If you could get rid of one?
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=52561
Printed Date: January 10 2025 at 07:42
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: If you could get rid of one?
Posted By: British Tradition
Subject: If you could get rid of one?
Date Posted: October 14 2008 at 03:34
| If you had the opportunity to get rid of a band that you feel doesn't belong on progarchives (doesn't mean that you don't like them) which band would you pick? |
Replies:
Posted By: martinprog77
Date Posted: October 14 2008 at 04:46
|
The Doors ------------- Nothing can last there are no second chances. Never give a day away. Always live for today. |
Posted By: NotAProghead
Date Posted: October 14 2008 at 06:05
|
Don't see the reason to get rid of any of these bands. ------------- Who are you and who am I to say we know the reason why... (D. Gilmour) |
Posted By: Angelo
Date Posted: October 14 2008 at 07:36
|
That last one is indeed missing from the list. Each band included here was included for a reason, which makes this poll a bit senseless. Oh well.... ------------- http://www.iskcrocks.com" rel="nofollow - ISKC Rock Radio I stopped blogging and reviewing - so won't be handling requests. Promo's for ariplay can be sent to [email protected] |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: October 14 2008 at 11:21
|
I've never been comfortable with the inclusion of The Beatles, but I really would not get rid of any band.
Every band goes through a robust process before being added. Removing any would be disrespectful to those involved in that process, to those who take the time to add bios and albums, and to all those who then review the albums.
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: October 14 2008 at 11:25
|
Dream Theater? Are you friggin' kidding me!?! If we're going down that road then easily Magma. (notice: satire) ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: October 14 2008 at 11:36
|
To be honest, the only bands I listen as a fan are The Doors, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Miles Davis. Otherwise, strictly concerning preferences, Deep Purple never enchanted me, I don't like Beatles at all and I'm a persona non grata for Metal fans (that should count Sabbath, in some way, probably, too. About the four I mentioned, The Doors are the closest I perceive, in some way, progressive (or to have played some progressive-notable rock), Led Zep have pioneered or blend a couple of styles, but prog rock isn't among any of those in my book, somewhat the same with The Who, where I see absolutely no reason to just say "Tommy made the genesis of Rock Opera" and call that prog history-making, and Miles Davis meets the issue of 20 years of jazz and stuff before the birth of prog rock itself, otherwise his decisive mark in the jazz-rock/fusion can be honestly pointed out... (I'm surprised David Bowie isn't mentioned: godfather of Art Rock, unfortunately, not the "Art Rock" that's genred regarding (Oh, I shan't comment upon bands that are actually in prog-genres - with the exception of Miles Davis, upon which I just did - if you don't like Dream Theater or Tool, that's neither surprising, but nor is it relevant...) That being said, I wouldn't "get rid of" any of the mentioned, because: 1. that's impossible (if this is a petition to remove some Prog-Related, it's worth zero) 2. that's not the point ("getting rid" is just not my type of a conception, to add...) The Prog-Related section certainly adds new chapters every large period of time, and it has grown beyond initial predictions. It's an exaggerate expansion which I don't like, but there's also little to be done, once steps are taken forward. The main bug is the "paradox of completeness", which sounds sweet when archiving prog rock in its most minute and obscurest ways, but backfires as a curse once you can't select the albums of Non-Prog bands that actually support the idea of "Prog-Relatedness", instead you have to add all the musical galaxy of these controversial bands, those galaxies having, in at least 70-80% case (IMO), other predominant styles than "progressive rock". ------------- 
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: October 14 2008 at 11:39
|
Given that prog related is just that, I will say The Who. Very not even close to prog for most of their career.
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: febus
Date Posted: October 15 2008 at 19:58
|
They're all here now, what can we do??
Sure there are a few names included on PA (and on this list) that make me scratch my head!!!
Fans from these bands will come up with all the right reasons why they should be included on PA, so why argue!!
So no name as safety is a concern when walking PA hallways at night might be hazardous to my health
  |
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: October 15 2008 at 20:19
|
SOFT MACHINE!...eeek, wrong forum...
I think each of the bands on the list have at least 1 album with Prog elements, and as well said the site says, it's prog-RELATED, not considered Prog bands, just bands of their own genre with Proggy elements. |
Posted By: Hawkwise
Date Posted: October 15 2008 at 20:34
|
Tool Heavy Mental Rubbish ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Runs away laffing ..................... Jumps into his 70s time machine,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ahhhh Bliss ------------- 
|
Posted By: febus
Date Posted: October 15 2008 at 20:42
Someone is looking for trouble here!!
