Are you Experienced? Jimi Hendrix
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Suggest New Bands and Artists
Forum Description: Suggest, create polls, and classify new bands you would like included on Prog Archives
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40215
Printed Date: April 19 2024 at 00:03
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Are you Experienced? Jimi Hendrix
Posted By: sheeves
Subject: Are you Experienced? Jimi Hendrix
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 15:34
|
I definitely think they belong here in either proto-prog or psychedelic rock. I want to hear your opinions on this matter |
Replies:
Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 15:36
|
No, they would not fit under the proto-prog definitions or the prog-related. Hendrix is not prog nor will he ever be. He is a blues rock musician. Not a prog musician. He influenced too many people to show him directly influencing prog. This was discussed a while back (it was more than 6 months ago - I think) |
Posted By: Dim
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 15:37
|
Absolutely not! ------------- 
|
Posted By: sheeves
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 15:38
o i did not know that because i didn't really frequent this site then |
progismylife wrote:Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 15:49
|
No. Have respect for other genres. Psychedelic bands like The Grateful Dead and Hendrix are not, and never were prog. I already take issue with the Doors and the Who being here. The late 60s was a messed up time and everybody influenced everybody else. Not everybody needs to be here.
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 15:57
|
No. But this is just a personal opinion ... the objective criteria to tell non-prog psychedelic apart from prog psychedelic still elude me.
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to: 
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 16:04
|
Oh for crying out loud...
------------- 
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 16:18
^ how should sheeves know about the fact that JH has been discussed several times already? ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: meinmatrix
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 17:00
Jimi plays blues.  ------------- 
|
Posted By: andu
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 17:07
|
Experience's third album was definitely progressive, at least in a more literal meaning of the word. The site should acknowledge this contribution somehow, maybe an essay on the documents page should do justice. ------------- "PA's own GI Joe!" 
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 17:11
Like nobody played it before ...  ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: febus
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 17:18
|
I think very soon the owners of this site will have to decide if they stay prog or go all the way cover all the rock field.
Jefferson Airplane, BS & T, DOORS, the Who, Led Zep and other bands never mentioned before in a prog conversation have been added to this site and i think the thin line separating the 2 genres is becoming very blurry now.
If you have Jefferson airplane, why not Grateful Dead, Quicksilver messenger service, Moby Grape or other rock-stoned californian bands?
Blood Sweat & tears? why not Chicago, Malo or Al Kooper solo?
The moment of truth will come soon.
 |
Posted By: Ghandi 2
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 17:25
| No! Stop the madness! |
Posted By: queenlerxst
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 17:27
I recently traded in my Hendrix albums for some prog ones.... ------------- 
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 17:30
hahhaha a big hell no from me... for reasons that have been explained numerous times every time this subject comes up when a group is added that someone doesn't agree with.  ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Hirgwath
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 17:36
|
Jimi Hendrix did tour with Pink Floyd, which lends him some credibility. However...if Jimi Hendrix was included, then that could open the flood gates for all of the random (great) guitarists in the world (Eric Clapton, Jeff Beck, etc.). And Hendrix is more bluesy than nearly any progressive rock is (it's already been established that he plays *the blues*, and of course we can't forget he was making forays into funk), and his lyrics are not very progressive either. The "Jimi Henrix Question" is a confusing one. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 17:42
|
Jeff''s already here - Clapton is the only ex-Yardbird not to have made it into the PA, but that still does not mean that Hendrix should be included. ------------- What? |
Posted By: ProgBagel
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 18:00
|
No, hell no. He is a classic rock guitarist, a blues player. He is great, not prog. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 18:04
what's confusing about HELL NO!!! btw...have you listened to Jeff Beck? Of course he is great... but not random at all... he was a good inclusion here. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Philéas
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 18:09
Seconded. |
Posted By: Shakespeare
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 19:18
I think 'nor will he ever be' is unneeded in this case. .. (because he's dead) |
Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 19:23
That is what I was getting at. |
Posted By: Dim
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 20:17
Stevie ray vaughn is probably 80 times better though...
