most unwanted popgroups/artists on PA
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics related to progressive music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=50850
Printed Date: November 29 2024 at 23:21
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: most unwanted popgroups/artists on PA
Posted By: progrules
Subject: most unwanted popgroups/artists on PA
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 04:20
|
Ever since I visit this website the only real flaw I can think of is the presence of a lot of (more or less) commercial bands and artists. Above you find 25 of them, I probably forgot quite some of them but I think these are the most significant ones.
Problem I have with them is the fact they are (or at least have been) commercial during a part of their carreer and their progressive grade is debatable. As most of us know one of the features of progressive music is that the bands/artists don't really care for commercial success, they just want to produce great music, a fact we all thank them for, don't we ?
I know Genesis, Yes and Pink Floyd also have been/are commercial but these great bands are so significant for progressive music that these are a different story.
I have to admit I have done some reviews of abovementioned bands but my statement doesn't mean I hate all the bands in this poll, I am even a fan of a few. But still it's my opinion they shouldn't be here.
Anyway my believe is that many of the above mentioned bands could be removed if I had to say anything about it. But I am curious if I'm the only one who feels like this and maybe it proves to be so that most of us really like their presence on Progarchives. In that case, please do response in a comment !!
If you don't want them around you can vote for as many bands if you like, even for all 25!
So, I'd say: have a go and give your opinion ! ------------- A day without prog is a wasted day |
Replies:
Posted By: Kotro
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 05:15
|
Commercial or not, the fact is most of those bands (if not all - well, maybe not Radiohead) have produced great music (better that A LOT of full-blown prog bands), and did so before even thinking about making a few bucks - and while I agree that not all of them show elements of prog, I would classify a lot of them as Art-Rock. For the others, well, I guess that's why I have Prog-Related and Proto-Prog. ------------- Bigger on the inside. |
Posted By: Rocktopus
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 05:20
|
You forgot Nightwish.
------------- Over land and under ashes In the sunlight, see - it flashes Find a fly and eat his eye But don't believe in me Don't believe in me Don't believe in me |
Posted By: erik neuteboom
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 05:59
|
delete |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 06:01
------------- 
|
Rocktopus wrote:Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 06:02
|
Hold on, just because these bands aren't full-blown prog bands doesn't mean they aren't at least partially prog. I mean look In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida By Iron Butterfly, Abbey Road By The Beatles, Tommy By The Who. Those are all pretty much full-blown prog albums. And Also without albums like Sgt. Pepper or The Doors, we probably wouldn't have prog. So just because they're not prog, doesn't mean they didn't create prog for future artists (although, I'm with on Black Sabbath and Iron Maiden). ------------- 
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: russellk
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 06:10
|
How can the appearance of a band you don't think is prog possibly mar your experience of the site? Why is commercial success considered any sort of yardstick as to a band's progressiveness - apart from snobbish reasons? Really, just really, how about we stop worrying about territory and start enjoying ourselves? I don't have the slightest problem with a any of the bands I've heard on this site. Give me more! I want more! |
Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 06:11
|
I agree with you that the prog content of most of the acts you mentioned is a matter of debate, but some of them have found their right place here because of their influence on prog bands (Beatles) or because their music can properly be called prog (Procol Harum, Mike Oldfield), despite their commercial success. Anyway, I think it's an error to define a band as prog because of their (lack of) commercial success. One can choose between a strictly dogmatic point of view on prog (in this case some of these bands may be discarded from PA) or go really out of bounds (in case we may welcome the Spice Girls, the Sugarhill Gang or some more trash metal bands which have noting to do with prog sooner or later). I withhold my vote...
|
Posted By: Yorkie X
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 06:23
|
See I wouldn't think of stirring up angst by constructing such a poll for starters many of those artists on this list deserve to be here on the site I think but my vote goes to ... was a toss up between bowie and the doors and I went with Bowie , though he's a class act the reasons I enjoy his material isn't prog related at all. How Mike Oldfield ended up on the list is a mystery to me ??? you are aware he really moved the prog spirit forward back in his day ? Like a launching pad for those who never heard anything like it to explore deeper and start to develop that prog way of thinking. |
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 06:42
Equalling prog-related & even crossover prog with "unwanted" gets  from me, with all due respect.Try a better approach than "commercial music" for some of the band's real reason for being here as well. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Jared
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 07:14
It shows just how muich the site has moved on since I joined over 3 years ago, when the 'en vogue' thing to do was to start a Styx bashing thread...and now they aren't even mentioned in your top 25...