 |
cacho wrote:Posted By: splyu
Date Posted: October 15 2008 at 20:52
|
Well, I do find it a bit funny that the archives include tons of Miles Davis albums that have absolutely zero relation to prog, resulting in pretty much the whole 50s and early 60s section being a one-man MD show where it's clear that prog didn't even exist at the time; but excluding him completely when there's bands like Mahavishnu Orchestra or Return To Forever makes even less sense, and the Fusion genre likely wouldn't exist if it wasn't for him. So I'd maybe "get rid" of his pre-Fusion albums if that were possible, but it doesn't seem to be, so I'm all for keeping him as long as it isn't suggested the whole Fusion section should go away (which there might be an argument for; much as I really love Fusion, I'm not actually sure it's a subgenre of prog rock). Keeping the Fusion section but excluding Miles Davis would be laughable. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: October 15 2008 at 21:10
|
I wouldn't kick off any bands, but there are some that I'd rather see in Related (okay, maybe some I'd kick out) -- Death, Nightwish, Epica, Torman Maxt, and Blind Guardian would be contenders as I don't think them Prog (maybe proggy), but as has been said, Progressive Metal is not the same things as Prog (Prog meaning Progressive Rock). Tool I don't think of as Prog, but don't know it that well. Metallica and Iron Maiden don't really sound proggy enough to my ears for the site even in Related. There are others not in metal that I find questionable, but being a non-metal expert I'm actually less comfortable talking about that which I know well. The Beatles -- it's clear to me why they are here in Proto-Prog. All the others I support, and Miles Davis was, for me, the most exciting addition to the site since I arrived. I strongly support it for the Jazz-Rock Fusion category. That said, I'm really very inclusive, and wouldn't get rid of anything from the site (though some could be re-categorised). In fact, I would like to open this site to much more progressive music, and I wouldn't even limit it to rock or rock-related (mind you, I would want new non-prog but progressive music categories). I'd love to have Coltrane, Stockhausen, and Philip Glass in the archives, and have supported artists such as Laurie Anderson for inclusion. I'd be happy to see The Stranglers here, and have offered support (while not saying it should be here) to P-Funk and Talking Heads. I've also wanted both Cream and Hendrix on the site, so.... I'm inclusive. So I wouldn't get rid of anything, but if you held a gun to my head, well, I could live without Metallica here very happily, but then I can live with Metallica here very happily. And even if it was in Prog Metal I wouldn't be upset. Heck, if people wanted, though I'd strongly disagree, they could put it in Canterbury Scene and I'd still sleep reasonably well at night, and put Iron Maiden in Zeuhl and Tool in Prog-Folk while you're at it (oh, but I actually, good categorisation is important to me, so maybe put Metallica in Progressive Electronic instead). EDIT: I understand that including certain albums by artists may be seen as problematic (be it the Miles Davis albums or later genesis albums, but I support complete discographies strongly -- it can also lead to slippery slope problems when it comes to determining PA worthiness -- we already have enough of that determining which bands should be here, let alone which albums should be represented, and I prefer the full discography because it's useful when you're interested in the artist to go through) |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: October 15 2008 at 23:14
In my case, not satire. I'd rather get rid of Magma than a band that is THE prog-fan-bringer to PA...
 Of the list, all have been brought here for a reason. If you put a gun to my head, I'd pick MILES DAVIS, as he fails to meet the second word of the prog-ROCK name. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Rocktopus
Date Posted: October 16 2008 at 00:37
You're wrong. Must be because you haven't heard his 70's music. Why don't everyone of you who keeps saying this, check out some of those albums instead? It would be good for you. ------------- 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: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: October 16 2008 at 11:21
-------------  |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: October 17 2008 at 14:52
I admit ignorance of his 70's music. I've only heard his jazz.
So there you go, after that clarification, I definitely would never get rid of any of these bands! -------------
|
Posted By: Avantgardehead
Date Posted: October 17 2008 at 16:34
|
Metallica without hesitation. And I didn't know there was so much hate for The Doors... weren't we all talking about expanding proto-prog into the more psychedelic bands just a while ago?! ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Avantgardian |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: October 17 2008 at 21:18
|
We are looking desperate guys! Now we are talking about who we would kick off.........
I could not resist...DT got my vote. ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 11:38
|
At least, this poll had one interest: to question the extension of the PA databse and, furthermore, the definition of progressive rock (a long sterile question, I know). When I discovered that Miles Davis, Black Sabbath, Iron Maiden, Blue Öyster Cult, Japan, Church and Steely Dan (my mind just went: !!!), I was... Let's say, "puzzled". Even when knowing these bands were described as "prog related" or "proto-prog", it made me think of an article in a French rock magazine which had an ironic question: does progressive rock start with Moody Blues, Procol Harum, Pink Floyd, the Beatles or Wagner and Debussy? An easy joke? Maybe. Yet, it can be seen as an interrogation on the aesthetics of popular music (especially rock) and its relations with other musical forms from jazz to "savant music". What is the meaning of "progressive rock"? An avant-garde in pop music trying to expand its musical vocabulary? Then how can and/or does pop music widen this vocabulary? By taking influences from other musics (symphonic rock, jazz-rock, fusion with traditional musics) or trying a new music (electronic, free rock, R.I.O., electric chamber music...)? Then, it appears that an encyclopaedia of progressive rock should have some limits. I heard of a dictionnary including Kate Bush and Throbbing Gristle! As for the presence of electronic artists I always saw listed as "Industrial Music" artists, now featured in the database of PA: Maurizio Bianchi, Aube, Lustmord... The next step? Stockhausen, Pierre Henry or Coil? And the same thing can be said about jazz and jazz-rock: Weather Report was rather a straight jazz band to my ears, for an example. So, if Miles Davis is here, PA would have to include Coltrane (for he had a strong influence on some rock musicians) or free jazz guitarist Sonny Sharrock (for he worked with rock musicians, like Bill Laswell). And I could go on and on about some possible featuring: Sonic Youth? My Bloody Valentine? AMM, Nihilist Spasm Band??? To conclude: I DO think maybe some entries in the PA database should be erased, for they tend to offer a more and more blurred and confusing "photograph" of what is progressive rock. Of course, it doesn't mean I would make a list of bands to kick off (I won't dare). Yet, for a starter, I really think PA should not keep Miles Davis in its entries. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 11:55
|
it is a discussion we have had just recently... this site stopped long ago being a classic prog only site.... as Raff noted... if you go on the narrow 'classic' definition of prog... fully 50% of the database could be eliminated. the site has evolved into a prog rock/progressive rock hybrid. It can't go back... can only go forward..
