Suggest New Bands and Artists - Dire Straits: Prog-Related? YES.

Print Page | Close Window

Dire Straits: Prog-Related? YES.

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=57779
Printed Date: June 23 2025 at 17:57
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: Dire Straits: Prog-Related? YES.

Posted By: JediJoker7169
Subject: Dire Straits: Prog-Related? YES.
Date Posted: May 07 2009 at 22:28

See older/closed thread here: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40503&KW=Dire+Straits&PID=2592133#2592133 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40503&KW=Dire+Straits&PID=2592133#2592133 .

How is Dire Straits NOT Prog-Related?

In my iTunes playlist of "Favorite Progressive Rock" (a playlist of studio recordings, which admittedly includes a lot of Prog-Related stuff), out of 639 songs (and growing), 14 are Dire Straits songs. From a band that only made 6 studio albums and a guy who listens to lots of Progressive Rock, that's saying something. Furthermore, I cite the inclusion of Dire Straits in a prominent Progressive Rock radio show: (San Francisco Bay Area's 98.5 KFOX's) Greg Stone's "Stone Trek" (see here: http://www.till.com/BayProg/radio.html). Stone is a true veteran DJ and longtime Prog fan. On his old page on the KFOX site (he was a victim of the recent Clear Channel layoffs), he had a picture of himself and David Gilmour from an interview, just in case you have doubts about his legitimacy.

So why are they not included?

In the previous thread, the naysayers mostly said (and I quote) things such as:

- "... Dire Straits is one [of] those bands who, although not quite prog, definitely ventured into some amazing sonic territory."

- "Dire Straits, while one of the more unique blues bands, does not qualify even for [Prog-Related, in my opinion]. The best argument for inclusion could come from either Love Over Gold or the live album Alchemy."

- "They are a great adventurous rock band with varied influences, but I don't think they should be on the site...."

- "Yes, for 80's standards[, Dire Straits was] Prog... But for Prog standards... Well... Well... Well[, was] only a very good band!!!"

- "They have their proggy moments (Telegraph Road for example) but I don't think they should be included."

Tenuous arguments at best. I think the best argument for inclusion comes from having "proggy moments;" does that alone not qualify for inclusion as Prog-Related? If not, then what does "Prog-Related" really mean? Just watered-down Prog?

Here are the Dire Straits songs in my "Favorite Progressive Rock" playlist:

- "Once Upon A Time in the West"

- "Brothers In Arms"

- "News"

- "You and Your Friend"

- "Love Over Gold"

- "The Man's Too Strong"

- "Ride Across The River"

- "Single Handed Sailor" --> "Follow Me Home"

- "Money For Nothing" (a difficult decision, but I finally decided it was worthy)

- "Planet of New Orleans" (which received frequent airplay on Stone Trek)

- "Private Investigations"

- "Iron Hand"

- "On Every Street"

All of the songs listed above are "proggy" or have their "proggy moments." A quick listen will confirm that. It is also true, of course, that they have their non-Prog moments, and maybe there are more of those than not. But isn't that true for some other Prog-Related bands, such as Styx? On their first album alone, they have one real Prog song ("Movement for the Common Man"), but mostly non-Prog ones (the rest of the album, except for maybe "What Has Come Between Us"). So what makes Dire Straits so different?

I challenge someone to make a cohesive and specific argument against Dire Straits' inclusion as a Prog-Related band.

Replies:

Posted By: ProgShine
Date Posted: May 07 2009 at 22:42

The Love Over Gold album, and Making Movies had 90% from prog related there, and there's a lot more on the other albuns, I think they should be here too, as I always say, there's a lot of other bands here that had almost nothing with prog and still there Wink

-------------
https://progshinerecords.bandcamp.com

Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: May 07 2009 at 23:46

JediJoker7169 wrote:

Because we can't include every band that had a few prog-esque moments. If we did, we'd already have Boston here for that annoying Long Time song. So where do we draw the line? I have no idea, I don't really pay attention, but it's probably not going to happen because the consensus is that they fall outside of our admittedly nebulous criteria.

And I philosophically think Prog Related does not need to be expanded at all, but that's not really on-topic.

-------------
if you own a sodastream i hate you

Posted By: Pekka
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 00:15

They've certainly got some prog in them so they could easily be added, but I have no ambitions about it. I hear there's tons of actual prog bands waiting for addition so perhaps it's not necessary to add any related things in the queue.

-------------
http://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=42652" rel="nofollow - It's on PA!

Posted By: JediJoker7169
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 00:37

Keppa4v wrote:

They've certainly got some prog in them so they could easily be added, but I have no ambitions about it. I hear there's tons of actual prog bands waiting for addition so perhaps it's not necessary to add any related things in the queue.

Now there's an argument I can appreciate.

But what if someone offered to do all the gruntwork (release research, biography, artwork, etc.)? I would be more than willing to look into it over the summer. I just feel kinda strongly about Dire Straits deserving to be recognized.

Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 10:02

I big yes to add Dire Straits to prog related

-------------

Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 10:27

Maybe I have just heard all the wrong songs, but to me this sounds ridiculous. Money For Nothing, Sultans of Swing, Julia, Brothers in Arms, absolutely zero prog in any of those.

Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 10:30

JediJoker7169 wrote:

Now there's an argument I can appreciate.

I believe that two key things have been hit upon with this post and its quoted post. The true goal of this site is to add prog bands, not prog-related bands. There are hundreds, if not thousands of bands that are related to prog and could be added to prog related. But there are also hundreds, if not thousands of bands that still need to be evaluated and added to prog categories. I believe that there is a pretty good general consensus that the site will benefit most from its collaborators concentrating on prog bands versus prog related bands.

A band like Dire Straits is probably as deserving for inclusion in prog related as other bands that are already included as well as others that are not included. Their inclusion would most likely to occur during a period of time when a collaborator or genre team that supports their inclusion are at a point where they are reasonably caught up with their current slate of evaluations and additions, and they are willing to take the time to champion them to the site administrators for their decision of whether or not to include the band in prog related. Even then though, the best way for inclusion is for the person who is suggesting their inclusion to be willing to follow up by writing a biography and addition the band's albums once they have been approved for inclusion.

-------------

Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 10:31

Deathrabbit wrote:

Maybe I have just heard all the wrong songs, but to me this sounds ridiculous. Money For Nothing, Sultans of Swing, Julia, Brothers in Arms, absolutely zero prog in any of those.

You are correct. You have not heard the right songs yet.

-------------

Posted By: StyLaZyn
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 10:41

No ABB, then no Dire Straits.

-------------

Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 10:48

What does or doesn't happen with ABB has absolutely zero relation with might or might not happen with Dire Straits.

-------------

Posted By: russellk
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 11:35

What's amazing, JediJoker, is you haven't included 'Telegraph Road', the most proggy thing they ever did.

Here's my argument against their inclusion (and bands like them). Dire Straits is world-renowned not for their progressive rock, but for their stripped-down, guitar-centric classic rock. They were the foremost rock revival band in the world in the early 80s dominated by post-punk and new wave. Like thousands of bands, their music was influenced by prog, and some of what they did was arranged with a sound similar to the classic British symphonic prog era. But at heart these songs, despite their increasingly elaborate arrangements (culminating in the fabulous 'Love over Gold'), are simple rock songs.

I love Dire Straits, and I acknowledge the influence prog rock had on their music, but they are not primarily a prog rock band. They are a classic rock band with prog influences in their song arrangements. In my opinion that is not enough to see them included here, even under prog-related.

Though anyone with even the slightest interest in prog ought to listen to 'Telegraph Road'.

Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 11:39

russellk wrote:

What's amazing, JediJoker, is you haven't included 'Telegraph Road', the most proggy thing they ever did.

Here's my argument against their inclusion (and bands like them). Dire Straits is world-renowned not for their progressive rock, but for their stripped-down, guitar-centric classic rock. They were the foremost rock revival band in the world in the early 80s dominated by post-punk and new wave. Like thousands of bands, their music was influenced by prog, and some of what they did was arranged with a sound similar to the classic British symphonic prog era. But at heart these songs, despite their increasingly elaborate arrangements (culminating in the fabulous 'Love over Gold'), are simple rock songs.

I love Dire Straits, and I acknowledge the influence prog rock had on their music, but they are not primarily a prog rock band. They are a classic rock band with prog influences in their song arrangements. In my opinion that is not enough to see them included here, even under prog-related.

Though anyone with even the slightest interest in prog ought to listen to 'Telegraph Road'.

Seconded.

-------------
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/sQD8uhpWXCw" rel="nofollow - It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood...Road Rage Edition

Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 11:41

rushfan4 wrote:

You are correct. You have not heard the right songs yet.

Well what's a good album then? Or is it just a smattering of PR songs here and there?

Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 11:52

Deathrabbit wrote:

rushfan4 wrote:

You are correct. You have not heard the right songs yet.

Well what's a good album then? Or is it just a smattering of PR songs here and there?

As mentioned by others, the album Love Over Gold, and the song from that Telegraph Road would probably contain their most prog-related material.

-------------

Posted By: StyLaZyn
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 11:53

rushfan4 wrote:

What does or doesn't happen with ABB has absolutely zero relation with might or might not happen with Dire Straits.

ABB belongs much more so before Dire Straits.

-------------

Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 12:06

StyLaZyn wrote:

rushfan4 wrote:

What does or doesn't happen with ABB has absolutely zero relation with might or might not happen with Dire Straits.

ABB belongs much more so before Dire Straits.

In your opinion, that might be but it still has no bearing on any decision regarding either band. I suspect it'll be a really cold day before either band is included but I'm sure that like with any other controversial bands, progressively speaking, arguments can be made for and against until the cows come home and more people will be unhappy than happy with the final decision.

-------------

Posted By: StyLaZyn
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 12:16

rushfan4 wrote:

StyLaZyn wrote:

rushfan4 wrote:

What does or doesn't happen with ABB has absolutely zero relation with might or might not happen with Dire Straits.

ABB belongs much more so before Dire Straits.

Of course it is my opinion. And that scenario already occurs. So what's one more?

Oh yah, admin aggravation. So that being said. I suspect no DIre Straits.

-------------

Posted By: rosenbach
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 15:36

Great band, but not prog at all to my ears. Sometimes i think people try to relate a favourite band to prog for an unknown reason to me.

Posted By: JediJoker7169
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 17:30

rosenbach wrote:

Great band, but not prog at all to my ears. Sometimes i think people try to relate a favourite band to prog for an unknown reason to me.

True that. But I think in this case, there's enough substance that it's not "clutching at straws" (if you'll excuse the pun).

I do now, however, have a greater appreciation for why the band is not yet included in the Archives. The previous thread contained no explanation of the real reason why they weren't there, but this one certainly does. I think I've achieved my goal, or at least part of it.

Oh, and as to why I don't have "Telegraph Road" in my playlist: it's just not one of my favorites. All of the other songs that are there, though, do relate.

Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 17:35

I do consider them Prog-Related, specially the so acclaimed here in PA, Love Over Gold, while the other 2 I have, Brothers in Arms and On Every Street do have their slight leanings.

Though, I, and really none of you, are the ones who choose wheter or not they're added, it's been discussed many times, and the admins have said NO, so...

Posted By: lucas
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 17:43

Who's next :

Police ? (well, Sting has sung for Ebehard Schöner so he is prog-related, and other members were also involved in prog projects...)

Abba ? (listen to 'visitors')

-------------
"Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood)

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 18:00

lucas wrote:

Who's next :

Police ? (well, Sting has sung for Ebehard Schöner so he is prog-related, and other members were also involved in prog projects...)

Abba ? (listen to 'visitors')

*facepalm, and, for further emphasis, I can hardly believe how stupid your implied comparison was*

Simply put, the reason Dire Straits should be on here is that album. Not that they had artsy leanings elsewhere (they did, but apart from a few gems like Planet Of New Orleans, certainly nothing else as progressive). I think it's very difficult to say that Love Over Gold isn't a progressive rock album (in the same way that Script For A Jester's Tear is a progressive rock album... sure, it's not Yes, it's not as obtuse as Crimson, but it's in a progressive rock vein). If the site wants to be a complete progressive rock resource, it needs that album, and with the current system, that means the rest of the albums would get in, too.

Now, yes, that album is the only really progressive one Dire Straits ever did, but I think it'd take wilful effort to say that isn't an album that, if produced by any artist who wasn't subsequently extremely commercially successful with (quality) artsy pop/rock material, noone at all would have a problem including here.

So, basically, I think folk in general are trying to use Dire Straits to 'draw a line' in the addition process, and I think the whole must-avoid-pop-albums-on-the-database-brrrrr reflex is overcoming what the site's stated intent, to be the best progressive rock resource, is. Frankly, it seems pretty daft and inconsistent with what I've heard stated as site policy (one progressive album = grounds for inclusion) that a band that have put out a clearly progressive rock album are being constantly rejected here for the basic reason that their pop career is better known.

Sorry about the mild rant, this is probably the one area in which I completely disagree with the site's actions.

Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 18:11

StyLaZyn wrote:

rushfan4 wrote:

StyLaZyn wrote:

rushfan4 wrote:

What does or doesn't happen with ABB has absolutely zero relation with might or might not happen with Dire Straits.

ABB belongs much more so before Dire Straits.

Of course it is my opinion. And that scenario already occurs. So what's one more?

Oh yah, admin aggravation. So that being said. I suspect no DIre Straits.