I think excellent points have been made in the posts above this one, so I shan't be voting. All I can say is that the respective collabs of each genre put in a lot of work into this site, and discuss at great length the inclusion/ exclusion of certain bands, for the benefit of the site's integrity, so it would be churlish of me to make criticsms.
For sure, there are bands that I wouldn't have added personally if I'd been in charge (and you should all think yourself lucky that no-one's ever put me in charge of anything... ), on the other hand, there are bands that I would most certainly add, but them not being here doesn't detract from my overall enjoyment... ------------- Music has always been a matter of energy to me. On some nights I believe that a car with the needle on empty can run 50 more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. Hunter S Thompson |
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 07:30
|
Sabbath 4 votes!!?? People have you heard Sabbath Bloody Sabbath and Sabotage? pff...
And at least their debut and Paranoid have a lot of Prog influences, especially Heavy Prog, which Sabbath isn't considered. Beatles? Huh? PROTO-Prog, don't you get it? How can you vote them? Deep Purple? Book of Taliesyn, Shades, Deep Purple, Concerto, In Rock, Fireball.. |
Posted By: JayDee
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 07:48
I don't see the point of this thread, really.
------------- 
|
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 08:05
Agree especially about Sabbath. I cant believe Supertramp ended up here either as theyve made the best album ever done. COTC. Progressive and unbelievably superb. OK their later stuff was far more commercial like Genesis, Chicago............. To vote in such an inane poll I would say The Doors as I think they are the most overrated but thats just me and me being vindictive ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 08:06
|
Jefferson Airplane.............However did they get on the list also, just saw them ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: npjnpj
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 08:19
| In my view all the artists on that list have some prog-oriented aspect to them somewhere that justify their presence here, even Rainbow, although they do seem to be pushing the envelope a bit. |
Posted By: fusionfreak
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 08:34
|
Santana has been losing contact with true music for years:jazz,Coltrane,flower power and kindness have
left him.Supernatural is a very bad album,moreover this guy keeps looking for praise quoting bands such
as Tinariwen(this is a very good band by the way)but he forgets to write good stuff(where are Caravanserai and Welcome?).Commercial bands were evoked(Queen for example)but if there were more commercial
bands like Led Zeppelin I would be happy.Black Sabbath has proggy elements thanks to Bill Ward's jazzy
drumming among others and some Maiden stuff is clearly prog(To tame a land or Rime of the ancient mariner).I hope someday big music labels will be wise enough to recruit real bands and accept losing money. ------------- I was born in the land of Mahavishnu,not so far from Kobaia.I'm looking for the world of searchers with the help from crimson king |
Posted By: proggy
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 08:42
|
Queensryche |
Posted By: GentleGiant
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 08:50
 ------------- BeGiantForADay "This British band is just the cup of tea for aficionados who demand virtuosity,progress and originality in their mix." http://rateyourmusic.com/~GentleG |
Posted By: Jared
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 08:52
^^quite right...I think it's about time this thread was locked, before some smart-arse decides that Pink Floyd or Genesis shoudn't be here.... ------------- Music has always been a matter of energy to me. On some nights I believe that a car with the needle on empty can run 50 more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. Hunter S Thompson |
Posted By: JayDee
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 08:55
 -------------
|
Posted By: iguana
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 09:55
|
even the most open minded and in musical taste most versatile and best established
cannot be here without having a major question mark above band's names, be it a commercially successful, “prog-related“ (your term, not mine), a stadium rock or just a good rock’nroll act. which is why i would like to put in a vote for QUEEN. this has nothing to do with their importance as a band. and while we're at it – DOORS and SANTANA are an iffy issue for me, too. so what! ------------- progressive rock and rural tranquility don't match. true or false? |
