no matter how tight their pants are  Obviously there's no clear line and there can't be one. So what maketh the prog band? Maybe that's a topic on its own but I can't be bothered starting one :) To my mind you need to be doing something new or unusual with the following elements to be a progger: - Timings / accents / tempos / time signatures - Dynamic range - Chords / chord combinations / harmony - Sonic range - coming up with cool (or charmingly ugly) new sounds or sound combinations - Lyrics that are not just about "Ah fell in/out of lurve" or "The government and big companies are b*rstards" - Influences from various genres - one of which must be classical, jazz, avant garde, free improv/noise or ambiance. The idea of prog is to move to interesting areas that the mainstream may flirt with at times but no more. Prog artists are the creators of tomorrow's music - coming up with awesome ideas that the canniest mainstream artists borrow to extend the general musical vocabulary of society. Of course, some of the experiments fall away, never to be be extended on or maybe picked up many years later. On a personal level, prog to me is music that tries to avoid the obvious cliches. Of course there's nothing truly new under the sun but prog tries to move way from the ideas and musical devices that have been done to death. It either sythesises what's gone before in interesting new ways or extends or combines existing ideas in unusual ways. Originality. Imagination. Creativity. Amazing new sounds, textures, feels, moods, melodies and harmonies. That's what we listen to prog for. Well, I do, anyway :)
|
|
Eagles may soar but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: July 22 2008 at 08:30 |
Greta007 wrote:
All good comments, guys.
Trouble is that a lot of non-prog bands - from the Steelies to Purple to Zep to Sabbath to Bowie to Talking Heads etc - have done some "prog-ish" stuff here and there (usually the songs of theirs I think are their best ones!). However, none are prog bands. Why Deep Purple is here and Steely Dan is not, to me, seems explainable because the Steelies use American musical idioms, especially RnB, which is generally considered very un-prog and perhaps it's historical - they did something a bit different at the time when prog started. I'm not sure they were ever part of the prog movement or influenced prog bands much. They did Child in Time, though and showed the world that singers can still perform no matter how tight their pants are
Obviously there's no clear line and there can't be one. So what maketh the prog band? Maybe that's a topic on its own but I can't be bothered starting one :)
To my mind you need to be doing something new or unusual with the following elements to be a progger:
- Timings / accents / tempos / time signatures
- Dynamic range
- Chords / chord combinations / harmony
- Sonic range - coming up with cool (or charmingly ugly) new sounds or sound combinations
- Lyrics that are not just about "Ah fell in/out of lurve" or "The government and big companies are b*rstards"
- Influences from various genres - one of which must be classical, jazz, avant garde, free improv/noise or ambiance.
The idea of prog is to move to interesting areas that the mainstream may flirt with at times but no more. Prog artists are the creators of tomorrow's music - coming up with awesome ideas that the canniest mainstream artists borrow to extend the general musical vocabulary of society. Of course, some of the experiments fall away, never to be be extended on or maybe picked up many years later.
On a personal level, prog to me is music that tries to avoid the obvious cliches. Of course there's nothing truly new under the sun but prog tries to move way from the ideas and musical devices that have been done to death. It either sythesises what's gone before in interesting new ways or extends or combines existing ideas in unusual ways.
Originality. Imagination. Creativity. Amazing new sounds, textures, feels, moods, melodies and harmonies. That's what we listen to prog for. Well, I do, anyway :)
|
nice post... and I suspect the reason SD is not here.. and may never be here.. when they do really belong was touched on in your post. They are American... and had no 'general' association with prog. See ...love that reasoning. Very selective.. for some groups... you are to just evaiuate on the music alone.. for that.. as our resident Jazz expert Dick Heath said.. .Steely Dan fits the bill. Yet for other groups ... the 'name' the background is more important than the music. Steely Dan is one of those groups that are tailor made for prog fans... as I like to say.. if they weren't from 70's America.. .they would have LONG been included here. Deep ..intelligent lyrics... demanding complex music.. performed by the best musicians that money can buy. Why they are not here? If anyone has a better explanation than simply being American.. I'd love to hear it....because it sure isn't for the music hahhaha. Nice post
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Dr. Occulator
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 04 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 628
|
Posted: August 16 2008 at 15:32 |
|
For the love of God and great music what do we have to do to get the Dan entered in the Prog-related category? I believe common sense and good taste must agree.
|
|
My Doc Told Me I Have Doggie Head.
