Gaskin Stewart surely must be on Prog Archives, - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

Snow Dog

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995

Posted: October 28 2009 at 11:21

Anyone man enough to say sorry can't be all bad. Smile

SaltyJon

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 08 2008
Location: Location
Status: Offline
Points: 28772

Posted: October 28 2009 at 11:22

Padraic wrote:

Thank you Brian. I was actually just thinking of my 3 year old, your post did an admirable job of reminding me of his behavior when he doesn't get his way.

Thanks for the laugh Pat. Clap

Anyway, from what I've seen while lurking/being active on the forums/website, the collabs give everything a fair listen, and it is possible for music to be good without being prog. If you really want to review it, there are other websites which do include it.

Edited by SaltyJon - October 28 2009 at 11:23

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: October 28 2009 at 11:31

In the Crossover team thread my actual words were:

Originally posted by dean 18 May 2009 at 19:44

dean 18 May 2009 at 19:44 wrote:

I'm afraid to say that I'm heading towards a "No" for crossover, but it's difficult to be sure with the material on MySpace with only extracts from their latest (the cover's don't really count, regardless of how well they are done).

So Gaskin/Stewart were not formally rejected by Crossover, this was before Starti joined the team and without his greater knowledge of the duo. I'm prepared to look at them again.

Edited by Dean - October 28 2009 at 11:32

What?

Padraic

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31165

Posted: October 28 2009 at 11:44

BRIAN STEFFENSEN wrote:

Sorry Padraic!

Apology accepted. Whether you believe it or not, I really did take a careful listen to the latest cuts from S&G, and they really are not appropriate for Canterbury prog as we have it defined. As that is the only relevant genre of which I am a voting team member, I can safely bow out of this discussion and let the Crossover team members revisit this if they wish.

Slartibartfast View Drop Down

Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29625

Posted: October 28 2009 at 12:40

I can certainly see them not fitting into Canterbury despite the presence of Stewart. I'm still not sure whether I'd advocate for Crossover or Prog-Related. Leaning towards the latter.

By the way, what's a US band like the Muffins doing in there? That's not right. LOL

I was about to say we ain't got no Canterburys here in the US, but then I looked it up and we have six, so there. Tongue

Edited by Slartibartfast - October 28 2009 at 12:53

Padraic

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31165

Posted: October 28 2009 at 12:43

Slartibartfast wrote:

I can certainly see them not fitting into Canterbury despite the presence of Stewart. I'm still not sure whether I'd advocate for Crossover or Prog-Related. Leaning towards the latter.

By the way, what's a US band like the Muffins doing in there? That's not right. LOL

Canterbury is a world-wide phenomenon! Catch it! Tongue

Slartibartfast View Drop Down

Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29625

Posted: October 28 2009 at 12:53

I visited the Canterbury section and I do have more than a few albums that call that sub-genre a home. Big smile

(Muffins included)

Edited by Slartibartfast - October 28 2009 at 19:47

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535

Posted: October 28 2009 at 14:24

Stackridge wrote:

At a push I would place D&B in the same category as Camel, Rick Wakeman or Renaissance, which just so happens to be Symphonic Prog.

Respectfully, I see no connection with Camel, Wakeman or Renaissance, so there's no place for G&D in Symphonic.

I agree with Debrewguy's opinion, it's mostly intelligent mainstream, but not Prog, maybe, forcing the issue a bit, Prog Related, but I don't believe they fit in the definition.

Sorry, but this is my honest opinion.

Iván

Evolver

Special Collaborator

Crossover & JR/F/Canterbury Teams

Joined: October 22 2005
Location: The Idiocracy
Status: Offline
Points: 5482

Posted: October 28 2009 at 15:11

I have a few of their CDs, and find no prog in them whatsoever.

So there.

Trust me. I know what I'm doing.

Easy Livin View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585

Posted: October 28 2009 at 16:01

There could be a case for prog related,but that case needs to be made on the basis of the music alone, not the pedigree. Asia is a classic example of a band made up of 4 prog heavyweights but who in that combination are not a prog band. They are listed as prog related.

From what I recall of S&G, I would probably come out supporting a proposal form Prog Related if someone was willing to prepare the bio etc. It would need to go to the admin team for approval of course.

For any who only recall the single "Busy doing nothing", there was certainly a lot more to S&G than that.