Posted By: Yorkie X
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 10:29
retracted my comment after thinking about it ... dont read this its pointless and a waste of your time  |
Posted By: LeInsomniac
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 11:10
|
Some groups don't need to be here, Ill give some examples: Muse, Radiohead, Queen, Talk Talk, Iron Maiden, 10 CC, and Black Sabbath, but thats just my opinion; even David Bowie which I ove shouldnt be here, and its not because of comercial sucess, its mainly because of they're lack of (if we may call it that) progressiveness in the composition in their works; And the whole idea of Proto-Prog and Prog-Related may be a cute idea to make people learn of some theories of pseudo-origins of other certain prog-rock groups, well if thats so, lets put proto-jazz or something, cause, it was jazz that eventually led to the birth of rock and blues. Well, let the debate that won't get anywhere...continue. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/LeInsomniac/?chartstyle=volta"> 
Happy Family One Hand Clap, Four Went On But None Came Back |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 11:17
|
It's quite depressing to see how many votes this poll is getting.
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to: 
|
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 11:23
|
From being open minded to its definitions of 'prog' this site has become THE resource on the web for discovering good music with reviews that for the most part can be relied upon as being subjective and informative. If you dont believe me visit some of the metal sites which review as a percentage where you find idiots rating albums with every song as 100 cause they like it and others at 0 cause they dont.
Sabbath not prog? give me a break ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 11:40
|
King Crimson ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: WinterLight
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 11:46
| Something to consider: one need not enjoy or approve of every band featured in the Archives. In fact, you do have the option of not liking every artist sanctioned as "Prog." |
Posted By: Roj
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 12:10
| ^ Exactly Winterlight. If you don't like a group, don't read about them, that's what I say. No vote on this poll from me. |
Posted By: Syzygy
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 12:12
Spot on as always, Erik !------------- 'Like so many of you I've got my doubts about how much to contribute to the already rich among us...' Robert Wyatt, Gloria Gloom |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 12:24
We're all different. Even if I don't like a group I may still want to read about it as I'm interested in things outside of my tastes, and one may like a group that one still doesn't think appropriate to its category, or even to PA. I'm quite inclusive -- provided I think a band/ artist has been categorised reasonably well, and have hoped to see progressive archives progress into more progressive music (even if not really Prog) -- of course this may require new "progreessive" categories for reasonable placement. There are some bands/ artists whose category I would change (and some I'd move to prog-related if it were up to me), but I wouldn't want to remove bands from the archives --a lot of work and preparation has gone into the additions (from evaluation, discussing and even debating the merits/ category, to preparing the addition). It would be unfair on the people who went to all that work to just remove an addition. Each proper addition, ones that follow the guidelines, involves considerable work. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 12:26
------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 12:29
At the risk of being pertinent I really think Tori Amos should be included as shes a lot more prog than a lot of artists here and for me is a real omission ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: Roj
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 12:36
|
^ Personally, I DO read about other bands, whether I like them or not. What I am saying is that if a band is not considered prog by a section of our posters this does not merit a band's exclusion. If you feel that strongly, just leave it alone, don't bother reading.
This is an amazing website and gives me an immense amount of enjoyment, exchanging news and views with likeminded proggies. I've learnt so much from this site, and I don't know how I managed without it.
