Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Suggest New Bands and Artists
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Sweet  Prog-related?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedSweet Prog-related?

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
krimson62 View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie


Joined: April 18 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 95
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Sweet Prog-related?
    Posted: April 21 2008 at 21:23
Recently i have gone back to listen to some old vinyls had forgotten about , and i came apon Sweet's "Give us a wink" album and i was truly surprised at the level of prog elements in some of their songs such as "Healer", "Yesterday's rain",4th of July" Not to mention one of  their  best known hit (beside "Ballroom blitz" which is not prog at all)" Love is like oxygen"  which are both on different albums. If The Who are Prog-related in PA, i think Sweet could also get a nod, don't you think? 
Back to Top
tuxon View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 21 2004
Location: plugged-in
Status: Offline
Points: 5502
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 21 2008 at 21:49
The Sweet are in a way prog related, but IMO only because the entire genre of glam-rock is basically based upon symphonic rock combined with early metal, check out Queen, and T-Rex, consider Mud, David Bowie etc. it's all rock structures expanded with outside (mostly symphonic stuff) elements. Bowie and Queen are within the boundary's because they have an uniqueness that permeates the nature of prog, while the Sweet, mud, T-Rex etc. doesn't
But the Sweet aren't progressive, theyre just a great band doing what they do best, and that's making great standard rock songs, incorporating than current styles and elements, which include progressive, but that doesn't make them progressive IMO, Love Is Like Oxygen is a song that can easily be considered prog, if we really want to, but we don't want to, so there it goes.
 
But for progressive rock fans I guess the Sweet is a good band to listen to, I know I enjoy them a lot.
I'm always almost unlucky _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Id5ZcnjXSZaSMFMC Id5LM2q2jfqz3YxT
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Online
Points: 64354
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 21 2008 at 21:59
 ^ well said
Back to Top
Certif1ed View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 22 2008 at 08:55
There was an underlying progressiveness in the Sweet's output that culminated with "Love is LIke Oxygen" - the songwriting grew stronger and more adventurous from album to album - and you can hear their influence in just about every metal band since 1976, after they released "Give us a Wink" - which is easily their heaviest album. The outfits they wore were often dark and featured chains at this time.
 
Their influence on metal as a genre is clear, but Prog they most definitely were not, IMHO - the songs show little sign of spontaneity as a rule; "Action" and "Hellraiser" have interesting moments, and "Healer" is long - but ultimately they're just songs, not Prog compositions.
 
Superb band, though.


Edited by Certif1ed - April 22 2008 at 08:58
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
Back to Top
salmacis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member

Content Addition

Joined: April 10 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 3928
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 22 2008 at 09:39
I think the albums, whilst I felt they were patchy, showed that they tended to really dislike the glam-pop material they did on the singles as hardly any of them appeared on the albums, save a few exceptions like 'The Six Teens' and 'Love Is Like Oxygen' and that grab-bag first one they put out for RCA which had those songs like 'Co Co' on it. That cover they did of 'Man With The Golden Arm' and a track called 'Medusa' are the most progressive sounding tracks on the albums I heard but there's no way their inclusion could ever be justified IMHO!
 
The problem they had was the massive schism between 'serious' rock and pop at that time- apart from maybe Queen, David Bowie or Roxy Music, few straddled that divide back then IMHO. Some of the singles are still enjoyable, fun numbers though- I particularly like 'Fox On The Run' and that deliciously daft Top Of The Pops performance of 'Blockbuster' with the bass player Steve Priest camping it right up.
 
 
Back to Top
Easy Livin View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 22 2008 at 11:10
There's no dount that their B-sides and album tracks belied their glam image. That said, I don't find much in the way of prog, even in their later albums.
Back to Top
akin View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 06 2004
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 976
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 29 2008 at 16:43
If think Sweet lays in the same category of thousands of 70's artists that sometimes did some technically demanding songs, some complex compositions and some unusual musical arrangements. But it was a reflex of the age and that is why rock was so good in the seventies. Apart from prog rock, hard rock, heavy metal, country-rock, glam rock, soft rock, folk rock and all the other genres of rock had their shining jewels in the seventies.
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: April 30 2008 at 00:11
Originally posted by akin akin wrote:

If think Sweet lays in the same category of thousands of 70's artists that sometimes did some technically demanding songs, some complex compositions and some unusual musical arrangements. But it was a reflex of the age and that is why rock was so good in the seventies. Apart from prog rock, hard rock, heavy metal, country-rock, glam rock, soft rock, folk rock and all the other genres of rock had their shining jewels in the seventies.
 

You got it Akin, if we compare mainstream of the late 60's and 70's, we’ll find a lot of great bands, something that doesn't happen today due to the short term recovery of investment of the labels and how easy you can turn into a star with one hit (with video) just looking good and having a barely decent voice.

 

On those days in any genre you performed, you had to be really good, because many around you were as good or even better than you were.

 

Music was more important than personal looks in a time where very rare bands had a video or their concerts recorded, so you had to base your popularity in how you sounded rather than in how you looked.

