Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Suggest New Bands and Artists
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Laura Meade
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedLaura Meade
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
rushfan4 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 22 2007
Location: Michigan, U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 65937 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2007 at 14:02
First off to try and keep this thread somewhat on point, I would like to mention that I really like the 4 albums that I have from Izz and I really like the singing on those albums.  I have not heard Laura Meade's solo album so certainly cannot judge it's level of progressiveness, although from Natural Science's postings it sounds as though the music itself is not progressive.  Based upon that I would say that she shouldn't be included.  However, again based upon semantics I wouldn't have a problem with her being included in prog-related because she is a member of a progressive rock band.  Accepting that therein lies the controversy of the understanding of prog-related.  Based on the current definition as written by Ivan and accepted by the site she wouldn't qualify, but based on one literal meaning of the term prog-related, she is related. 
 
Now to continue with the thread hijack:
 
To Ivan, I am well aware of your feelings and positions on the subject of both Phil Collins and the category of Prog-related both from reading other threads and discussing these subjects with you in other threads.  I fully respect your feelings and positions on these items and I actually understand these feelings and positions.  I won't say that I disagree with these positions because that would be too strong of a term, but I will say that my feelings and positions are different.  I believe that this is mostly because of the timing of where we entered the progressive rock scene.   
 
I think that we both realize that we have different points of view on both latter day Genesis as well as Phil Collins' solo career, and I also realize that my view differs with that of the majority of the prog rock community.  I am just different that way.  I happen to like both latter-day Genesis and Phil Collins while many prog fans do not like these.  I am certainly not suggesting that Phil Collins solo career is made up of progressive rock music, but I do feel that there are some tendencies and influences there in some songs.  Also, for what it is worth, I do agree with you that based on the current definition of prog-related as written by you and posted on this site that Phil Collins solo would not qualify.  As long as that remains the site position and definition than it is what it is, and I certainly don't have a problem with Phil Collins being left off PA based on that. 
 
In regards to your comment regarding "Do you believe a fan of No Jackett required will ever buy any Gentle Giant or Van Der Graff Generator albuim?"  My answer is yes, because I would qualify to that answer.  No Jacket Required was one of the top pop albums when I was in high school and I own and like that album.  I have only "discovered" Gentle Giant and VDGG in the past couple of years.  Although I had heard of these bands a number of years ago when I purchased the Super Natural Fairy Tales boxset, I hadn't really heard anything from them until the past couple of years.  I do like Gentle Giant, but the jury is still out on VDGG.  I am hoping that they will grow on me.  I recently purchased the Real Time concert CD and actually liked it better than the studio albums that I have purchased, so maybe that is a sign that they are growing on me.  This being said, I also realize that I am most likely in the minority in this category too.  There really aren't too many people who are going to be Phil Collins fans who will become early Genesis fans. I am still working on that too.  Granted, I am pretty much there, but I think that my enjoyment for early Genesis can still grow.
 
In regards to my "food on the table" quote, I really am not that familiar with the situation behind their break-up, so my apologies for my tabloid comment.  In regards to Peter Gabriel and Steve Hackett, I own and enjoy many of their solo albums as well.  I have no interest in denigrating either of them.  However, I think that one of the reasons that Mr. Gabriel is not a starving artist is because of the hits that he had with Sledgehammer and to a lesser extent Shock the Monkey.  I like both songs but have seen various arguments of the degree of prog or art rock quotients in those songs.  I wish to preface this by saying that I certainly am not saying that he made his solo career up out of pop songs, and I would also agree that his solo career is more progressive or "artsy" than Phil Collins solo career.
 
Our position on lyrics also differ.  I believe that there is to a degree such a thing as progressive lyrical content.  The lyrics in progressive songs are generally far more intelligent than the lyrics in non-prog songs.  Certainly not always and I am sure that we could both list hundreds of instances either way where this is not the case.  Being a Rush fan, I am as much drawn to their lyrics as I am to their music (and no need to bring up a specific song from Test for Echo that is not very well liked even by Rush fans).  Prog songs tend to talk about many subjects other than "I love you, you love me" or "I like big butts and I will not lie".  I am always a sucker for a good love ballad so I don't have anything against them, but they are a dime a dozen.  I would much rather hear about "The Spirit of Radio" or "Natural Science" or "The Trees", etc..  Despite this comment, I agree with you that lyrics alone do not make a song a progressive rock song, and that there are a good many singer-songwriters out there such as those who you mentioned that do sing songs with intelligent lyrics but are most definitely not prog.
 
