Big Five Proto Prog Bands
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=98740
Printed Date: December 18 2024 at 15:52
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Big Five Proto Prog Bands
Posted By: Svetonio
Subject: Big Five Proto Prog Bands
Date Posted: June 26 2014 at 06:17
|
Imho, Big Five Proto Prog bands were:
Deep Purple Rare Bird Colosseum Procol Harum Iron Butterfly |
Replies:
Posted By: Altairius
Date Posted: June 26 2014 at 07:16
|
1. The Moody Blues 2. Those bands Procol Harum competes but only because of In Held Twas in I. |
Posted By: Mellotron Storm
Date Posted: June 26 2014 at 08:39
I'd replace the bottom two with The Beatles and The Doors.  ------------- "The wind is slowly tearing her apart" "Sad Rain" ANEKDOTEN |
Svetonio wrote:Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: June 26 2014 at 15:22
 |
Posted By: Horizons
Date Posted: June 26 2014 at 16:23
|
Is this thread pretty much a replacement for "Your Favorite Proto-Prog Bands?" ------------- Crushed like a rose in the riverflow. |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: June 27 2014 at 01:44
|
^ I suspect it's a knee jerk reaction to the recent Big 5 Prog bands thread: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=98706" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=98706 (nothing like a spate of revisionist w.a.n.k. to set my teeth on edge  )------------- 
|
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: June 27 2014 at 01:58
Exactly! I ripped off the idea of BIG FIVE thread where the brilliant second post at the first page is: 
|
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: June 27 2014 at 22:46
|
The Moody Blues, The Doors , and of course The Beatles need to be on any list...all were 3 very influential on other bands. ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: Horizons
Date Posted: June 27 2014 at 23:19
Yea i was just unsure how someone could exclude bands like The Beatles, The Doors, etc on a list thought to be built on sales/influences/yadadada But instead put Rare Bird? I'm also flattered that my not-so-serious post about thinking a band wasn't good enough to be considered Big Five material was mentioned in here. Though i'm sure this thread was doomed since it's creation. ------------- Crushed like a rose in the riverflow. |
Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: June 28 2014 at 02:42
IMO, The Doors were not proto prog. IMO they were a progressive rock band because of the songs as Celebration of the Lizard, The End, People Are Strange and so on. That's why Rare Bird is on my list and The Doors aren't  The Beatles is bad JokIng aside, The Beatles were IMO Pop Rock, Psychedelic Rock, Rock and Progressive Rock band - 'cause of the single Strawberry Fields Forever / Penny Lane; they aren't a Proto Prog band to my ears. E.g. those songs are 1960's progressive rock songs IMO: E.g. those are proto prog songs IMO: |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: July 08 2014 at 16:33
|
The Who Beatles Deep Purple Procol Harum don't care for anyone else , The Doors especially  apparently neither The Moody Blues or Coloseum qualify as 'proto -prog' I also would have left The Nice where they were as well.
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 08 2014 at 17:07
Don't they?  Why's that then?------------- What? |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: July 09 2014 at 03:59
|
Beach Boys - when the evidence is explored there's a strong case they
were the first professional band to do what would later be called
artrock. Beatles - despite America's false starts in fully progressive rock music, these four delivered, always and impeccably-- they did almost everything first; odd meters in rock; infusion of classical and avant-garde motifs; sophisticated and ultra-literate lyrics and themes; multiple songs linked together; and always had something fresh to say. Clouds - after further exploring the '66-'71 comp, seems to me they should be PP here, not PR; maybe it's because the first record was '68. Procol Harum - their influence at the time was probably even bigger than is realized, everyone was listening and being blown away. The debut is as spectacular now as it ever was. Frank Zappa - actually I still have yet to have a big Zappa moment myself, but if you listen to some of those boots from '67/68, no doubt he was way ahead of the game. No one could touch him for ambition and musicality in the late '60s. ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 09 2014 at 05:05
|
^ Clouds was not Proto Prog, their previous incarnation as 1-2-3 was but they never released an album under that name. An encyclopaedia of Prog site would acknowledge 1-2-3 as Proto Prog but as we are a review-site we can only list them as such if they had released something. Clouds first release was 1969, not 1968. ------------- What? |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: July 09 2014 at 14:26
no idea http://www.progarchives.com/subgenre.asp?style=37" rel="nofollow - Proto-Prog Bands
|
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: July 09 2014 at 14:42
I guess the first couple of albums from both The Moodies and Colosseum would classify for proto, but I guess they are listed here (in xover and jazz fusion respectively) for what they did later on. I'm not sure though, I wasn't around at the time ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 09 2014 at 16:58
Ah, you mean we list them in Prog subgenres (Xover and JR/F) rather than just Proto Prog. That's not the same as they don't qualify as 'proto-prog'. You included Procol Harum in your Proto Prog list and that confused me because 'apparenty' neither Procol nor Harem qualify as 'proto -prog'.  ------------- What? |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: July 09 2014 at 18:48
Sure, 1-2-3 then, my point is they were making proto-progreessive rock as far back as '66/67. But yes, this is not a Encyclopedia. ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 09 2014 at 20:20
Well, actually we don't know 1-2-3 were making proto-prog as far back as 1967 (not '66) because there is only tenuous anecdotal evidence (that appears to have surfaced around 1994) to support it. There are no contemporary accounts from 1967/68 that describe the music they were playing.
------------- What? |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: July 09 2014 at 21:38
|
Interesting; the retrospective from 2010 includes material from
1967 ("America") and claims to have stuff from '66 ~ presumably at
Falkirk's in November ~ but that material doesn't seem to appear on the
2-disc set. Either it's a misprint or a some kind of mix-up. ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 10 2014 at 02:56
Or something more "mendacious".  They have a "interesting" explanation for claiming to have played a cover of a song in 1967 when the original version was first recorded by S&G in Feb 1968 and released in April of that year - hearing pre-release copy of "Bookends" is one thing, but hearing a copy before it was recorded is something else. If you've heard the version you will be undoubtedly impressed by the sound quality, mix and balance achieved by an audience member with a 1960s portable tape recorder and how the audience of a small 150-seater Soho club can sound like 5,000 screaming teenagers at the Hammy O. It is strange that when a band is claimed to have invented Prog, inspired Fripp and influenced Wakeman, Emerson and everyone in The Syn and Mabel Greer's Toyshop (ie Yes) that they don't include tracks recorded in 1966 on a recent retrospective compilation. Recordings of old 1-2-3 songs do exist that Billy Richie recorded in the mid-90s but they haven't been released either.
------------- What? |