Stylie, disappointment that your opinion in & of itself is not enough to carry the day is really not a reason to dismiss the work of many at this site.
He's trying to tell you that one band's inclusion or exclusion does not impact the candidacy of another.
Add to that, that if you actually took the time to read posts from admins, collabs & reviewers, you would notice that neither this group nor the community at large indulge themselves in groupthink.
The difference from your behaviour is that collabs & admin notice that their own opinion is judged by the case they make, and they will win some AND lose some.
I ( & others) have not been able to amass a sufficiently strong case for System of a Down. They have been turned down for inclusion. For now. Would it surprise you to know that a new proposal would be considered as long as there is a fresh overview of their merit ? Re-read this - a fresh overview. Not simply re-stating the initial arguement.
And this may very well be the case for Dire Straits. You must have notived that not everybody has come out as rabidly anti-Dire Straits as you seem to believe. But the "official" stance is that the merit has not been proven. And , if you are not aware to begin with, Prog Related submissions are based on more than a few prog songs. Depending on the era, the influence, whether the group has at least one full blown prog album, are just some of the obvious things that are looked at.
So instead of whining that your idea wasn't accepted as gospel, why not, if you really believe that there is a case to be made for Dire Straits candidacy, well ... why not take some time, research , develop , sharpen and review your presentation and see if you can add anything constructive to help ALL of us to see that they are deserving.
Or you could just wait and whine about the next band that doesn't make it in, or does , despite your all knowing knowledge of what is truly prog.
Work at it, boy, work at it.

-------------
"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.

Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 19:12

This is really getting childish now.

Dire Straits?

What next, Bruce Springsteen. Knopfler's nearer to Bruce Springsteen than he is Prog.

Jester indeed.

Posted By: lucas
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 20:03

TGM: Orb wrote:

lucas wrote:

Who's next :

Police ? (well, Sting has sung for Ebehard Schöner so he is prog-related, and other members were also involved in prog projects...)

Abba ? (listen to 'visitors')

Simply put, the reason Dire Straits should be on here is that album.

Simply put, Dire Straits is a ...rock band : you wouldn't have guessed

Serioulsy your thread should be renamed in "Dire Straits : country-related ?" as Mr Knopfler is more influenced by / related to country gentlemen/ladies than prog ones (cf his collaborations with Notting Hillbillies, Emmylou Harris, Chet Atkins). The only connection with prog I see is the first drummer hired, Mr Pick Wthers who played with Spring.

-------------
"Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood)

Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 20:33

^to add a band, the band doesn't need to have connection with Prog, which apparently you don't know by the examples you're giving and gave....
To add band, supposedly, you just need 1 prog album, which in many people's opinion, Love Over Gold is a full blown Progressive Rock record, while like Rob said very well, maybe not in the heights of King Crimson, nor Yes, etc, but it's Prog nonetheless.

Of course this decision is held by the Admin Team, so I will really rest my case for now.

Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 21:06

And that is the question - is Love Over Gold prog enough ? There are questions that can be asked as to whether we are biased to believe so because of the song lengths ...

-------------
"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.

Posted By: lucas
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 21:24

cacho wrote:

^to add a band, the band doesn't need to have connection with Prog, which apparently you don't know by the examples you're giving and gave....
To add band, supposedly, you just need 1 prog album, which in many people's opinion, Love Over Gold is a full blown Progressive Rock record, while like Rob said very well, maybe not in the heights of King Crimson, nor Yes, etc, but it's Prog nonetheless.

Of course this decision is held by the Admin Team, so I will really rest my case for now.

to add a band, the band doesn't need to have connection with Prog :

Why this artist must be listed in www.progarchives.com :
Geddy Lee is an icon of prog and one of the best-ever bassists in rock music.

Geddy Lee's solo album is NOT prog...

I was joking when I wrote that the next band to consider for addition in PA will be Police. I simply recalled that the only connection they have with prog is to find in the previous bands of its members. Same with Dire Straits.

-------------
"Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood)

Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 22:28

Finnforest wrote:

Seconded.

Thirded

-------------
<font color=Brown>Music - The Sound Librarian

...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR]

Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 22:28

Warning: long post.

Mark Knopfler is probably my favorite guitarist ever, and I've heard 'em all, in real time, since George Harrison 'round 'bout '64.

DS never made a bad studio album.

Dire Straits: the beautiful lilt of Walking on the Wild West End.

Communique: the cinematic wash of Once Upon a Time in the West

Making Moveis: pretty much the whole damn album. Knopfler writing soundtracks, which of course he would later pursue with a bit more passion. Gotta love Tunnel of Love as being proggy, and maybe even Romeo & Juliet in that category, which actually I have problems holding back tears when I listen to it. Ya know, the dice was loaded from the start.

Love Over Gold: well yes Telegraph Road is prog, pure and simple. But Knopfler's writing more soundtracks. Better song on the album is Industrial Disease. Which in fact brings up the point, if somehow DS is included in PA, then you'd better include that Bob Dylan guy.

Brothers In Arms: no doubt the title track is pure prog. The rest, um I'm not so sure, albeit excellent rock.

On Every Street: hey, sometimes you're the windshield, sometimes you're the bug.

I'd love to see this band here. I'd love to see every band I enjoy here, and I occasionally make some noise for some of those bands. When it doesn't happen I move on.

I'd love to see the Dylan albums that Knopfler produced here. They are perfection.

Hell, I'd like to see the soundtrack from Local Heroes here.

I'd love to see Knopfler's solo albums here. I can assure anyone still reading this thread that some of Knopfler's solo work is so perfect that it is jaw-dropping.

But in the end, I ain't so sure that Dire Straits belongs here.

-------------
Can you tell me where we're headin'?
Lincoln County Road or Armageddon.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 08 2009 at 23:24

Tony R wrote:

This is really getting childish now.

Dire Straits?

What next, Bruce Springsteen. Knopfler's nearer to Bruce Springsteen than he is Prog.

Jester indeed.

Have to agree 100% with you Tony.

Dire Straits has a lot of POP, Blues Based Rock, some country like music and a lot of mainstream, I have all their albums, becaue I love the band, but that means nothing, the argument:

"In my iTunes playlist of "Favorite Progressive Rock" (a playlist of studio recordings, which admittedly includes a lot of Prog-Related stuff), out of 639 songs (and growing), 14 are Dire Straits songs. From a band that only made 6 studio albums and a guy who listens to lots of Progressive Rock, that's saying something."

Is simply empty, i listen mostly prog, but i have a lot of Fleetwood mac (Not even Peter Green, talking about Stevie Nicks & Lindsay Buckingham, more than two albums), Meatloaf (two albums), and even a track of Madonna...This doesn't mean anything, only that I like other genres.

Now Cacho, if it's true that to add a band, the band doesn't need to have connection with Prog, we better change the name of he site to Whateverthememberswant.com because this would cease to be a Prog site.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 00:22

Hmm, I thought there was thing lately that the whole collab section didn't want to deal with prog related additions for ages because things were getting out of hand.
It seems these prog related suggestions cause a butt load of argument, time better spent finding an actual prog band that we know can be cleared for addition ASAP and get a bio done and add it.
Seriously, think about it people.
Collabs could be arguing about this with the OP for the next 10 pages, but in that time I reckon several biographies for an actual prog band could be done.

Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 03:06

Quite.

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 05:04

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Tony R wrote:

This is really getting childish now.

Dire Straits?

What next, Bruce Springsteen. Knopfler's nearer to Bruce Springsteen than he is Prog.

Jester indeed.

Have to agree 100% with you Tony.

Dire Straits has a lot of POP, Blues Based Rock, some country like music and a lot of mainstream, I have all their albums, becaue I love the band, but that means nothing, the argument:

Iván

Ivan, you're really intentionally misrepresenting/quoting out of context what Pablo was saying there.

Cacho wrote:

^to add a band, the band doesn't need to have connection with Prog, which apparently you don't know by the examples you're giving and gave....
To add band, supposedly, you just need 1 prog album, which in many people's opinion, Love Over Gold is a full blown Progressive Rock record, while like Rob said very well, maybe not in the heights of King Crimson, nor Yes, etc, but it's Prog nonetheless.

What he was trying to say, quite clearly, is that a vague/solid 'connection' or 'relation' with prog music (as exhibited by David Bowie or David Gilmour) is not necessary if you've released one prog album.

Love Over Gold, if it had been the last thing the band had released, would be considered something of a lost prog gem, and the band would probably be kicking around in crossover or PR or neo-prog or something like that.

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 05:05

lucas wrote:

TGM: Orb wrote:

lucas wrote:

Who's next :

Police ? (well, Sting has sung for Ebehard Schöner so he is prog-related, and other members were also involved in prog projects...)

Abba ? (listen to 'visitors')

Simply put, the reason Dire Straits should be on here is that album.

Simply put, Dire Straits is a ...rock band : you wouldn't have guessed

Dire Straits was, by and large, a rock band. Yes. My point was that they released a progressive rock album, and, regardless of their general style and intent, that should qualify them for inclusion here. Yes, Knopfler was more influenced by/related to country gentlemen/ladies than prog ones, but this is prog archives, not country archives, and, if they've released a prog album, the country influence/rock success shouldn't factor into their approval.

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 05:43

Now, about Love Over Gold

site definition wrote:

The main characteristics of Symphonic are the ones that defined all Progressive Rock: (There's nothing 100% new under the sun) which among others are:

Mixture of elements from different genres.
Complex time signatures.
Lush keyboards.
Explorative and intelligent lyrics, in some cases close to fantasy literature, Sci Fi and even political issues.
Non commercial approach
Longer format of songs

Well, lush keyboards are certainly in there, with a lot of gorgeous piano and organ (and synthethiser). It's even got vibes + marimba on a couple of songs). The non-commercial approach is pretty clear on this one. Longer format of songs, definitely. Exploratory lyrics, I think so. The snide, witty take on British industrial sloth, a full-on concept song, a couple. Time signatures, I don't know (counting idiocy), but I don't think anyone'd say that time signatures are an absolute must-have in prog (Floyd, at least, would suggest not).

Well, to be fair, Pink Floyd and Goblin, for instance, were both involved with soundtracks at some points, and, with the whole classical influence into soundtracks in general, that could surely qualify as one of the mixture of elements thing the above definition's on about. Yes, I can see where you're coming from (and a very well-thought-out post, as well Clap

), but I think that picturesque is maybe a better word than soundtrack - they're song-stories with a movie feel.

To expand on that, there's the classical-sounding guitar on the title track, a folk feel to a couple of the songs (It Never Rains in particular), one unusual rocker, some jazzy tinglings throughout, a combination of improv. (the jam at the end of Telegraph Road, for instance) and clearly prepared music and so on. There are a lot of mood changes done in a fashion I haven't really seen before.

As I said, it's not a seminal prog album in the way that Close To The Edge or Pawn Hearts, but I think it's certainly along the lines of the other progressive rock released around '82.

TonyR wrote:

This is really getting childish now.

Dire Straits?

What next, Bruce Springsteen. Knopfler's nearer to Bruce Springsteen than he is Prog.

Edited for politeness.

I see two reasonable options here:
1) Ignore the thread, don't bother reading the arguments, don't (effectively) insult people who've thought about it when you obviously haven't.
2) Go to the thread, read the arguments for the suggestion, and comment on them intelligently.

Well, not exactly (sorry for responding so aggressively to that post, btw, I was a bit out of order). Love Over Gold is more than connected with prog. I've never seen anyone say Telegraph Road isn't prog, and I think that quite a number of folks agree that the album is, essentially, a progressive rock album. It's not just a tenuous connection.

...

I appreciate the argument that time would be better spent adding new obvious and uncontroversial material than bands which take a lot of debate to push through to categories like prog-related (which not a lot of folks care about that much, anyway). What I find difficult to appreciate is that bands like Metallica had a thread in the collab zone discussing whether their new album was 'prog enough' to merit their inclusion, while a band with a distinctly progressive album is continually dismissed out of hand for, basically, their later rock success.

Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 06:16

Definitely don't need odd time signatures to be a prog band, I'll back you there anyway. Plenty of post rock and post metal bands that write entire albums using just 4/4 and/or 6/8 really.

Posted By: Diaby
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 06:36

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

I think Cacho means, that the band doesn't need to have such a connection with prog, that one of their members have ever played in a prog band/with a prog musician. After reading the things above his post, that's my interpretation.

-------------
yeah

Posted By: lucas
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 07:46

TGM: Orb wrote:

You are right that LoG is a prog album, and maybe PA should follow a pattern similar to other prog sites (Babyblaue, Ground and sky which has Joni Mitchell's 'Hissing of Summer lawns' in its database, Sea of Tranquility...), I mean include only the albums that are prog-related for artists that are otherwise non-prog.

See the discussions we had about Gorgut's 'Obscura' album :

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57808&PID=3237749#3237749 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57808&PID=3237749#3237749

-------------
"Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood)

Posted By: Diaby
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 07:56

lucas wrote:

TGM: Orb wrote:

See the discussions we had about Gorgut's 'Obscura' album :

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57808&PID=3237749#3237749 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57808&PID=3237749#3237749

What is with José Cid? He has only one album and an EP on PA, but he has released several other things as well.

-------------
yeah

Posted By: StyLaZyn
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 08:35

debrewguy wrote:

...
Or you could just wait and whine about the next band that doesn't make it in, or does , despite your all knowing knowledge of what is truly prog.

Work at it, boy, work at it.

OK Brewie

Personally, I feel there is a strong aspect of opinion involved with certain decisions. Listening to Prog since the late 70's certainly does not qualify me as a Prog expert. And I certainly have not heard all Prog by all Prog bands. But likewise, this site has made me recognize that sometimes even the wisest most knowledgable fail to exhibit, IMO, consistent decision making. But they are human, like me.

-------------

Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 08:47

How about this: if Yes and Genesis had never made their '70s albums, and were being judged solely on the basis of their albums during 1979-1985, would they be worthy of inclusion?

-------------
Can you tell me where we're headin'?
Lincoln County Road or Armageddon.

Posted By: lucas
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 08:48

Diaby wrote:

lucas wrote:

TGM: Orb wrote:

See the discussions we had about Gorgut's 'Obscura' album :

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57808&PID=3237749#3237749 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57808&PID=3237749#3237749

What is with José Cid? He has only one album and an EP on PA, but he has released several other things as well.

Idon't know, maybe the person who included him was wise enough to see the difference between his early prog work and his later non-prog efforts...Anyway, I am pretty sure that 99 % of the artists/bands in PA database have their full discography available.

-------------
"Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood)

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 09:53

TGM: Orb wrote:

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Tony R wrote:

This is really getting childish now.

Dire Straits?

What next, Bruce Springsteen. Knopfler's nearer to Bruce Springsteen than he is Prog.

Jester indeed.

Have to agree 100% with you Tony.