You won't find any negativity from me, sorry if my last post came across differently
 |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 12:38
I think I lent support to Tori Amos before when she was suggested for inclusion -- hmm, I seem to remember that it was suggested that she, along with female artists such as Bjork, Laurie Anderson and Kate Bush, be included in a new category -- Chick Prog.  Not PC I know -- don't shoot the messenger.------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 12:43
it didnt come across differently and I agree with your views wholeheartedly. This site is a pleasure of discovery and diverseness ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 12:57
I wanted to go on a tangent since I've seen it said by a number of people that if you don't like a band, ignore it (which wouldn't work for me, because I want to gain more general knowledge -- though this is just a hobby for me and isn't like, say when I was in film studies which required me to watch and learn about films that I didn't inherently enjoy). For passionate music lovers, and people who are passionate about this site's direction, as well people who just like to debate merits as well as those who actually evaluate music for the site, it's not surprising that some wish to read and post their opinions about merits. Again, we're all different. I find such discussion stimulating. Controversy is stimulating. My opinions are expressed in my post before, but I respect that others feel and wish to express themselves differently. I feel strongly, and get worked up, about wars, yet I still follow it. I would rather people discuss such issues in a less passionate and more rational way, but, hey that's me. Anyway, this topic also relates to the site's direction, how inclusive should PA be? Ultimately that's up to the owners, but those who care about the site will have an opinion. And I generally find exchanges between not so like-minded proggies more interesting (must admit that I prefer getting involved in polite discussion than heated debate as I'm pretty casual in life). Conflict is at the root of drama, and drama can be very entertaining. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 13:04
Forgot about Bjork. If there ever was an experimental artist she is the epitome, ever changing, ever progressing! ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: unclemeat69
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 13:17
|
leave 'em all in here, I would say, as the acts I know (like Black Sabbath, Iron Maiden, Kate Bush, the Beatles etc.)all did at the very least have some progressive tendencies at some point, with the Beatles being among those showing the way to go.
------------- Follow your bliss |
Posted By: Norbert
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 13:37
For instance Radiohead's Kid A is a commercial album? I have no issues with this bands in the Archives, they are not Gentle Giant, but have some great music, with some proggy tendencies. |
Posted By: Statutory-Mike
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 13:41
The Beatles  Also Led Zepplin, The Doors, Queen.
Nothing to do with prog, maybe influential to some bands..but then again there are plenty of other artists like this who were influential to prog bands that aren't included on the site. Just get rid of em. ------------- 
|
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 13:42
seconded  ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 13:44
|
The Beatles at 23. you guys dont know what you are talking about ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 13:49
for instance its the band who has produced some of the most 'progressing music' albums of all time. Shame on you ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 13:54
|
I have to agree with dzx on this one. Sure a good chunk of the Beatle's output was pop rock, but their last few albums were quite progressive, at least for the time period that they were released. ------------- 
|
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 13:57
ty ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 14:07
Honestly, to describe for example Abbey Road as banal RnRoll is a sheer abortion ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: moreitsythanyou
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 14:21
|
I mean what idiot thought Follow You, Follow Me and Invisible Touch were prog to begin with? HAving Genesis on the 'chives is a huuuuuuuge blunder.
And yes, I will hunt down everyone who voted for Radiohead. 
(and honestly I can't decide between Led Zeppelin and the Who) -------------  <font color=white>butts, lol[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Rocktopus
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 14:41
Finally someone sticking to topic, instead of just another post from the selfcongratulating moralist crowd. Keep on posting honest opinions even when they're not positive (and even when they are wrong). I'd much rather see more of that, than all these hugging and clapping emotions littering the site. ------------- Over land and under ashes In the sunlight, see - it flashes Find a fly and eat his eye But don't believe in me Don't believe in me Don't believe in me |
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 14:51
And I'd much rather see categories and genres being understood more correctly/profoundly. This sheer poll of rock/pop bands the author even goes on categorizing as "commercial" thus "unwanted" or "bad" proves the opposite. And usually, besides the argument "not prog", you got to add something that asks the question "why". A real concludent, full and interesting answer as to "why". Again, if the premise on which the poll was created was that most prog related (and even crossover prog, what's an early prog-rocker like Oldfield doing here?!) band were added despite their commercial sound, it's a low understanding of the genres, of the bands and the actual reasons for which many (maybe not all, I can agree) were accepted/added/etc. -------------
|
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 15:46
|
Genesis in the early 70s were far too popular to belong on this site.
