Should ELO be added to prog archives?

Come on!  They are (symphonic) prog rock and you know it!  They are on all the other major prog websites I have visited.  Now this site is what I consider to be the biggest, despite the fact that ELO is missing.  They are a famous band and should be added!  Lets try and get Max's attention.  ELO!!!!

I'm not convinced. They were very original in some respects; obviously in their use of strings, and were clearly very talented. However, most ELO I've heard, which I admit is not an enormous amount, seems like rock n roll at the end of the day. Not prog IMO.

Good point. I'm not aware of Warhorse, or Captain Beyond to be honest, so I'll take your word for it. Deep Purple??? They were blues/rock/metal etc, and not prog, I agree. Just because they had an organist

I guess my criteria for a band being prog would probably not be met by ELO, but by the same token niether by Atomic Rooster and Deep Purple.

richardh wrote: Very early on they were a Prog band but Jeff Lynne did pretty much the same for ELO as Phil Collins did for Genesis (ie turn them into pop bands).I don't want to see reviews of pop albums here so I've got to say NO.

I agree. On the Third Day was their watershed album.
After that they veered more toward symphonic pop/rock.
But overall they were a bit too gimmicky.

than why is styx on prog archives? 

What about Chicago from 69-75?  thats prog.

What is Gorp?

Styx are poppy. Elo are poppy. James last does alot of classical stuff but you would not say he was a classical performer.

I agree with Richard. If they'd carried on the way Roy Wood had intended, they may have gone on to become a good prog band.

When they were formed, Wood/Lynne said that the intention was to carry on from where the Beatles left off with "Strawberry fields forever", so that gives a hint of the original intended direction.

Jeff Lynne initially kept on a similar path, and I'd argue that "Eldorado" was a good prog album, but after that they quickly went pop. If you look at the double album "Out of the blue", almost every track has the same simple verse/chorus structure.

They made great music, with a lot of symphonic input, but I wouldn't say they fit in here.

ELO? I don't think so.  Even though they used strings and some classical bits I think that was more of a novelty or gimmic than trying to draw you into something deeper. I think they were a very slick pop group.  I think the same way of Supertramp also.  I would almost put Ambrosia in the class but they did some progressive numbers as well as their hits.  Styx?  I have always debated this band in my mind. I do like a lot of their music but they stay on the fringe of progressive unlike their contemporaries like Kansas who took deep plunges. Deep Purple?  Yes.  Heavy Metal?  Yes, but they were the inovators of metal so they score points there.  They did the orchestra thing with John Lords composition.  Child in Time is a very progressive song. Not all the material for sure but enough to say they were early on.

CFF:

Your basic premise is unarguably correct: there are, indeed (in my and others' opinions) at least a few bands on PA that probably do not belong.  And there are at least a few bands who are not on PA who (again, in my and others' opinions) should be.

The ultimate decision for this rests with the webmasters.  Even I, as what amounts to a "senior administrator," have little or no control over this.  The best anyone can do is make a cogent argument for why a particular band belongs on PA, the webmasters consider it and, if they agree, they add that band, and if they do not, they don't.  And although it is true that a great number of people supporting a particular band's inclusion carries some weight, the ultimate decision is based on whether the webmasters feel that the band fits their chosen definition of "progressive rock" - which, of course, they have every right to do, given that they developed and control the site.

I have never known Max and the other webmasters to be arbitrary or capricious in their decision to add or not add a band.  Personally, I agree that Styx does not belong here.  (Indeed, I do not think Supertramp belongs here either, as much as I love them.  As I have argued, if Supertramp belongs here, then so do 10CC - who are equally "progressive" in the same way - and XTC, who are more "progressive" than both of them.  Yet Max et al have made no move to add either of them, despite strong arguments and quite a bit of support from other members).  Note that I was successful in getting Max to add The Church to the site only because I made a solid, clear and ongoing case based on the majority of their most recent albums, and the music thereon.  And I am certain Max et al took the time to listen to some of those albums, and arrived at the conclusion that The Church fit the site's description of "progressive."

Ultimately, this debate - who belongs and who doesn't - will probably continue as long as PA exists.  However, the final decision rests with the webmasters, and we must accept that, like the judges on Jeopardy, "their decision is final," and it must be respected.

Peace.

I do not seen much difference (aesthetically of course) between ELO and Manfred Mann, Procol Harum or Supertramp. So yes, they very well may be in Prog Archives. However, since it is not straight prog, it is up to Max....