Fusion section lacking...
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Suggest New Bands and Artists
Forum Description: Suggest, create polls, and classify new bands you would like included on Prog Archives
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6097
Printed Date: November 29 2024 at 23:47
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Fusion section lacking...
Posted By: Soulman
Subject: Fusion section lacking...
Date Posted: May 11 2005 at 00:56
|
Is it just me or is the Fusion part of Progarchives missing some very
seminal fusion bands? The obvious ones being Chick Corea, Di Meola,
Weather Report, Pastorious, Miles Davis (maybe?). Maybe others can post some Fusion bands that they'd like to see on Progarchives. I'd like to be able to get into more fusion music; call me lazy but I'd like to do it here  |
Replies:
Posted By: MorgothSunshine
Date Posted: May 12 2005 at 11:11
|
Chick Corea, Di Meola, Weather Report, Pastorious, Miles Davis??? Great musicians but you're talking about jazz not fusion!!! Take care ------------- For every truth even the contrary is true... 
|
!Posted By: Soulman
Date Posted: May 14 2005 at 16:43
NOT FUSION!!! My belief system is crumbling Care to explain?  |
Posted By: chorus of one
Date Posted: May 14 2005 at 20:39
|
The fusion bands in the archives are there because they are considered to be close to progressive rock. That doesn't mean any band labelled fusion is also progressive rock, because the majority are not. |
Posted By: JMCecil
Date Posted: May 14 2005 at 23:22
| If f**king Dream Theater, Opeth and Pain of Salvation can be on this site then how can there possibly be an argument against people like Chick, Al and Miles. Hell you might as well put Metallica, Megadeath and Iron Maiden in the list. Screw it I vote for Judas Priest and Machine Head. Chick, Al and Miles have done more prog-like work than dozens of bands on this site combined. |
Posted By: Soulman
Date Posted: May 16 2005 at 01:30
Damn Straight!  I don't mean this to put down other bands in prog archives, because I listen to most bands. Though I don't think anyone can say that most popular fusion jazz musicians haven't done much prog, because it just isn't true. In ways fusion jazz musicians were even more progressive because of their musical prowess. I don't mean this to be totally biased, but it just seems unfair that those musicians can't be in it, when arguably other bands that weren't as progressive as fusion artists can. I wish more people were behind me on this, because this is the basic response that I've got in Progarchives, that fusion artists are too "jazz" for progarchives. What the heck is that supposed to mean? That Prog is only symphonic and/or "spaced-out"? Come on people, get your head out of the hole!! |
JMCecil wrote:Posted By: Chooks
Date Posted: May 28 2005 at 04:36
| Totally agree that the above mentioned musicians and bands should be included on the site. why would one exclude them because they are jazz. i believe that if you want to get down to it these guys took jazz and added a huge amount of varaity to it through the fusion of different geners. I've grown up being told by my dad that these musicians were jazz fusion musicians not simply jazz musicians. but JMCecil i do believe that Opeth, Dream Theater and Pain of Salvation should be on this site (but i am a bit bias being a huge Opeth and POS fan, not so much Dream Theater) |
Posted By: goose
Date Posted: May 28 2005 at 04:45
|
No, it means that progressive rock is all rock music! |