Uriah Heep

Great rock/metal band - but prog???

Not really.

Maybe "July Morning" is a prog track - but "The Magician's Birthday" definitely isn't!!! It's pure Spinal Tap - classic stuff, but not prog.

Heep wrote some blinding tunes with superb, even definitive rock arrangements with classy touches, like the keyboards and the "Heep choir". But Queen, who adapted the "choir" to the next few levels were more progressive by far - particularly through their 1970's output - and you won't see them in the archives anytime soon

So if they're not really prog, they can't be the greatest prog band in history.

But they ARE the best band in history at what they did!

UH Rock!!!

I saw them at least six times once with Atomic Rooster as support;Carl Palmer and all

Fragile wrote: Certified - agree 100% about The Heep.Not so sure about Queen I have friends who are fanatical about them but would never consider listening to anything prog.What of theirs do you consider Prog?

The main 3 problems with considering Queen as a prog band are;

1) That they also fitted other categories.

On more than one level, playing delibratly different musical styles on different albums (R&R, R&B, Classic Rock, Symphonic Rock, Disco etc.) but always maintaining a clear rock sound, that was a style on it's own

2) They went very strongly into a commerical direction - even the early material had commerical angle ("We are musical prostitutes, dear boy" - Freddie RIP).

Commercialising is not a bad word, when done without selling-out, just to sell out, they made the best possible rock within a fairly commercialised genre

3) They were strongly "No Synths".

Not entirely true, they had no need for synthesisers, since Brian May was able to play (with overdubs echo, and his ability to make his guitar sound like an orchestra) the needed effects. They mentioned the "nobody played synthesiser" to make sure people would understand that it was all guitar they heard.

BUT

The first two albums are, to my ears, more full-blown prog than many bands in the archives, and the same goes for "A Night At The Opera". There is hardly an album of Queen's that does not have some progressive aspects in a real prog sense, as opposed to a Led Zep or Deep Purple sense of progressive.

I agree on that entirely

Queen, despite the overt and intentional sell-out, never stopped being true to their sound and a really creative approach to writing rock music.

So true, one of the reasons I like their 80's work, despite their moving with the trends they maintained their distinctive easily recognisable sound, and high quality of composing, I recognise a Queen composition (even if I don't know the song, which happened on a movie soundtrack once) within the first second

Many balk at considering them prog - but I think they're just scared to admit it. Mercury's piano playing was light-years ahead of almost every prog band in the archives, and his voice was genuinely operatic - none of the quasi-operatic nonsense you keep hearing. May's guitar is superlative, and between the two, they wrote some magnificent works of art (as well as some insanely catchy pop rock).

Don't agree on the first part of that statement, Mercury was a capable pianist, but not overly brilliant on it, that's why on Man On The Prowl, and the Barcelona album Mike Moran plays the piano.
His voice indeed is the best I know of, and the combination Freddie's piano play, his vocals and Brian's guitar made a perfect mix (listen for excample to the live versions of Spread Your Wings and Don't Stop Me Now on Killers)

I guess the problem with accepting them as prog, apart from the commercial thing, is that Deacon was only ever solid as a bass player, so there was a prog element missing there, and their overall approach was more of a glam rock band early on in their career.

I think Deacon is one of the best bass players, not a show man like Squire, and hardly any solo's, but he made some really fancy bass-lines (again Spread Your Wings, You're My Best Friend, Tie you Mother Down etc. etc. etc.) I would agree on Taylor not being the best drummer, but he keeps it simple, and the songs benefit from that approach.

But so what?

Prog is about diversity, for a very large part, and Queen's back catalogue is probably more diverse than, say, Marillion's. And it takes a lot for a devout Marillion fan such as myself to say that.

How diverse can one get, Queen I, Queen II, News Of The World, The Game, Hot Space, The Works, Innuendo

Prog is also about a unique sound that completely identifies the band, to a smaller degree. No-one could mistake Queen's sound.

totally recognisable

Prog is also about complexity.

I present "Queen", "Queen II" and "A Night At The Opera" as exhibits A, B and C, yer honour...

dare I add Hot Space to that