Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Proto-Prog and Prog-Related Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Queen as progressive band?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedQueen as progressive band?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 8>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
prog4evr View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 22 2005
Location: Wuhan, China
Status: Offline
Points: 1455 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 08 2011 at 22:07
Originally posted by pool2000 pool2000 wrote:

... i would put queen in the 70's as a rock band, the first 2 albums maybe prog but the game onwards more of a pop/rock band...
Agreed - good analysis...
Back to Top
akaBona View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 15 2010
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 2082 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2011 at 03:07
just an average rock band ... prog rock status makes me Big smile
Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26108 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2011 at 14:06
Originally posted by akaBona akaBona wrote:

just an average rock band ... prog rock status makes me Big smile
yep there was nothing remotely 'average' about Queen ,prog or not prog. They had the ability to be anything. Perhaps like a lot of seventies bands they just went with the pop flow at the end of that decade but even then they were exceptional and no one release was like another.
Back to Top
Battlepriest View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie


Joined: August 31 2009
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 40 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2011 at 15:41
By my take, they are as much a prog band as Uriah Heep or Atomic Rooster (both of whom I consider to be prog, but barely so). They're a whole league more prog rock than Tori Amos, Nine Inch Nails or Robert Plant. I think the root of the classification problems is the concept of "100% progressive". Few albums, and fewer albums live up to that extreme standard.
Back to Top
Horizons View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: January 20 2011
Location: Somewhere Else
Status: Offline
Points: 16952 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2011 at 16:28
Originally posted by topographicbroadways topographicbroadways wrote:

Just because a band is original and talented doesn't immediately make the Prog Rock. They were progressive yes. I guess they can be prog related (they already are aren't they?). But cmon. They were a great rock band. That's it
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 16145 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 09 2011 at 16:38
Hi,
 
When you go back and listen to it today, you can see how good they were, and ... fairly distinctive, though not necessarily original. When the first album came out, the radio blurb sent around was trying to compare them to Led Zeppelin, which they were not ... they never got into "blues" per se, or "rock'n'roll" as it were ... they were about themselves and their work, and that is something that as time goes by, you can appreciate more and more and more ... there aren't that many "distinctive" bands out there ... right or wrong ... and Queen did stand out and it would not have done so if it were simply Freddie Mercury ... the whole band was involved and very active in their work.
 
And it shows! And for goodness sakes, they were not as pretentious as some bands are telling you they play "progressive" music! You don't need to be pretentious when you are GOOD!
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26108 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 03:20
^ good comments
Back to Top
wjohnd View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 16 2011
Location: Scotland, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 327 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 03:28

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

I think that any album which includes their hits is a great album. Unfortunately, for me, I found that every single album they did also contained some atrocious rubbish.

yup...total agreement with you on that.
Back to Top
Icarium View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34050 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 03:34
this band is some ways similar to Queen with blending glam rock, folk rock, hard rock and sometimes lenghty songs does that make Mott the Hoople prog then





several songs longer then the longest queen song and to me unmistacenle variant of heavy prog, but also with originality

this song is also proto progish




Edited by aginor - September 10 2011 at 03:54
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 04:43
I see no issue in calling Queen PR if Tori is crossover. Tongue  The problem might simply be that Queen was and is already very well known as one of the top hard rock acts of the 70s and reclassifying them for the sake of this website seems superfluous.  As for being progressive, I think Sparks should get some of the credit that is generally reserved for Queen because they did this whole glam rock with faux-operatic vocals thing, AND anticipated New Wave, AND did it a whole lot more effectively than Queen.  As much as I like Queen, most of their memorable tracks are pastiches.
Back to Top
Gerinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5091 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 05:45
They did rock in a way which had never been done before, May's overdubs, orchestrations, the way he managed to mimic a whole lot of other instruments with his guitar, together with Mercury's melodical sensitivity made their rock unique. They were innovative and that's enough for me to qualify even if they did not do the standard prog of the time.
 
And although Deacon and Taylor provided strong contributions they contributed to the more pop-rock feel, had they had a proggier bassist and drummer and a proper keyboardist things might have been different, although the leading personalities were May and Mercury so probably not much.
 
Prog rock is frequently defined as rock which incorporates elements from other styles such as classical or jazz. In the case of Queen those other styles were cabaret music, big band music, lullabies or whatever, and ok their songs were not very long and they did not frequently change time signatures within the same song, so what? they just had their own approach to making innovative rock.
 
Nowadays some have no problem calling Opeth prog, by the same token I have no problem considering Queen progressive rock, at least until A Night At The Opera.
 


Edited by Gerinski - September 10 2011 at 05:46
Back to Top
Icarium View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34050 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 05:49
10cc is also prog 
Back to Top
irrelevant View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 07 2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 13382 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 06:28
Originally posted by aginor aginor wrote:

10cc is also prog 
New album!
http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385
Back to Top
harmonium.ro View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 18 2008
Location: Anna Calvi
Status: Offline
Points: 22989 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 07:20
Queen on RateYourMusic:

Pop/Rock, Hard Rock, Rock, Glam Rock, Pop, Soundtracks, Disco, Film Score, Art Rock, Film Soundtrack, Progressive Rock, Symphonic Rock, Synth Pop, Funk Rock, Piano Rock, Christmas Music, Rock Opera

I'd say that's fair.
Back to Top
ExittheLemming View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Penal Colony
Status: Offline
Points: 11415 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 07:49
^ They could conceivably come up with a genre description for every rock song ever written but it wouldn't make Queen any more Progressive Rock than eclectic.

BTW I love Queen but don't feel the need to qualify their credentials of excellence as being 'Prog' to legitimise their worth
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29625 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 07:55
Queen never, you know, really rocked me. Tongue
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
Back to Top
harmonium.ro View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 18 2008
Location: Anna Calvi
Status: Offline
Points: 22989 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 07:58
Originally posted by ExittheLemming ExittheLemming wrote:

^ They could conceivably come up with a genre description for every rock song ever written but it wouldn't make Queen any more Progressive Rock than eclectic.



I don't understand, you say that RYM is trying to sell Queen as a Progressive Rock act? Because I don't see that at all.
Back to Top
ExittheLemming View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Penal Colony
Status: Offline
Points: 11415 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 08:03
^ No. I inferred from your post that you consider such a wide diversity of classifications of their music from 3rd parties as conclusive evidence of Queen being unadulterated 'Progressive Rock'

It's not the first time I've misunderstood you is it? Embarrassed
Back to Top
harmonium.ro View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 18 2008
Location: Anna Calvi
Status: Offline
Points: 22989 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 08:13
LOL  Hug
Back to Top
lucas View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 06 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 8138 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 10 2011 at 10:50

I really don't care how you label them, they were an astonishing band, one of the best ever. They were sort of an operatic rock band evolving with their time. And if some people tell they lost their "bite" after the game, they should listen to songs like "innuendo", "is this the world we created", "tear it up", "gimme the prize", "who wants to live forever", "was it all worth it", "scandal", "I can't live with you", "don't try so hard", "the hitman", "the show must go on". They all showcase some tremendous musicianship and exceptional vocals, of course.
"Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood)
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 8>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.219 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.