| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
sircosick 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 29 2007
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 1264
|
 Topic: A change of location needed?
Posted: September 20 2007 at 21:55 |
|
Honestly, I expected a change of location of Radiohead after the split up of the term Art-rock. They keep remaining in Crossover prog..... well, I could make a poll of this, but I think I've done it more than once.....
So, my central though is that Radiohead should be moved from their actual genre, crossover prog, to prog related. The reasons were already explained along a pair of years and there's really no need to dilate them..... they're simply not 100% prog. I doubted if this topic is well-placed here (is it a relevant improvement to the site?), but I think there's no problem, you can move it...... but that's my idea.
Commentaries?
|
|
The best you can is good enough...
|
 |
moreitsythanyou
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: April 23 2006
Location: NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 11682
|
Posted: September 20 2007 at 22:01 |
No.
Leave it to me to defend Radiohead's progressiveness, but they are perfect in Crossover Prog. They certainly have the sophistication, experimentalism, and complexity to remain a crossover prog band, yet with the shorter song structure and pop influence that is outlined in the definition for crossover prog. Honestly, they can make a really complex song musically sound close to a typical brit-rock song, but it's not. The definite progressive influence is always there from OK Computer (well, maybe not every song) to today.
|
 <font color=white>butts, lol[/COLOR]
|
|
bhikkhu
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 06 2006
Location: AČ Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 5109
|
Posted: September 21 2007 at 00:42 |
|
But what are the other sub-genres they are crossing into? Do they do Symphonic, Folk, Metal, Neo, or even Italian? Seems to me that (if they must be in a true prog genre) they should be where other ambient, or electronic artists are. Anything else they have done has been universally agreed upon as not prog.
|
|
|
|
Raff
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24392
|
Posted: September 21 2007 at 01:07 |
Perhaps you should bring the issue to the attention of the Crossover team. For what I can tell you, Micky believes they are prog, and he's not going to move them anywhere else for the time being. You see, as I have tried to point out time and again (to very little success, I have to say...  ), the notion of what is prog and what isn't is highly subjective. I know many forum members disagree with Radiohead being considered 100% prog - however, there are about as many who think they are. This is one of the reasons why we have genre teams. It's quite obvious they can't make everybody happy about their choices, but this is one of the limits of classification in the arts.
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: September 21 2007 at 05:25 |
I'd like to mull this over at some later date after I've sat down and played all the RH CD's I own in sequence (to me honest it's a while since I last played The Bends, Kid A & OK Computer, though Pablo Honey, Amnesiac & Hail to the Theif get regular spins depending upon my mood). It will be intersting to see what next years album will be like.
I haven't discussed with Micky stuff we'd like to kick out of xover, we are concentrating on bands to add or transfer in at the moement - I think we'll need a to-do list.  |
|
What?
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: September 21 2007 at 05:26 |
 Ghost Rider wrote:
Perhaps you should bring the issue to the attention
of the Crossover team. For what I can tell you, Micky believes they are
prog, and he's not going to move them anywhere else
|
well said..
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: September 21 2007 at 05:30 |
darqdean wrote:
I'd like to mull this over at some later date after
I've sat down and played all the RH CD's I own in sequence (to me
honest it's a while since I last played The Bends, Kid A & OK
Computer, though Pablo Honey, Amnesiac & Hail to the Theif get
regular spins depending upon my mood). It will be intersting to
see what next years album will be like.
I haven't discussed with Micky stuff we'd like to kick out of
xover, we are concentrating on bands to add or transfer in at the
moement - I think we'll need a to-do list. |
 that we will
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
sircosick
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 29 2007
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 1264
|
Posted: September 23 2007 at 22:53 |
I think I need to take a pair of looks more to the respective definitions then......... 
|
|
The best you can is good enough...
|
|
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator
Prog Folk
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 19706
|
Posted: September 24 2007 at 11:50 |
I've no problem with Radiohead in crossover!!
|
|
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
|
|
P.H.P.
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 01 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 334
|
Posted: September 24 2007 at 12:17 |
Hm, I think bands that could represent a doubt or not complete agreement through prog fans like this band, Radiohead, could be placed in "prog related", just like sircosick said, and note that he's not against Radiohead, he told me he likes them very much, though he doesn't consider them to be really Prog.  I don't honestly think they're really Prog, because when they started no one thought they could be in any case related to Prog, what really happened is that lately this band appealed to some, just some, Prog fans, and then this band entered here as just a consideration in Prog music, and I think Radiohead's music can't really afford more than that, just a consideration, IMO.
|
|
sircosick
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 29 2007
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 1264
|
Posted: September 24 2007 at 18:00 |
P.H.P. wrote:
Hm, I think bands that could represent a doubt or not complete agreement through prog fans like this band, Radiohead, could be placed in "prog related", just like sircosick said, and note that he's not against Radiohead, he told me he likes them very much, though he doesn't consider them to be really Prog.
