Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all.
Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage") |
|
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 2425262728 30> |
| Author | ||||
Catcher10 
Forum Senior Member 
VIP Member Joined: December 23 2009 Location: Emerald City Status: Offline Points: 17847 |
 Posted: February 18 2013 at 21:12 |
|||
I understand the hugs were not for me....I did not ask for any
 .There are many proto-prog bands, by definition it can be almost any band before 1970....I could careless who they influenced that does not make them more prog. BTW they influenced 1,000's of bands probably, but I doubt any of that influence was because someone called them prog or thought they were prog, they had some psychadelic stuff.
Most of the time what you hear about was their song writing ability as an influence, lyrics. I am sure KC liked their song writing and lyrics, but I don't hear any Beatles in any KC music.....more of what you hear is Soft Machine and what Coltrane and Miles had done with freeform playing and just letting it flow and hang out......Beatles songs are way more structured with a more natural beat that most people prefer as popular music.
IMO
|
||||
  
|
||||
 |
||||
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer 
Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
Posted: February 18 2013 at 21:37 |
|||
|
And I suppose the changes that Happiness is a Warm Gun passes through is very standard and popular?
And how about the middle section of Day in a Life, especially the piano, which dances in and out of time? I could go on and on, but the question is how much of post-Help Beatles have you paid attention to. Especially beyond Rubber Soul, whether or not it is prog, it becomes very obvious that it is not regular run of the mill pop anymore. Beatles influence on Fripp and many other musicians of the time is well documented and needs no re-iteration. Are you, by the way, also going to deny the influence of Simon & Garfunkel on Yes? These great 60s rock bands may not have come up with the epic structure and extended sections we associate with prog but they provided the meat, the melodies and the harmonies, where prog rock bands were not always the most original and were happy to lean on 60s music or the classical masters for inspiration. I don't deride that because that's how music is made, but credit where it's due, please. Without LZ, there would be no Rush. Without Beatles or S&G, there would be no Yes or Genesis. And so it goes. The 60s was an explosive period in rock music and it is sad if we are going to devalue it only because it's not epic or technical or whatever. |
||||
|
||||
|
The Dark Elf
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member Joined: February 01 2011 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 13056 |
Posted: February 18 2013 at 22:03 |
|||
I agree completely, Roger. It is rather like a previous thread discounting The Moody Blues as a 1960's progressive band. I don't really see how one cannot hear the epic nature of an album like Days of Future Past, or compositions like the suite "Are You Sitting Comfortably/The Dream/Have You Heard/The Dream/Have You Heard (Reprise)" or "House of Four Doors/Legend of a Mind/House of Four Doors (Part 2)". These are not mere 2:30 pop ballads but mellotronic symphonies. The same can be said of the Beatles and S&G. Like Bob Dylan, they were not simply spewing out pop hits (although they could write pop gems with stunning regularity). 1970s prog bands owe quite a bit of their aural beauty and depth to these 60s bands, who could paint in a few minutes what it took later bands half an album side to achieve. |
||||
|
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
||||
|
||||
|
Kati
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 10 2010 Location: Earth Status: Offline Points: 6253 |
Posted: February 19 2013 at 10:48 |
|||
|
I don't like to go into serious debate about progressive music, whithin reason and context there's no right or wrong. Plus there are already too many subjects to avoid i.e. politics, religion and football/soccer
 thus music certainly should not be one of them, I much rather focus my energy on positive things.
http://www.cracked.com/funny-2359-progressive-rock/#ixzz2LGqYMyli These are just a few things quote from the above article: Progressive
Rock is an attempt to musically orgasm as many times as possible during a
15-minute song. Basically, progressive rock is anything-goes rock music. If you feel like adding a 30-second audio clip of some farm animals orgasming in the middle of your song, that's a-ok by progressive standards. Hell, it's even encouraged. Literally anything you can record a sound of is welcome in progressive rock. Except autotune. Read more: http://www.cracked.com/funny-2359-progressive-rock/#ixzz2LMhJy566 Edited by Kati - February 19 2013 at 10:58 |
||||
|
||||
|
The Doctor
Special Collaborator 
Honorary Collaborator Joined: June 23 2005 Location: The Tardis Status: Offline Points: 8543 |
Posted: February 19 2013 at 10:59 |
|||
You should stop by the Libertarian Thread or the Agnostic-Atheist Thread. Rather than avoid those subjects, I like to dive in head first and slap around anyone who disagrees with me. Back on topic, I love both bands, but as someone already said, without the Beatles there would be no Rush. Of course, the same could be said of Genesis, GG and VDGG (and I'd have a harder time voting against those three). But in this case, Beatles by a nose (Ringo's).