Dire Straits has a lot of POP, Blues Based Rock, some country like music and a lot of mainstream, I have all their albums, becaue I love the band, but that means nothing, the argument:

Iván

Ivan, you're really intentionally misrepresenting/quoting out of context what Pablo was saying there.

Not misrepresenting anything TGM,

- A band to be added to Prog Related needs one of three characteristics, so analyzed all

- Without being 100% Prog, received clear MUSICAL influence of this genre, Not at all IMO

- Are widely accepted as MUSICALLY influential to the development of Progressive Rock by the community, In no way is recognized as influential for Prog

- Blend 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. I explain my reasons why I don't beluiieve it's the case, but you haven't talked about them, I see Blues based Rock, Country Folk like and a lot of mainstream

Only in that case, the importance of a key musician has been accepted as anpossible cauise, but neither is the case....In no way Dire Straits has any reason to be added to Prog Rerlated.

Love Over Gold, if it had been the last thing the band had released, would be considered something of a lost prog gem, and the band would probably be kicking around in crossover or PR or neo-prog or something like that.

I don't believe so, find absolutely not more connection than any band of the era that diidn't played Prog, as a fact I'm against boston, but I see more a case in them than in Dire Straits, despite I like DS much more than Boston.

Taste or Ipod selections have nothing to do with an addition.

Iván

PS: This post also replies:

Diaby wrote:

-------------

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 09:56

jammun wrote:

How about this: if Yes and Genesis had never made their '70s albums, and were being judged solely on the basis of their albums during 1979-1985, would they be worthy of inclusion?

If my aunt had wheels she would be a charriot.

It's an itelligent movement trying toe ask as a questionn ¿How could Genesis and Yes could not had been added?", So the fans say "no way, they will always hadt

to be here.

They made then 70's music, and that's the reason why they are here, their 80's music is an extension of their career, but what counts are their 7 or 8 Prog releases each one and some related..

But even if that was the case, maybe Yes in PR, I see no way for Genesis, and as a fact I doubt anybody would had cared to suggest any of the bands without their 70's material.

And of course Collins Genesis would never had been added without at least ATOTT and W&W, somethingh that would never happened if they had started in the late 70's without the Gabriel Genesis precedent, being that they played that music as a transition to Pop, as a fact part of ATOTT (The title song and some say Mad Man Moon) is old Gabriel material that didn't made it to previous albums.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 16:22

lucas wrote:

TGM: Orb wrote:

See the discussions we had about Gorgut's 'Obscura' album :

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57808&PID=3237749#3237749 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57808&PID=3237749#3237749

Fair enough. Have to admit I agree that the site's 'all albums of every artist are allowed' policy isn't always perfect (though preferable to the alternative, in my opinion). On the other hand, it's frustrating that this policy is preventing a prog album being on the site more. Personally, I think the site loses more credibility and usefulness as a prog rock resource by not including Love Over Gold than it would by having two or three more harmless non-progressive albums kicking around in PR.

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 16:27

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

TGM: Orb wrote:

Iván

Ivan, you're really intentionally misrepresenting/quoting out of context what Pablo was saying there.

Not misrepresenting anything TGM,

- A band to be added to Prog Related needs one of three characteristics, so analyzed all

Only in that case, the importance of a key musician has been accepted as anpossible cauise, but neither is the case....In no way Dire Straits has any reason to be added to Prog Rerlated.

I don't believe so, find absolutely not more connection than any band of the era that diidn't played Prog

Taste or Ipod selections have nothing to do with an addition.

Iván

[/QUOTE]

Yes, taste and I-pod selections have nothing to do with an addition. I think the OP was using them as a starting point for discussion rather than his main case, and, at least, indicating that he thought those songs were progressive.

About misrepresenting: you took 'to add a band, the band doesn't need to have connection with Prog' completely out of the context of the sentence it was in. What Pablo clearly wasn't trying to say was that a band doesn't need to be related to prog to be added, but that if it has released a prog album, the band as a whole doesn't need to be 'related', by personnel or influence, to prog. That seems to be site policy, from what I've heard over various threads, though I haven't been able to pinpoint where it's from.

Now, about the three routes of PR addition:

Clearly musically influenced by progressive rock. A fifteen minute song with elaborate structure, loads of keyboards, a mix of improvised and pre-conceived music, a concept underlying it, etc. I think that shares so many features with progressive rock that you can at least say it's acting along the same lines, even if it's not obviously directly influenced by any particular progressive artist.
Influence on the development of progressive rock. None whatsoever, I agree.
Characteristics of progressive rock blended with the mainstream. Well, there are a few of them scattered throughout their albums, but, overwhelmingly, Love Over Gold remains the focus of my argument. That album has clearly got five out of the six characteristics which are cited as having 'defined all progressive rock' (see my post in the previous page) in the Symphonic Definition. It could have the sixth, I don't know. For that album, they should therefore be here.

allmusic wrote:

Adding a new rhythm guitarist, Dire Straits expands its sounds and ambitions on the sprawling Love Over Gold. In a sense, the album is their prog rock effort

I see the blues, country, folk, rock and pop, too. I also see a big album of overbearing progressive rock in the middle of it. I've seen a lot of others agreeing that that album is at least in part progressive rock, and more than a few agreeing that it is entirely progressive rock. The fact that the band is bringing together so many elements into long songs would sort of indicate a progressive intent to me.

If you've heard Love Over Gold, and you don't see any connection to prog in it stylistically, I'm not going to be able to change your mind. On the other hand, it does fit at least five of the six criteria stated by the site for a symphonic prog album. It's not Close To The Edge, but it's not all that far removed from Script For A Jester's Tear.

Site policy is, as far as I'm aware, one prog album = grounds for inclusion. Yeah, I admit it's not perfect when an artist has clearly released an overwhelming majority of non-prog material, but it's the system we've got, so it should be applied evenly.

Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 16:38

^thanks for clearing things up Rob, you couldn't have said it better.

Posted By: JediJoker7169
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 17:42

Good to see some intelligent arguments this time around. I believe I and others have made my point.

Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 18:25

i think Chicago have more progrock material from 1968 -1978 then the entire Dire Straits Discographie, but Love over Goold is Sure Progressive rock album, both the Police and Dire Straits made albums that were quite sofisticated in an age were New Wave, Punk/Alternative rock and Glam/Hair metal was the moust popular music at that time.

but together with Dire Straits and the Police you can also add Joe Jackson, Elvis Costello and Nik Kershaw all made songs that was a protest against Punk with more sofisticated arangment, with inlcusion of different styles as Reagge, Ska, World Music, Pop, Funk and Blues/rock. Including Prince... Smile

Posted By: lucas
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 18:51

aginor wrote:

i think Chicago have more progrock material from 1968 -1978 then the entire Dire Straits Discographie, but Love over Goold is Sure Progressive rock album, both the Police and Dire Straits made albums that were quite sofisticated in an age were New Wave, Punk/Alternative rock and Glam/Hair metal was the moust popular music at that time.

Did anyone notice the big influence Police had on the evolution of Rush's music in the eighties ? (the "ska" thing)

aginor wrote:

but together with Dire Straits and the Police you can also add Joe Jackson, Elvis Costello and Nik Kershaw all made songs that was a protest against Punk with more sofisticated arangment, with inlcusion of different styles as Reagge, Ska, World Music, Pop, Funk and Blues/rock. Including Prince... Smile

'Symphony n°1' (feat Steve Vai) album is symphonic jazz :-) and IS prog to certain extent...I first discovered it while listening to a prog rock broadcast on radio...

-------------
"Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood)

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 09 2009 at 22:07

TGM: Orb wrote:

Yes, taste and I-pod selections have nothing to do with an addition. I think the OP was using them as a starting point for discussion rather than his main case, and, at least, indicating that he thought those songs were progressive.

Honestly, I don't see the point to say that this means something, it means nothing IMO, with the respect the opener of the thread deserves.

About misrepresenting: you took 'to add a band, the band doesn't need to have connection with Prog' completely out of the context of the sentence it was in. What Pablo clearly wasn't trying to say was that a band doesn't need to be related to prog to be added, but that if it has released a prog album, the band as a whole doesn't need to be 'related', by personnel or influence, to prog.

If a band has a Prog album, is automatically related to Prog,. that's simple logic, but still i can't find the slightest connection.

That seems to be site policy, from what I've heard over various threads, though I haven't been able to pinpoint where it's from.

If I believed they have a full Prog album, I would be supporting their addition to PR, but IMO it's not remotely the case.

Now, about the three routes of PR addition:

Clearly musically influenced by progressive rock. A fifteen minute song with elaborate structure, loads of keyboards, a mix of improvised and pre-conceived music, a concept underlying it, etc. I think that shares so many features with progressive rock that you can at least say it's acting along the same lines, even if it's not obviously directly influenced by any particular progressive artist.

A long song with a concept is not necessarilly prog, and even when it was, a song in a career is not enough.

Influence on the development of progressive rock. None whatsoever, I agree.

We agree

Characteristics of progressive rock blended with the mainstream. Well, there are a few of them scattered throughout their albums, but, overwhelmingly, Love Over Gold remains the focus of my argument. That album has clearly got five out of the six characteristics which are cited as having 'defined all progressive rock' (see my post in the previous page) in the Symphonic Definition. It could have the sixth, I don't know. For that album, they should therefore be here.

You say it, a few of them, probably as most AOR bands or even Rock bands of the 70's, but the phrase is clear, please, complete the requirement, it also is said (I know, i wrote it):

creating a final product that despite not being part of the genre is evident that are close to Prog

The characteristics have to be EVIDENT, and that's not the case of Dire Straits

allmusic wrote:

Adding a new rhythm guitarist, Dire Straits expands its sounds and ambitions on the sprawling Love Over Gold. In a sense, the album is their prog rock effort

Sort of a Progressive intent is not success i being a Prog Rock band or even related, plus i don't trust ALLMUSIC at all, after they wrote multiple descriptions like saying that Triumvirat is a Finnish Prog band "A La Focus", i had to send them 10 mails until they discovered that Triumvirat is German and has not the slightest relation with Focus.

If you've heard Love Over Gold, and you don't see any connection to prog in it stylistically, I'm not going to be able to change your mind. On the other hand, it does fit at least five of the six criteria stated by the site for a symphonic prog album. It's not Close To The Edge, but it's not all that far removed from Script For A Jester's Tear.

Oh please, Script of a Jester's is an album in the borderline that divides Symphonic with Neo prog, while Love Over Gold is in the borderline of AOR, POP, Folk and Blues Based Rock.

Site policy is, as far as I'm aware, one prog album = grounds for inclusion. Yeah, I admit it's not perfect when an artist has clearly released an overwhelming majority of non-prog material, but it's the system we've got, so it should be applied evenly.

But you even say that they have a few characteristics (that i don't see), then we are not talking about a full Prog album remotely.

Plus lets remember, no Prog site adds them (At least not GEPR, Proggnosis, Progressor or Progressive Ears, few of the ones I trust not as much as our's), so the approval would had to be by all the votes of the team formed by administrators, something that at least by Tony R's response and what I read from the rest of the Adms, in another thread, I doubt.

We should focus in adding real Prog bands, not in famous bands that have been in the market for decades and are not included anywhere as Prog.

My two cents.

Iván

PS: Look at this:

http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=41 - eneral Music Discussions
	http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=50453&KW=Dire+Straits - - Dire - Straits By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=18422 - DJPuffyLemon , July 25 2008 at 04:06	13	117	By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=14911 - jammun July 25 2008 at 23:33 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/get_last_post.asp?TID=50453&KW=Dire+Straits">
http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=1 - Suggest New Bands and Artists
	http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40503&KW=Dire+Straits - The - Dire - Straits By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=8987 - endlessepic , August 02 2007 at 16:39 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40503&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=1 - 1 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40503&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=2 - 2	24	416	By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=318 - Ivan_Melgar_M August 11 2007 at 20:22 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/get_last_post.asp?TID=40503&KW=Dire+Straits">
http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=41 - General Music Discussions
	http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27665&KW=Dire+Straits - Favourite - Dire - Straits album? By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=4818 - Kid-A , August 23 2006 at 12:02 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27665&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=1 - 1 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27665&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=2 - 2	22	280	By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=2715 - NutterAlert September 08 2006 at 17:39 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/get_last_post.asp?TID=27665&KW=Dire+Straits">
http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=53 - Artists/Bands under evaluation
	http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=21238&KW=Dire+Straits - - Dire - Straits By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=1585 - Snow Dog , April 04 2006 at 06:54 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=21238&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=1 - 1 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=21238&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=2 - 2	22	270	By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=882 - Trotsky April 18 2006 at 08:37 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/get_last_post.asp?TID=21238&KW=Dire+Straits">
http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=41 - General Music Discussions
	http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8778&KW=Dire+Straits - Best - Dire - Straits song By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=3371 - RUM26 , July 16 2005 at 00:58 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8778&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=1 - 1 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8778&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=2 - 2	25	307	By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=3822 - Damen August 12 2005 at 02:16 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/get_last_post.asp?TID=8778&KW=Dire+Straits">

They were rejected in each and every case, a poll was 18 to 4 (81.87% against) and in the fourth thread every Administrator said no....I believe it's enough of this.

-------------

Posted By: russellk
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 00:39

'Love Over Gold' is a very interesting album in a prog rock context.

To my ears it has clearly been influenced by progressive rock. It is still mainly a standard rock album, but I can't help but hear the extension of rock, the complexity of the arrangements, the influence of classical music, and the uniqueness of the lyrical subject (who else has done a song on the geographical development of a ribbon urban area?) - and that is just 'Telegraph Road'. 'Private Investigations' is similarly an extension of classic rock, and the aroma of prog is all over it.

But as for the rest of the album, it's just pure Dire Straits, classic rock. 'Industrial Disease' is great fun, but in no way prog. 'It Never Rains' is a little more sophisticated, but nothing more than a rock song, as is the title track, lovely as it is.

Therefore, although the album has clearly been influenced by prog rock, it is not a 100% prog rock album.

This means Dire Straits cannot be included on this site as a prog band.

But are they prog related?

