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.
Nektar started out as some sort of space/psychedelic version of progressive rock and you'll find elements of that on all their relevant albums. As long as it's only possible to select one genre for an entire discography, Psychedelic/Space Rock is nektar's natural place. Eclectic is an embarrassing Progarchives-invention that should be scrapped. It's not a genre but more of a descriptor. All progressive rock-bands needs to be somewhat eclectic.
All genres are descriptors! People get too hung up about this stuff. Eclectic simply means that no genre is the dominant one. I love the tag eclectic because it tells me that the artist at hand cannot easily be pigeon-holed into any particular genre. To me it makes more sense than RPI here.
Good for you.I still think Eclectic is silly as prog is eclectic by default. Practically every song on every 1970's album by Genesis and Yes is eclectic and neither of their careers can be pigeon-holed into any particular genre. Same goes for Banco, Le Orme and PFM...
You're totally missing the point of the genre. Of course all prog is eclectic but every single early Yes and Genesis is clearly symphonic prog dominated. Eclectic prog means NO genre is dominate. Eclectic is the PA way of having multliple genre tags with equal standing.
Nektar started out as some sort of space/psychedelic version of progressive rock and you'll find elements of that on all their relevant albums. As long as it's only possible to select one genre for an entire discography, Psychedelic/Space Rock is nektar's natural place. Eclectic is an embarrassing Progarchives-invention that should be scrapped. It's not a genre but more of a descriptor. All progressive rock-bands needs to be somewhat eclectic.
All genres are descriptors! People get too hung up about this stuff. Eclectic simply means that no genre is the dominant one. I love the tag eclectic because it tells me that the artist at hand cannot easily be pigeon-holed into any particular genre. To me it makes more sense than RPI here.
Good for you.I still think Eclectic is silly as prog is eclectic by default. Practically every song on every 1970's album by Genesis and Yes is eclectic and neither of their careers can be pigeon-holed into any particular genre. Same goes for Banco, Le Orme and PFM...
You're totally missing the point of the genre. Of course all prog is eclectic but every single early Yes and Genesis is clearly symphonic prog dominated. Eclectic prog means NO genre is dominate. Eclectic is the PA way of having multliple genre tags with equal standing.
Which is completely inane.
-You're missing my point. And has it cought on anywhere else. No, of course not.
Nektar started out as some sort of space/psychedelic version of progressive rock and you'll find elements of that on all their relevant albums. As long as it's only possible to select one genre for an entire discography, Psychedelic/Space Rock is nektar's natural place. Eclectic is an embarrassing Progarchives-invention that should be scrapped. It's not a genre but more of a descriptor. All progressive rock-bands needs to be somewhat eclectic.
All genres are descriptors! People get too hung up about this stuff. Eclectic simply means that no genre is the dominant one. I love the tag eclectic because it tells me that the artist at hand cannot easily be pigeon-holed into any particular genre. To me it makes more sense than RPI here.
Good for you.I still think Eclectic is silly as prog is eclectic by default. Practically every song on every 1970's album by Genesis and Yes is eclectic and neither of their careers can be pigeon-holed into any particular genre. Same goes for Banco, Le Orme and PFM...
You're totally missing the point of the genre. Of course all prog is eclectic but every single early Yes and Genesis is clearly symphonic prog dominated. Eclectic prog means NO genre is dominate. Eclectic is the PA way of having multliple genre tags with equal standing.
Which is completely inane.
-You're missing my point. And has it cought on anywhere else. No, of course not.
The reason it hasn't caught on elsewhere is because multiple genre tags are allowed elsewhere. This site came out before many of the more modern ones and has proved impossible to add the multiple tag feature without reinventing the entire site. What's so hard to understand about this? Seems pretty straight forward to me.
