The Who? Proto-Prog? - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

Yorkie X

Forum Senior Member

Joined: July 04 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1049

Posted: July 23 2007 at 02:49

Edit // deleted my last post because it was just plain dumb Wink

Edited by Yorkie X - July 24 2007 at 10:31

fuxi

Prog Reviewer

Joined: March 08 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2459

Posted: July 23 2007 at 03:20

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Atavachron wrote:

much of what you point out is acurrate, Ivan, but again I stress that none of it deletes history-- the effects the Who's theme albums (and perhaps certain cuts on Who Sells Out) had on what a rock album could be, the size, theater and sophistcation, is clear and deeply felt.. most markedly on prog, not punk.

Chuck Berry
Little Richard
Elvis Presley
The Rolling Stiones
The Animals

Had influence in everything that came later, but we can't include them,. because they are generic influences for all Rock the case of The Who is exactly the same.

Proto Prog is for bands that were DIRECT INFLUENCE for Prog, and that' not the case of The Who.

The Who may not had existed and Prog would never been affected, take psyche from History or The Moody Blues or The Nice or Pink Floyd Psyche era, and there's probably not Prog as we know it.

Cheers.

Iván

I definitely agree with Ivan. Now that the Who are here, you might as well include the Stones and the Kinks. Aren't "Gimme shelter", "You can't always get what you want" and "Sympathy for the devil" prime examples of proto-prog? And Ray Davies wrote even more rock operas than Pete Townshend! So while we're at it, where are the Small Faces and the Bonzo Dog Band? Not to mention Percy Sledge!

The Whistler View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: August 30 2006
Location: LA, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7113

Posted: July 23 2007 at 03:28

HEY! "When a Man Loves a Woman" is a beautiful song!

But I think that half of the reason the Who ought to be here is that they were prog in spirit. Did the Stones (much as I like 'em) or the Animals have any virtuoso players? And was their main purpose in life to create ART? Or were they a bunch of talented guys playing at a profession?

Pete had already written his first rock opera by '64, they (the record companies) just wanted something a little more...single-ish. And I think that the supreme talents, certainly worthy of a "real" prog band, of Misters Entwhistle and Moon have been mentioned enough that I need not do so. And the Who seem to be an influence on the likes of Tull, ELP...certainly the Zepsters. Gods, they even modeled their photos after the Who.

I'm not sure if they should be in related rather than proto, but the fact is they're here. Pity we can't jam 'em in art rock.

"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson

Eetu Pellonpaa View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 17 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 4828

Posted: July 23 2007 at 03:30

fuxi wrote:

the Bonzo Dog Band?

I wouldn't agree with the other acts you mentioned, but wouldn't these guys might be seen as some kind of proto avant band?

The Whistler View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: August 30 2006
Location: LA, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7113

Posted: July 23 2007 at 03:32

Eetu Pellonpää wrote:

fuxi wrote:

the Bonzo Dog Band?

I wouldn't agree with the other acts you mentioned, but wouldn't these guys might be seen as some kind of proto avant band?

They're often lumped in with Zappa anyways. Oh well, I actually sort of like the Bonzos, so if anyone makes a fuss, I've got their back.

"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson

Atavachron View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 64375

Posted: July 23 2007 at 03:36

fuxi wrote:

I definitely agree with Ivan. Now that the Who are here, you might as well include the Stones and the Kinks.

if I know Ivan, he's the last one that would use such a ridiculous excuse to add any band

Edited by Atavachron - July 23 2007 at 03:37

fuxi

Prog Reviewer

Joined: March 08 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2459

Posted: July 23 2007 at 03:37

The Whistler wrote:

HEY! "When a Man Loves a Woman" is a beautiful song!

And it's proto-prog!

The Whistler View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: August 30 2006
Location: LA, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7113

Posted: July 23 2007 at 03:38

fuxi wrote:

The Whistler wrote:

HEY! "When a Man Loves a Woman" is a beautiful song!

And it's proto-prog!

And so is Benny Goodman! And J. S. Bach!

"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson

Sean Trane View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Online
Points: 19626

Posted: July 23 2007 at 04:15

jfleischh wrote:

What is The Who doing on this website and why are they considered proto-prog? Now, don't get me wrong, I like The Who a lot, I have Tommy and Who's Next. I just don't think that they have a place on this website; I am sure that their presence here cannot be reversed, but come on. I have always thought of The Who as proto-punk. They are basically the fathers of punk music, which is in complete opposition to progressive rock music. I am not saying that I am against punk either. But punk and progressive rock are two genres of music that are complete opposites. The whole idea behind punk is that you don't have to know how to play your instruments; emotion is more important than skill or technique. The music is based on simplistic power chords. As we all know, prog is completely the opposite; it prides itself on being complex (and still emotional). To me, The Who is the farthest thing from "proto-prog." I mean, just because you have a couple "concept" albums does not mean that you are prog. It just seams to me that some people around here don't know much about genres of music. I can't believe the guff I got for suggesting Steely Dan be placed in prog-related! I'm sorry, but seeing The Who on this website is a totally mind-boggling to me. Does anyone else share my viewpoint; or maybe someone can explain why a proto-punk band is on a progressive rock website!