 

I remember that some people called Pink Floyd "The band with no face" because they were not superstars individually; everybody had listened their albums but only real fans knew them, for God's sake, their most popular albums didn't even had photos of them.

 

Nobody knew Alan Parsons, hardly any person could identify Jethro Tull members (except Ian) or even Genesis before the Pop boom, look at the photos of the 5 men Genesis, Steve with his beard and dark rimmed glasses, Toby hiding from the crowd as Mike, people mostly knew Peter and Phil, all except Peter dressing as college kids, so they had to rely in how you sounded.

 

And you had at least one band that made you a competition, Deep Purple had Uriah Heep, The Who, had at least 20 bands almost as good as them.

 

It was a different time and a different reality.

 

Iván

            
Back to Top
debrewguy View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 30 2007
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3596
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2008 at 11:50
Ah, c'mon Ivan. There are as many good bands today as there was in the 70s. Give it 20-30 years & I'm sure some music fanatics will start their current day equivalent of PA and have no problem finding 1500 plus bands to fit their ever-expandable chosen genre with a never ending explosion of subsequent sub-genres.
The only difference will be that 70s bands were reliant on record labels, where today the artist has more freedom to get his music directly to the people. True , the million selling albums will be much rarer, but remember that the only "home entertainment" that competed with music in those "Happy Days" was the TV. Atari & Intellivision came out in the early 80s. VHS & Beta came mid 80s. From then on the consumer's dollar was starting to get split, but the booming economy made all expand in a big way.
The 80s, then the 90s with their respective massive trends (new wave, metal's comeback, pop/dance, hair metal, MTV, Grunge, Punk, pop Punk, Boy Bands etc...) provided record companies with a massive & steady stream of hot new fads that fed record sales as if they were steroids. Then Napster happened, the music fan saw a way to give the finger to the record companies that were pushing $20 hit albums comprised of one big single that you liked & 60 minutes of crap or filler. The major labels stuck their heads up their asses, refusing to even contemplate any change to what had been a gold mine of a business model. And the irony is that Napster offered them all licensing options. But no, they knew better (as said the dinosaur as he saw the comet streaking through the sky And here we are almost a decade after the implosion, and the P2P scene is still blamed for the precipitous fall of CD sales. Yet, no one of those music industry money hogs will ever mention, not to say acknowledge that the consumer's entertainment dollar has many available options open to it - Video games, Computer & Internet, Ipods, Cable and pay per view TV. Heck how come DVDs still sell well ? Because they've done everything they could to make the product of interest to its' potential buyers - extras, bonus materials, alternative cuts, outtakes, and most of all, they didn't wait 10 years to sell them at reasonable prices.
So look around at the many prog bands that have come out in these past 10 years & wonder how many you & I have yet to hear about, then figure if in 2020 we'll be back at PA debating as to whether prog is in as good shape as it was in the 00s.
Example - how many then obscure RPI, Prog Andaluz, Krautrock, RIO, Prog Folk bands are here ? I used to read quite a bit of music media back in the 70s. And a lot of the groups found here were not exactly filling up music mags. Just as many of today's acts pass under the radar of even the most diverse music fan.

P.S. this is in noway meant to support, condone or defend illegal downloads; merely to offer my insight as to why things happened as they did.
P.P.S. And while may of the groups today don't interest me, they may later. Who Knows. ALthough I could do without the "Post-XXXX" appellation that seems to try to indicate that the music more serious than what came before ...????


"Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case.
Back to Top
NotAProghead View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Errors & Omissions Team

Joined: October 22 2005
Location: Russia
Status: Offline
Points: 7678
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2008 at 19:09
It seems we'll come soon to the conclusion that everything is either prog or at least prog related.
Who are you and who am I to say we know the reason why... (D. Gilmour)
Back to Top
The Quiet One View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 30 2008 at 20:26
...Ha like that about Deep Purple VS Uriah Heep, would have been fun living in those years, really fun and exciting to go to concerts of my fave bands.



Edited by cacho - April 30 2008 at 20:26
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: April 30 2008 at 20:42
Originally posted by debrewguy debrewguy wrote:

Ah, c'mon Ivan. There are as many good bands today as there was in the 70s. Give it 20-30 years & I'm sure some music fanatics will start their current day equivalent of PA and have no problem finding 1500 plus bands to fit their ever-expandable chosen genre with a never ending explosion of subsequent sub-genres.
 
Not so sure DB, if that was truth:
 
  1. Rolling Stones
  2. The Who (with two original members)
  3. The Doors (with 2 original members)
  4. Yes
  5. Kansas
  6. STYX
  7. Genesis
  8. King Crison
  9. Uriah Heep (with one original member)
  10. Deep Purple

And hundreds of 60's or late 70's bans would had retired long ago. They still play, because no replacements can be found for them.

I'm ALMOST sure that the number of 80's and 90's bands still on tour and/or releasing albums is inferior, despíte being younger.
 
Iván
            
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.230 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.