My introduction to Nektar was the double lp 'Nektar sounds like this' which is basically them jamming live in the studio; it sounded to me (as a teenager) like a looser, spacier Deep purple or Uriah heep.. kind of what was called 'Stoner rock' (ugghh i hate that term) in the 90's/2000's. Then i heard 'Remember the future' and i heard a gentler, almost Caravan/ Fruupp sound.. i was never so keen on 'Tab in the Ocean' (but the word 'Tab' should kinda give a clue to their mindset..). They toured with Man, Hawkwind, Help Yourself etc so they fitted in that Space-rock/ Jam rock/ UK 'West coast' sound and the light-show with the ink slides over weird images definitely puts them in the very early Floyd/ Jefferson Airplane camp which i guess is Psych (certainly in terms of presentation). I also think they are very much like Eloy in their progression and evolution. I do understand those who have to put tags on these things and good for you for making whatever decision you have to make but it doesnt mean a bean to me what 'genre' they are in the long run
Nektar started out as some sort of space/psychedelic version of progressive rock and you'll find elements of that on all their relevant albums. As long as it's only possible to select one genre for an entire discography, Psychedelic/Space Rock is nektar's natural place. Eclectic is an embarrassing Progarchives-invention that should be scrapped. It's not a genre but more of a descriptor. All progressive rock-bands needs to be somewhat eclectic.
All genres are descriptors! People get too hung up about this stuff. Eclectic simply means that no genre is the dominant one. I love the tag eclectic because it tells me that the artist at hand cannot easily be pigeon-holed into any particular genre. To me it makes more sense than RPI here.
Good for you.I still think Eclectic is silly as prog is eclectic by default. Practically every song on every 1970's album by Genesis and Yes is eclectic and neither of their careers can be pigeon-holed into any particular genre. Same goes for Banco, Le Orme and PFM...
You're totally missing the point of the genre. Of course all prog is eclectic but every single early Yes and Genesis is clearly symphonic prog dominated. Eclectic prog means NO genre is dominate. Eclectic is the PA way of having multliple genre tags with equal standing.
Which is completely inane.
-You're missing my point. And has it cought on anywhere else. No, of course not.
The reason it hasn't caught on elsewhere is because multiple genre tags are allowed elsewhere. This site came out before many of the more modern ones and has proved impossible to add the multiple tag feature without reinventing the entire site. What's so hard to understand about this? Seems pretty straight forward to me.
I understand everything. I just disagree with all your arguments - and still think the way I do.
^ LOL. They're not arguments. Just trying to give you perspective in
how the databases work. These are facts not opinions. Whatever!
What? I understand how it works. Your argument is basically "Eclectic is the PA way of having multliple genre tags with equal standing" - which doesn't change my mind regarding me finding the "invention" of Eclectic Prog-genre laughable. PA's approach to sub-genres has been flawed from the get go, and that's why "we" have to come up with these ridiculous new genres. What arguments do I actually need? "Eclectic prog means NO genre is dominate" - and you'vedecided that King Crimson, Van Der Graaf Generator and Gentle Giant fits that description moreso than Genesis. Looks completely random to me.
"The Eclectic category recognizes bands that evolved markedly over their career (in a progressive, evolutionary way), or have a plural style without a clear referential core".
-I'd say VdGG and Gentle Giant has a clearer referential core than... most profilc bands/artists on PA, really.
One of the downfalls of this site is that we can't multiple tag individual albums like RYM
The answer to your question is that Nektar were quite eclectic and were symph, space, funk, Kraut, hard rock as well as a jam band.
Often we evaluate on a single album's experience and make our decisions based on a particular album.
The band's debut "Journey To The Centre Of The Eye" was the most psychedelic of their canon and rightfully featured a predominant psychedelic first tagging.
Starting on the second album "A Tab In The Ocean," the psychedelic elements while still present were equally matched by hard rock and good old fashioned King Crimsonian prog.
I'd probably prefer an eclectic tag as well but ultimately we have better things to worry about than reassigning artists that are somewhat OK with where they sit.
I'm OK with Nektar in the psych category myself.
There are many artists on PA i would love to see reassigned but considering we are short staffed there are more important things to focus our attention on :)
Hi.
Ofcourse you (or anybody) cant do it (about multi tags) . I guess you mean , you focused on 2-3 albums and then reach to the agreements about genres. Its logical but I cant say "Remember the future" is a Psychedelic album.