|
||||
|
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
|
||||
|
||||
|
Kati
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 10 2010 Location: Earth Status: Offline Points: 6253 |
Posted: February 19 2013 at 11:02 |
|||
|
[/QUOTE]
You should stop by the Libertarian Thread or the Agnostic-Atheist Thread. Rather than avoid those subjects, I like to dive in head first and slap around anyone who disagrees with me. Back on topic, I love both bands, but as someone already said, without the Beatles there would be no Rush. Of course, the same could be said of Genesis, GG and VDGG (and I'd have a harder time voting against those three). But in this case, Beatles by a nose (Ringo's). [/QUOTE]
hahahahaha!!! Doctor haha.. you made me laugh so much now   |
||||
|
||||
|
Kati
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 10 2010 Location: Earth Status: Offline Points: 6253 |
Posted: February 19 2013 at 16:21 |
|||
Catcher I insist on giving you hugs although you don't want them  listen to this track by the Beatles which is considered by many the first heavy metal track ever made http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjtGWWXTyQk&list=FLW3NlyKPJqFL8OnvvATV4YQAnyway I insist on giving you a friendly hug
 |
||||
|
||||
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 16 2006 Location: Pennsylvania Status: Offline Points: 31169 |
Posted: February 19 2013 at 16:22 |
|||
|
I like both of these bands about the same.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Kati
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 10 2010 Location: Earth Status: Offline Points: 6253 |
Posted: February 19 2013 at 16:23 |
|||
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
Kati
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 10 2010 Location: Earth Status: Offline Points: 6253 |
Posted: February 19 2013 at 16:25 |
|||
|
Tum ta te ti em teti tetum
I LOVE THE FRENCH HORN HERE!!!! A LOT!!!! XXX
The hummmhayummpuppupupu's is priceless xxxxx Edited by Kati - February 19 2013 at 16:32 |
||||
|
||||
|
Kati
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 10 2010 Location: Earth Status: Offline Points: 6253 |
Posted: February 19 2013 at 16:56 |
|||
|
This all said I personally think the vocalist from Budgie has better vocals than Geddy.
 but it's my personal opinion and certainly not shared by 99% of peeps.
Edited by Kati - February 19 2013 at 16:57 |
||||
|
||||
|
Sumdeus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 23 2012 Location: SF Bay Area Status: Offline Points: 831 |
Posted: February 19 2013 at 17:36 |
|||
|
thought it'd post this here since there's a lot of beatles discussion going on
https://soundcloud.com/rc428/side-1-x-100 "100 copies of the White Album played on 100 turntables at the exact same time. Due to the miniscule differences in playback speed of the various turntables things start to quickly devolve into an interesting sonic experiment." very interesting listen |
||||
|
Sumdeus - surreal space/psych/prog journeys
|
||||
|
||||
|
Catcher10
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member Joined: December 23 2009 Location: Emerald City Status: Offline Points: 17847 |
Posted: February 19 2013 at 23:53 |
|||
Boy you sure like to put words in people's mouths..Where did I say they were not epic? Whether I believe that or not, I never said that. I never brought up any other artist like you have......Why are you bringing Yes and S&G into this discussion? What do they have to do with the poll question? I never insinuated any denial with regard to your question...I am not interested in that discussion, you can have it with someone else if you like. I don't care what you think influenced who on who....That is 100% subjective and your opinion and that is fine, no arguement from me. If you said the Beatles influenced Mastodon and Carrie Underwood, ok fine whatever...its your opinion, that's all.
Where I have a problem is where you seem to know for sure that without Zeppelin there would be no Rush and without Beatles and S&G there would be no Yes or Genesis.
I have no idea that without Elvis, Bill Haley, Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly, Jerry Lee Lewis, Little Richard..there would be no Beatles.......but I am sure you will tell me.
I have no desire to continue with this discussion path........How you feel about what I feel means nothing to me and if you find some displeasure in me not liking the Beatles...oh well, nothing I can do to change that
Have a great day!
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
Dayvenkirq
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 25 2011 Location: Los Angeles, CA Status: Offline Points: 10970 |
Posted: February 20 2013 at 00:05 |
|||
|
^ Easy, rider. There is no reason to personalize this. No one was assuming anything about your feelings.
Edited by Dayvenkirq - February 20 2013 at 00:06 |
||||
|
||||
|
Kati
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 10 2010 Location: Earth Status: Offline Points: 6253 |
Posted: February 20 2013 at 03:08 |
|||
Catcher10, no one is having a go at you here. Rogerthat has a valid argument, he is trying to explain why the Beatles deserve more credit especially in regards to your comment about The Beatles being nothing but a pop band and that you consider Lady Gaga plus Madonna superior musicians to them. Also there's nothing wrong in not liking The Beatles, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: September 30 2006 Location: Pearland Status: Offline Points: 65261 |
Posted: February 20 2013 at 03:10 |
|||
|
good God this thing has been going since '08
|
||||
|
||||
|
Kati
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 10 2010 Location: Earth Status: Offline Points: 6253 |
Posted: February 20 2013 at 03:12 |
|||
hahahahaha!!! Atavachron
|
||||
|
||||
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
Posted: February 20 2013 at 08:28 |
|||
You mentioned the cited influence of Beatles on songwriting and proceeded to claim that their songs have a natural beat which people prefer in popular music. Actually, the influence of the second half of their career originates from, among other things, their willingness to veer from this formula. Hence I asked a valid question: how familiar are you with their post-Rubber Soul albums, to what extent have you analysed them musically? I am not forcing you to, by the way, but I believe pointed comments on musical characteristics should be made on firm ground. You are entitled to dislike Beatles or any other band (something I expressly urged even to other members notwithstanding your insinuation) but it does not entitle you to disdain your influence unless you are prepared to argue your point.