The Who was a mod band! And their only link to punk is mod/punk band The Jam.

Proto punk included MC5, The Stooges and eventually Velvet Underground (VU who might also one day find its way into PA under proto-prog BTW), but I never saw The Who included in there.

However, I wished Micky included The Who in prog related rather than proto-prog, because The Who's proggier works was in the 70's, unlike Deep Purple's whose proggier works were from the 60's >> which is why they are proto-prog.

BTW, I have no qualm with SD being in prog-related.

let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword

The Whistler View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: August 30 2006
Location: LA, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7113

Posted: July 23 2007 at 04:17

Or Ween...is what Mr. Trane meant to say...

"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson

stonebeard View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057

Posted: July 23 2007 at 04:18

I don't know the Who, I don't care about the Who.

I trust members who do know about these "prog-related"/"proto-prog" bands are not diluting the site with superfluous additions.

My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!

The Whistler View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: August 30 2006
Location: LA, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7113

Posted: July 23 2007 at 04:20

...Wait, you don't know the Who? Is that humanly possible? They're one of those bands that you're allowed to call "The greatest band ever" (you know, like the Stones or the Ruttles or what have you).

"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson

stonebeard View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057

Posted: July 23 2007 at 04:22

"Know" as in know more than the hits.

My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!

The Whistler View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: August 30 2006
Location: LA, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7113

Posted: July 23 2007 at 04:25

Oh. Whew. Well, they're pretty sweet, and I've always thought they were artsy-fartsy enough to be here. Uh, for whatever that's worth...

And I think that the argument "If we have the Who, then we should have Percy Sledge" falls a bit flat because so often people forget that half of prog rock...is the rock. Sledge was a pop guy who used an orchestra, but for pop arangements. Standard lenght pop arrangements; the Who could carry on for a while if they wanted to.

And Sledge didn't rock, or have any kind of a fusion attitude. Not that the Who were big about fusion (although Pete loved to bring in orchestras and synths, which just SEEMS old hat to us, because we've been overexposed. I guess). But they did rock.

Edited by The Whistler - July 23 2007 at 04:26

"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

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

Posted: July 23 2007 at 12:50

Atavachron wrote:

fuxi wrote:

I definitely agree with Ivan. Now that the Who are here, you might as well include the Stones and the Kinks.

if I know Ivan, he's the last one that would use such a ridiculous excuse to add any band

You know me well Atavachron, I wouldn't add a band with the "If x, then why not Y" argument, as a fact I don't add Prog Related bands unless it's a band that has comed to our team and we notice that being DIRECTLY AND UNDOUBTLY related with Prog but not 100% Prog, and if it's only the only solution.

When we as a team receive a band that could go to Prog Related we ask all the possible teams and post it, but unless there's a clear concensus (Which we see is not the case with The Who) we don't add it.

But Fuxi was just being sarcastic, he knows I would never add such bands to Prog Archives.

Now, if The Who must be here (I can't find the priority when Erik, HT You Atavachron, Chus, Rico, myswelf among others make daily posts wiith 100% bands that capture no interest of ther members), lets do it the less traumatic, Proto Prog is a well defined sub-genre and The Who have no relation with it, Sean is right, their almost Prog Related stuff is from the 70's, tio be precise October 19, 1973, so they would fit better in Prog Related.

Now I added Proto Prog bands becausee I believe this sub-genre is well defined and it's part of Prog, but not without a poll at least in the Collaborator's section.

In this case I believe Viv Stanshall and the Bonzo Dog Band deserve to be here, they as Arthur Brown are clear examples of what Proto Prog is.

Iván

1800iareyay View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: November 18 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2492

Posted: July 23 2007 at 13:05

stonebeard wrote:

"Know" as in know more than the hits.

but so few Who songs aren't hits. that's why they're gods.

clarke2001 View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 14 2006
Location: Croatia
Status: Offline
Points: 4160

Posted: July 23 2007 at 13:16

The Whistler wrote:

Eetu Pellonpää wrote:

fuxi wrote:

the Bonzo Dog Band?

I wouldn't agree with the other acts you mentioned, but wouldn't these guys might be seen as some kind of proto avant band?

They're often lumped in with Zappa anyways. Oh well, I actually sort of like the Bonzos, so if anyone makes a fuss, I've got their back.

A massive thumb up for the Bonzo Dog Band in proto-prog section. They are much more complex, diverse (and progressive) version of Giles, Giles and Fripp.

fuxi

Prog Reviewer

Joined: March 08 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2459

Posted: July 23 2007 at 16:10

clarke2001 wrote:

A massive thumb up for the Bonzo Dog Band in proto-prog section.

If it helps, on HATWISE CHOICE Dave Stewart clearly states that Hatfield & the North were influenced by the Bonzos!

Easy Livin View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

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

Posted: July 23 2007 at 17:17

A new thread is needed in the "Suggest bands" section for the Bonzos if they are being proposed for addition.

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

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

Posted: July 23 2007 at 17:52

Easy Livin wrote:

A new thread is needed in the "Suggest bands" section for the Bonzos if they are being proposed for addition.

I'll start it tonight or tomorrow Bob.

Iván