Radiohead

The clash mixed other musical styles with punk, was my point.

Thanks for clearing the point, but aren't The Clash a non conventional punk band formed with guys as Mick Jones formed in Heavy Metal/Hard Rock bands and Sandy Perlman from The Blue Oyster Cult (Heavy Metal/Arena Rock) and even recorded an album with Lee Scratch Perry (Producer of Bob Marley)?

We know there can be some non typical punk bands, but the essence of Punk is to make music simple as the essence of Progressive is to make the music complex. In this case I don't believe The Clash were the typical Punk band.

Anyway, I accept I only know the basics of Punk because I never really cared for the genre.

Iván

PS: Not talking about Radiohead there's no other choice than accept they are in ProgArchives to stay.

Edited by ivan_2068

I showed a friend of mine (who loves Radiohead but does not consider them prog) this thread, and he wrote a very articulate, interesting comment on it after reading some of the thread which he has asked me to share with you all.  So for the record, this was written by my friend Max, and not by me.

slipperman wrote: I totally support it. Radiohead is a rock band >> They have pushed the limits, exanded their sound in multiple ways>> they always challenge the listener (except the very first album, that is) >> they continue to PROGRESS, making cerebral, inventive, adventurous music = Sounds like a prog band to me. They are in the true spirit of prog moreso than a lot of other bands included in the archives.

I agree with every sentiment Slipperman expressed in his above post. Radiohead have pushed the boundaries of their sound and have never been a band to rest on their laurels and drop the next OK Computer.  Their music is endlessly fascinating and engages the mind in labyrinthine enjoyment, even their b-sides are a demonstrable yardstick highlighting a level of achievement and progress, a testament to the power of creativity against the product of mainstream mediocrity.  However this is where our opinons diverge.  Using Kid A as an illustration of a prog rock album for example is questionable.  I recall a review of Kid A in which the author stated that this album makes other music childish, how it defies classification, how it renders current rock vocabulary and iconography to be the subject of a kangaroo court. It is in this respect that I concur, and that is my stand on Radiohead and their music. They defy, like all great bands, neat classification (or classification at all).  Their music is an entity all its own, a powerful catalogue of timeless music that elucidates ancient echoes, above and beyond a vernacular of nomenclature.  To suggest otherwise would cheapen the band's contribution to the rock canon.

ivan_2068 wrote: goose wrote: ivan_2068 wrote: A progressibve band will use any element of any genre to create a different sound, that's their nature and one of their main characteristics. But Punk is basicly take rock to it's simplest form, so mixing elements of other genres is not their nature, if they do so, they stop being punk. Sorry? so the Clash aren't punk? Probably, and Donna Summer is the Queen of Disco, but still don't get your point. Iván

The clash mixed other musical styles with punk, was my point.

damn straight Cert!

goose wrote: ivan_2068 wrote: A progressibve band will use any element of any genre to create a different sound, that's their nature and one of their main characteristics. But Punk is basicly take rock to it's simplest form, so mixing elements of other genres is not their nature, if they do so, they stop being punk. Sorry? so the Clash aren't punk?

Probably, and Donna Summer is the Queen of Disco, but still don't get your point.

Iván

Alan-

worthy point for sure, BUT I don't hear the depth or ambition in Coldplay that I do in Radiohead, and Muse is only Radiohead-ish because they're playing in The Bends-era style, which Radiohead left behind years ago from more (here we go) Progressive areas.

 

Ivan-

haha, I guess I didn't bother checking into the 3rd and 4th Pavlov's cuz I figured if I didn't like the first 2,why bother? I would never argue to get them kicked off the archives  or anything, if enough proggers say they're proggy, then so be it. 

ivan_2068 wrote: A progressibve band will use any element of any genre to create a different sound, that's their nature and one of their main characteristics. But Punk is basicly take rock to it's simplest form, so mixing elements of other genres is not their nature, if they do so, they stop being punk.

Sorry? so the Clash aren't punk?

but, and and myabe I'm crazy, couldn't Radiohead be used as a gateway band?  I mean, if someone you know likes Radiohead, then you could sumply say, "oh, you like Radiohead?  Then maybe you would like (Insert band here).

 

ivan_2068 wrote: Pavlov's Dog is a mistake, not Radiohead! Why, because you don't like Pavlov's Dog and you like Radiohead? Pavlovs Dog is recognized by all the progressive community as a neo progressive band and Radiohead is considered an Indie Alternative band by most people. Pavlov's Dog is included in every respectable progressive enciclopedia or web page, Radiohead not. Ok, Radiohead is in and we will have to accept it even when a good part of the forum disagrees, but to deny Pavlov's Dog is a Progressive band is being at least a bit narrow minded. Iván

Well, here we are again at interpretation, taste, standards, and opinion. I would always see Pavlov's Dog referenced in prog guides and on sites, incl. this one of course, and when I finally picked up their first two (only?) albums, I could not find anything that, to me, resembled prog. Maybe it was the singer I couldn't stomach (and I love Geddy Lee) and I couldn't hear the music properly because of that distraction. But still, I didn't find anything forward-thinking, groundbreaking, stimulating or interesting about P.D. I'm in the camp of people who think Radiohead are a modern prog band. They moved away from pop just as Manfred Mann did when he started taking Earth Band in a way more cosmic direction...they shouldn't be scorned for having once had a huge alternative hit. It's all opinion, it's "allllll talk! Elephant Talk!" 

You know at first I thought it was a joke, and then to my utter dismay it were a bell that rang true: Radiohead has been added.

I agree with Ivan! If Radiohead is in, then bring on the Beegees, and ELO while we're at it! ARRRRGH!!!

If Prog Rock is what some people here say it is: Rock music that progresses (personally I always thought it was far more than that), then by definition Bowie, Eno, Roxy Music and Queen should be in as well. Certainly long before Radiohead, who while pushing boundaries ARE NOT PROG ENOUGH TO BE PROG!

Edited by Rob The Good