And nothing that I said would suggest that I denied the influence of these artists on Beatles either. Of course, they did and if you had read what I had written earlier, I have myself stated that music only comes into being out of other music: " where prog rock bands were not always the most original and were happy to lean on 60s music or the classical masters for inspiration. I don't deride that because that's how music is made, but credit where it's due, please. " That by itself does not provide you any ground to deny that Zeppelin influenced Rush unless you can demonstrate it. Good luck with that, considering that Lifeson acknowledges the influence of Page and Peart that of Bonham. As for Simon & Garfunkel, it appears a logical question to me because they never went prog in "form" but they possessed vital elements necessary for its development as a genre, so I was curious if you shared a similar perception of them as you do of Beatles. It was a question borne out of curiosity, nothing more. I see that you took it quite badly and I am sorry if anything I said instigated you to because I didn't mean to.
 I only ask that when people explain and elaborate when they claim the influence of a band widely acknowledged as influential is not evident to them, because without that such a discussion is pointless. No point in claiming it's just an opinion, such an opinion was borne out of some thoughts. What were they? Can you not see it would be more interesting to do that and get confrontational and offended over what is ultimately only a discussion on music. Edited by rogerthat - February 20 2013 at 08:30 |
||||
|
||||
|
NickHall
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 15 2011 Location: Chingford Status: Offline Points: 144 |
Posted: February 20 2013 at 15:47 |
|||
|
is this a joke? I admire Rush, but comparing them to the Beatles? Not fair to Rush.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Catcher10
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member Joined: December 23 2009 Location: Emerald City Status: Offline Points: 17847 |
Posted: February 20 2013 at 21:31 |
|||
I believe based on numerous interviews with 70-80-90-00-10 artists who cite the Beatles as an influence most of the time, and I said this, is about their song, lyric writing ability...That's what most, not all, artists like about them. I am sure some like their music style and or how they may have designed a certain portion of their catalog, but in general its about how they wrote lyrics.
I am not Beatle bashing, I do not believe in any of my posts I have done that from a serious perspective because as you say they do deserve a lot of credit for how they influenced music. I said this in another post about them influencing probably thousands of bands...I know this to be true.
I really am not concerened as to who they influenced, just as I don't care who Rush influenced....Because as you state music comes from other music.
Where did I state that I did not think Zeppelin influenced Rush? I never said such a thing...I fully agree that Zeppelin was a major influence on Rush as well as The Who were and Cream and The Yardbirds. Again this comment is putting words in my mouth. Please everyone else READ MY LIPS....I do not believe this!
I have no comment, I don't listen to them....I only know the Bridge song
 I have no reason to doubt you here.
I have zero issues talking about music, my issue was stating that my beliefs as otherwise, and how your comments read as though I said something I had not.
Honestly, maybe I don't read the right interviews....but seems that most, most people who cite influence from the Beatles are pop artists and not so much hard rock or newer prog rock artists....Michael Jackson, Kanye West come to mind....So maybe on this site certain people are having a hard time that more prog artists are not mentioning the Beatles as much as maybe we would like them to.
In my mind who they influenced and why is not an issue, they had influence on 1,000's of artists.......It just seems that the influence was not from a portion of prog Beatles rather than mainly the pop Beatles portion. I remember a thread, I think, about when the Rush documentary came out, Beyond A Lighted Stage. I remember reading how people were perturbed that commentary was coming from Jack Black, Sebastian Bach, Zakk Wylde, Vinnie Paul and Taylor Hawkins and them talking about Rush. Certainly not members of prog bands and people on this site had issues with that.
Bottom line is who cares.....they influenced many, and again music comes from music.
Because I don't like the Beatles does not mean I do not think they are due merit....That would be dumb coming from someone like me who has been a music listener of almost every genre (except country) for the past 40yrs.
I find their songs boring, repetitive and vocally I find McCartney unlistenable....Some songs during Wings is better. I grew up during a time when I should have grown up listening to them...but I am part of that miniscule % of population that never got it, I never understood the hype.....I grew up in So Calif in an area where R&B, Funk and Hard Rock, Progressive Rock ruled, I can only guess that the Beatles during that time did not fit those segments....Not even my wife grew up listening to them.
So I guess its easy for me to say I don't hear any Beatles in Yes, Genesis, Pink Floyd, KC, Nectar, Parliament/Funkadelic, Earth Wind & Fire, Ohio Players or Rainbow.
We are good...  |
||||
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 2425262728 30> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Rush vs The Beatles
Topic Options
ProgMetaller2112 wrote:
and to say that Lady Gaga and Madonna are more Prog than The Beatles is just plain silly 
. The Beatles were one of the first Proto-Prog bands and they were an influence on Procol Harum and King Crimson 