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Jared
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 12:21
quite right, Angelo...  ------------- 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: Logan
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 12:25
|
Absolutely, in fact it's become something of a Progressive Rock/ progressive music hybrid. I support Stockhausen, Coltrane, Glass etc. in the archives, though I would like for there to be a new category for influential to Prog (Prog simply meaning here for convenience sake all of the categories considered Prog here) key non-rock progressive music artists -- the problem is, where does one start and where does it end from a both temporal and stylistic perspective? The parameters of what can be considered for archives inclusion have expanded/ changed, and I don't see that as a bad thing as long as the music is well-categorised. There must be limits, but I think this site could benefit from much more progressive music being represented (of course the focus should be on rock, or at least rock-related music that shares traits, and an approach to music that defined the Progressive Rock movement). Incidentally, My Bloody Valentines was in at one time, I believe, but was removed from the database. |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 12:50
No, Greg, that was My Dying Bride ... Similar name, though different music!
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 13:00
| Oh, thanks Raff, that's right, my mistake. I'm still waking up. I am familiar with both. |
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 13:02
Maybe because the site is called ProgArchives, not ProgRockArchives, then it means that this site started with the first stuff that was called Prog, then kept on PROGressing until we will reach to New Wave, Punk, Hardcore, Hip Hop, Blues and any other genre you imagine off
PA, keep on PROGressing!! 
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 13:17
will reach?... we HAVE reached it ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 13:17
|
None of those listed (though I might take up Chris's suggestion and go with DT...) - they were all added for a reason, though people may disagree with it. As you all know by now, I am a very open-minded person, and I would never lose sleep, let alone throw a tantrum, over ANY controversial addition to the PA database. However, if I had to pick up something, I'd say Triumph have a very, very flimsy relation to prog (if even that), and neither Steeleye Span nor Fairport Convention (which I both like a lot) strike me as particularly prog-related. That said, I'm perfectly happy to have them here. There are much more pressing matters in my life that command my indignation.
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 13:19
I'm sure it is not lost on anyone that other prog sites list artist such as those...  ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 13:19
You may be right on this one Micky!
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 13:29
I'd settle for just the fanboys... though we'd keep a few like Teo around ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Jared
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 13:33
I hope I'm on your list of essential DT fan-boys too, 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: micky
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 13:36
|
hahahhaha.. of course you are hahahha
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 13:37
|
I suppose that I should just keep quiet, but Micky, nice of you to leave us Rush fanboys alone. ------------- 
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 13:45
|
oh yes.. I have been easy on Rush and the fanboys recently have I. hmmm.. now that Raff walks among us again... maybe it's time to kick them out as well hahahha
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: E-Dub
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 15:01
|
^^As much as Steely Dan took a hit when they were added, I'm surprised they're not here. I voted for Sabbath, but have resigned to the fact that there will always be bands that I don't agree with. If anything, I'm a HUGE Steely Dan fan, so now that they're on it means we can talk about them more often. Right, Micky?  I listened to Alive In America earlier in the week and I still love that one. The live version of "Green Earrings" just rules. Now they need to release a double live disc. E ------------- 
|
Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 15:36
|
Out of these, Metallica or the Beatles.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 16:30
DT was just a bit of a wind up..
 , but I still don't get them. However your last line is a classic and one of the best points made on this site...."...There are more pressing matters in my life that command my indignation...."
So very true, sometimes hard to do, but very very true ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: The Doctor
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 16:34
Damn. You beat me to it Raff.
By the way, just noticed in another thread that wedding bells are in the air for you and Micky. Congratulations to both of you. I know it's been a long wait, and it's nice to see that once in awhile, love really does conquer all.  ------------- I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you? |
Posted By: splyu
Date Posted: October 18 2008 at 18:23
|
With a friend of mine (the same one I cited in the Stranglers thread, incidentally), we had a saying, "Anything can be Prog." That is not to say, of course, that "Everything is Prog"... more like "Any style of music can potentially be turned into prog". And has, too. "Prog" is a logical evolution to any style of music. Any style will and some point reach its "prog" state; then next you know, it will have a "roots revival". |