Does Miles Davis belong in Prog?

This is fantastic and much less bluesy than Miles with Hendrix. Absolutely fantastic! Miles Davis - Bitches Brew (Tanglewood live 1970 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRj67oAC6TA

I don't get all this Miles Davis worship in some prog rockers.

Ok, ok, already ! 

I agree Scott and thanks for being so levelheaded and informative throughout this thread.
Regarding Sun Ra, one of my absolute faves in jazz: he did also make a few notable fusion albums, but they were produced at a much later time. His most iconic and famous of them is probably Lanquidity from 1978.
Progressively speaking it was no near the towering heights of say Atlantis, that literally threw the rulebook out the window. Just a wee sidenote that exemplifies the distinction between progressive and the different boxes we use here;-)
I'm not sure what I wanted to say other than it seems as if people in here are busy confusing words like prog, fusion, progressive and whatnot. Keep it going - it's a hoot!

HolyMoly wrote: It doesn't really matter what category he's in. I think he fits the criteria for Jazz Rock Fusion solely on the basis of a relative handful of his immense discography. His importance as an artist is as massive as anyone America has yet produced; his importance to "prog" is miniscule by comparison. This site has chosen to focus on just a thin sliver of the musical spectrum, for ease of management as much as anything else. Davis's relevance to prog lies in his contributions to Jazz Rock fusion, that is i believe the rationale for putting him there. You could make a decent argument for Proto Prog, but that would rest on the assumption that he wasn't ever a prog artist and he preceded prog. In a Silent Way was 1966, right? So maybe you're right. But back to my point. If he's on the site anyway, why change his sub? What benefit would that have?

"In a Silent Way" was released in '69, so that probably leaves out the possibility of proto-prog, although the sites definition of proto-prog says "any band that combined some elements of Progressive Rock with other genres prior to 1970".

micky wrote: Here is my two cents, it might be bullsh*t but I do think it reflecive of the site itself. At the center you have prog rock, prog rock which is an established musical genre filled with all the dots artists need to connect if they are to be considered 'prog'. Encompassing that you have the larger form 'progressive rock' which doesn't exactly follow the established norms of prog, or considered historically TO be prog but in general deemed to be part of the movement to expand the boundries of rock. I think Fusion and much of J-R falls into this Encompassing that is the larger 'Progressive Music' which obviously includes more progressive music with less emphasis on the rock.  Notablly RIO-Avant, large aspects of Krautrock, and of course electronic/ambient. Just my two cents of course but I think that is a fair synopsis of the site and how the various bands and subgenres interact.  The site is not a prog rock site, and hasn't been for many years and the site, and its users are far better for it.

I guess that the inclusion of such an all encompassing artist as Miles Davis cuts to the dichotomy at the heart of PA and yes, this ambivalence has existed for some considerable time i.e. his inclusion vouchsafes a progressive music policy c/f his exclusion, which would represent a valid interpretation of the original Prog criteria as outlined by the definitions still currently in place. Those who might disagree with this need to ask themselves why it took so long for Miles to finally appear. I also think your estimation of much RIO-Avant and almost all of Krautrock not being Prog as accurate but changing these now would smack of 20-20 hindsight revisionism. (as most other Prog sites have them included) Progressive Electronic probably represents the future and it's a future that will be a very great distance away indeed from what is traditionally recognised as Prog.

One of the reasons I ceased being an Admin was that I felt the site had to make a clear decision as to it's future direction e.g. historical Prog archive or progressive music appreciation site? (with a large and incredibly detailed Prog section of course) We seem to just muddle aimlessly along avoiding this question and end up falling short on both fronts. Until such time as we confront this issue we will continue to feign indifference to that embarrassing state of affairs where inclusive collaborators seem compelled to shoehorn their favorite non Prog artists onto the site under the woolly blanket that used to be Prog related.

I adore the Doors, Bowie, NIN, Talking Heads, Queen, Sabbath et al (but they all belong on a progressive music appreciation site NOT a Prog Rock one)

On a more practical note, if we do open PA's borders to any manner of progressive music artists, we clearly don't have the capacity to deal with the inevitable influx and if push comes to shove, it will be Max who has the most leverage methinks....

Keep fanning those flames Prog kinder....


Edited by ExittheLemming - December 23 2014 at 13:56

ExittheLemming wrote: ... I guess that the inclusion of such an all encompassing artist such as Miles Davis cuts to the dichotomy at the heart of PA and yes, this ambivalence has existed for some considerable time i.e. his inclusion vouchsafes a progressive music policy c/f his exclusion, which would represent a valid interpretation of the original Prog criteria as outlined by the definitions still currently in place. Those who might disagree with this need to ask themselves why it took so long for Miles to finally appear. I also think your estimation of much RIO-Avant and almost all of Krautrock not being Prog as accurate but changing these now would smack of 20-20 hindsight revisionism. (as most other Prog sites have them included) Progressive Electronic probably represents the future and it's a future that will be a very great distance away indeed from what is traditionally recognised as Prog. ...