I don't honestly think they're really Prog, because when they started no one thought they could be in any case related to Prog, what really happened is that lately this band appealed to some, just some, Prog fans, and then this band entered here as just a consideration in Prog music, and I think Radiohead's music can't really afford more than that, just a consideration, IMO.
|
You just spot an important thing, which is also remarked in your post: the case of Radiohead, they only deserve a consideration in progressive music; they took inspirations from a lot of prog sub-genres to create their own style (and not even in all their stuff), which flirts with prog all the time but never being 100% prog or prog enough to call 'em crossover or eclectic or whatever..... Their alternative roots prevent those kind of labels IMO.
|
|
The best you can is good enough...
|
|
Shakespeare
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 18 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 7744
|
Posted: September 24 2007 at 19:52 |
|
I think Radiohead is just as proggy as Sigur Ros. In fact, Radiohead would not be misplaced in the Experimental subgenre. But Crossover is quite perfect for Radiohead, if you ask me.
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 20667
|
Posted: September 25 2007 at 02:39 |
|
Frankly I don't see how the introduction of the category "Crossover Prog" could affect the prog status of bands like Radiohead. They were not moved to prog related before this new category, so why should the situation be different now?
|
|
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: September 25 2007 at 03:39 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Frankly I don't see how the introduction of the category "Crossover Prog" could affect the prog status of bands like Radiohead. They were not moved to prog related before this new category, so why should the situation be different now? |
|
|
What?
|
|
bhikkhu
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 06 2006
Location: AČ Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 5109
|
Posted: September 25 2007 at 11:07 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Frankly I don't see how the introduction of the category "Crossover Prog" could affect the prog status of bands like Radiohead. They were not moved to prog related before this new category, so why should the situation be different now?
|
That is a good point, but I am still curious as to why people think crossover is the best place for them. The ones that people consider to be the Radiohead prog albums seem to be experimental or electronic.
|
|
|
|
Raff
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24392
|
Posted: September 25 2007 at 11:19 |
bhikkhu wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Frankly I don't see how the introduction of the category "Crossover Prog" could affect the prog status of bands like Radiohead. They were not moved to prog related before this new category, so why should the situation be different now?
|
That is a good point, but I am still curious as to why people think crossover is the best place for them. The ones that people consider to be the Radiohead prog albums seem to be experimental or electronic. |
I am afraid Xover is on its way to being considered the site's 'dumping ground', much as Art Rock was before we took matters into our hands. Micky and Dean are worried about that, but aren't letting people think that Xover is a surrogate for Prog-Related. Since Radiohead are a band that have enjoyed considerable commercial success (i.e. not fully prog, according to some), many see it as no more than related to our beloved genre. I can't claim to know them very well, but I've heard both OK Computer and Kid A, and the latter is definitely prog, though not really my cup of tea.
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 20667
|
Posted: September 25 2007 at 11:26 |
^ there is an obvious contradiction in the definition of Crossover Prog ... on one hand it says that the music contains considerable mainstream influences, on the other hand it says that it's 100% prog. Perhaps it would be better to say that these bands are considered to be fully fledged prog bands "despite of" these mainstream influences. Obviously for prog purists those bands aren't prog no matter how we change the definition of the genre ... but that shouldn't bother us.
|
|
|
|
Raff
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24392
|
Posted: September 25 2007 at 12:50 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
^ there is an obvious contradiction in the definition of Crossover Prog ... on one hand it says that the music contains considerable mainstream influences, on the other hand it says that it's 100% prog. Perhaps it would be better to say that these bands are considered to be fully fledged prog bands "despite of" these mainstream influences. Obviously for prog purists those bands aren't prog no matter how we change the definition of the genre ... but that shouldn't bother us.
|
Perhaps you should pass your suggestion to the Xover team, so that they can edit their definition. I do agree with you that our genre definitions should be as clear as possible, in order to avoid misunderstandings.
|
|
bhikkhu
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 06 2006
Location: AČ Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 5109
|
Posted: September 25 2007 at 12:56 |
Ghost Rider wrote:
bhikkhu wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Frankly I don't see how the introduction of the category "Crossover Prog" could affect the prog status of bands like Radiohead. They were not moved to prog related before this new category, so why should the situation be different now?
|
That is a good point, but I am still curious as to why people think crossover is the best place for them. The ones that people consider to be the Radiohead prog albums seem to be experimental or electronic. |
I am afraid Xover is on its way to being considered the site's 'dumping ground', much as Art Rock was before we took matters into our hands. Micky and Dean are worried about that, but aren't letting people think that Xover is a surrogate for Prog-Related. Since Radiohead are a band that have enjoyed considerable commercial success (i.e. not fully prog, according to some), many see it as no more than related to our beloved genre. I can't claim to know them very well, but I've heard both OK Computer and Kid A, and the latter is definitely prog, though not really my cup of tea. |
Yes, and those are the albums that people site as their prog ones. They aren't really mainstream, but more ambient/electronic. This is why I keep asking if Radiohead might be better suited for one of those subs, rather than crossover.
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 20667
|
Posted: September 25 2007 at 13:28 |
^ Kid A might qualify as Ambient/Electronic, but none of the other Radiohead albums ... OK Computer is not really electronic for example - It would fit nicely though in a category "New/Alternative Prog", which doesn't yet exist ... 
|
|
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
A change of location needed?