'Love Over Gold' is certainly related to prog, and a couple of tracks on 'Making Movies' are proggy, but in my opinion there simply isn't enough prog to qualify them as prog-related. And note: I'm usually an inclusive voice here.

Posted By: Diaby
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 06:43

TGM: Orb wrote:

What Pablo clearly wasn't trying to say was that a band doesn't need to be related to prog to be added, but that if it has released a prog album, the band as a whole doesn't need to be 'related', by personnel or influence, to prog. That seems to be site policy, from what I've heard over various threads, though I haven't been able to pinpoint where it's from.

The same I wanted to express. Iván, I don't know why you verified your statement with my post.

-------------
yeah

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 07:18

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

TGM: Orb wrote:

Now, about the three routes of PR addition:

Clearly musically influenced by progressive rock. A fifteen minute song with elaborate structure, loads of keyboards, a mix of improvised and pre-conceived music, a concept underlying it, etc. I think that shares so many features with progressive rock that you can at least say it's acting along the same lines, even if it's not obviously directly influenced by any particular progressive artist.

A long song with a concept is not necessarilly prog, and even when it was, a song in a career is not enough.

Characteristics of progressive rock blended with the mainstream. Well, there are a few of them scattered throughout their albums, but, overwhelmingly, Love Over Gold remains the focus of my argument. That album has clearly got five out of the six characteristics which are cited as having 'defined all progressive rock' (see my post in the previous page) in the Symphonic Definition. It could have the sixth, I don't know. For that album, they should therefore be here.

You say it, a few of them, probably as most AOR bands or even Rock bands of the 70's, but the phrase is clear, please, complete the requirement, it also is said (I know, i wrote it):

creating a final product that despite not being part of the genre is evident that are close to Prog

The characteristics have to be EVIDENT, and that's not the case of Dire Straits

allmusic wrote:

Adding a new rhythm guitarist, Dire Straits expands its sounds and ambitions on the sprawling Love Over Gold. In a sense, the album is their prog rock effort

But you even say that they have a few characteristics (that i don't see), then we are not talking about a full Prog album remotely.

We should focus in adding real Prog bands, not in famous bands that have been in the market for decades and are not included anywhere as Prog.

My two cents.

Iván

PS: Look at this:

http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=41 - eneral Music Discussions
	http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=50453&KW=Dire+Straits - Dire Straits By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=18422 - DJPuffyLemon , July 25 2008 at 04:06	13	117	By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=14911 - jammun July 25 2008 at 23:33 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/get_last_post.asp?TID=50453&KW=Dire+Straits">
http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=1 - Suggest New Bands and Artists
	http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40503&KW=Dire+Straits - The Dire Straits By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=8987 - endlessepic , August 02 2007 at 16:39 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40503&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=1 - 1 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40503&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=2 - 2	24	416	By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=318 - Ivan_Melgar_M August 11 2007 at 20:22 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/get_last_post.asp?TID=40503&KW=Dire+Straits">
http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=41 - General Music Discussions
	http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27665&KW=Dire+Straits - Favourite Dire Straits album? By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=4818 - Kid-A , August 23 2006 at 12:02 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27665&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=1 - 1 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27665&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=2 - 2	22	280	By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=2715 - NutterAlert September 08 2006 at 17:39 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/get_last_post.asp?TID=27665&KW=Dire+Straits">
http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=53 - Artists/Bands under evaluation
	http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=21238&KW=Dire+Straits - Dire Straits By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=1585 - Snow Dog , April 04 2006 at 06:54 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=21238&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=1 - 1 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=21238&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=2 - 2	22	270	By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=882 - Trotsky April 18 2006 at 08:37 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/get_last_post.asp?TID=21238&KW=Dire+Straits">
http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=41 - General Music Discussions
	http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8778&KW=Dire+Straits - Best Dire Straits song By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=3371 - RUM26 , July 16 2005 at 00:58 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8778&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=1 - 1 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8778&KW=Dire+Straits&PN=2 - 2	25	307	By http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/member_profile.asp?PF=3822 - Damen August 12 2005 at 02:16 http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/get_last_post.asp?TID=8778&KW=Dire+Straits">

They were rejected in each and every case, a poll was 18 to 4 (81.87% against) and in the fourth thread every Administrator said no....I believe it's enough of this.

Just to keep my arguments clear, I'm not responding to specific sentences, though I believe I've herein answered all the substance of your post (for instance, the 'a song in a career' point is answered by the first paragraph, though I haven't made an effort in clearly highlighting that).

The main characteristics of Symphonic are the ones that defined all Progressive Rock: (There's nothing 100% new under the sun) which among others are:

Mixture of elements from different genres.
Complex time signatures.
Lush keyboards.
Explorative and intelligent lyrics, in some cases close to fantasy literature, Sci Fi and even political issues.
Non commercial approach
Longer format of songs

Except the underlined one, Love Over Gold CLEARLY meets all of these requirements. Those characteristics are evident to the point of undeniable. It could well meet the complex time signatures characteristic, I don't know. It's pretty much agreed that if the rest is in place, time signatures aren't a necessary ingredient (Pink Floyd, Post-Rock etc. would suggest this). Allmusic (you may not trust them, but the site still needs to keep in touch with those who are considering music history and have a relatively wide public regard) believes it's the band's progressive rock effort, Rolling Stone remarks it's 'In almost suicidal defiance of commercial good sense', particularly in the context of the early 80s, and it's 'a collection of radically expanded epics'. Even if the rest of Dire Straits output is at best sporadically progressive, if that album is prog, it merits inclusion.

About the previous threads. Well, yes, but even then I remember seeing a fair few replies saying that Love Over Gold is a prog album, but they don't think the band should be here anyway. In that case, their views would indicate that the band should be here according to site policy, but should not according to their preference. I'd also like to point out that three of those are in general music discussions, and don't appear to be an effort to get them added to the site.

Attainability doesn't equal merit. Yes, I understand it's unlikely that Dire Straits would be added no matter how reasonable an argument was made, and I understand it's easier and less controversial to add half a million retro-prog bands. My complaint is more that in the case of Dire Straits, the site is somewhat deliberately not implementing its policy (one album = band inclusion) consistently, which is more of a problem to its credibility than having a couple of harmless non-prog albums floating about in the prog-related category (we already have a lot of those from, say, Metallica or Kate Bush and, frankly, noone really cares about that).

In short, great if the admins/teams get on with adding new progressive rock... perhaps more worthwhile than this sort of debate, but I think it's healthy to have these sorts of debates every now and then, just to make sure we're keeping in touch with the fact that the exact definition of progressive, by its very nature, not fixed.

Script For A Jester's Tear and Love Over Gold are actually pretty damn similar from a stylistic point of view. Instrumentation, structure, dramatic flair, progressive rock created with an awareness of the mainstream. I'd say the latter is actually more 'progressive' as an album, in that it's creating progressive rock without clearly referencing previous progressive rock acts. Yes, it has one or two folk elements, a couple of pop elements (well, basically, it's only got melodies in that respect... it certainly doesn't conform to pop structures), and one more regularly structured (but nonetheless pretty bizarre) rocker, but really, these grounds of reference do not define the substance of the album. Scheherezade and Other Stories, for instance, though it leans heavily on classical and jazz props, is clearly a progressive rock album. Likewise, Love Over Gold.

Edit: and Russellk, that's another interesting and informed response. Much appreciated Clap

Personally, I think the whole album is, to a lesser or greater extent, progressive rock. Industrial Disease is admittedly the least certain of that, with the quirky guitar, bizarre subject matter and choppy organ melody marking, at least, some progressive territory, and it still doesn't really sound like anything else out there. The classical sounding guitar, smooth piano and jazzy vibes on the title-track, I think, are certainly expanding the rock format... at least, it's not something I've heard anywhere else in the rock repertoire. It Never Rains... well, eight minute songs with keyboards tend to go down as progressive rock on my part, I'll have to take another listen to that one to see if there's anything more specific that led to me putting it in the prog rock pigeonhole.

Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 07:28

I just think that the "characteristics of Symphonic" you quote show how difficult it is to define Prog Rock and that maybe you have proved that the definition and description need fine-tuning as when it comes down to it they could apply to all manner of musical genres.

If Dire Straits are Prog Rock then so is just about any Danny Elfman score I've heard, and just about any rock-based Move/TV Theme and Soundtrack that's ever been produced. Just because an artist produces expansive and imaginative rock music it doesn't necessarily follow that it is Prog.

Posted By: kenethlevine
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 08:53

StyLaZyn wrote:

No ABB, then no Dire Straits.

forgive my ignorance but who is ABB?

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 09:42

TGM: Orb wrote:

Just to keep my arguments clear, I'm not responding to specific sentences, though I believe I've herein answered all the substance of your post (for instance, the 'a song in a career' point is answered by the first paragraph, though I haven't made an effort in clearly highlighting that).

THE SONG....That's all. not enough

The main characteristics of Symphonic are the ones that defined all Progressive Rock: (There's nothing 100% new under the sun) which among others are:

Mixture of elements from different genres. They simply mix elements, not something particularyly complex or elaborate
Complex time signatures. No way
Lush keyboards. Not particularly
Explorative and intelligent lyrics, in some cases close to fantasy literature, Sci Fi and even political issues. I agree, so Cat Stevens, Bob Dylan, etc and with more credentials are not here, because they are not Prog
Non commercial approach Please, they always were a COMMRCIAL band, is incredible not to accept this
Longer format of songs A few long songs are not Prog

Honestly find no complexity at all.

About the previous threads. Well, yes, but even then I remember seeing a fair few replies saying that Love Over Gold is a prog album, but they don't think the band should be here anyway. In that case, their views would indicate that the band should be here according to site policy, but should not according to their preference. I'd also like to point out that three of those are in general music discussions, and don't appear to be an effort to get them added to the site.

The administratiors, the vast majority of members and all the Prog sites disagree with you, there must be a reason, they have been actiove since decades ago and not added to any Prog site, but

Attainability doesn't equal merit. Yes, I understand it's unlikely that Dire Straits would be added no matter how reasonable an argument was made, and I understand it's easier and less controversial to add half a million retro-prog bands.

Thuis bands you call Retro Prog, PLAY PURE PROGRESSIVE ROCK, NOT WATTERED POP, AOR, COUNTRY.

The term Retro Prog is negative and inaccurate, in this case it's absurd because Dire Straits was formed in 1977, an older band with no Prog mentions in any respectable Prog site.

My complaint is more that in the case of Dire Straits, the site is somewhat deliberately not implementing its policy (one album = band inclusion) consistently, which is more of a problem to its credibility than having a couple of harmless non-prog albums floating about in the prog-related category (we already have a lot of those from, say, Metallica or Kate Bush and, frankly, noone really cares about that).

Please is not a clearly Prog album, at the bast with shady relations with Prog Related, not enough

In short, great if the admins/teams get on with adding new progressive rock... perhaps more worthwhile than this sort of debate, but I think it's healthy to have these sorts of debates every now and then, just to make sure we're keeping in touch with the fact that the exact definition of progressive, by its very nature, not fixed.

It wouid be more healthy to focus in real Prog bands, not in commercial bands with almost any relation with Prog only because we like them.

Script For A Jester's Tear and Love Over Gold are actually pretty damn similar from a stylistic point of view. Instrumentation, structure, dramatic flair, progressive rock created with an awareness of the mainstream. I'd say the latter is actually more 'progressive' as an album, in that it's creating progressive rock without clearly referencing previous progressive rock acts. Yes, it has one or two folk elements, a couple of pop elements (well, basically, it's only got melodies in that respect... it certainly doesn't conform to pop structures), and one more regularly structured (but nonetheless pretty bizarre) rocker, but really, these grounds of reference do not define the substance of the album. Scheherezade and Other Stories, for instance, though it leans heavily on classical and jazz props, is clearly a progressive rock album. Likewise, Love Over Gold.

There's no relation in complexity, structure, influebnces, sound, indiovidual performances (except mark Knopfler). in nothing at all, not saying that Dire Strait is a bad band, simply not Prog at all, while Marillion is a pure Prog band.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 10:03

There seems to be a concerted effort to see every rock band in history that is highly-regarded for its musicianship elevated to Prog or Prog-Related status. How sad.

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 10:41

OK, still trying to maintain some clear structure while answering your specific points. If I've missed any specific point of yours which you feel is important, feel free to reiterate it for me. I thought keeping everything clearly formatted was in the interests of meaningful debate.

---

On the six points

They simply mix elements, not something particularyly complex or elaborate
That's exactly what's implied by the 'Mixture of elements from different genres.' bit, no? Personally, I think there's some pretty subtle classical and jazz-influenced touches underneath the folk and rock underpinning some of the songwriting.

Lush keyboards. Not particularly
Synthesiser, piano and organ alternately throughout the majority of the album, including a further guest synth operator, none of which seem to me to be especially stuck in the rock vein. The further additions of vibes and marimba, which have the same rough effect on a couple of tracks.

Explorative and intelligent lyrics, in some cases close to fantasy literature, Sci Fi and even political issues. I agree, so Cat Stevens, Bob Dylan, etc and with more credentials are not here, because they are not Prog

Yes, intelligent lyrics alone don't make a prog band. On the other hand, in conjunction with other evidence, they imply progressiveness.

Non commercial approach Please, they always were a COMMRCIAL band, is incredible not to accept this

It's incredible and ridiculous to suggest that opening an album with a fifteen minute song was a commercial move in 1982. [/shoutingbigtext] Rolling Stone suggested the band was committing 'commercial suicide' and 'in a period when most pop music is conceived purely as product, Love Over Gold dares to put art before airplay. '. The album lacks an obvious single cut, and every song is over five and a half minutes long, IIRC. Suggesting that Love Over Gold is commercial, especially given that much of the band's previous success had come from the smooth, fairly concise single, Sultans of Swing, is beyond silly.