I would rather see stevie hear then Jimi  -------------
|
Posted By: sheeves
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 22:32
Thank you for defending me Mike anyways, i did not know there was such a thing as progressive psychdelic I saw the psychedelic section, and thought, Jimi Hendrix is psychedelic, so why isn't he in the psychedelic section anyways, I am confused i guess by certain additions also, to the people saying he plays blues, so does procol harum |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 22:58
| even Jimi's most 'progressive' work on Axis and Ladyland was still acid/blues... No |
Posted By: sheeves
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 23:05
the thing is, acid is part of psychedelia and psychedelic rock is in progarchives, i guess i don't know what prog is any more, and from now on i probably won't care and like i said, procol harum sounds more like pure blues to me than anything else |
Posted By: erik neuteboom
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 23:08
This site is named Prog Archives, an abbreviation of Progressive Archives so I would like to welcome The Jimi Hendrix Experience on this site. I am looking forward to review it among reviews about previous additions like Iron Maiden, Talk Talk, Osibisa, JM Jarre and Magnum, I think The Jimi Hendrix Experience their progressive ideas on Electric Ladyland will be superior in comparison with those aforementioned 'progressive' bands 
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 23:13
the psychedelic movement helped contribute to Prog, but Hendrix's small amount of progressive psych material didn't have the same impact on Prog as that of, say, Pink Floyd or Jefferson Airplane. I for one thought the Doors should never have been added to PA... |
Posted By: JesusisLord
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 23:55
|
This all started a while back with the inclusion of Queen, ( to this day, I cannot understand what they are doing in the Progarchives.) The floodgate had been opened and it was then noted that the progarchives would soon have to change it's name to the Rockarchives.It was that mistake that has led to this confusion. Does Hendrix belong? Well, if The Who, Led Zeppelin, The Doors, Jefferson Airplane etc. belong then so does Jimi! ------------- And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. Phillipians 2:11 |
Posted By: Dim
Date Posted: July 25 2007 at 00:35
Maiden is very progressive, they're guitar playing is very noodly, they show great amounts of technical talent and they're lyrics are much more sophisticated than the average metal bands. Besides, everyone in Maiden was actually an avid prog listener, except Dickonson.
Jimi, can only boast guitar playng which I dont consider very good. IMO -------------
|
Posted By: proghairfunk
Date Posted: July 25 2007 at 00:55
|
As much as I love Hendrix, I have to say no. I'd say he influenced the Proto prog bands more than the prog bands. So in a roundabout way yes? I think I'm just trying to stand up for him. So no. I guess...  |
Posted By: Eetu Pellonpaa
Date Posted: July 25 2007 at 01:56
|
I voted "Yes", though these polls don't have a fundamental effect for what is included in proto or related or not: Many of the bands added there had been voted "no" in previous polls.
Jimi is not prog, so he couldn't be in Psych prog genre, but in my opinion his playing style and musical ideas done with the Experience group (along with the live improvisations of Cream) set standards to the acid rock guitar playing style and expanded the psychedelic musical forms from the mid 60's rock towards more wider perspection, and he influenced many Psych prog and Krautrock musicians like Manuel Göttsching. There wouldn't be Ash Ra Tempel with out Hendrix!
Also blues style doesn't exclude anyone out from the proto prog section, nor even the propg section IMO: If you listen mid 70's Pink floysd songs, many of them are just slow blues songs with long synth chords and some effects played upon them (like Shine on You Crazy Diamond etc.). I don't think there are any musical reasons to not include him to proto prog, but as long as the proto and related artists are in a same zones, people wont be happy as non-prog artists are introduced there; I think it's seen like some XO Cognag would be mixed with Coca Cola.
Just my penny for the debate, thanks.
 |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 25 2007 at 02:47
So I guess you haven't heard Queen II yet? ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: NotSoKoolAid
Date Posted: July 25 2007 at 02:49
|
Jimi Hendrix was not a part of the progressive rock movement. Going beyond this he is progressive (in dictionary-sense) as someone mentioned earlier in this topic (thousands have), he played the blues like no other. I believe that's a truth, and therefore he took blues music in places it hadn't been before. Yes took classical music where it hadn't been before. Mahavishnu Orchestra took jazz where it hadn't been before. See the trend?