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: August 16 2008 at 15:37 |
|
Steely Dan are under evaluation......
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
darkshade
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: November 19 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 10964
|
Posted: August 16 2008 at 15:51 |
|
i love Steely Dan. I could see them being here, maybe under prog-related. I dont know where they could be besides that. Jazz-fusion is the only other spot i could see them, but they're more rock than jazz. Maybe Eclectic?
Someone said they're sophisticated rock, not prog rock. Isn't that a contradiction? Isn't that what prog is all about? Wasn't prog rock made for rock to be respected like classical music is? Steely Dan aren't the proggiest band, but they were prog and definitly progressive in their rock-jazz fusion. Instead of power chords and your basic major/minor chords used in your everyday hard rock band, they used jazz, blues and other "non-commercial" chords sequences and structures. If that isn't prog, idk what is...
Im for their inclusion. But where would they be put???
Edited by darkshade - August 16 2008 at 15:52
|
|
|
|
Greta007
Forum Groupie
Joined: February 20 2008
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 45
|
Posted: August 16 2008 at 21:18 |
|
Darkshade, you may have hit on one reason why SD aren't here - genre confusion. The Steelies are not wildly eclectic - pop, jazzrock, RnB, probably not enough to be classified as "Eclectic", at least the case is less compelling than it is for Jazz Rock / Fusion.
I doubt that anyone would argue with SD being included in Jazz Rock / Fusion. The band is highly respected in jazz circles and many of their albums have stunning examples of jazz fusion. In fact, I struggle to think of a better JR / fusion piece than Aja.
While their debut album isn't as jazzy as the others, the heavy rock bands included in Proto-Prog have done a lot of pretty primitive gumph that has zero relation to prog.
When you look at the fuzziness that surrounds other bands' inclusion, putting SD in the Jazz Rock/Fusion area is a no-brainer. It's hard to be precise in determining genres in regard to a band's entire body of work, which may vary over time ... and I think that any band whose career-long output creates confusion in categorisation has something going for it :)
|
|
Eagles may soar but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: August 17 2008 at 08:27 |
Greta007 wrote:
Darkshade, you may have hit on one reason why SD aren't here - genre confusion.
|
very astute.. especially for someone rather new here.... 
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
E-Dub
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 24 2006
Location: Elkhorn, WI
Status: Offline
Points: 7910
|
Posted: August 17 2008 at 08:39 |
|
I'm an absolute Steely Dan fanatic; however, they really don't belong here. If you asked Walter Becker or Donald Fagen I'm sure they'd agree.
I'm not even sure I'd lump them in with fusion. They have a smoother sound like Boz Scaggs with a bit more of an edge.
E
Edited by E-Dub - August 17 2008 at 08:39
|
|
|
|
Greta007
Forum Groupie
Joined: February 20 2008
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 45
|
Posted: August 17 2008 at 08:52 |
Thanks micky, but I'm not all that new. At the time of this post I've only posted 19,585 fewer posts here than you ... that's not too many, is it? :) E-Dub, do you think that Black Sabbath belongs here more than SD? I'm not sure that Walter and Donald would mind one way or another.
Some more Steelies songs that fit pretty neatly into "prog", at least when compared with other bands who are here: Your Gold Teeth,
Doctor Wu, The Royal Scam and King of the World. As for sophisticated
jazz rock, add to the above songs Babylon Sisters, Home at Last, Josie,
Black Cow, Home At Last, The Fez ... miles from Boz.