About Nektar first 3 albums that you mentioned , in compare to Pink Floyd (as a near sample) , I convinced Pink Floyd is a Psychedelic Prog band and we know all of PF albums are not Psychedelic. In Nektar case , I didnt find exact Psyc elements like Ummagumma .
Perhaps you are limiting yourself to what YOU think psychedelic rock is. The term has a broader meaning than you would expect which is why heavier rock bands like Hawkwind are there. It's not just Pink Floyd.
According to Wikipedia (which is not always correct but this is fairly accruate): (just apply this to progressive rock and it makes perfect sense why Nektar is psychedelic here and not just heavy)
Psychedelic rock is a rock musicgenre that is inspired, influenced, or representative of psychedelic culture, which is centered on perception-altering hallucinogenic drugs. The music incorporated new electronic sound effects and recording techniques, extended instrumental solos, and improvisation.[2] Many psychedelic groups differ in style, and the label is often applied spuriously.[3]
Originating in the mid-1960s among British and American
musicians, the sound of psychedelic rock invokes three core effects of
LSD: depersonalization, dechronicization, and dynamization, all of which detach the user from everyday reality.[3] Musically, the effects may be represented via novelty studio tricks, electronic or non-Western instrumentation, disjunctive song structures, and extended instrumental segments.[4] Some of the earlier 1960s psychedelic rock musicians were based in folk, jazz, and the blues, while others showcased an explicit Indian classical influence called "raga rock".
In the 1960s, there existed two main variants of the genre: the more
whimsical, surrealist British psychedelia and the harder American West
Coast "acid rock".
While "acid rock" is sometimes deployed interchangeably with the term
"psychedelic rock", it also refers more specifically to the heavier,
harder, and more extreme ends of the genre.
The peak years of psychedelic rock were between 1967 and 1969, with milestone events including the 1967 Summer of Love and the 1969 Woodstock Rock Festival, becoming an international musical movement associated with a widespread counterculture
before beginning a decline as changing attitudes, the loss of some key
individuals, and a back-to-basics movement led surviving performers to
move into new musical areas. The genre bridged the transition from early
blues and folk-based rock to progressive rock and hard rock, and as a result contributed to the development of sub-genres such as heavy metal. Since the late 1970s it has been revived in various forms of neo-psychedelia.
Come on! Why you accused me to limited mind guy?! I just share my opinion about one of the most impressive band in Progressive history.
I dont have any problem with genres . I always try to find out new stuffs in music that I thought no one talked about it and try to learn more .
You refer me to bad source . I dont expected it from guys like you....
Well i'm on the PSIKE team so i guess i don't know what i'm talking about.
This is how psychedelic rock is defined. Either accept it or not.
It makes me no difference but i guarantee you that Nektar is not moving.
Who was talking about moving Nektar?! Are you Ok? I guess you are angry mate. Calm down .
I dont care about you are in which team and its not my business. I just talked about my opinion about a band. BUT I never let anybody to dictate his/her opinion to me.
I recommend you : if you cant talk and argue about music , dont write in this kind of topics. I am not here to fight against you....
^ LOL. They're not arguments. Just trying to give you perspective in
how the databases work. These are facts not opinions. Whatever!
What? I understand how it works. Your argument is basically "Eclectic is the PA way of having multliple genre tags with equal standing" - which doesn't change my mind regarding me finding the "invention" of Eclectic Prog-genre laughable. PA's approach to sub-genres has been flawed from the get go, and that's why "we" have to come up with these ridiculous new genres. What arguments do I actually need? "Eclectic prog means NO genre is dominate" - and you'vedecided that King Crimson, Van Der Graaf Generator and Gentle Giant fits that description moreso than Genesis. Looks completely random to me.
"The Eclectic category recognizes bands that evolved markedly over their career (in a progressive, evolutionary way), or have a plural style without a clear referential core".
-I'd say VdGG and Gentle Giant has a clearer referential core than... most profilc bands/artists on PA, really.