One last comment to my overlengthy post.  I have mentioned this before in regards to the All Music Guide format.  I think that as awesome as this website is, it would be even more so, if it had some of the functionality of All Music Guide, that you would be able to go to a band on this site and be able to click on a link to related bands, or click on a band member on this site and be able to find all the bands he or she has performed with.  Hence the addition of artists like Laura Meade or Phil Collins.  As we discussed before this is both not practical, and at least this time, not the purpose of the Prog Archives.  I think that this would be an awesome feature to have, but the fact that we don't just means that I need to go the All Music Guide in order to find these kind of things. 
 
Peace be with you my friend.  I have no wish to debate you on these items and certainly have no desire to offend you. 
Back to Top
rushfan4 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 22 2007
Location: Michigan, U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 65937 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2007 at 14:30
Originally posted by Ghost Rider Ghost Rider wrote:

. I think there would be a much better MUSICAL case for adding The Police on the strength of two of its members having been involved with prog bands or artists, and also of their music showing much stronger progressive qualities than anything Collins has ever recorded.

 
Hi Raff,
 
Thank you for your kind response.  I think that my response to Ivan also to extent responded to your comment.  I have no problems at all with Phil Collins not being in Prog Archives under the current definition of Prog-related.  Putting my theory aside that  "if it is in my collection it must be prog", I certainly understand that any attempt to consider Phil Collins solo career as progressive wouldn't even qualify enough to be "tenuous at best". 
 
In regards to the above quote, the Police's discography is in my collection so I must once again refer to my theory, and thus they must be prog. Big%20smile  Geez oh pete, where does it end!!!! LOL  You all aren't going to make me rethink my theory are you????
 
Let me ask you this.  Would it be such a bad thing if Phil Collins were added to PA and if his biography consisted of the following in big bold black letters in size 40 font:  AS A SOLO ARTIST PHIL COLLINS DID NOT PERFORM PROGRESSIVE ROCK MUSIC, HOWEVER, HE IS A WELL KNOWN PROGRESSIVE ARTIST FROM A SEMINAL PROGRESSIVE ROCK BAND AND THAT IS WHY HE IS HERE. He was the drummer and vocalist for Genesis as well as the drummer in the jazz fusion band Brand X..... For progressive rock you should check out these bands or other similar bands such as.....
 
My guess is that if people choose to review his solo albums they will end up with an average rating of 1 or 2, based upon the review standards provided by this website.  Although ratings don't matter that much that should lay to rest any doubt that the members of PA believe that this work is poor and for fans only. 
 
 
 
To my way of thinking, I don't see why this is a bad thing other than that the front page will be dripping with venom for the first few weeks while all the negative reviews are being posted.  I think that this does send the message that Phil Collins is not a prog rock artist, but if you do like Phil Collins you should try Genesis or Brand X or whatever other bands are listed there.  Will it persuade anybody else to like progressive rock music?  I don't know.  I have seen others post in some threads that they were aware of Phil Collins and latter day Genesis and had no idea that progressive era Genesis existed until they came here.  What I will say is that there is at least one person, being me, who is living proof that being a progressive rock fan and being a Phil Collins fan is not mutually exclusive.
Back to Top
Padraic View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31165 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2007 at 14:37
Originally posted by rushfan4 rushfan4 wrote:

First off to try and keep this thread somewhat on point, I would like to mention that I really like the 4 albums that I have from Izz and I really like the singing on those albums.  I have not heard Laura Meade's solo album so certainly cannot judge it's level of progressiveness, although from Natural Science's postings it sounds as though the music itself is not progressive.  Based upon that I would say that she shouldn't be included.  However, again based upon semantics I wouldn't have a problem with her being included in prog-related because she is a member of a progressive rock band.  Accepting that therein lies the controversy of the understanding of prog-related.  Based on the current definition as written by Ivan and accepted by the site she wouldn't qualify, but based on one literal meaning of the term prog-related, she is related.

 
Great to meet another IZZ fan, that's for sure.