While they are American, the site does include Todd Rundgren's Utopia and Frank Zappa who are both so proggy you'd need to be genre-blind to miss it. There's no doubt they are "iffy" but the site's scope is quite broad and includes plenty of fringe-prog artists ... and there's enough metal on the site to melt down and start a car factory! So, for me, it would be good to see more "grown up" bands that play music whose edginess challenges adult sensibilities rather than beats them into submission. But then again I admit to being an incorrigible BOF  My views are entirely selfishly based, of course, because I'd like to read members' views on SD's albums :) I went looking for them and was amazed that they weren't to be found given the other bands I'd seen here.
|
|
Eagles may soar but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: August 17 2008 at 09:39 |
E-Dub wrote:
I'm an absolute Steely Dan fanatic; however, they really don't belong here. If you asked Walter Becker or Donald Fagen I'm sure they'd agree.
I'm not even sure I'd lump them in with fusion. They have a smoother sound like Boz Scaggs with a bit more of an edge.
E
|
so let's see what the man says  Question: Why did Steely Dan move away from their original guitar oriented sound?
Becker:
The music that we were writing became more jazz oriented harmonically.
This suggested that we feature keyboards more prominently.
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: August 17 2008 at 09:44 |
Greta007 wrote:
Thanks micky, but I'm not all that new. At the time of this post I've only posted 19,585 fewer posts here than you ... that's not too many, is it? :)
E-Dub, do you think that Black Sabbath belongs here more than SD? I'm not sure that Walter and Donald would mind one way or another.
Some more Steelies songs that fit pretty neatly into "prog", at least when compared with other bands who are here: Your Gold Teeth,
Doctor Wu, The Royal Scam and King of the World. As for sophisticated
jazz rock, add to the above songs Babylon Sisters, Home at Last, Josie,
Black Cow, Home At Last, The Fez ... miles from Boz.
While they are American, the site does include Todd Rundgren's Utopia and Frank Zappa who are both so proggy you'd need to be genre-blind to miss it. There's no doubt they are "iffy" but the site's scope is quite broad and includes plenty of fringe-prog artists ... and there's enough metal on the site to melt down and start a car factory! So, for me, it would be good to see more "grown up" bands that play music whose edginess challenges adult sensibilities rather than beats them into submission. But then again I admit to being an incorrigible BOF
My views are entirely selfishly based, of course, because I'd like to read members' views on SD's albums :) I went looking for them and was amazed that they weren't to be found given the other bands I'd seen here.
|
just like Bowie who was handled with a great deal of care.. SD is coming and is long overdue.. delayed for what you said ..'genre confusion' where... is being determined.
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Avantgardehead
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 29 2006
Location: Dublin, OH, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1170
|
Posted: August 17 2008 at 16:48 |
|
First Steely Dan and next Glenn Miller!! Come on guys, I know you can do it!!!!
|
|
http://www.last.fm/user/Avantgardian
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: August 17 2008 at 16:52 |
Avantgardehead wrote:
First Steely Dan and next Glenn Miller!! Come on guys, I know you can do it!!!!
|
God I love this forum.... happy days are here again.......
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: August 17 2008 at 19:34 |
Avantgardehead wrote:
First Steely Dan and next Glenn Miller!! Come on guys, I know you can do it!!!! |
I would, but I'm not in the mood. 
Edited by Dean - August 17 2008 at 20:31
|
|
What?
|
|
darkshade
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: November 19 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 10964
|
Posted: August 17 2008 at 19:44 |
i like how more jazz-oriented artists and bands are dominating the site. Enough of all the tech-speed-extreme-death-prog metal bands flooding the site.
micky wrote:
The music that we were writing became more jazz oriented harmonically.
This suggested that we feature keyboards more prominently.
|
if that isnt prog then i dont know what is
|
|
|
|
darkshade
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: November 19 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 10964
|
Posted: August 17 2008 at 19:49 |
Hey Micky, maybe we should have a "Rock-Jazz" category on this site. Steely Dan would easily fit that one. Then we could have Jeff Beck, Cream, Jack Bruce, Jimi Hendrix, etc....
|
|
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: August 17 2008 at 19:50 |
|
Jack Bruce is another I have wondered about.. .. I know Dick is a fan... wonder if he would go well there. As everyone knows.. he is a jazzer at heart.
need to talk to him about that...
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Steely Dan Prog-jazz-blues band