On the other hand, being the strict person I am I don't believe all these psychedelic "proto-prog"/"prog-related" groups (beatles, who, led zeppelin, jimi hendrix, etc) should actually be put on the same level as the prog-rock classics we have here, if they even have to be here at all. I'd prefer if they weren't, as much as I love these groups. The more you blur the lines between progressive and not progressive, the more the term progressive becomes meaningless to everything and everyone. Stop applying the word to everything, please. For God sakes save the term for when it actually applies.
|
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: July 25 2007 at 03:18
| I voted no. The only reason I could think for possibly justifying including him is that his style influenced just about every kid who picked up a guitar after 1970, but I don't think that you could claim that that influence was something particularly pertaining to prog. |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: July 25 2007 at 03:44
|
A number of the responses here say no because he isn't prog.
Let's take that as read, he died before prog was born. Did he influence prog though? Should be be added as Proto Prog.
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: July 25 2007 at 03:49
|
if anything, Prog influenced him. We know that he very much liked certain prog acts, even lesser ones such as Touch. But as you point out Bob, he died before he had a chance to explore this area. |
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: July 25 2007 at 04:06
"Prog Archives, the ultimate Prog Rock Archives" there was already a huge topic about this, mr. Erik.  And I don't see how Hendrix relates to Iron Maiden, Talk Talk, Osibisa, Jarre (?!) or Magnum (who, themselves, are between prog and non-prog). To tell you the truth, I feel that Hendrix has some progressive worth, whilst thinking of other very stretched and inconsistent great bands added under the same "suspicion" that they have influenced progressive rock. But I decided not to go by this way of thinking (that Hendrix deserves what X,Y,Z don't), because I actually criticize it. Therefore, I'm more thinking that Hendrix is a master of his blues and his psych, but never good for a prog or proto-prog influence. -------------
|
Posted By: Eetu Pellonpaa
Date Posted: July 25 2007 at 04:13
Touch are also a proto prog band, they released their album 1968. Before this album Jimi had already released "Are You Experenced" and "Axis: Bold as Love" records. I think they are very influental albums concidering the evaluation of Psychedelic prog and Krautrock. They didin't influence YES nor GENESIS though.
|
Posted By: mystic fred
Date Posted: August 02 2007 at 03:28
|
Hendrix definitely deserves to be included in PA - his influence on psyche and prog metal is inestimable - listen to Electric Ladyland, most cite this as a blues album but IMHO an essential blueprint for prog-metal (and Axis..).
-------------  Prog Archives Tour Van 
|
Posted By: mystic fred
Date Posted: August 02 2007 at 03:30
i don't think SRV himself would have even remotely agreed with that daft comment...
------------- Prog Archives Tour Van
|
Posted By: jimidom
Date Posted: August 02 2007 at 20:07
|
SRV is in no way 80 times better than Jimi! Secondly, Nine to the Universe is Jimi's most progressive album, then perhaps Electric Ladyland. Hendrix, although primarily a blues guitarist, started to evolve his sound into free-form jazz rock, like in the sessions which eventually became Nine to the Universe. Add to that the influence of prog bands like ELP, and it was evident that he was headed in that direction. Hendrix was even considering joining ELP (HELP) before he died. As for the question of whether or not Jimi belongs in the Prog Archives, I still voted no, but it's not because his music was not progressive enough. It certainly was, but he died before "prog Hendrix" could become a reality. It's yet another of those "what ifs" had he lived. |
Posted By: darksideof
Date Posted: August 02 2007 at 23:07
|
Love JIMI but he is records aren't prog so that means NO!!!!! ------------- http://darksideofcollages.blogspot.com/ http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/ https://www.facebook.com/pages/Darksideof-Collages/ |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 02 2007 at 23:14
|
reading the last couple of posts.... remember.... it is a NON prog category he is being considered for. The question isn't whether he was prog.... but rather if he significantly influenced the development of prog rock. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: August 03 2007 at 13:03
