Jimi Hendrix added to proto-prog

Nothing in life goes according to a plan... Those who think so are deluding themselves, I'm afraid. But this is not the time nor the place for such philosophical discussions.

Raff wrote: Well, if people get heart attacks over additions to a music site, it means they have no other worries in their lives... Lucky them!

I would say that the agreements and disagreements seen in this thread are 95% close to the desirable among friends and comrades. Well, 100% would be perfect but the actual percentage is fairly enjoyable.

Heh. if Cream ever gets added I fear we'll have to notify doctors in a few select cities due to imminent danger of heart attacks for some of our members ;-)

Great Electric Ladyland review, Ivan! 

I agree with the addition, but I feel it was made in a hurry. A very important issue wasn't considered: what is the exact artist we are adding and what are the albums that fit it's description?

I mean, what exactly is "Jimi Hendrix" the artist? The three albums already added are albums released by the band "Jimi Hendrix Experience". Should we stick to this band only? It definitely has the best credential, since it is the only band Jimi was in while being proto-progressive, something he never was later, while he played in other bands. Or should we add any of his bands, despite the band-name, just because they all were "his" bands"? (BTW it is good to know that the record didn't have a contract with The Experience but with Jimi himself, the bandmates were hired personnel. Jimi could change the musicians and the band name, but from a contractual point of view this meant no changes - like in the case of "Band of Gypsys".) Or should we only add Experience albums plus albums released by "Hendrix" / "Jimi Hendrix" which have Mitchell and Redding in the line-up (like some of the early post-mortem albums)? What do we do with ALL those "Jimi Hendrix" compilations which throw in material from ALL his periods? Wtf


Edited by Swan Song - April 11 2009 at 17:29

Personally, I was rather in favour of the addition, though I would not have lost sleep if it had not happened. As many of you know, I am pretty open-minded, and, even if I might disagree with some of the additions, you will hardly ever see me post to that effect. I think life is hard enough for everyone without getting upset because Band X or Artist Y gets added to our database.

That said, there is something that really bugs me about some people's reactions... I wonder if it would be possible to disagree with any given addition without questioning the integrity of the people who do them. Things seem to have got better with time here at PA, but still there are those who believe it is a good idea to say, "hey, let's add Tom Petty/Britney Spears/New Kids on the Block/etc. etc.", every time a controversial addition is made. In my very humble opinion, this is VERY offensive to those who work on behalf of the site, and implies that either they are clueless about music, or (even worse), that their only purpose is to add their favourites.

Disagreeing is everyone's right, but not when it involves slurs against other people. In this threads there are examples of constructive disagreement (Ivan, to mention but one). Is it very hard to do the same?

I personally don't like the move, but as Garion has said, the groundwork for this has been laid a LONG time ago.  Might as well open the floodgates and let all of the Psychedelic bands in....  Heck I'll bet the Grateful Dead fans are already posting.

I can think of a lot bands already here I would have put behind Hendrix for inclusion.  Does that justify it? Hardly but precedent was set a long time ago so I don't see this as wrong.  Jimi was involved in pushing the boundaries of Rock in that altogheter expansive late 60's.  Some would minimize it others maximise it.  Either way it was there.

Edited by Garion81 - April 11 2009 at 13:10

Petrovsk Mizinski wrote: I can see the connection, it was Ivan that said he didn't

I must say that I found Easy Money's introduction of Hendrix to proto-prog close to hillarious. It is clearly written by someone who himself is not "a believer". Well, don't shoot him, he's only the messenger...But Easy Money seems to be trying to find all kinds of excuses for Hendrix' inclusion, one less valid than the other.