According to Wikipedia (which is not always correct but this is fairly accurate): (just apply this to progressive rock and it makes perfect sense why Nektar is psychedelic here and not just heavy)
Psychedelic rock is a rock musicgenre that is inspired, influenced, or representative of psychedelic culture, which is centered on perception-altering hallucinogenic drugs. The music incorporated new electronic sound effects and recording techniques, extended instrumental solos, and improvisation.[2] Many psychedelic groups differ in style, and the label is often applied spuriously.[3]
Originating in the mid-1960s among British and American
musicians, the sound of psychedelic rock invokes three core effects of
LSD: depersonalization, dechronicization, and dynamization, all of which detach the user from everyday reality.[3]
...
Hi,
I'm not a great fan of posting material that is badly written, and really not quite well studied or possible. I really wanted to call that write up middle class garbage, because it is generalized to the point of destroying what the music is about.
First of all, the true "psychedelic" stuff had NO MEANING, beyond the experience itself ... thus saying that it is strictly about detaching yourself from this or that would be inaccurate. Why bother if yo are not curious and want to learn? Did you check/read your Aldous Huxley, Lilly, Monroe and the many other studies around the whole thing?
1. There is a lot of literature, music and art that is centered on perception altering anything, and they are not considered "psychedelic" ... Edgar Allan Poe!
2. Like there has never existed any art that has no "depersonalization, dechronicization and dynamization, that show a side of detachment from reality in general. This comment is ridiculous and uneducated!
siLLy puPPy wrote:
...
Musically, the effects may be represented via novelty studio tricks, electronic or non-Western instrumentation, disjunctive song structures, and extended instrumental segments.[4]
...
Like it never happens elsewhere in everything else!
siLLy puPPy wrote:
...
Some of the earlier 1960s psychedelic rock musicians were based in folk, jazz, and the blues, while others showcased an explicit Indian classical influence called "raga rock". In the 1960s, there existed two main variants of the genre: the more whimsical, surrealist British psychedelia and the harder American West Coast "acid rock".
...
Another horrible generalization. Surrealism was not British ... it was FRENCH/SPANISH for a start, though English Theater is better known for it. Surrealism is very whimsical, on a personal level, not on a literary, or cultural level at all. This comment needs to be fit into a bit of literary/artistic history to make sense.
The varieties of the genre were similar in all places ... although the West Coast is given more "free form", mostly because the Fillmore was a haven for it, and other places were not as open to it all ... likewise there is also a West Coast /East Coast thing about the really early electronic music in America, and the differences there are very wide, but I think that in the pop/rock/jazz areas, it was a lot less about anything except the "experience".
The weird side of it is comparing it to a RAGA ... and if you study/read about "raga's", it is not quite the freeform exercise that we think, and some of it has structure, at least from the start. See Peter Michael Hamel's book about music. There are, really, not many rock ragas, although it is easy to put them side by side, because in many ways, they have some similarities, but I seriously doubt that a lot of the Fillmore "raga" was anywhere near the Hindu versions and designs, though it is possible. I think we use the term, very loosely, to make it seem better than it really is, however, for me, it takes away the originality of the rock version of the pieces. A lot of the free form stuff in the Fillmore, so much of which is STILL not released by a handful of folks, is still some of the very best free form rock music ever done, and a lot of European musicians loved listening to it, and you can hear some of the folks from AD2 even talk about LA and SF a lot, and in fact it was the biggest dream for the band ... that didn't happen!
I simply would like to see a lot of this stuff cleared up so that the music itself can stand up to the history of music and the arts ... as it is written it is nothing ... and in fact, all the descriptions show no originality or talent whatsoever ... and my friend, I'm afraid that even leaves out something like "krautrock" that was very psychedelic in its start, but developed into solid music and work as time went by ... the problem with the stuff in England and America is that it became so commercialized that it could not go anywhere or get better ... and instead got ripped and destroyed everywhere it went ... only to be remembered so fondly 50 years plus later!