| Jimi signficantly influenced everybody. I don't think that you claim that any part of that influence was somehow more relevant to prog than anything else. Hence, I think he should be excluded. |
Posted By: Kaizer_O
Date Posted: August 13 2007 at 04:49
| 1983 was the closest thing to prog Jimi ever played imo, though that's not a song that a lot of people remember him by. I suspect he might have made full-blown prog, had he lived longer (he almost joined ELP, mind you). |
Posted By: oliverstoned
Date Posted: August 13 2007 at 05:16
| He deserves to be here of course. "Third stone from the sun" is a another prog piece (from "Are you experienced?"). |
Posted By: oliverstoned
Date Posted: August 13 2007 at 05:17
There are a lot of prog bands with a strong hendrixian influence, such as "Guru guru". |
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: September 13 2007 at 23:19
| A lot of you have a very shallow knowledge of what Hendrix was really about and about the amazing prog-rock songs he put out in addition to his more well known blues and pop-hard rock stuff. Hendrix along with Zappa, Fripp, Pink Floyd, Soft Machine, Procol Harum and the Beatles invented prog-rock. One thing Hendrix had over many artists on this site is some very real lyrics. |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: September 13 2007 at 23:28
This is a very unfair thing to say. If many people here don't think Hendrix is prog, it is because their view of what constitutes prog is not the same as yours. We are talking about art, not hard science, and art is a very subjective thing. Many of the members of this site have an incredibly extensive knowledge of music, so I think that calling their knowledge "shallow" is very untrue, as well as slightly rude. |
Posted By: bluetailfly
Date Posted: September 13 2007 at 23:31
I think you should revisit the definition of prog rock. ------------- "The red polygon's only desire / is to get to the blue triangle." |
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: September 13 2007 at 23:36
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: September 13 2007 at 23:44
|
Hendrix didn't influence Prog, he was influenced by it, but died before he could make a substantial contribution to the fledgling form. In fact, many of the 'prog rock' artists were moving away from the music of Hendrix and others. He didn't influence the majority of prog musicians at the time and didn't have the chance to participate in it. He is neither ProtoProg nor ProgRelated. |
Posted By: Philéas
Date Posted: September 15 2007 at 18:35
 |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: September 15 2007 at 18:41
 ------------- 
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: September 15 2007 at 19:10
|
Jimi was "Blend[ing] characteristics of Progressive Rock with mainstream elements
creating a final product that despite not being part of the genre is
evident that are close to Prog" before "Prog" really even existed... sort of in a way (before the movement was recognised). Now that's progressive! But he's not suitable for Proto-Prog, nor does he really fit the Prog-related definitions. Perhaps there should be a new category for such artists? Like maybe "Not Prog"? or "Not Progressive Rock, but not crap either"? Like his music muchly... Band of Gypsies is my favourite project of his, and I must say that I've always associated him with progressive rock music to an extent even if I don't think he fits this site as it now stands. Cream is more closely related to Prog, imo. Yeah, I always mention that even if it's rather a case of apples and oranges. ------------- Just a fanboy passin' through. |
Posted By: Eetu Pellonpaa
Date Posted: September 17 2007 at 10:18
From the view point of psychedelic prog and krautrock, it was fundamental IMHO.
|
Posted By: Abstrakt
Date Posted: September 17 2007 at 10:20
|
Hendrix Created Blues-rock, and influenced Later Psychedelic/Hard-rock bands, IMO
So, my answer is: NO!
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: September 17 2007 at 20:41
hmmmm....I'm in the camp that his influence ...undenialby .vast influence is due to his guitar playing which transcends prog.. . not his music. Eetu... let's be frank here.... lets not lose sight of history with the way we have divided prog into discreet sub-genres here at PA's . WE have decided there is such a thing as psych prog for example. Everything in prog has derived from Floyd, King Crimson and the other masters... did Hendrix directly influence them musically. If so, then he should be in, I just don't see it... or hear it. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 17 2007 at 21:05
|
Interesting point Micky.