Longer format of songs A few long songs are not Prog

" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegraph_Road_%28song%29 - Telegraph Road " – 14:15
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Investigations - Private Investigations " – 6:45
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Disease_%28song%29 - Industrial Disease " – 5:49
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_over_Gold_%28Dire_Straits_song%29 - Love over Gold " – 6:16
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_Never_Rains_%28song%29 - It Never Rains " – 7:54

Length isn't a definite clincher in and of itself. On the other hand, in conjunction with other evidence, it strongly implies progressiveness, particularly when, as on Telegraph Road and Private Investigations, it allows for sophisticated structures.

---

General remarks on prog credentials.

Please is not a clearly Prog album, at the bast with shady relations with Prog Related, not enough

It obviously fulfils five of the six suggested criteria for a symphonic prog album, and it's got some innovative touches, and given the sixth is hardly necessary, I personally think that's enough to say it's 'clearly' a prog album

Attainability doesn't equal merit. Yes, I understand it's unlikely that Dire Straits would be added no matter how reasonable an argument was made, and I understand it's easier and less controversial to add half a million retro-prog bands.

Thuis bands you call Retro Prog, PLAY PURE PROGRESSIVE ROCK, NOT WATTERED POP, AOR, COUNTRY.

The term Retro Prog is negative and inaccurate, in this case it's absurd because Dire Straits was formed in 1977, an older band with no Prog mentions in any respectable Prog site.

You've entirely missed the point of that paragraph. You've also managed to pull out a clause which makes no sense whatsoever to me ('in this case it's absurd') - maybe you're investing my words with meanings that certainly weren't intended, but I don't see exactly what you're referring to. I was simply using the 'retro-prog' movement (which is a widely used term, anyway) to provide generic examples of bands which would be easier to add.

A complete facepalm at the suggestion that Dire Straits play 'wattered pop, AOR, country'.

I was suggesting that, just because it's easier to add various other artists, who are more generally agreed upon, I didn't see the need to give up on considering or suggesting the addition of other, potentially worthy artists.

THE SONG....That's all. not enough

I was, obviously, saying that the whole album was progressive.By fairly obvious implication, that responds to the suggestion that one song isn't enough for an inclusion. I even drew attention to that.

The administratiors, the vast majority of members and all the Prog sites disagree with you, there must be a reason

That doesn't mean that reason is right. I think, for a lot of people, the reason is that people don't agree with the one-album=band inclusion policy, or think it would lead to ridiculous results if applied in this case. I suspect there wouldn't be all that many who'd be against Love Over Gold alone being in the PR or Crossover categories.

---

Comparison to SFAJT

Script For A Jester's Tear and Love Over Gold are actually pretty damn similar from a stylistic point of view. Instrumentation, structure, dramatic flair, progressive rock created with an awareness of the mainstream. I'd say the latter is actually more 'progressive' as an album, in that it's creating progressive rock without clearly referencing previous progressive rock acts. Yes, it has one or two folk elements, a couple of pop elements (well, basically, it's only got melodies in that respect... it certainly doesn't conform to pop structures), and one more regularly structured (but nonetheless pretty bizarre) rocker, but really, these grounds of reference do not define the substance of the album. Scheherezade and Other Stories, for instance, though it leans heavily on classical and jazz props, is clearly a progressive rock album. Likewise, Love Over Gold.

Personally, I'd say that sound is similar in some respects (the drumming for both is 'AOR'-styled, and somewhat blunter than the remaining material, though Pick Withers is evidently somewhat more talented and subtle than Pointer, imo): both have fairly 80s production. In terms of complexity, Love Over Gold is generally considered to be 'increased musical complexity' on the start of Dire Straits, while Script has never seemed very complex to me. In terms of structure, well, the reliance on explosive bursts from out of moody, downcast passages is a common feature. Script is hardly a pure prog album, really, given that Chelsea Monday is somewhat a generic guitar-heroics rocker with some vestigial references to The Wall. Anyway, given that I've yet to see you, in all your many arguments here, actually change your position from your starting position, I'm obviously not going to persuade you of this.

Yeah, I'm not saying they're the same album, but I think there are a lot of similarities in style and approach.

Edit:

TonyR wrote:

There seems to be a concerted effort to see every rock band in history that is highly-regarded for its musicianship elevated to Prog or Prog-Related status. How sad.

An admin seems to be trolling an addition suggestions thread. I'm not complaining.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 10:47

Tony R wrote:

There seems to be a concerted effort to see every rock band in history that is highly-regarded for its musicianship elevated to Prog or Prog-Related status. How sad.

Hi Tony, I mentioned this before because it's a common mistake.

Being Prog or Prog Related doesn't elevate the level of a bband, take the case of The Who (Who have far more Prog credentials than Dire Straits), they are copnsidered among the top three Rock bands ever, here they are just an almost Prog band (not even reached that "status"), this sounds terrible to me as a Who fan, we are making them almost something except of an icon, a status they fully deserved.

Now, Dire Strait, will cease to be an icon of the late 70's and 80's to a a somehow related to Prog band, according to the guidelines, we shouldn't rate their albums with more than 3 stars, because it's not Prog, and that's a sin, because Brother in Arms (For example) is an outstanding that should deserve a 5 stars rating in a non Prog site.

Progressive Rock is a GENRE, NOT A STATUS, but people love this bands and want to see them here, because they seem to feel that being Prog is the epitome of music. But in Prog Archives they will be behind 90% of the bands , very find from the preferentisl place they deserve in their genre.

Or maybe people want to say they only listen Prog, so lets turn every bandv we like into Prog to keep our record clean.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 10:53

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Tony R wrote:

There seems to be a concerted effort to see every rock band in history that is highly-regarded for its musicianship elevated to Prog or Prog-Related status. How sad.

Progressive Rock is a GENRE, NOT A STATUS,

No that's completely wrong. Otherwise, fusion, post-rock/metal and others would not be on this site. Prog rock is a mindset, and to me, that mindset is not really shown in Dir Straits, but to be fair, I haven't heard the album most of you are talking about.

Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 11:02

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Tony R wrote:

There seems to be a concerted effort to see every rock band in history that is highly-regarded for its musicianship elevated to Prog or Prog-Related status. How sad.

Hi Tony, I mentioned this before because it's a common mistake.

Or maybe people want to say they only listen Prog, so lets turn every bandv we like into Prog to keep our record clean.

Iván

Come on Ivan, you can't be serious on that last sentence, either in the paragraph before it.

You're saying people are discussing this to death because they love the band? You're saying people want to make people in HERE think they only listen to Prog making other bands they like be here in PA?

Coming from a guy like you, it's pretty much absurd I'm afraid.

If people think a album is Prog, does it mean they love the band? You're being way too extremist, just because you and others don't consider it. I know the Admin team didn't approve them, yet it doesn't mean they're right, either we are. Of course, they take the decision not us, but please don't go on saying that the ones who defend the position of Love Over Gold being Prog are just people who like to see a good rock band here in PA, just for the sake of a "Prog Status"

Posted By: StyLaZyn
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 11:06

kenethlevine wrote:

StyLaZyn wrote:

No ABB, then no Dire Straits.

forgive my ignorance but who is ABB?

The Allman Bros. Band

My comment was not well received. I feel that ABB is much more Prog-like than Dire Straits. ABB was shot down, but I wasn't the first to bring it up either.

-------------

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 11:07

TGM: Orb wrote:

there's some pretty subtle classical and jazz-influenced touches underneath the folk and rock underpinning some of the songwriting.

That's not exact TGM, Walter Murphy made a Disco version of Beethobven's Fifth Symphony, what more mixture of genres you want?

Bob Dylan was practically the creator of electric Country - Rock, nobody dreams to add them here.

OMD mixes Punk, Pop, Electronuic music and nobosy sane will suggest them

Synthesiser, piano and organ alternately throughout the majority of the album, including a further guest synth operator, none of which seem to me to be especially stuck in the rock vein. The further additions of vibes and marimba, which have the same rough effect on a couple of tracks.

Massive is not a synonimous of lush

Yes, intelligent lyrics alone don't make a prog band. On the other hand, in conjunction with other evidence, they imply progressiveness.

Non commercial approach Please, they always were a COMMRCIAL band, is incredible not to accept this

It's incredible and ridiculous to suggest that opening an album with a fifteen minute song was a commercial move in 1982. [/shoutingbigtext]

One long song doesn't imply any Ptrog relation, because the format and structure goes first, Dire Straits was an excelñlent Top 40 Rock band

Rolling Stone suggested the band was committing 'commercial suicide' and 'in a period when most pop music is conceived purely as product, Love Over Gold dares to put art before airplay. '. The album lacks an obvious single cut, and every song is over five and a half minutes long, IIRC. Suggesting that Love Over Gold is commercial, especially given that much of the band's previous success had come from the smooth, fairly concise single, Sultans of Swing, is beyond silly.

Look at all their career,pelase, we are talking about the band, you want them because of the album that is barely related to Prog Related if maybe too much.

Plus Riolling Strones considers anythiong most top 40 as arrogant crap.

" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegraph_Road_%28song%29 - Telegraph Road " – 14:15
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Investigations - Private Investigations " – 6:45
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Disease_%28song%29 - Industrial Disease " – 5:49
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_over_Gold_%28Dire_Straits_song%29 - Love over Gold " – 6:16
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_Never_Rains_%28song%29 - It Never Rains " – 7:54

Still can't fibnd the connection, one epic and nothing more, ion the 80's the 3.30 minutes limit was dead, 6 or 67 minutes is not too long, and long doesn't mean Prog either

It obviously fulfils five of the six suggested criteria for a symphonic prog album, and it's got some innovative touches, and given the sixth is hardly necessary, I personally think that's enough to say it's 'clearly' a prog album

It's easy to manipulate terms, when they are so shady as in the case of Prog, if i said that the mainelement of Symphonic is the blend of Classical and Rock, I should add walter Murphy, but no person with slight knowledge of music would dream to suggest him.

No, you are using RETRO PROG as a derogatory term, just as i said in another thread

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

I refuse to call anything Retro Prog, because this name implies:

That we are talking about a dead genre, and Prog never died, it's the same genre from 4 decades ago, only that bigger.

Why has a gernre to be limited to 10 or 15 years? Why can't Symphonic today be the same Symphonic than 20 years ago?

Most of this bands have some references to past icons, but they also have some new aspects.

I believe it's a harsh term,

Just my 2 cents.

Iván

But you have done it implying that is easier to add retro Prog rather than bands that according to you and almost nobody else, deserve to be here

A complete facepalm at the suggestion that Dire Straits play 'wattered pop, AOR, country'.

I was suggesting that, just because it's easier to add various other artists, who are more generally agreed upon, I didn't see the need to give up on considering or suggesting the addition of other, potentially worthy artists.

If we generally agree they are Prog and there's no controversy here and in other places, TYHEY ARE OBVIOUSLY PROG, SO WHAT'S THE QUESTUION.

This is a Prog site and outr main priority is Prog.

[quote]Just to keep my arguments clear, I'm not responding to specific sentences, though I believe I've herein answered all the substance of your post (for instance, the 'a song in a career' point is answered by the first paragraph, though I haven't made an effort in clearly highlighting that).

Please read the threads, veryu clear reasons have been given

---

Comparison to SFAJT

[quote]Script For A Jester's Tear and Love Over Gold are actually pretty damn similar from a stylistic point of view. Instrumentation,

Most of the bands of the late 70's used keyboards, bass, drums, guitars this nmeans absolutely nothing

structure,

Not at all, you can't compare a 100% Neo OProg/Symphonic band, with clear genesis influence and a classical Prog style with a band that has maybe some reminiscences of Prog, no connection at all.

dramatic flair, progressive rock created with an awareness of the mainstream. I'd say the latter is actually more 'progressive' as an album, in that it's creating progressive rock without clearly referencing previous progressive rock acts.

Progressive Rock doesn't mean a band has to break wioth the past, if today appeared a band that sounds exactly as yes they woyuld be added uinmediately, because they belong to a genre called proggressive Rock

Yes, it has one or two folk elements, a couple of pop elements (well, basically, it's only got melodies in that respect... it certainly doesn't conform to pop structures), and one more regularly structured (but nonetheless pretty bizarre) rocker, but really, these grounds of reference do not define the substance of the album. Scheherezade and Other Stories, for instance, though it leans heavily on classical and jazz props, is clearly a progressive rock album. Likewise, Love Over Gold.

Funny how you diminish their clear Folk and Blues based sound to priorize wwhat ou see as Prog....I bet you they will never be added.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: kenethlevine
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 11:16

StyLaZyn wrote:

kenethlevine wrote:

StyLaZyn wrote:

No ABB, then no Dire Straits.

forgive my ignorance but who is ABB?

The Allman Bros. Band

My comment was not well received. I feel that ABB is much more Prog-like than Dire Straits. ABB was shot down, but I wasn't the first to bring it up either.

Thanks! I only know a few songs by them and one, memory of elizabeth reid, sounds pretty prog related.

I've pretty much given up on trying to understand prog related as a genre here because there are so many bands in it that I don't agree with, while others are not here that I feel are at least as deserving, so unless a band merits a higher sub genre, like crossover or something more directly prog, I don't bother to fight it.

In some sense, it's hard to conceive of any remotely serious band in the progressive era not being prog related, just because they were there and influences rubbed off. I understand the argument of primarily prog vs primarily rock/blues etc, but I think that's a hard thing to determine, and I don't see Bowie or Zeppelin as primarily progressive any more than, say, early Fleetwood Mac or Cat Stevens. I know people here always re-iterate that we cannot judge whether a band should be included based on whether another band should be included, but to me that is a pretty important consideration and difficult to ignore. Just my 0.02 CAD Wink

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 11:16

cacho wrote:

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Tony R wrote:

There seems to be a concerted effort to see every rock band in history that is highly-regarded for its musicianship elevated to Prog or Prog-Related status. How sad.

Hi Tony, I mentioned this before because it's a common mistake.

Or maybe people want to say they only listen Prog, so lets turn every bandv we like into Prog to keep our record clean.

Iván

Come on Ivan, you can't be serious on that last sentence, either in the paragraph before it.

cacho, I am completely serious, from the moment people say THEY DESERVE TO BE HERE, they are catalñoguing the band as superior for being Prog

You're saying people are discussing this to death because they love the band? You're saying people want to make people in HERE think they only listen to Prog making other bands they like be here in PA?