You have encapsulated perfectly what I've been thinking these past couple days.  Certainly I have never asserted that Laura Meade's output is prog, for it most definitely is not.  I originally was told that there had to be a (still somewhat fuzzy) "musical relationship or connection" to prog, and that simply being a member of a prog band and releasing non-prog music wouldn't qualify.  This latest rehash over her music stemmed from a new understanding that the actual policy was that non-prog works of members of prog bands were automatically prog-related (for some reason, Phil Collins being a notable exception perhaps due to the enormous vitriol his addition would engender).  I am now told this is in fact not the case.  Some very good arguments were put forward why it should not be the case, and to be honest I agree with them.

rushfan4:  I don't care too much about the hijack, however, I feel discussion about Laura Meade doesn't need to continue.  Might I suggest starting a new thread to discuss Phil Collins, or if it's more prog-related in general, there's a current thread about it in the Help Improve the Site section (or whatever it's called).  At this point, to avoid using this thread as a jumping board for more prog-related matters, I suggest one of the admins simply close it.

Thanks again all, and sorry if I got anyone riled up.  Wink


Edited by NaturalScience - November 15 2007 at 14:39
Back to Top
rushfan4 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 22 2007
Location: Michigan, U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 65937 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2007 at 14:47
I have copied a portion of my previous post and I will re-post it in the "help improve this site" section.  Thank you for the suggestion.
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2007 at 14:51

Great post Rushfan, I only partially disagree with two statements you made:

 

  1. I been a member of the Genesis Official Forum, and I had to abandon it because the disgust expressed by most members towards early genesis and specially towards Prog, of course there were people as me who liked only the second era, but due to an age fact (Most people who joined that Forum were very young and only heard Collins era music) we were a tiny minority………There were also the guys who liked both eras, but this were mostly the ones of my age that were too young when Gabriel was in the band but got familiar with the band during the Duke era.

 

But the point is, very few, I would say insignificant portion of the three men era Genesis will become interested in Prog, as a fact they would never visit a site called Prog Archives, I read the comments about us and were very harsh.

 

By the contrary, as Raffaella well said, more Prog fans would leave the site forever if Collins was added, already for less conflictive additions people has abandoned the site.

 

  1. Progressive Lyrics: There’s not such thing as Progressive lyrics Rushfan, as you well say Prog lyrics are more intelligent than in most mainstream genres, but this is not a prerogative of Prog, there are thousands of mainstream artists with great lyrics.

 

If you take the lyrics of Close to the Edge and place them in Salsa rhythm (I heard that in a Peruvian band that believed there could be Prog salsa), you get a mess, it ceases to be Prog, imagine Karn Evil 9 sung by N’Sync, that wouldn’t be Prog at all, by the contrary, it’s possible for Prog bands to take mainstream songs and turn them into Prog, a good example would be America by Yes or Blinded by the Light by Manfred Mann, in the moment they recorded those lyrics, the song ceased to be mainstream by Simon & Garfunkel or Bruce Springsteen and turned into Prog.

 

Lyrics are neutral, they may be intelligent or dumb, but depending in the music they may be lyrics of a Prog or a Pop song.

 

Thanks for the kind reply, it’s good to discuss in this civil terms, I don’t share your love for Phil Collins, but I respect your taste and defend your right to express it, just I don’t believe he should be added as you have also noticed.

 
Cheers
 
Iván
            
Back to Top
rushfan4 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 22 2007
Location: Michigan, U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 65937 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2007 at 15:24
Hi Ivan,
 
Thank you.  It has been an enjoyable discussion. 
 
In regards to your first statement, I know that I am in the minority in regards to being a latter day fan who likes the early days, and that you and Raff are probably right in that it probably is not going to covert too many fans and that it will upset some prog fans.  Please let me know what your thoughts are on my "compromise" biography.  However, if possible I have moved that discussion to Micky's thread regarding "what is the related in prog-related". 
 
In regards to your second statement regarding the lyrics I both agree and disagree with you.  And by that I mean that I mostly agree with you.  This is another area where I am again in the minority in that I enjoy progressive rock music as much for the lyrics as I do for the music.   The same applies to non-progressive rock music as well, and I think that we are similar in many instances in this regard.  To use one of your examples, an artist like Bob Dylan has most certainly created some very intelligent lyrics in his career.  I am not sure of his exact musical category but I suppose he would be considered either strictly Rock or Folk-rock, if there is such a thing.  I think that because of these intelligent lyrics a prog rock fan would more likely be drawn to him than to a non-progressive rock artist with dumb lyrics.  Of course, there are also many prog rock fans that probably do not like Bob Dylan because the music is not complicated enough for them.  That being said to make your point the fact that he does have intelligent lyrics does not make him a progressive rock artist.
 
Bad lyrics set to good progressive rock music can, but doesn't always, turn me off to a band.  And I certainly understand that many prog rock fans favorite lyrics are the nonexistent ones.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.