Hendrix toured with Floyd in 1967 and obviously they heard each other's music a lot, yet I cannot hear any Hendix influence in Floyd or vice versa. ------------- What? |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: September 17 2007 at 21:10
hey... it's all great music... but let's face it damnit. Prog in it's beginning WAS english... and Hendrix grew up on... and played American 'roots' music.. though with a highly individualistic manner and in a highly ampflied manner
The problem is... other additions here.. have left the door open for
him...and should have never (IMO) been opened. Like Jefferson
Airplane.. a HUGE a fan of them as I am.His guitar playing is a WHOLE other story.. but we don't include people for instrumental influence.. it's all about the music. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Eetu Pellonpaa
Date Posted: September 19 2007 at 08:06
There are records which are both psychedelic and progressive rock in theire nature, so the way we have decide to label these bands here doesn't make the fact of their existence our invention, but the product of the artists which made the records.
I don't agree with you with this non-precise statement statement. King Crimson were prog already, and Fripp himself has said that he wanted to create music which would sound like Jimi Hendrix playing classical music (I recall this was in Eric Tamm's book).
To be frank, IMHO you don't hear it.
From the first album 1967 "Are You Experienced?" there are very interesting tracks ahead of their time in the rock music frame of reference. Like "Third Stone from The Sun", "I don't Live Today", "Love or Confusion" + the many details in the playing and arrangements of the songs. If you listen the Jimi Hendrix "Best of" album having only "Purple Haze" and "Hey Joe", I understand that the influence to prog music remains a mystery. I don't know how much you have listened to this band. Also the following albums "Axis: Bold as Love" continue the artistic andventures in the psychedelic reference, and teh following "Electric Ladyland" could be seen as a pure prog album IMO. So I think he influenced the psychedelic prog and krautrok bands fundamentally. He didn't probably influence YES and GENESIS, but so what? They are not the only aspect of progressive rock music, though they are good bands?
|
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: September 19 2007 at 08:46
| Yeah I think a lot of people judge Hendrix by his more popular stuff and that is not his progressive output. I think if people dug deeper into his dicography they would be suprised at the invetivness, originality and deepness of his music. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: September 19 2007 at 16:31
oh cut that crap.... who here HASN'T heard every damn one of Hendrix's albums scores of times over the years. Chalking up difference in opinion to ignorance is going not going to win you any fans... and will earn you quite the opposite. This isn't a kiddie site where Hendrix is thought of only for burning guitars and Purple Haze. let's ge real here ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: September 19 2007 at 16:57
|
back to your post Eetu oh goodie.... haven't broken out MY red font since ...god knows when
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: paolo.beenees
Date Posted: September 19 2007 at 17:03
|
Some days ago I started a topic called "Missing Pieces" about artists and bands which had a single prog output in their production.
I think Jimi Hendrix's "Electric Ladyland" should be mentioned amond these "single" jems. That's not a matter of guitar sound (a field where he was an absolute innovator) - and I can well regognize that "Are You Experienced" and "Axis: as bold as love" aren't prog (if not in the sense that they helped rock to take a consistent step forward in its evolution). But "Electric Ladyland" is something different: it expands Jimi's typical psychedelia towards jazz-blues structures and an astounding space rock (just listen to the sequence represented by "1983... (a merman should I turn to be)" and "Moon, turn the tides"... has anybody said Hawkwind???) ------------- 
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: September 19 2007 at 17:09
I saw that thread Paolo.... and is something I have suggested for the site... and was rejected of course so we do it on our own with the genre teams.. which is add bands IF they did a prog album. The is 'YOUR ULTIMATE PROG ROCK RESOURCE" you know It works for the obscure... and falls flat for the well known. Want to see Ivan's head explode?... move Styx to symphonic based solely on their early prog albums. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: September 19 2007 at 18:04
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: September 19 2007 at 18:05
hahahha... good deal... neither am I... so just spare us the ignorance bullsh*t OK? ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: September 19 2007 at 23:35
|
Posted By: Eetu Pellonpaa
Date Posted: September 30 2007 at 05:36
|
Micky, thanks for your informative and kind reply. This proto prog thing is a tricky one, as it's always about the way how the wideness of scope is seen, and what things are important or not... I personally think that proto genre should have artist that invented buiding blocks of the prog in the 60's, not being actual prog itself. Ofcourse the content and the wideness of the proto genre is administrated by the admins, but I thought to little promote my own personal view of this case. Won't start anykind of sabre dances for it though! Jimi's music and meaning is not lost even if he wouldn't be listed here.
|