|
Posted By: Rocktopus
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 16:04
Except for in Italy and Belgium, Genesis weren't particulary popular or big in the early 70's. If you use one of the groups that actually were really popular back then (ELP, Yes, Pink Floyd) your ironic comment will work much better. ------------- Over land and under ashes In the sunlight, see - it flashes Find a fly and eat his eye But don't believe in me Don't believe in me Don't believe in me |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 16:11
|
None of the above. All bands are here on merit whether we like it or not!! ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: laplace
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 16:26
|
voted for Muse, the most predictable "prog" band of all time ;P ------------- FREEDOM OF SPEECH GO TO HELL |
Posted By: Dr. Occulator
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 16:41
|
Dream Theater
------------- My Doc Told Me I Have Doggie Head. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 16:50
wow.. happy to be proven wrong.. would have bet my paycheck that this thread would have been dead and buried by the time I got home when I saw it this morning. Way to go people.  For me Black Sabbath... why.. easy.. Black Sabbath is to Prog METAL as... Elvis is to prog ROCK  ELVIS for Prog-Related perhaps hahahha. that was a BIG stretch to have added them... even for me who is one of the more open-minded souls here hahahha. In the end though... it doesn't really matter.. some thought they belonged here.. and this site has ..and always should be rather open and inclusive since we all have very different views on the music. and what is ..or is not Prog (related) ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: ProgBagel
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 17:51
| Radiohead. God. |
Posted By: Jared
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 17:56
I suggest you start re-evaluating Sabotage with any open mind, Micky...  ------------- Music has always been a matter of energy to me. On some nights I believe that a car with the needle on empty can run 50 more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. Hunter S Thompson |
Posted By: moreitsythanyou
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 18:16
Yes, they are basically synonomous 
And Micky's statement about BS and Elvis does make sense to me. ------------- <font color=white>butts, lol[/COLOR] |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 18:38
you know... I have recently been sort of Victorian in my giving out of the almighty clappie... so.. a couple of clappies for Radiohead... great ...great group. Probably my favorite for modern prog. and a couple more for digging the logic... ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 18:41
Perhaps I should.. never liked that album hahah.------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 18:48
|
I vote we randomly remove every other Rush, Magma, Mandalaband and DT album from the archives. Would be way more fun. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 18:52
we keep Teo and Tony R... and lets keep the albums, gotta have stuff to review that balances the 5 stars for other albums.... and just randomly erase the fan-boys ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 18:54
does not compute. |
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 19:02
|
Jefferson Airplane? Progressive , hmmm I guess in a way but the West Coast scene really cannot qualify as progressive as say Yes, KC or Genesis. Long blown out live jams a prog band does not make .
------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth. |
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 19:07
And Sabbath bloody Sabbath ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 19:07
I couldn't agree more... did not agree with that one much as I LOVE that group and would be Jack Casady's man-whore at the drop of a hat.. Though.. they were not added as a prog band Thomas.. but something just as ridiculous. As proto-prog. Anyone ever read a write-up on the origins of prog. Had not a damn thing to do with the Airplane.. or any of the stuff on the Left Coast. And opened the ..hahahha.. doors for other bands that made just as little sense here. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 19:09
Yes Krimson are the archetypal commercial band ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 19:11
|
Labels, libels , lay belles , I think I prefer the last one , especially in Georgia, or anywhere Down South! ------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 19:15
Mississppi lay belles > Georgia lay belles ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 19:16
Actually they were! Sold millions of records worldwide. KC is a different story because they transcended different styles (hence KC Marks I, II, III and IV ) . I was referring to the Dead, Hot Tuna, Spirit and the many other West Coats bands that enjoyed psychedelic rampages that were progressive at a time when everything WAS progressive! ------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth. |
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 19:26
Thus KC are the archetypal prog band.......transcending all genres and beating all contenders.. ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: Sacred 22
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 21:34
|
I'd axe the whole lot of em' except for the possible exception of Supertramp and Kate Bush
|
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 22:12
I was going to take that out of context and make a dirty joke about Kate Bush until I realized that axes and women don't mix well... Unless you're into that kind of thing. Where's Micky? Anyways, I'm with some of the people earlier in this thread. Prog Related is NOT PROG! It has a RELATION TO IT, prog related artists will be of interest to people who like prog, doesn't mean it is prog. End of rant that's already been done 100 times before |
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 22:22
Since its been done 100 times , maybe a nice long mellotron sweep in the background would be wholly appropriate , just to add a little drama to the routine.  add a little audio to the thead. Hahahaha------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth. |
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 22:41
|
NO! God forbid we be retrogressive
|
Posted By: Avantgardehead
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 05:17
|
Oh yes, despite the fact that The Beatles pretty much laid the groundwork for progressive rock and did all kinds of things to actually PROGRESS rock music to a whole new level, let's get rid of them! Yeah, tr00 prog like Muse, Radiohead, Tool, and Blind Guardian 4ever!!!!!!1!!
