Genre Jumping
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: Proto-Prog and Prog-Related Lounge
Forum Description: Discuss bands and albums classified as Proto-Prog and Prog-Related
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=42145
Printed Date: December 04 2024 at 13:53
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Genre Jumping
Posted By: rushfan4
Subject: Genre Jumping
Date Posted: September 29 2007 at 17:24
|
An interesting point was brought up on a Coheed and Cambria thread regarding the difficulty for a band that starts out as a non-prog/prog-related band to get recognized on PA for their progginess if they later begin to create more progressive music. Such a band is still deemed prog-related or not at all prog. Whereas, our heroes of prog, Rush, Yes, Genesis, Jethro Tull, etc... started progressive and then in their later years, depending on your individual point of view, lost their progginess and yet they will forever be categorized as progressive.
If a bands first 6 albums are prog and their last 6 albums are pop they might still be considered Eclectic Prog, but what if it were the other way around? If their first 6 albums are pop and then they see the light and their next 6 albums are prog can they ever overcome their first 6 albums to become Eclectic Prog, or should they just be happy to even get a mention on Prog-Related?
I am not familar with Coheed and Cambria and cannot comment on their progginess or lack thereof, but to use them as an example, if their next album comes out and it is Tales of Topographical Mountains, or The Lamb Got Up And Went to the Yankees' Game Because It Didn't Want to Get Run Over By A Red Barchetta on Broadway what would the chances be that they would be moved from Prog-Related to Eclectic Prog or Crossover Prog. Any chance, or have they been pigeon-holed to prog related because of their first albums? Just curious. Don't you just love hypothetical questions?
P.S. I don't want this thread to be a bash PA and the Collabs thread or a bash Coheed and Cambria thread. I am hoping that this will help us PA users to better understand what a difficult job the Special Collabs have when it comes to trying to categorize these progressive bands and their tendencies to be all over the map over the course of their lengthy careers. ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: September 29 2007 at 17:42
|
"Eclectic Prog" does not mean that the discography of an artist contains prog and non prog albums ... it's for artists which released albums from different prog genres or are inherently eclectic in style (it's impossible to say whether they're symphonic or avant for example). As for moving bands from prog-related to prog: I think such a move would be justified if one of these bands releases one fully progressive album.  ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to: 
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: September 30 2007 at 03:15
|
I am in perfect agreement with Rushfan's post, and I thank him for his civil, helpful tone. The debate going on in the Collabs section often hinges upon this same issue, though unfortunately it is quite difficult to find an agreement about the best way to proceed. However, this seems to be a particularly thorny issue when the band of artist in question is very high-profile. A few weeks ago it came up in the case of a very well-known band that is currently in Proto-Prog, and is not very likely to be moved from there any time soon because of the huge backlash it would cause among members. The case of Coheed and Cambria is probably a bit less controversial, since they are not as well-known as the band I have been talking about. In any case, my own impression is that a lot of our reactions are based on the fact that many famous acts bear a sort of 'tag', which is very hard to shrug off. To make myself clearer, if a band is known as heavy metal, there will be lots of people who will refuse the idea of their being prog, even if half of their output is such. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: October 01 2007 at 19:14
I know... it really makes no sense to me... we add artists if they did one prog album since this is a prog site.. not a career retrospective site or even a general music site. It's a frickin prog site. We classify artists based on their music... yet continue to insist that some bands can't be put in a subgenre.. .because they aren't 'known' as prog. What the hell do we have experts and teams for if all you have to do is see whether a band.. is KNOWN as prog or not.  Hell of
a way to run a site... ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Ghost Rider wrote:Posted By: chamberry
Date Posted: October 01 2007 at 19:22
At the rate Circle's going I think I'll have to propose them to the Crossover genre. 
------------- 
|
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: October 02 2007 at 03:32
|
It's an interesting point. We would look to our genre teams to adopt any such bands if they felt they warranted such a move.
The majority of bands classified as Prog Related and all those classified as Proto Prog have been around for a long time though, so the extent of their prog credentials should be well established.
|
Posted By: toolis
Date Posted: October 02 2007 at 04:18
|
well, my dear friend Rushfan4, in this site the criterias for adding or changing a band/artist's genre are: 1. classicality (e.g Rush, Yes, Genesis) 2. popularity (Iron Maiden) 3. 4. popular demand (Coheed & Cambria) while other bands suggested to the proper thread wait in line until all popular, all time fave bands are added... God, it's good to be back!!!  3. deleted for disguised personal attack. ------------- -music is like pornography... sometimes amateurs turn us on, even more... -sometimes you are the pigeon and sometimes you are the statue... |