BRIAN STEFFENSEN View Drop Down

Forum Newbie

Joined: June 30 2008
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Points: 21

Posted: October 28 2009 at 16:28

Oh for crying out loud!!! I'm reading such pretentious, 'know it all' "Cod's Wallop", here. I could stop right here and accept your premise that S&G do not produce progressive (not even prog related) music and that my understanding of the term has clearly been wrong for at last 40 years (since I bought my first 'Nice' LP). I could accept that I'm wrong but then I look at the artists you DO include. Has anyone seen some of the stuff that is defined as Prog Related, Proto Prog or Crossover Prog!? ANYTHING, absolutely anything can be found is these categories...DAVID BOWIE!!! Do Not !!...Please, I beg you ...Do Not make me cough up a lung laughing at all this nonsense. I guess that, if you have enough clout on this site, you could get Michael Jackson and Gerry and The Pacemakers included (prog related and proto prog). As for "fettid dingo's kidneys"...please refer to Zaphod Beeblebrox!...er?? You see!! you just don't get it! By the way I didn't start today's outburst! its all that "Stackridge" guy's fault. I had accepted defeat month's ago, and then my old friend has to throw in his (sensible, understandable, reasonable and so bloody well obviously correct) opinion in and the "Poo-Poo extract" most definately hits the fan and then I'm in full RANT mode!! And while I'm at it why isn't Toto on this site as Prog Related??? Oh no, here we bloody well go again! DAVID BOWIE!!? don't make me laugh...and yet here I go...Ha, Ha, Ha Ha!!! and what about the Buzzcocks and Sha Na Na? Kylie Minogue and Bob Dylan?...Oh now I'm being stupid, yes I know!!! but I was serious about Toto! Wow!!! Did I really write all this?NOW! Where the heck did I put by Prozak???

BRIAN STEFFENSEN View Drop Down

Forum Newbie

Joined: June 30 2008
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Points: 21

Posted: October 28 2009 at 16:36

Hey "Stackridge"!

You could do a bloody marvelous Bio...so please submit one to this excellent "Easy Livin'" Moderator, so that we can get this thing settled (or 'put this puppy to bed' as they say in America)!

Oh and by the way I am assuming that we're adult here and that we can all take a joke as well as the next guy/girl. Let's keep a sense of humour here! I have been called complaining 3 year old, and I welcome that description (better than 56 year old balding Git! anyway).

Brian

Evolver

Special Collaborator

Crossover & JR/F/Canterbury Teams

Joined: October 22 2005
Location: The Idiocracy
Status: Offline
Points: 5482

Posted: October 28 2009 at 17:08

I understand your point, Brian. There are quite a few bands listed here that, as far as I can tell, have done very little progressive music. I personally don't care who is listed here, as long as the artists I like are here. I S&G were listed, I would have no problem with that. But I still don't think they are prog.

Trust me. I know what I'm doing.

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: October 28 2009 at 17:09

BRIAN STEFFENSEN wrote:

Hey "Stackridge"!

You could do a bloody marvelous Bio...so please submit one to this excellent "Easy Livin'" Moderator, so that we can get this thing settled (or 'put this puppy to bed' as they say in America)!

Brian

Sorry, but it doesn't quite work like that - a majority vote is required from the Admin team to approve the addition before they can be added. (In Bob's post: "It would need to go to the admin team for approval of course"). While there is nothing wrong in preparing a bio beforehand, it could be a waste of someone's time if we still reject them.

What?

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: October 28 2009 at 17:37

BRIAN STEFFENSEN wrote:

Oh for crying out loud!!! I'm reading such pretentious, 'know it all' "Cod's Wallop", here. I could stop right here and accept your premise that S&G do not produce progressive (not even prog related) music and that my understanding of the term has clearly been wrong for at last 40 years (since I bought my first 'Nice' LP). I could accept that I'm wrong but then I look at the artists you DO include. Has anyone seen some of the stuff that is defined as Prog Related, Proto Prog or Crossover Prog!? ANYTHING, absolutely anything can be found is these categories...DAVID BOWIE!!! Do Not !!...Please, I beg you ...Do Not make me cough up a lung laughing at all this nonsense. I guess that, if you have enough clout on this site, you could get Michael Jackson and Gerry and The Pacemakers included (prog related and proto prog). As for "fettid dingo's kidneys"...please refer to Zaphod Beeblebrox!...er?? You see!! you just don't get it! By the way I didn't start today's outburst! its all that "Stackridge" guy's fault. I had accepted defeat month's ago, and then my old friend has to throw in his (sensible, understandable, reasonable and so bloody well obviously correct) opinion in and the "Poo-Poo extract" most definately hits the fan and then I'm in full RANT mode!! And while I'm at it why isn't Toto on this site as Prog Related??? Oh no, here we bloody well go again! DAVID BOWIE!!? don't make me laugh...and yet here I go...Ha, Ha, Ha Ha!!! and what about the Buzzcocks and Sha Na Na? Kylie Minogue and Bob Dylan?...Oh now I'm being stupid, yes I know!!! but I was serious about Toto! Wow!!! Did I really write all this?NOW! Where the heck did I put by Prozak???

can I get this on a T-shirt?