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Avantgardian |
Posted By: b_olariu
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 07:36
| First, some of the bands mention here are not commercial, second ,none of the bands from the list i want to be deleted, maybe Radiohead, some of them have prog background in the early days, like Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, etc, later become something else , this is another discussion. In stead of adding prog bands that are real prog you now must delet bands that shoudn't be here in a first place. |
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 13:24
| I was all set to vote for Roxy Music when I noticed the presence of Black Sabbath, Let's kick out the AntiProggers! |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 14:22
| This just shows a lack of understanding of proto-prog and prog-related. |
Posted By: The Whistler
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 15:58
|
Holy crap, why are Radiohead up there? And, like, WINNING? I'm starting to really like them a freakish amount...
Oh well. Considering the bands, and which ones I'm really aware of, I might say Sabbo. They had their one lil' spot of prog metal with Sabotage, but that's about it.
But, meh. If they're here, they're here. Whado I care? ------------- "There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson |
Posted By: horsewithteeth11
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 17:04
|
I'd say good-bye to the Beatles (too pop-ish as far as I can tell), The Who, and Queen. I may not care for Led Zeppelin but I can at least understand how they're on this site in the PR section.
------------- 
|
Posted By: CryoftheCarrots
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 17:26
|
Stupid poll ------------- "There is a lot in this world to be tense and intense about" MJK |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 18:05
And thus the point I made in my previous post is proven. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 18:14
yes.. .I saw that post.... and gave it the attention it deserved... to be honest... I would have been embarrassed to have posted that.... ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 18:54
Yup, or even worse Retroagressive  ------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth. |
Posted By: Garion81
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 19:14
and I couldn't disagree more with you Micky. They were writing things in different time signatures (especially Grace Slick), the use of the bass as a lead instrument and the guitar harmonies were fairly uniqe and my choices to back that statement up are Rejoyce, Eskimo Blue Day and Wooden Ships. Maybe the band itself or the movement came from was not prog but what they did was certainly proto prog in enough elements to add them. While they weren't the most accomplished musicians they certainly did push a lot of boundaries at a time when most groups were still in top 40 heaven.
I do agree about black Sabbath. They once played a concert with ELP. That is about as close to prog as they would get.
------------- 
"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?" |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 07:25
...fortuantely Prog is not a tin of salmon and rejecting or accepting any of the bands listed here will not affect the progginess of the remaining 3000+ bands or the credibility of the PA in general.
