Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
frenchie
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 30 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2234
|
Topic: A RULE ON THIS SITE HAS BEEN VIOLATED!!! Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:05 |
long ago prog archives made a rule where if a band has more "non prog" albums than "prog albums" then they should not be added. Genesis nearly got booted out because of this rule.
Queen have technically violated this rule. However i do not have a problem with them being on this website... does the rule need to be revamped or clamped down more strictly to new bands coming into this website?
|
The Worthless Recluse
|
|
The Hemulen
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 31 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 5964
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:07 |
I think it's a silly rule. Surely we should just use common sense when adding groups?
|
|
frenchie
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 30 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2234
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:08 |
has anyone noticed how black sabbath, the who, the beatles and led zeppelin are much proggier than queen yet no1 is adding any of these bands.
|
The Worthless Recluse
|
|
frenchie
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 30 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2234
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:08 |
same applies for even metallica, megadeth and death
|
The Worthless Recluse
|
|
Man Overboard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 07 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 3830
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:10 |
OR THE ARCADE FIRE!!!!!
oh wait
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:10 |
^ So add them Frenchie, thats what happened with Queen I believe.
|
|
|
Cygnus X-2
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 24 2004
Location: Bucketheadland
Status: Offline
Points: 21342
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:10 |
Maani and I were talking about something that would allow for us to "include" them. The suggestion he made was for a Influenced/Proto-Prog section, so pretty much all those suggestions would apply. Of course, nothing has been finalized.
|
|
|
frenchie
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 30 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2234
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:12 |
i am not going to add any of the bands i mentioned... i will personally stick to the rule.
as for arcade fire i have put in a request for them to be deleted. this was a mistake of judgement and i apologise for insulting you hardcore proggers by adding them!
|
The Worthless Recluse
|
|
The Hemulen
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 31 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 5964
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:12 |
Cygnus X-2 wrote:
Maani and I were talking about something that would
allow for us to "include" them. The suggestion he made was for a
Influenced/Proto-Prog section, so pretty much all those suggestions
would apply. Of course, nothing has been finalized. |
I feel this is really the way forward. I'd also suggest Queen get moved to such a section.
|
|
Cygnus X-2
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 24 2004
Location: Bucketheadland
Status: Offline
Points: 21342
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:14 |
Trouserpress wrote:
Cygnus X-2 wrote:
Maani and I were talking about something that would allow for us to "include" them. The suggestion he made was for a Influenced/Proto-Prog section, so pretty much all those suggestions would apply. Of course, nothing has been finalized. |
I feel this is really the way forward. I'd also suggest Queen get moved to such a section.
|
That's the way I feel. I am a big Queen fan (always have been), but I don't feel they deserve a place here.
|
|
|
Hangedman
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 03 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1261
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:14 |
Snow Dog wrote:
^ So add them Frenchie, thats what happened with Queen I believe. |
please dont frenchie
|
|
frenchie
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 30 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2234
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:16 |
the influenced/proto prog is a good idea. we should still acknowledge albums such as sgt peppers that have had a historical impact on prog, even if the band themselves are not technically prog rock.
The Who are said to have made the first prog track, circa 1966, "A quick one while he is away". The Who, along with the beatles made some of the first concept albums with tommy and quadrophenia.
Black Sabbath arguably made some of the first ever prog metal tracks.
led zeppelin not only had a strong prog connection but jimmy page taking the bow to the guitar is something that inspired many post rock prog bands such as GYBE!.
These bands have strong prog connections but are not officially prog bands themselves.
|
The Worthless Recluse
|
|
The Hemulen
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 31 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 5964
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:17 |
Cygnus X-2 wrote:
Trouserpress wrote:
Cygnus X-2 wrote:
Maani and
I were talking about something that would allow for us to "include"
them. The suggestion he made was for a Influenced/Proto-Prog section,
so pretty much all those suggestions would apply. Of course, nothing
has been finalized. |
I feel this is really the way forward. I'd also suggest Queen get moved to such a section.
|
That's the way I feel. I am a big Queen fan (always have been), but I don't feel they deserve a place here. |
I do. Well, they need acknowledging as so-called "proto-prog", hence my support for a section dealing with it.
|
|
Cesar Inca
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 19 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 4888
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:19 |
frenchie wrote:
has anyone noticed how black sabbath, the who, the beatles and led zeppelin are much proggier than queen yet no1 is adding any of these bands. |
That's very true!! Especially, regarding Sabbath and Zep -- they were far more prog-related than Queen, not only concerning the musical quality but also concerning the consistent application of new ideas into the realms of rock.
Regards.
|
|
Cygnus X-2
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 24 2004
Location: Bucketheadland
Status: Offline
Points: 21342
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:20 |
frenchie wrote:
the influenced/proto prog is a good idea. we should still acknowledge albums such as sgt peppers that have had a historical impact on prog, even if the band themselves are not technically prog rock.
The Who are said to have made the first prog track, circa 1966, "A quick one while he is away". The Who, along with the beatles made some of the first concept albums with tommy and quadrophenia.
Black Sabbath arguably made some of the first ever prog metal tracks.
led zeppelin not only had a strong prog connection but jimmy page taking the bow to the guitar is something that inspired many post rock prog bands such as GYBE!.
These bands have strong prog connections but are not officially prog bands themselves. |
If we go ahead with this project, I already called the Who (my biography would be a little too long).
|
|
|
Fitzcarraldo
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 30 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1835
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:27 |
Trouserpress wrote:
Cygnus X-2 wrote:
Trouserpress wrote:
Cygnus X-2 wrote:
Maani and I were talking about something that would allow for us to "include" them. The suggestion he made was for a Influenced/Proto-Prog section, so pretty much all those suggestions would apply. Of course, nothing has been finalized. |
I feel this is really the way forward. I'd also suggest Queen get moved to such a section.
|
That's the way I feel. I am a big Queen fan (always have been), but I don't feel they deserve a place here.
|
I do. Well, they need acknowledging as so-called "proto-prog", hence my support for a section dealing with it.
|
A section named specifically "proto-prog" would not be the right place for QUEEN, as their first album was released in 1973 and the prefix proto- would give the connotation of QUEEN having been the first or the origin of something. There is no way that QUEEN were proto-Prog. For QUEEN specifically I favour Tony Banks' term for QUEEN ("imaginative pop"), or maani's term "progressive pop".
proto-
prefix
1. |
first in time, earliest
protolithic
protomartyr |
2. |
original, ancestral
protostar
Proto-Norse |
3. |
first in a series, having the least amount of a particular element or radical
protactinium |
[From Greek prôtos ; ultimately related to pro (see pro2)]
|
|
Humanizzimo
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 19 2005
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 109
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:28 |
Queen shoudnt be here...cant be considerated as a prog band...
I dont agre with the rule, because Genesis is Genesis...but Queen...
|
|
|
frenchie
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 30 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2234
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:43 |
perhaps the section should be proto prog/influenced/post prog. i feel that bands like radiohead and muse are more post prog or influenced by prog rather than prog themselves. this is pushing it tho.
|
The Worthless Recluse
|
|
Fitzcarraldo
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 30 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1835
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:51 |
Why not have two separate categories?
1. "imaginative pop"/"progressive pop" : bands such as QUEEN, 10CC, SUPERTRAMP. ELO etc.
2. "precursors to Prog"/"proto-Prog" : bands such as WISHBONE ASH, URIAH HEEP etc.
Seems a better solution than trying to put very different bands into the same basket.
|
|
stonebeard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 12:59 |
make a section called "unpure" prog so we can all act like elitists and put whatever prog band we find not too prog in there.
|
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.