Cream - a progressive band?

    I think Cream is between few basic proto-prog bands for sure. They are not real blues band, they're mixing blues roots with heavy dose of psychedelia ( in their own manner) and long instrumental pieces, again in ,let say, proto-progressive manner. If The Who is proto-prog, and The Beatles is proto-prog, do you really think, that Cream isn't?

So really, what we're waiting for is THE one arguement that settles the case for Cream being in here. Proto Prog would seem to be obvious, because they were among the first "blues" based groups to start incorporating more complex pieces & "deeper" more intellectual lyrics into their music.
What's lacking though , is that I can't recall too many references to the group at PA.It's not rare to come across a prog guitarist's playing or stylings being compared to Hendrix. Even some of Jimi's compositions are referenced from time to time in genres beyond Psychedelic (RPI & Kratutrock) .

So maybe the final word will be based on what influence we can find ... if any ...  on subsequent prog groups

Cream is a band that has been discussed on this site many times. I don't think they will be added anytime soon, but dismissing them too quickly would only show one's naivette about the development of rock and jazz fusion. By the way, Cream's most progressive member, Jack Bruce, is a member of PA in the jazz-rock genre.

Cream was a very innovative and 'progressive' band for their time. Their studio songs can be very artsy in a Beatles kind of way and their live performances that utilized extended improvisation had a huge impact on the developing prog-rock and jazz fusion scenes. There is a case for Cream in proto-prog, prog related and/or proto-fusion if we had such a category.

Inevetably discussions about Cream's progressivness always leads to comparisms to the JH Experience. Before the conversation goes that way I'd like to point out that Cream never developed the sort of compositions that the Experience did (1984, Drifting, Midnight Oil, Aint No Tellin, Third Stone etc), they did not interract with early proggers on quite the same level as Jimi (long running musical associations with Keith Emerson, Robert Wyatt etc), and their improvs were not as innovative as the Hendrix-Mitchell onslaught. You can read more on this in our Hendrix bio.

By the way, I've moved this thread to suggest new bands.

Edited by Easy Money - December 22 2009 at 08:19

Must admit I ain't a fan, (to the extent that I really can't stand them ) but that has no bearing on their prog credentials. From memory I think their inclusion has been debated several times before but I would imagine that for a band being so firmly blues inspired, (albeit with some gaudy psychedelic trimmings) the types of arguments needed to get them into PA will probably bear an uncanny similarity to the ones that held sway for Zep's inclusion ?

In a time like right now - when nothing seems to quite mean what it used to (take R&B which used to be 1950s/60s rhythm & blues to me) does progressive actually mean what it used to?

Edited by Ghostmojo - December 22 2009 at 07:25