Yes, has happened 100 times, and will happen again

Coming from a guy like you, it's pretty much absurd I'm afraid.

You've not been here wenough, I seen people lobbying to add the band they enjoyedc as kids, the fiorst post of the thread gives as a strong argument that he listens Prog and has 14 Dire Straits songs on his IPOD, it's more than evident this is the case.

If people think a album is Prog, does it mean they love the band?

Most of the people (I'd say almost everybody) suggest bands they love, while the teams have to add bands we believe are Prog.

Look at the Cem Karaca thread, a lot of pages, flooded with samples from a guy who said he's here to promote Prog from his country.

You're being way too extremist, just because you and others don't consider it. I know the Admin team didn't approve them, yet it doesn't mean they're right, either we are. Of course, they take the decision not us, but please don't go on saying that the ones who defend the position of Love Over Gold being Prog are just people who like to see a good rock band here in PA, just for the sake of a "Prog Status"

Please, a band that existed since 32 years ago and is not included uin ANY respectable Prog site is not Prog in 99.99999%v of the cases.

To Deathrabbitt: Progressive Rock is a genre that is divided in sub-genres, visit our forst page plus each and every Prog site,

Of course it has a mindset, stylistic, structural, etc component, but not enough to describe it, some bands are very Progressive because they were ahead of most of the bands from their era (early U2, Early REM, etc) but not part of the PROGRESSIVE ROCK GENRE.

Fusion and Post Rock Metal are here, because theyshare elements of both jazz or Metalo and progressive Rock.

Listen Aurora by Ponty for example, is a clear blend of Symphonic Prog and Jazz Fusion, the same wit metal bands.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 11:33

Tony R wrote:

There seems to be a concerted effort to see every rock band in history that is highly-regarded for its musicianship elevated to Prog or Prog-Related status. How sad.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Or maybe people want to say they only listen Prog, so lets turn every bandv we like into Prog to keep our record clean.

Do we really need derogatory and sweeping generalisations like this in what has so far been a fair discussion with differing opinions? I really think it's belittling the whole thing.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 11:44

Not belliteling, it has happened we all know it, you have been long enough here to notice it.

I have read arguments like:

For me there are two kinds of music, the good one and the bad one
Doesn't matter if not Pog, it's a great band
I listen them all the time

At least a hundreed times,.......What does this means?

Iván

-------------

Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 11:46

I just think it's unnecessary since it's just an open forum discussion, where you try to change each other's minds. Should it ever reach evaluation, you're still free to reject it.

Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 11:54

Sssh! Linus! Don't stop them! This is amusing

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 11:56

LinusW wrote:

I just think it's unnecessary since it's just an open forum discussion, where you try to change each other's minds. Should it ever reach evaluation, you're still free to reject it.

Yes linus, but to focus again and again in bands rejected ad nauseam, makes us loose the perspective of what is our central work...PROGRESSIVE ROCK, not classical Rock bands that may or may not have some light connection with Prog.

When a 100% Prog band is added, the average is 1 reply or less, when one of this non Prog bands is suggested, we waste an average of 5 threads of 3 or more pages each.

Is this a Prog site or a Prog - Almost Prog - Somehow Prog, He played with a Pog band, Maybe connected with Prog, They played in the same time than most Prog bands, some similarities with Prog and Not Prog but I like them site?

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 11:59

Yes - but it's a waste of time to argue this when no one is going to change anyone's mind. It's up to the admin team, and they've declined it on more than one occasion.

So the perusing arguments are just funny.

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 12:02

Mm... some selections, and some thoughts.

I personally love a fair few songs by The Beach Boys, Talking Heads, Bob Dylan and the Afro-Celt Sound System. I wouldn't dream of saying any of them ought to be added. There are non-prog bands I like much more than some prog bands, there are non-prog albums I like much more than prog albums. My favourite Dire Straits album, by far, is one I acknowledge isn't prog (the debut).

I believe my arguments in favour of the album being prog have all been stated, rebutted and defended, so I won't bother using the volume of text to make them seem better. Crucial to my argument was that they fulfilled multiple criteria of the symphonic definition, and in a definite rock vein. Saying that other bands fulfil one such criterion and aren't here isn't actually really engaging with my argument.

One long song doesn't imply any Ptrog relation, because the format and structure goes first, Dire Straits was an excelñlent Top 40 Rock band

Please stop pretending a quote was about something it wasn't Smile

That one was clearly about the album taking a non-commercial approach, not about one song's length representing a progressive band.

cacho, I am completely serious, from the moment people say THEY DESERVE TO BE HERE, they are catalñoguing the band as superior for being Prog

No, they aren't. They're saying that the band's output is such that they should be on prog archives, not that they should be on prog archives because they're good. In the same way, I'd say Moonmadness deserves to be progarchives, because, little as I like it, it's a prog album.

But you have done it implying that is easier to add retro Prog rather than bands that according to you and almost nobody else, deserve to be here

That was exactly my point, yes. Wow. Big shock. Personally, however, I'm not busy adding those bands. I was simply saying that, just because it's easier to add those bands, there's no reason not to discuss a band I feel should be here. It's hardly a huge drain on manpower. I know I wasn't trying to deride 'retro-prog', but if you want to believe I was, go ahead - I could just as easily have said 'prog-metal' or 'post-rock'.

structure,

Not at all, you can't compare a 100% Neo OProg/Symphonic band, with clear genesis influence and a classical Prog style with a band that has maybe some reminiscences of Prog, no connection at all.

That's not at all about structure, now, is it?

Massive is not a synonimous of lush
.
Without meaning to sound too rude, I'm a native English speaker and I'm pretty sure that lush, in its basic meaning, combines the idea of density or abundance with that of attractiveness. Thesaurus.com agrees with me

lush - 6 thesaurus results

function ss(w){window.status=w;return true;} function cs(){window.status='';}

http://cache.lexico.com/css/d/v2/sponsoredListing.css - function render_ads(position, num, ajsl_ads, gsl_count) { var s = ''; if(!num) { return; } var top=true; if(position == 'top' || position.indexOf('mid')!=-1){ top=true; }else if(position == 'bot'){ top=false; } window['sponsoredResultText'] = '

' var prefix = '\n

- '; window['spLabel'] = ' - Sponsored Results'; var suffix = '

'; var template = '

%7burl%7d - - {abstract}
{label} - {visibleUrl}

\n'; s += prefix; var ads = window['google_ads']; var offset = 0; var idx=0; if(true&& true && position=='bot' && ads.length > window['ad_config_mid']){ offset = window['ad_config_mid']; idx= offset; } for(var i = idx, j=0; j.url); fragment = fragment.replace(/\{visibleUrl\}/, ads.visible_url.length > 65 ? ads.visible_url.substring(0, 65) : ads.visible_url); ads.line1 = highlightQuery(ads.line1); fragment = fragment.replace(/\{title\}/, ads.line1); ads.line2 = highlightQuery(ads.line2); ads.line3 = highlightQuery(ads.line3); fragment = fragment.replace(/\{abstract\}/, ads.line2 + " " + ads.line3); fragment = fragment.replace(/\{io\}/, offset ? offset+i : i); return fragment; } var repeatAds=true; function debug_info_update_render_ads(){ if(document.getElementById('afc_ads_recieved')){ var no_of_ads_debug_info = document.createTextNode(google_ads.length); document.getElementById('afc_ads_recieved').appendChild(no_of_ads_debug_info); } } function google_ad_request_done(google_ads) { debug_info_update_render_ads(); window['google_ads'] = google_ads; if(google_ads.length != 0) { apply_ad_config(google_ads.length); if(window['ajsl_ads']) { if (3 <= 5 'ad_config_top' = 'ad_config_top' - 'ajsl_ads'.length; render_ads'top', 'ajsl_ads'.length, 'ajsl_ads', 'ad_config_top'; else render_ads'top', 'ad_config_top'; apply_ad_confignum 'ad_config_top' = Math.min3, num; ifrepeatAds 'ad_config_mid' = Math.min3, num; 'ad_config_bot' = Math.min5, num; iftrue && true ifnum <= 2 'ad_config_mid' =0; else ifnum == 3 'ad_config_mid' =1; else ifnum > 3 && num < 8 'ad_config_mid' =2; else ifnum == 8 'ad_config_mid' =3; else 'ad_config_mid' = Math.min3, num - 'ad_config_top'; 'ad_config_bot' = Math.min5, num - 'ad_config_top'-'ad_config_mid'; iffalse google_ad_client = 'ca-aj-lexico-thes'; google_ad_channel = 'channel-01'; google_ad_output = 'js'; google_max_num_ads = '5'; google_page_ = ''; google_num_ads_recieved= ''; google_ad_ = 'text'; google__size = ''; google_ = ''; google_country = ''; google_encoding = 'utf8'; google_safe = 'high'; google_adtest = 'off'; google_hints = ''; google_kw = 'lush'; google_kw_ = 'broad'; google_ad_section = 'default'; else google_ad_client = 'ca-aj-lexico-thes'; google_ad_channel = 'channel-01'; google_ad_output = 'js'; google_ad_ = 'text'; google_max_num_ads = '5'; google_safe = 'high'; google_encoding = 'utf8'; google_hints = 'lush'; google_ad_section='def'; var word_arr ; var word_arr_len ; highlightQuery_str var queryTokenArray = "lush,"; var tok_arr = queryTokenArray.split","; fortok_arr_idx=0; tok_arr_idx < tok_arr.length-1; tok_arr_idx ++ ifisCombinationWordtok_arrtok_arr_idx word_arr = tok_arrtok_arr_idx.split"-"; word_arr_len = word_arr.length; first_pos = _str.toLowerCase.indexOfword_arr0,0; iffirst_pos !=-1 _str = highlightCombinationWords_str,first_pos; else first_pos = _str.toLowerCase.indexOftok_arrtok_arr_idx,0; iffirst_pos != -1 _str = highlightSimpleWords_str,tok_arrtok_arr_idx,first_pos; return _str; isCombinationWordword ifword.indexOf"-" != -1 return true; else return false; isAlphach if ch != null && ch.match/^a-zA-Z0-9+$/ return true; return false; isQueryinfirstindex, _str, j fori=firstindex; i< _str.length ; ++i var currindex = i; if!isAlpha_str.charAti iffirstindex == currindex 2 consecutive non-alpha characters firstindex++; else ifword_arrj != _str.subfirstindex,currindex.toLowerCase return -1; if j == word_arr_len-1 return currindex; else return isQueryincurrindex+1,_str,++j; ifj < word_arr_len ifword_arrj != _str.subfirstindex,currindex+1.toLowerCase return -1; return currindex + 1 ; highlightCombinationWords_str,first_pos exactmatch = isQueryinfirst_pos+word_arr0.length,_str,1 ; ifexactmatch !=-1 bold_str = "" + input_str.substring(first_pos,exactmatch) + ""; input_str = input_str.substring(0,first_pos) + bold_str + input_str.substring(exactmatch); next_pos = input_str.toLowerCase().indexOf(word_arr[0],exactmatch+7); while(next_pos != -1) { return highlightCombinationWords(input_str,next_pos); } } return input_str; } function highlightSimpleWords(input_str,token, first_pos) { var end_pos = first_pos + token.length; if(!isAlpha(input_str.charAt(end_pos)) && !isAlpha(input_str.charAt(first_pos-1))){ bold_str = "" + input_str.substring(first_pos,end_pos) + ""; input_str = input_str.substring(0,first_pos) + bold_str + input_str.substring(end_pos); next_pos = input_str.toLowerCase().indexOf(token,end_pos+7); } else { next_pos = input_str.toLowerCase().indexOf(token,end_pos); } while(next_pos != -1) { return highlightSimpleWords(input_str,token,next_pos); } return input_str; } < style="display: none;" ="" ="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"> < ="http://cache.lexico.com/js/premium.js" ="text/"> < ="http://cache.lexico.com/js/luna.js" ="text/">

Main Entry: lush

Part of Speech: adjective

Definition: profuse and delightful

Synonyms: http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/abundant - abundant , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/ambrosial - ambrosial , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/delectable - delectable , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/delicious - delicious , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/deluxe - deluxe , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/dense - dense , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/elaborate - elaborate , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/extensive - extensive , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/extravagant - extravagant , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/exuberant - exuberant , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/flourishing - flourishing , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/fresh - fresh , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/grand - grand , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/green - green , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/heavenly - heavenly , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/juicy - juicy , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/lavish - lavish , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/luscious - luscious , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/luxuriant - luxuriant , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/luxurious - luxurious , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/opulent - opulent , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/ornate - ornate , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/overgrown - overgrown , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/palatial - palatial , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/plush - plush , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/prodigal - prodigal , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/prolific - prolific , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/rank - rank , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/rich - rich , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/riotous - riotous , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/ripe - ripe , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/ritzy - ritzy , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/scrumptious - scrumptious , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/sensuous - sensuous , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/succulent - succulent , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/sumptuous - sumptuous , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/teeming - teeming , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/tender - tender , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/verdant - verdant , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/voluptuous - voluptuous

Antonyms: http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/austere - austere , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/bare - bare , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/barren - barren , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/sparse - sparse

Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 12:03

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

LinusW wrote:

I just think it's unnecessary since it's just an open forum discussion, where you try to change each other's minds. Should it ever reach evaluation, you're still free to reject it.

When a 100% Prog band is added, the average is 1 reply or less, when one of this non Prog bands is suggested, we waste an average of 5 threads of 3 or more pages each.

Iván

Fair enough. Regarding the bolded part, this is where opinion kicks in, and what makes this site even more interesting and constantly evolving Big smile

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 12:03

I agree King by Tor, but some of us tstill think we can change the mentality, focus in the priority of a site called:

http://www.progarchives.com/">

Return to the roots, but it seems like building in the sand.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 12:11

TGM: Orb wrote:

An admin seems to be trolling an addition suggestions thread. I'm not complaining.

You can complain all you want but my making a valid observation based on seeing the "big picture" is not trolling. It seems to me that there is a fear of stating the obvious:

some people on this site quite clearly haven't a clue what Prog Rock is.