Which is the main reason why I would like to see the study/definition of the medium get cleaner and fit better wiithin a HISTORICAL content. At this point, i think the definition is too isolated from its "soul" and "source" and us STILL not understanding, or accepting what the material in ITCOTCK is really about when they were played at Hyde Park and other very active pollitical arenas!

Those words and music, are the best snapshot of a generation ... and the sad part is that we're wanting to separate the music from its "soul" and in the end kill its ability to live. As just a song, with this and that on its repertoire, it becomes meaningless ... totally meaningless, and the words disappear!

We have to learn to do this as a whole, not separate the elements!

ExittheLemming wrote: ... One of the reasons I ceased being an Admin was that I felt the site had to make a clear decision as to it's future direction e.g. historical Prog archive or progressive music appreciation site? (with a large and incredibly detailed Prog section of course) We seem to just muddle aimlessly along avoiding this question and end up falling short on both fronts.

I think, in part, the main reason for this is the selection of folks falls into one area only ... how much can you help my database, and there is no time available to teach someone else to help improve it and do something else. After all, it would take a lot of time and effort, that I am not sure many folks are interested in helping with. I have offered before, however, I was immediately told that I could not do this or that, and that my reviews had to have 1.57685490 words and 4.5864 paragraphs and that they would have .... I gave up! I'm a person, not a f**king database, and I am not interested in being told what to do when it's about the "person's artistry" not the database. In the end, the database ends up winning, and the quality is going to keep on slipping until ... it fades away, which is not what we want to have happen, but is the history of the arts all along.

it is said that we should learn from the apst mistakes, but the issue here is not the past mistakes, but getting those folks to even care and give a damn about the previous mistakes, because their database is God!

It's their choice ... let them kill their God? And all the other Gods along with it?

ExittheLemming wrote: ... Until such time as we confront this issue we will continue to feign indifference to that embarrassing state of affairs where inclusive collaborators seem compelled to shoehorn their favorite non Prog artists onto the site under the woolly blanket that used to be Prog related. ...

This would also require the choice of folks that have this huge care and respect for all these other abilities. Too many of the folks that appear involved, come off like hardcore fans for their top 5 and that's it.

Perfect example is how their "tastes" influences it all. As I mentioned before the main thing I would like to see this site help define "progressive/prog" would be to make the list a top "100 artists", not the top "100 albums", which would help with the concept of the proper definition of the work ... it's not about Genesis or ELP, for crying out loud ... it's about the artists and their work. We don't need Picasso listed three times in our list, any more than we do Dali, or Miro, or Warhol ... but the perspective about those folks being "artists" is missing ... and too many folks, even here, still thik it's just another song! And the majority of that music that got "progressive started, WAS NOT just another song ... and this is where folks like Miles are important.

The same thing happened in Brazil, btw, where Villa Lobos, and the big names in composition in the late 50's and 60's were already spreading the music into an element that did not fit one area, and this helped create the likes of Egberto Gismonti, a very creative and visual idealist with his music ... and extremelly progressive in the early days, although now he is just thought of as another jazz artist, when he is less jazz today that he is classical. He's an artist nonetheless! But Brazil can never be "progressive" because of the "albums" that fans like! If we take the separate albums out, we would have 100 artists, not 65 of them ... and I think this would represent the world a lot better, and would likely make room for folks like Miles Davis ... where as 5 albums by Genesis, are preventing more artists from being there! Or ELP, or anyone else.

This is the only request I have ... anything else is a bonus for me. I just would like to see us treat this is more important music than just a song. I simply don't see enough folks with that thought in their heads!

To all peeps who say why they don't know why this is being discussed, I am lost for words  thus see no purpose to discuss or debate this further. xxx

Padraic wrote: You resurrected this thread to say that?

Svetonio wrote: micky wrote: Lear'sFool wrote: micky wrote: I never really saw Cat Food or Lizard as fusion. Then again I suppose like most things Fusion means something different to each listener. I tend to see it this way. Fusion is to Jazz Rock what Prog is to Progressive Rock. (...) (...) Like some perhaps I don't use them interchangeably. Perhaps I've been sort of institutionalized by the years spend trying to pigeon hole groups and trying to pound round groups into square holes but I do make a distinction between Fusion and jazz-rock.  Fusion being more a flat out style, jazz-rock being more a subtle take on merging jazz and rock (subtle enough that at times it can be even hard to recognize or easy to overlook.. ie Steely Dan or the ABB.) That's interesting to me also, that distinction beetween fusion and jazz-rock.   Well, right off the top of my head, here are two examples; in my opinion, this is (progressive) fusion, and this is jazz-rock.

I'm sure it is all in the lexicon of the beholder. Look no further than the age old progressive rock/Prog Rock usage.  For many they are interchangeable. Yet for some you have 3 distinct usages on the notion. Prog Rock. Progressive Rock (n). and progressive rock (adj).