One minor point - while Crossover Prog suffers a little from legacy additions into the category once known as Art Rock made long before my time here, we do endeavour to keep it on the right side of the Prog/Not Prog borderline, which is why you see Roger Water's solo sitting one side and David Gilmour peering in from the other, why Radiohead can smugly stare out at Muse's strutting away in PR land and why Japan scratch their heads wondering how Rain Tree Crow got in and they didn't. These flavours may not appeal to you, or make any logical sense, but there is method in our madness and on that you may have to just take my word for it.

As to Bowie - meh, whether Krautrock inspired Low and Heroes albums alone are enough, or whether the Prog experiments of 'Cygnet Committee' or 'Width Of A Circle' qualify him, there is more to Mr David Robert Jones than a few pop singles and we'll offer Gaskin and Stewart the same courtesy.

What?

Slartibartfast View Drop Down

Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29625

Posted: October 28 2009 at 19:46

My aren't we a little excitable? You have to accept that there are big variations between many of us member's opinions on what is prog and what is not, what should be included and what should be excluded and where it should be stuck. Make your case and don't get too upset when someone takes a contrary position.

Still leaning to Prog-Related

From the definition there is a check list of sorts:
- Without being 100% Prog, received clear MUSICAL influence of this genre, AND

- Are widely accepted as MUSICALLY influential to the development of Progressive Rock by the community, AND

- Blend characteristics of Progressive Rock with mainstream elements creating a final product that despite not being part of the genre is evident that are close to Prog.

I think item two is a bit too harsh of a standard (sorry Iván LOL

). If they haven't done something developmentally influential to prog, they aren't worthy? I think they meet one and three though.

The case for their inclusion comes from the Crossover definition:
Whereas Prog Related bands are generally commercial groups with certain prog elements or players that were involved in prog acts, Crossover Prog artists are predominantly progressive with elements of popular music.

By that standard I nominate them for Prog-Related. Not being on that team, it is of course up to them...

Edited by Slartibartfast - October 28 2009 at 20:14

Easy Money View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10380

Posted: October 28 2009 at 19:56

Sure, let's talk about Bowie, ever listen to Man Who Sold the World, that's just straight up Progressive Rock as far as I can tell. During the late 70s and early 80s when all the other prog rockers had no idea what to do with themselves, Bowie, Fripp, Eno, Hillage and Gabriel stepped up to the plate and kept things relevant.

Re Slarti's S&G eval: one out of three criteria wouldn't get my PR vote, two could, but just one is a criteria that probably thousands of bands could make.

Edited by Easy Money - October 28 2009 at 19:59

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535

Posted: October 28 2009 at 20:08

Slartibartfast wrote:

Still leaning to Prog-Related

- Are widely accepted as MUSICALLY influential to the development of Progressive Rock by the community, AND

I think item two is a bit too harsh of a standard (sorry Iván LOL

). If they haven't done something developmentally influential to prog, they aren't worthy? I think they meet one and three though.

Believe it or not, N° 2 has been the entrance for some bands like:

Iron Maiden
STYX
Roxy Music

People knew them as related to Prog, some even considered them full Prog bands (I don't).

My original definition was 1 or 2 or 3, but it was changed (not fopr me), even when I agree 100% with the change, because PA wa getting too open.

I already gave my opinion, now it's in hands of the Adms.

Iván

Slartibartfast View Drop Down

Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29625

Posted: October 28 2009 at 20:10

That's funny, for me "Heroes" was his first 100% progressive album. I still like The Man Who Sold The World. That track in particular.

Edited by Slartibartfast - October 28 2009 at 20:14

Slartibartfast View Drop Down

Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29625

Posted: October 28 2009 at 20:14

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Believe it or not, N° 2 has been the entrance for some bands like:

Iron Maiden
STYX
Roxy Music

People knew them as related to Prog, some even considered them full Prog bands (I don't).

My original definition was 1 or 2 or 3, but it was changed (not fopr me), even when I agree 100% with the change, because PA wa getting too open.

I already gave my opinion, now it's in hands of the Adms.

Iván

I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around the concept that any of those were influential to the development of prog. Big Roxy Music fan BTW. The other two I don't care to get to know any better than I already do. Not a slam, mind you.

Edited by Slartibartfast - October 28 2009 at 20:15

Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...