I bought all the Dire Straits albums as they came out. I have seen them in concert at the height of their popularity. I have read interviews and articles about the band and never once was Prog mentioned. Never once was a Prog Rock band cited as influence or praised retrospectively. I am certain that if you were to ask Mark Knopfler himself about his band being Prog-Related he would be non-plussed.

Show me the articles, the interviews or the quotes that support your claim or stop your revisionism.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 12:12

Just one more thing TGM, because this has grown too much read the synonyms of Lush you quote:

Synonyms:

http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/abundant - abundant , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/ambrosial - ambrosial , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/delectable - delectable , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/delicious - delicious , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/deluxe - deluxe , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/dense - dense , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/elaborate - elaborate , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/extensive - extensive , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/extravagant - extravagant , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/exuberant - exuberant , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/flourishing - flourishing , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/fresh - fresh , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/grand - grand , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/green - green , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/heavenly - heavenly , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/juicy - juicy , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/lavish - lavish , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/luscious - luscious , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/luxuriant - luxuriant , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/luxurious - luxurious , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/opulent - opulent , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/ornate - ornate , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/overgrown - overgrown , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/palatial - palatial , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/plush - plush , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/prodigal - prodigal , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/prolific - prolific , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/rank - rank , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/rich - rich , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/riotous - riotous , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/ripe - ripe , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/ritzy - ritzy , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/scrumptious - scrumptious , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/sensuous - sensuous , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/succulent - succulent , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/sumptuous - sumptuous , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/teeming - teeming , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/tender - tender , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/verdant - verdant , http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/voluptuous - voluptuous

Im neither a native English speaker, but I think Synonyms means equivalent., and none of the highlighted has any relation with DS.

But lets leave it there, the Adms will decide.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 12:12

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

LinusW wrote:

I just think it's unnecessary since it's just an open forum discussion, where you try to change each other's minds. Should it ever reach evaluation, you're still free to reject it.

When a 100% Prog band is added, the average is 1 reply or less, when one of this non Prog bands is suggested, we waste an average of 5 threads of 3 or more pages each.

Iván

The question is really whether a prog site should have every prog album on it. I think most people would say yes. Now, given I think Love Over Gold is a definite prog album (and quite a few others have agreed with this point of view in the past), but it isn't on here, I'm going to defend its suggested addition to the archives, not because I'm trying to include non-prog material I like, but because I think the site should *shock* include prog material, even if it's perhaps going to be controversial.

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 12:22

Alright, Ivan, let's leave it at this.

@Tony. You've posted four responses, now, two of which were essentially snide comments making assumptions about the character/intent of those supporting the suggestion without any grounds for it. My, admittedly, in a sense, revisionist, arguments for the band's inclusion were based, exclusively, on the content of Love Over Gold, not on historical perception or influences. If someone else wants to make those arguments, fine.

Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 13:12

TGM: Orb wrote:

Alright, Ivan, let's leave it at this.

@Tony. You've posted four responses, now, two of which were essentially snide comments making assumptions about the character/intent of those supporting the suggestion without any grounds for it. My, admittedly, in a sense, revisionist, arguments for the band's inclusion were based, exclusively, on the content of Love Over Gold, not on historical perception or influences. If someone else wants to make those arguments, fine.

There is nothing snide about my responses. Incredulity sometimes makes it difficult to couch ones language in a tone that will satisfy the recipient. Let's just say I answered you in a manner I would, say, an alchemist. (Apt analogy actually) but if you are genuinely offended or feel harassed then I apologise.

Posted By: russellk
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 14:45

As this discussion has proceeded the two sides of the argument have become more entrenched. This is odd, because I thought the way forward was quite clear.

DIRE STRAITS has been suggested for Prog-Related.
- This means the proposer considers the band is not prog.
- The major piece of evidence offered in support of this proposition is the 1982 album 'Love Over Gold'.
- If 'Love Over Gold' is assessed as 100% prog, then by the rules of this site the band should be placed in a full prog category.
- Arguments and counter-arguments to this assessment have been made.
- Therefore it seems DIRE STRAITS cannot be considered a prog band, which supports the proposer's contention.
- The single question remaining, therefore, is whether DIRE STRAITS is prog-related.

With the greatest of respect to the admins/collabs who have adopted a tone of faint ridicule to this suggestion, I'd argue that this is not as clear-cut as you seem to be indicating. TonyR challenges the proponents of the argument to find any mention of progressive rock in articles/interviews/quotes. That's not going to be a fruitful search, as identifying with prog rock in 1982 was commercially limiting, to say the least. But reviewers haven't been so reticent:
(NB: I understand that the views of amateur reviewers and wikipedia are simply opinions. You don't need to tell me that AllMusic and Wikipedia are dubious; I know. My quoting them here is to indicate that some people out there consider 'Love Over Gold' progressive.)

In a sense, the album is their prog rock effort, containing only five songs, including the 14-minute opener "Telegraph Road." (AllMusic.com)

The song [Love Over Gold] is the closest song to reveal any blues characteristics on a relatively progressive album. (Wikipedia)

Due to its lengthy atmospheric instrumental passages it has been cited as the band's only album that resembles progressive rock, although not quite achieving it. (Wikipedia)

Plenty of Amazon.com reviews mention the album’s progressive tendencies: “Whoever said progressive rock was dead in 1982 must have forgotten to tell Mark Knopfler”, “The music here is very and innovative progressive rock”, “Love Over Gold offers subtle nuances in its progressive leanings”, and “Love Over Gold resembles those concept albums of the progressive rock bands of the 70's” are representative of this view. Moreover, many of the negative reviews the album receives are similar to the criticism suffered by progressive rock. Songs too long, music meanders, too complex etc.

I mention these views as they are similar to my own. If 'Love Over Gold' was representative of DIRE STRAITS' output I doubt we'd be arguing. But is one album that some say is clearly influenced by prog rock enough to be included in prog related? That is the question remaining to be answered.

And here's where it gets difficult and subjective. If you then try to argue 'X or Y are here in prog-related on the strength of one album, therefore so should Z', the argument is ruled invalid. So here's what we need to know. By what criteria can we suggest a prog-related band?

A final note to those who make these decisions. If you are unhappy that a band you believe should not be on this site actually has a case to be included, then, I beg you, don't argue with the proposer or ridicule him/her. Instead, change the rules to eliminate the ambiguity.

Posted By: StyLaZyn
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 14:47

Prog Related definition

Progressive rock is not a separate universe in music, it’s a genre among many others, a voice in the chorus and as part of a biggest scenario has points of contact with other musical genres.

Prog Related is the category that groups bands and artists that:

- Without being 100% Prog, received clear MUSICAL influence of this genre, OR

- Are widely accepted as MUSICALLY influential to the development of Progressive Rock by the community, OR

- Blend 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.

We specify the word MUSICAL because simple performance of a determined instrument in a Prog or mainstream band is not justification enough to include an artist, no matter how virtuoso he/she may be, Prog Archives has to evaluate their compositional work because the music is what determines the characteristics of a band or an artist.

Prog Related bands are not considered part of the genre but they have contributed in some form in the development of Progressive Rock, the inclusion of a band is exceptional and only after verifying that it’s a contribution for the better understanding of Prog among the members and visitors instead of a source of confusion for the community.

-------------

Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 14:51

Russellk, did you post that as a member of the forum or representing the views of the Prog Reviewers/Collaborator ranks?

My point is that I am entitled to my personal opinion as the next member and in a discussion such as this if I was making an official pronouncement I would add "Admin Note:" or something similar.

Just for the record.

Posted By: russellk
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 14:59

Tony R wrote:

Russellk, did you post that as a member of the forum or representing the views of the Prog Reviewers/Collaborator ranks?

My point is that I am entitled to my personal opinion as the next member and in a discussion such as this if I was making an official pronouncement I would add "Admin Note:" or something similar.

Just for the record.

Yes, fair point. It's hard to know when admins/collabs are giving personal opinions or commenting on things in their official capacity.

Ooh, I have an official capacity! *unwraps shiny new toy*

Posted By: russellk
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 15:14

StyLaZyn wrote:

Prog Related definition

Yeah, I've seen this, and I struggle with it. The statement "Blend 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"is very broad and seems to invite thousands of bands into the category - certainly DIRE STRAITS would make it easily with 'Love Over Gold'.

But there's a much more limiting statement: "Prog Related bands are not considered part of the genre but they have contributed in some form in the development of Progressive Rock, the inclusion of a band is exceptional and only after verifying that it’s a contribution for the better understanding of Prog among the members and visitors instead of a source of confusion for the community". This allows those who decide a simple way out of any controversial suggestion: band X did not contribute to the development of Progressive Rock, and it would be a source of confusion for the community. By these two criteria, which are in addition to the three initial 'or' statements, DIRE STRAITS is clearly excluded from Prog-related. But then, he said, ducking: so would many other bands/acts in prog related.

If the intent of the definition is to include all bands influenced by prog, we'd instantly triple the number of bands on the site. If the intent is to include all bands influential to the development of prog (a completely different thing), we have a clear overlap with proto-prog, surely? If the intent is to make this category a seldom-used term to include a few rare acts, and exclude bands like DIRE STRAITS, then why include the first three broad 'or' statements?

Look, I know how extraordinarily difficult constructing such a definition is. I know how incredibly frustrating it is to spend time countering arguments like those in this thread when you've got much better things to do. But the frequency and repetition of such debates suggests that a rethink of the category might be easier than feeling compelled to respond!

Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 15:18

russellk wrote:

Yes, fair point. It's hard to know when admins/collabs are giving personal opinions or commenting on things in their official capacity.

Ooh, I have an official capacity! *unwraps shiny new toy*

I LOL'd

On a serious note, I am aware that if I contribute to a discussion it looks like the heavy guns have been brought out but I only comment on bands (etc) that I am very familiar with. I genuinely do not see the Prog in Love Over Gold but that's just my opinion. If the band were presented to the Admin Team then I would be one vote in 7 and I am pretty certain that the likes of Dean, Bob, Guigo, John, Jim and Jody are not going to be swayed by my opinion.

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 15:28

russellk wrote:

f the intent of the definition is to include all bands influenced by prog, we'd instantly triple the number of bands on the site. If the intent is to include all bands influential to the development of prog (a completely different thing), we have a clear overlap with proto-prog, surely? If the intent is to make this category a seldom-used term to include a few rare acts, and exclude bands like DIRE STRAITS, then why include the first three broad 'or' statements?

No Russelk, it's not the intention to open the doors, by the contrary, this limited a lot, and my definition approved by the Administrators is clear at the end, I knmow it well, I wrote it:

Prog Related definition

Prog Related bands are not considered part of the genre but they have contributed in some form in the development of Progressive Rock, the inclusion of a band is exceptional and only after verifying that it’s a contribution for the better understanding of Prog among the members and visitors instead of a source of confusion for the community.

Iván Melgar Morey

Dire Straits:

Have contributed to the development of Prog Rock: Not remotely the case of Dire Straits, tbey have contributed in nothing with Prog Rock.
The inclusion of a band is exceptional: This limits more the universe
Only after verifying that it’s a contribution for the better understanding of Prog among the members and visitors instead of a source of confusion for the community: If :
1. All the Administrators were against the inclusion
2. No representative Prog site has added them as Prog in 32 years of existence, despite one of them have added Jerry Lee lewis and William Shatner, and another considers AOR a full Prog sub-genre
3. Is not an obscure band that could had been forgotten or lost in time, on the contrary, everybody knows about their existence
4. 81.87% of the voters in a poll consider them not part of Prog Archives
5. Has been rejected six times

Then is a source of confusion rather than help the better understanding of the genre called Progressive Rock.

Rest my case, the definition is perfectly clear.

Iván

BTW: We, even when special collaborators, give our PERSONAL OPINIONS, except when talking in the name of the team we represent (in my case is Symphonic), so when talking about a band that somebody wants to add to Prog Related, I have no special prerrogatives based on my rank or whatever you call it.

-------------

Posted By: StyLaZyn
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 15:29

russellk wrote:

StyLaZyn wrote:

Prog Related definition

It is all that we have. It seems to work.

That being said, I am surprised to find that Dire Straits was influenced by Prog.

-------------

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 16:20

russellk wrote:

StyLaZyn wrote:

Prog Related definition

Hm, now that's quite an interesting line of thought. I suppose one frustration here is that, given my grounds for supporting the suggestion are one progressive rock album (which I'd have said falls somewhere between Neo and Crossover, probably leaning towards the latter, because there's no tangible specific influence/connection with the original progressive acts), but the PR category seems to evade the 'one prog album = inclusion' rule, even if that one album would, perhaps, belong in a prog genre rather than the related one.

On the other hand, I think that category would be a much better fit for a band which, for the most part, did not output progressive music, and is known overwhelmingly for its non-prog material. As a category that seems to be maintained for the sake of completeness (solo artists, tangential artists like Kate Bush or David Bowie, later influences on prog), I can say that I think the inclusion of Dire Straits here would be rational if they were to make the site.

About the clarifications. I think, if you insisted on putting under the 'magniifying glass', so to speak, many of the PR artists, you could easily say that they haven't obviously contributed anything to prog, or at least, have not contributed to its development (which is surely what PP is for, anyway?) - what, for example, has Mike Rutherford's solo career done for prog's development? Kate Bush's? (yeah, I know the 'if X is here, Y should be' argument is off-kilter, but I'm using that rather of an example of a case where I feel that if we applied the definition in too constricting a fashion, we'd have difficulty justifying some of the most obvious inclusions for the genre.

In particular,
'Blend 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.' seems to me to suggest that this 'influence on the development of prog' can come simply from being an extension of prog... otherwise, at least, that third condition (and possibly the first) would be somewhat irrelevant.

