Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: August 16 2010 at 20:41
harmonium.ro wrote:
rogerthat wrote:
harmonium.ro wrote:
I simply responded to your derogatory remarks about Stevie Wonder's suggestion.
They are nevertheless not very different from the outcry at the very suggestion at his name, often accompanied by emoticons like .
That has nothing to do with band evaluations. Lots of band were added despite of tons of
I should hope so. Or maybe the reason is what Textbook gave, but that's not a very convincing one either. One argument that was forwarded against Stevie, though not specifically attributed as the reason, by a Collab/Admin was that prog rock is about ROCK ultimately. Well, then, how is Tori Amos more rock than All Day Sucker? Speaking of seriousness, Visions is as serious as any Tori Amos song.
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: August 16 2010 at 20:26
Logan wrote:
If she were quirkier, I'd be more accepting.
Quirkiness is not a criterion at all, Tori is quirkier than Strawbs that way.
Laurie isn't conventional rock. If being conventional "rock' is all that counts then there are a lot of artists who should be tossed out.
Yes. Actually, Tori is not rock, at least not the first four albums, unless we use a very liberal definition. I wonder why Stevie Wonder was rejected now. Maybe, it's a necessary precondition that a pop artist should have a lot of cool quotient riding on him and not be mega-popular? Or, the Motown label is so abhorrent?
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: @ wicker man
Status: Offline
Points: 32691
Posted: August 16 2010 at 16:58
^ Edit, you said it so much better, not conventional rock (hadn't read you response when I wrote the following paragraphs). And in a way, I see progressive rock as a progression away from rock (moving farther from the rock lexicon, and we have embraced much music at PA that people would not generally consider rock -- but I can stile place it in the greater rock universe). Prog should be, I think, in large part about getting away from conventions.
I know this is a progressive rock site, but rock is not really essential (can be rock-related, even in a fairly loose manner). I think Laurie Anderson has music that can be compared to Krautrock artists, and has similarities to music in Electronic. I think Crossover would suit her well for her art pop approach. Anyway, to my ears, she has music that comes closse enough to rock universe to me.
Just posting a couple of ones I like from different albums for those that don't know her (Big Science, in particular, was a favourite album of mine in the 80s, and it still speaks to me).
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29625
Posted: August 16 2010 at 16:57
Laurie isn't conventional rock. If being conventional "rock' is all that counts then there are a lot of artists who should be tossed out. What makes prog great is the music that doesn't fit neatly in the box.
Edited by Slartibartfast - August 16 2010 at 16:58
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
Special Collaborator
RIO/Avant/Zeuhl,Neo & Post/Math Teams
Joined: October 31 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 13358
Posted: August 16 2010 at 16:45
Laurie Anderson and Carla Bley. They should have a dedicated sub-genre. The problem is with "rock". I never heard anything of Laurie Anderson that can be called Rock. A bit more with Carla Bley.
Curiosity killed a cat, Schroedinger only half. My poor home recorded stuff at https://yellingxoanon.bandcamp.com
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: @ wicker man
Status: Offline
Points: 32691
Posted: August 16 2010 at 16:41
Slartibartfast wrote:
stonebeard wrote:
Textbook wrote:
She's a more comfortable fit than Nine Inch Nails and they got in before her.
Please tell me you're lying.
I know them both well and I would have put Tori in before NIN. Though they are both on the fringe of prog, I think they are both worthy inclusions. Controversiality was to be expected with both of them. So, if you like them and/or know the music, review, if you don't, ignore.
I so wish you guys would approve Laurie Anderson (to my ears, she has a much stronger case). I looked into Tori Amos music before (maybe not enough, but I followed song suggestions of those who wanted her in) and I was left under-impressed for PA inclusion. If she were quirkier, I'd be more accepting. Speaking of female artists, I would have sooner seen Bjork in. I'm not saying the team got it wrong, of course, just that my impressions based on limited listening left me thinking that she was no more than Related at best.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.191 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
tori amos
Topic Options
Chris S wrote:
. 
Maybe, it's a necessary precondition that a pop artist should have a lot of cool quotient riding on him and not be mega-popular? Or, the Motown label is so abhorrent? 