Edited by moshkito - January 04 2023 at 14:49
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com
According to Wikipedia (which is not always correct but this is fairly accurate): (just apply this to progressive rock and it makes perfect sense why Nektar is psychedelic here and not just heavy)
Psychedelic rock is a rock musicgenre that is inspired, influenced, or representative of psychedelic culture, which is centered on perception-altering hallucinogenic drugs. The music incorporated new electronic sound effects and recording techniques, extended instrumental solos, and improvisation.[2] Many psychedelic groups differ in style, and the label is often applied spuriously.[3]
Originating in the mid-1960s among British and American
musicians, the sound of psychedelic rock invokes three core effects of
LSD: depersonalization, dechronicization, and dynamization, all of which detach the user from everyday reality.[3]
...
Hi,
I'm not a great fan of posting material that is badly written, and really not quite well studied or possible. I really wanted to call that write up middle class garbage, because it is generalized to the point of destroying what the music is about.
First of all, the true "psychedelic" stuff had NO MEANING, beyond the experience itself ... thus saying that it is strictly about detaching yourself from this or that would be inaccurate. Why bother if yo are not curious and want to learn? Did you check/read your Aldous Huxley, Lilly, Monroe and the many other studies around the whole thing?
1. There is a lot of literature, music and art that is centered on perception altering anything, and they are not considered "psychedelic" ... Edgar Allan Poe!
2. Like there has never existed any art that has no "depersonalization, dechronicization and dynamization, that show a side of detachment from reality in general. This comment is ridiculous and uneducated!
siLLy puPPy wrote:
...
Musically, the effects may be represented via novelty studio tricks, electronic or non-Western instrumentation, disjunctive song structures, and extended instrumental segments.[4]
...
Like it never happens elsewhere in everything else!
siLLy puPPy wrote:
...
Some of the earlier 1960s psychedelic rock musicians were based in folk, jazz, and the blues, while others showcased an explicit Indian classical influence called "raga rock". In the 1960s, there existed two main variants of the genre: the more whimsical, surrealist British psychedelia and the harder American West Coast "acid rock".
...
Another horrible generalization. Surrealism was not British ... it was FRENCH/SPANISH for a start, though English Theater is better known for it. Surrealism is very whimsical, on a personal level, not on a literary, or cultural level at all. This comment needs to be fit into a bit of literary/artistic history to make sense.
The varieties of the genre were similar in all places ... although the West Coast is given more "free form", mostly because the Fillmore was a haven for it, and other places were not as open to it all ... likewise there is also a West Coast /East Coast thing about the really early electronic music in America, and the differences there are very wide, but I think that in the pop/rock/jazz areas, it was a lot less about anything except the "experience".
I simply would like to see a lot of this stuff cleared up so that the music itself can stand up to the history of music and the arts ... as it is written it is nothing ... and in fact, all the descriptions show no originality or talent whatsoever ... and my friend, I'm afraid that even leaves out something like "krautrock" that was very psychedelic in its start, but developed into solid music and work as time went by ... the problem with the stuff in England and America is that it became so commercialized that it could not go anywhere or get better ... and instead got ripped and destroyed everywhere it went ... only to be remembered so fondly 50 years plus later!
Hi ..
You explained everything very clear and as always I learned from you too many things. I really appreciated .
I find that Nektar is like a mixture of various genres. You can definitely hear the symphonic Prog side but you can absolutely hear the space and psych rock stuff. They can also get a little jazzy from what I have heard from them. They are definitely an odd band of Prog
I find that Nektar is like a mixture of various genres. You can definitely hear the symphonic Prog side but you can absolutely hear the space and psych rock stuff. They can also get a little jazzy from what I have heard from them. They are definitely an odd band of Prog
Hi. You completely right. Most of Progressive great bands play with different genres but they have their specific sound.
Labels, 'shmabels!!! Who cares, Nektar is great music........If it was called DISCO would you not listen to it??
Perhaps , If I never listen their music and I heard they are a Disco band , I never try them. No one cant listen to all albums around the world.
But after I listen their music and people call them Disco band , Its not important for me. Genres not essential parameter of a band but they can help people to choose what they want to listen.
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
This page was generated in 0.117 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote 
Posted: December 13 2022 at 08:31
Who cares, Nektar is great music........If it was called DISCO would you not listen to it?? 
Topic Options
Saperlipopette! wrote: