Some artists that should be in prog related

Slartibartfast wrote: Textbook wrote: Probably number one for me here is Tori Amos. As has been endlessly said, she more or less IS Kate Bush, except perhaps a little more progressive. Bush gets a pass because of her relationship with David Gilmour and Peter Gabriel I think. Tori is not more or less Kate Bush though her early stuff shows influence.  I know those two quite well.  I just got a Happy Rhodes CD the other day and there you can make the case. By the way, Iván has put in a fairly restrictive definition of prog related so that many of the artists already there would be tossed out.  I don't happen to agree with it but here it is for what's it's worth: "- 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." Item two is the one I have the biggest problem with.  Take that one away and I basically like the definition provided.  But hey, as soon as we all start agreeing on things we're probably in trouble.

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - May 27 2010 at 13:21

I like Nine Inch Nails but I don't know what they're doing here.

Desoc wrote: Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Shouldn't we be focussing in this artists who deserve to be here by own right rather than in somehow related to related artiststs or because they have a couple of atmospheric sounds?   Please, our priorities are wrong, Prog Related artists are THE EXCEPTION to the rule of having a Progressive Rock database, not the main interest of the site. What I cannot comprehend is why some people are obsessed with having everybody contributing in accordance with their own priorities. I do, to the best of my ability, contribute by suggesting bands and artists that in my opinion are progressive rock, but my ability is mostly limited to the national scene of my native country. And I understand fully if members of this forum do not feel capable of contributing even this way, because it demands a lot of time and devotion to dive into the more obscure corners of any music scene. But additionally, I see it as a value-add that this database conveys a broad spectre of progressive and progressive-related music. And if some people feel that they have their comparative advantage here, and therefore want to spend their time on discussing this, then I cannot to the heart of my soul understand why it is a problem.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: As far as I know, this site is called Prog Archives, not almost Prog or Prog Related Archives, and the priority should be PROGRESSIVE ROCK.   It's frustrating to see 10 pages for each Prog Related suggestion and 10 posts (if too much) for Progressive Rock bands.

Well, what I find most frustrating is the continous ranting against people who are engaged in discussions. It's not very constructive. They are not likely to alternatively use their energy on researching obscure 1968 Tanzanian prog acts no matter how annoyed some people may get

From one thing to another: You mentioned Titanic, a band from Norway who were included after having "waited 40 years". This is an add I assume you endorse since it has your name on it. However, as they are included in Prog Related, as they are from Norway, and as I have never heard of them although I count myself as quite enlightened on the topic of Norwegian prog, I'd like to hear your thoughts on how on earth they fulfill your criteria for inclusion in PR, particularly the second paragraph:

"- 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."


Edited by Desoc - May 29 2010 at 05:30

Desoc wrote: Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: As far as I know, this site is called Prog Archives, not almost Prog or Prog Related Archives, and the priority should be PROGRESSIVE ROCK.   It's frustrating to see 10 pages for each Prog Related suggestion and 10 posts (if too much) for Progressive Rock bands. "- 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, ."

Call me a stupid guy , no problem, but i have a serious problem to understand the meaning of this paragraph. How some Prog Related band/solo artist, who recieved a clear influence from the genre, but still to be *not really Prog*, then ought to be influential to the development of Progressive Rock, but somehow same act have to stay Prog Related, I mean without 100% being Prog, although that band/solo artist is to spread clear Prog influences all around ? EDIT:  I'v been thinking that Prog Related and Proto Prog are two different things. Proto Prog ought to be influential, no question. Prog Related is an act who recieved Prog influences by 100% Prog acts,( why not  from Proto Prog acts too) and mixed that with a mainstream or something, but to be "influential to Prog develepment" is too much for "poor" *not really prog* act, in my opinion.

Edited by ko - May 29 2010 at 06:04

I love Joy Division, but while they had some elements that were similar to prog so did every post punk band and all the elements of prog are pretty vague on their own.

Edited by boo boo - May 29 2010 at 13:47

ko wrote: Call me a stupid guy , no problem, but i have a serious problem to understand the meaning of this paragraph. How some Prog Related band/solo artist, who recieved a clear influence from the genre, but still to be *not really Prog*, then ought to be influential to the development of Progressive Rock, but somehow same act have to stay Prog Related, I mean without 100% being Prog, although that band/solo artist is to spread clear Prog influences all around ?