The line between Prog and Not Prog is broad, meandering and impossible to define since it is constantly shifting and being redrawn. Even Progressive artist do not know where this line is and will continually push at it (probably more so than pushing the "envelope of Prog" in the opposite direction), thus forcing us to re-assess our own previously held truths or bury our heads in the sand. And "mainstream" artists will push at the line from the opposite direction until they crossover into our world and their's is a riskier path from their perspective with the threat of a lesser return from their desire to be more creative and experimental. We should not be slinging brick-bats at these artists and attempting to kick them out of our playground, but should be welcoming, applauding and encouraging them. ------------- What? |
Posted By: LeInsomniac
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 09:30
|
All I have to say about this, (to finalize) is that if Radiohead, Black Sabbath, Muse and the likes of this list are here in PA, then Miles Davis has every right to be listed here as well. Give ME a break. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/LeInsomniac/?chartstyle=volta">
Happy Family One Hand Clap, Four Went On But None Came Back |
Posted By: Yorkie X
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 11:24
polls like these have legs 
|
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 18:10
|
^^^^^^ Favorite Beatles tune HEY BULLDOG! Whadyasay? I said Woof! Ya know anymore? ------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth. |
Posted By: Okocha
Date Posted: August 14 2008 at 11:03
| Iron (not Butterfly)!!! |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: August 14 2008 at 19:55
|
I can't believe the Beatles and Radiohead are taking this kind of beating. Two groups I happen to like a lot. You swine! I picked on Iron Maiden. And nobody better pick on Moody Blues, Kate Bush, or Mike Oldfield or I will have to kick your ass! ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: dzx
Date Posted: August 14 2008 at 20:07
I know, The Beatles ......key proto-prog band...... As I said before you guys dont know what your talking about! ------------- was that just an Am augmented minor 9th i heard? nice! |
Posted By: Philip
Date Posted: August 17 2008 at 11:10
| Possibly in this order: Radiohead, Muse, Black Sabbath, Iron Maiden |
Posted By: progrules
Date Posted: August 17 2008 at 12:01
|
Well, turned out to be an interesting poll, even more than I had expected !
Just some remarks from my part to elucidate:
1) I know I made my statement harshly, partly meant that way but also to elicit.
(I know I got a lot of bashing because of that but my main intention was to have this discussed)
2) The 25 bands that I chose have had at least one hit in the charts so that was the only criterion.
3) I'm neither a hater of any band nor a troublemaker on this site. I'm just a "purist".
4) I have a soft spot for bands that just make wonderful (progressive) jewels and don't get any financial benefit out of that and some of them don't even care. I think those are more or less the counterparts of the 25 listed above. ------------- A day without prog is a wasted day |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 17 2008 at 12:27
|
Procol Harum????????????
Is somebody crazy????
If there's a band that defines Proto Prog and makes this term worth is Procol Harum.
Now, ELO and Radiohead....I can live without them in Prog Archives, but they are here and won't vanish, so lets stop this kind of threads that will end in some kind of trouble.
Iván ------------- 
|
Posted By: Imadofus
Date Posted: August 17 2008 at 13:07
KEEP 'EM ALL 
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Imadofus - last.fm |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 17 2008 at 13:23
Nope, Moody Blues, Procol Harum neither Mike Oldfield have a vote.
Something logical in the last two.
BTW: I'm as purist and maybe more than you, as a fact I'm a proud purist, but this is a lost fight, save your energies progrules, all this bands are here to stay.
Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 17 2008 at 15:14
^ not that chart Iván
hmm, who else (non PP or PR) has had singles chart success I wonder? Pink Floyd, Genesis, Yes, Jethro Tull, Marillion, Kraftwerk, Emerson Lake & Palmer, Hawkwind, Family, Rush, Peter Gabriel, Focus, Sigur Ros, The Nice, Osibisa, Blood Sweat and Tears, Rare Bird, David Sylvian (with Ryuichi Sakamoto), Argent, East of Eden, The Mars Volta, Fish, It Bites, Manfred Mann's Earth Band, The Strawbs, Mogwai, Robert Wyatt... (note, these are UK "hits" other bands, such as Ekseption & Supersister, have had singles success in their own country).
I have the opposite view - I want bands to get financial reward for their efforts, nothing would please me more than hearing Van der Graaf Generator, Dream Theater, Pendragon and Pain Of Salvation on daytime radio or seeing kids in the Mall wearing Ayreon, Sylvan or Grayceon t-shirts.
------------- What? |