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - May 29 2010 at 13:42

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: ko wrote: Call me a stupid guy , no problem, but i have a serious problem to understand the meaning of this paragraph. How some Prog Related band/solo artist, who recieved a clear influence from the genre, but still to be *not really Prog*, then ought to be influential to the development of Progressive Rock, but somehow same act have to stay Prog Related, I mean without 100% being Prog, although that band/solo artist is to spread clear Prog influences all around ?   Not stupid at all, Prog Related was added long after the site was created, and it costed so many problems, that the Administrators took the responsability of exclusively decoiding which bands should be added or not.   In certain moment people believed almost any band from the 70's was Prog Related, then when I first wrote the definition, only one of the three cgharacteristics was required, now it's more restrictive, because the issue got out of control.   Now to your case, maybe some examples will help:   The Who: Obviously a classic Rock band placed in Proto Prog by mistake (IMHO) because their most Progressive release "Quadrophenia" was released in 1973, so should be in Prog Related.:   Influenced Prog: Pete Townsend was one of the first musicians to defy the 2.30 minutes limit to a Rock a song, the release of TOMMY is a huge influence to Rock Operas and Conceptual albums, formats used widely by Prog bands.   Influential on  Prog: It's clear that QUADROPHENIA was released in the context of Progressive Rock initial boom, the influence of the genre are more than evident   Soi as a consequence is accepted by the Prog community that without TOMMY, Prog would probably wouldn't had evolved as it did, but whoever says that The Who is a full Prog band, is wrong IMO.   STYX: An AOR/Proggy/Pop band.   Influenced: t's clear that they were influenced by Prog, it's enough to listen their first albums and even songs like Fooling Yourself or Lights.   Influential: Their sound,mthe massive use of chorus and some complex arrangements, influenced the USA Prog  development, and you will find curious to notice that they released in 1972 "Movement for a Common Man" and 5 years later ELP released "Fanfare for a Common Man".   So they were both,  ibnfluenced and influential, but mainly an AOR (as people understand AOR) band.   ko wrote: EDIT:  I'v been thinking that Prog Related and Proto Prog are two different things. Proto Prog ought to be influential, no question. Prog Related is an act who recieved Prog influences by 100% Prog acts,( why not  from Proto Prog acts too) and mixed that with a mainstream or something, but to be "influential to Prog develepment" is too much for "poor" *not really prog* act, in my opinion.   I agree with this, I asked some weeks ago that Proto Prog passed to be a 100% Prog category, but the majority disagrees, still I believe that the role of Proto Prog is transcendental in the evolution of the genre, but Prog Related relation is mostly casual.   As I believe, without Proto Prog, there would not exist Prog as we know it...Without PR bands nothing significant would happen.   Iván

Ivan, thanks for your answer. IMO, when you were decided to be more restrictive with Prog Related, it cannot fix the problem completely because you  (admin team, special collaborators) restricted adds, but the rules is still the same so the same problems also. You have to have Proto and  Prog Related categories but  for the albums ONLY. For example: Who's Next, Quadrophenia, Tommy Soundtrack, and Who Are You are prog related albums and that is that.... Although my fav album by The Who is By Numbers, that's not a proggy album at all, its far away from Prog as same as Live at Leeds as well. Tommy original album fit Proto Prog category, and maybe A Quick One and Who Sell Out because of few important tracks. Another example: The Dead albums as From The Mars Hotel, Blues For Allah, Terrapin Station should be listed as Prog Related; '60s masterpieces as Athem Of The Sun, Aoxomoxoa fit Proto Prog. In that case, you have a clear situation. Some bands could have just one album in those categories, for example The Stones' Their Satanic Majesty Request or Beach Boys' Smile fit Proto Prog; Good Rats' Ratcity In Blue and ABBA's Arrival fit Prog Related category,  etc..

Edited by ko - May 30 2010 at 00:49

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: KO, I decided nothing,   Collaborators only make suggestions in the site's structure and rules, pretty much as any member..   Cheers.   Iván   BTW: Did I heard ABBA Prog Related?

Edited by ko - May 30 2010 at 03:38