And to say, 'source of confusion for the community'... would having a definition saying 'in because Love Over Gold displays overt progressive characteristics' somewhat lessen that (hypothetically speaking, of course), in the same way that the excellent Hendrix-inclusion blurb, I think, helped express reasonably the motivations behind his inclusion in proto-. I think 'confusion for the community' is a very imprecise term, and somewhat of a watery get-out-of-jail-free card. Understandable, but I think community confusion is something which could very easily be worked around, and consequently, this condition should perhaps be seen in that light.

---

All the Administrators were against the inclusion

Yeah, not much I can say to that.

No representative Prog site has added them as Prog in 32 years of existence, despite one of them have added Jerry Lee lewis and William Shatner, and another considers AOR a full Prog sub-genre.

William Shatner?! That's pretty impressive. On the other hand, I think PA shouldn't shy away from including things just because other sites don't... yes, they're a useful point of reference in some respects, but I think, perhaps, PA's the one that's defining the genre these days.

On the other hand. Just googled a generic review site, whaddaya know, about the fifteenth or so review of this:

'A progressive masterpiece, my favourite work form DS. 'Telegraph Road' is the most complex stuff the Strais ever did, thus their best song ever. 'Private Investigations' is a bit strange and dark, but in the end becomes very progressive and a bit anvatgarde too. 'Industrial Disease' is the odd one out track, I like it the least, but the last two pieces are very satisfactory again.

However Dire Straits was never a "mainstream" prog band, this record is defnitely belonging to the collection of the biggest progressive works of all time.'

On about the twelfth.
'Dire Straits go art-rock. It was probably necessary for the band to try something new on their fourth album but I don't like the results. What they do here is not what I want from this band. It all sounds so "tasteful", and I mean in a bad way. In my opinion, the tracks are too long, the soloing is partially pointless and the new keyboard player takes up too much space. And I simply can't stand the nylon string guitar on "Private Investigations". Okay, that's just me, but it isn't exactly rock 'n' roll, is it?'

On the tenth or so
'Musically, this is a MUCH better song than the more commercially appealing BROTHERS IN ARMS'

'If it weren´t for that one throwaway pop song (Industrial Disease) I wouldn´t hesitate to call this one of the best albums of all time. For the most part, it is. It consists of strikingly original compostions and a mature, sober character and mood of a storytelling character. The album is certainly one of the noblest and most ambitious ever released.'

'the band seems to have two sides - the snide hard rock band that is displayed on most of their singles, and the more ornate, cinematic soft-rock/lite-progressive band that fills out the rest of their albums. Love Over Gold represents mostly this second side'

'This album is a real prog blues rock masterpiece!! WOW!'

Etc.

So, you know, someone out there agrees with me in essence, and they're surprisingly easy to find.

Is not an obscure band that could had been forgotten or lost in time, on the contrary, everybody knows about their existence

Yes, but the view of their existence is coloured by their otherwise mainstream career. It could well be that the progressive elements of it (i.e., mostly Love Over Gold) were dismissed

81.87% of the voters in a poll consider them not part of Prog Archives

18 voters considered they weren't suitable for PA, if that's the same poll you referred to in the other post. Let's put it into context. Additionally, if that poll is the one I remember, I think I saw at least one post saying, in essence, 'Love Over Gold is a prog album, but they shouldn't be here', which, at least, indicates that by the 'letter of the law', they would have been in support of the addition, but by their preference, they weren't.

Has been rejected six times

On the other hand, they've been suggested seven times, now... surely that indicates there is a feeling from at least a few people, that they're a band worthy of inclusion? I don't think anyone's suggested, say, AC/DC six times, even if, for my generation, they'd perhaps be comparably popular?

Posted By: Tuzvihar
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 16:44

-------------
"Music is much like f**king, but some composers can't climax and others climax too often, leaving themselves and the listener jaded and spent."

Charles Bukowski

Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 17:31

TGM: Orb wrote:

Hm, now that's quite an interesting line of thought. I suppose one frustration here is that, given my grounds for supporting the suggestion are one progressive rock album (which I'd have said falls somewhere between Neo and Crossover, probably leaning towards the latter, because there's no tangible specific influence/connection with the original progressive acts), but the PR category seems to evade the 'one prog album = inclusion' rule, even if that one album would, perhaps, belong in a prog genre rather than the related one.

Our ruules that you mention constantly say clearly that in case of a conflictive band, which is not mentioned in at least three sites, we must approve them by allthe members of a team, 100%, so that's almost impossible

that seems to be maintained for the sake of completeness (solo artists, tangential artists like Kate Bush or David Bowie, later influences on prog), I can say that I think the inclusion of Dire Straits here would be rational if they were to make the site.

I still think that Kate Bush was a mistake, but I respect he decision of a team, inn the case of Bowie, HE WAS CLEARLY INFLUENTIAL ON PROGRESSIVE ROCK, AS A FACT DURING HIS STAGE OF ZIGGIE STARSDUST COULD BE CONSIDERED THE FATHER OF THEATRIC PROG.

asily say that they haven't obviously contributed anything to prog, or at least, have not contributed to its development (which is surely what PP is for, anyway?) - what, for example, has Mike Rutherford's solo career done for prog's development? Kate Bush's? (yeah, I know the 'if X is here, Y should be' argument is off-kilter, but I'm using that rather of an example of a case where I feel that if we applied the definition in too constricting a fashion, we'd have difficulty justifying some of the most obvious inclusions for the genre.

I don't agree with Bus or Mike, but if a band or artist with whom I disagree has been accepted, it doesn't mean I have to make a worst mistake again just to make it even, only in abstract logic two mistakes make a correct conclusion, in real world we learn from our mistakes

In particular,
'Blend 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.' seems to me to suggest that this 'influence on the development of prog' can come simply from being an extension of prog... otherwise, at least, that third condition (and possibly the first) would be somewhat irrelevant.

No, the conclusion defines the degree of closeness they need to have, and in the case of Dire Straits is very shady to say the least

And to say, 'source of confusion for the community'... would having a definition saying 'in because Love Over Gold displays overt progressive characteristics' somewhat lessen that (hypothetically speaking, of course), in the same way that the excellent Hendrix-inclusion blurb,

Hendrix influenced Prog in some degree, not enough for me (if you remember i disagreed also), but Dire Straits absolutely not.

I think, helped express reasonably the motivations behind his inclusion in proto-. I think 'confusion for the community' is a very imprecise term, and somewhat of a watery get-out-of-jail-free card. Understandable, but I think community confusion is something which could very easily be worked around, and consequently, this condition should perhaps be seen in that light.

If all the administrators and the voters of the poll think they don't belong here, well it's clearly a confusion

---

All the Administrators were against the inclusion

Yeah, not much I can say to that.

Not much really

No representative Prog site has added them as Prog in 32 years of existence, despite one of them have added Jerry Lee lewis and William Shatner, and another considers AOR a full Prog sub-genre.

Our rules mention the case of conflictive bands, must be accepted by 100% of the votes of the team, and that won't happen.

On the other hand. Just googled a generic review site, whaddaya know, about the fifteenth or so review of this:

'A progressive masterpiece, my favourite work form DS. 'Telegraph Road' is the most complex stuff the Strais ever did, thus their best song ever. 'Private Investigations' is a bit strange and dark, but in the end becomes very progressive and a bit anvatgarde too. 'Industrial Disease' is the odd one out track, I like it the least, but the last two pieces are very satisfactory again.

However Dire Straits was never a "mainstream" prog band, this record is defnitely belonging to the collection of the biggest progressive works of all time.'

On about the twelfth.
'Dire Straits go art-rock. It was probably necessary for the band to try something new on their fourth album but I don't like the results. What they do here is not what I want from this band. It all sounds so "tasteful", and I mean in a bad way. In my opinion, the tracks are too long, the soloing is partially pointless and the new keyboard player takes up too much space. And I simply can't stand the nylon string guitar on "Private Investigations". Okay, that's just me, but it isn't exactly rock 'n' roll, is it?'

On the tenth or so
'Musically, this is a MUCH better song than the more commercially appealing BROTHERS IN ARMS'

'If it weren´t for that one throwaway pop song (Industrial Disease) I wouldn´t hesitate to call this one of the best albums of all time. For the most part, it is. It consists of strikingly original compostions and a mature, sober character and mood of a storytelling character. The album is certainly one of the noblest and most ambitious ever released.'

'the band seems to have two sides - the snide hard rock band that is displayed on most of their singles, and the more ornate, cinematic soft-rock/lite-progressive band that fills out the rest of their albums. Love Over Gold represents mostly this second side'

'This album is a real prog blues rock masterpiece!! WOW!'

Etc.

So, you know, someone out there agrees with me in essence, and they're surprisingly easy to find.

Our universe of action is Progressive Rock, what general music sites normally missinformed about Prog say, mean nothing. It's funny, you want us to ignore what Prog sites say, but accept what non Prog sites say.

Is not an obscure band that could had been forgotten or lost in time, on the contrary, everybody knows about their existence

Yes, but the view of their existence is coloured by their otherwise mainstream career. It could well be that the progressive elements of it (i.e., mostly Love Over Gold) were dismissed

That's exactly my `point, in 32 years no Prog site has added them, that's clear enough for me, all the sites consider that even that album is not enough excuise to add them.

81.87% of the voters in a poll consider them not part of Prog Archives

But they weren't, they clearly said NO. Guessing will take you knowhere, the people talked with the nuumbers, 18 said no, 4 said yes.

Has been rejected six times

That's the stubborn condition of human being, a few try to force the majority to go against their opinion, I propose that once rejected, a band shouldn't be suggested again unless they release new material that merits their inclusion, of course that's not the case of Dire Straits.

We are loosing time in a 5 pages thread about a band that has been rejected six times.

Lets remember, you need one person to suggest, but you need many more to reject.

Iván

-------------

Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 20:56

Let's divert our attention for a moment to a great concept album - the Eagles Hotel California

Mixture of elements from different genres. - Country, Hard Rock, Reggae, Classical
Complex time signatures.- title track is a combination reggae , fandango.
Lush keyboards. -nothing spectacular , like LOG. But - Wasting Time, Pretty Maids All In A Row, The Last Resort.
Explorative and intelligent lyrics, in some cases close to fantasy literature, Sci Fi and even political issues. as quoted from WIkipedia :

Hotel California touched on many themes, including, insanity, innocence (and the loss thereof), death, the dangers, temptation and transient nature of fame, shallow relationships, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce - divorce and loss of love, the end results of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny - manifest destiny , and the " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dream - American Dream ."

Members of Eagles have described the album as a metaphor for the perceived decline of America into materialism and decadence. In an interview with Dutch magazine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZigZag_%28magazine%29 - ZigZag shortly before the album's release, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Henley - Don Henley said:

“

This is a concept album, there's no way to hide it, but it's not set in the old West, the cowboy thing, you know. It's more urban this time (. . . ) It's our bicentennial year, you know, the country is 200 years old, so we figured since we are the Eagles and the Eagle is our national symbol, that we were obliged to make some kind of a little http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicentennial - bicentennial statement using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California - California as a microcosm of the whole United States, or the whole world, if you will, and to try to wake people up and say 'We've been okay so far, for 200 years, but we're gonna have to change if we're gonna continue to be around.'

re - the Last resort - It was the first time that Don took it upon himself to write an epic story and we were already starting to worry about the environment...we're constantly screwing up paradise and that was the point of the song and that at some point there is going to be no more new frontiers. I mean we're putting junk, er, garbage into space now.

Non commercial approach - lead off single (yes, a non-edited single release) Hotel California - 6 minutes 30 seconds. Album bookended with the Last Resort - 7:28. Indeed , this song can be considered a mini-suite.
Longer format of songs - see above.

Love over Gold is a fine album, with prog aspects. But are the longer songs prog in length only. Is it possible that they are really just extended jams on the basic melody ? We're not talking Dancing with the Moonlight Knight or 21st Centruy Schizoid Man, now are we ?

So , it is entirely possible that Love over Gold doesn't quite make it over the line into prog. And a long way from "full blown prog".
In fact, I'm still trying to figure out how Tunnel of Love & Romeo and Juliet are prog ??????

-------------
"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.

Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: May 10 2009 at 21:58

OK, enough is enough I reckon....

First off I am a great believer that the prog related genre is a sensible offering for ambiguity as well as genuine related material...BUT The most consistent aspect this site offers is that unless an artist's albums/or one single album qualifies as prog then that artist/s does not qualify. I for one would love to invent 1000 different reasons why Phil Collins should be added for Face Value alone but I cannot. 80% prog maybe but not 100% prog, Love Over Gold as an album prog related? Not in a million years. Side one yes, side two no,no,no!!!!

So lets give Dire Straits a miss for valid reasons. Forget Eagles and the likes ( Joe Walsh maybe

). There are some inconsistent inclusions like Roger Hodgson but overall we need to respect and agree the format........Dire Straits......................NO!

-------------
<font color=Brown>Music - The Sound Librarian

...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR]

Posted By: progrules
Date Posted: May 11 2009 at 02:15

debrewguy wrote:

In fact, I'm still trying to figure out how Tunnel of Love & Romeo and Juliet are prog ??????

Interesting you name these two songs because I always wondered if they were prog related. I don't have really good arguments to state that but I do wonder. I consider myself 90-99% prog where my love for music is concerned and I'm VERY critical about pop music and here it comes: I LOVE these two songs (as well as Once upon a time in the west and Brothers in Arms (the song, that is). Along with Telegraph Road and It never rains, hmmm that's quite a list of great "pop" (or prog related ?) songs.

Coming to the essential question: where does inventive and great pop end and does prog related begin ?

On the other hand: if I hear other songs of the ALBUM Brothers in Arms (like MTV and Walk of Life) I can only be satisfied they are NOT on PA. Inconsistent band, Dire Straits (or versatile if you wish) !

-------------
A day without prog is a wasted day

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 11 2009 at 03:26

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Our ruules that you mention constantly say clearly that in case of a conflictive band, which is not mentioned in at least three sites, we must approve them by allthe members of a team, 100%, so that's almost impossible

Doesn't affect my support for an addition.

that seems to be maintained for the sake of completeness (solo artists, tangential artists like Kate Bush or David Bowie, later influences on prog), I can say that I think the inclusion of Dire Straits here would be rational if they were to make the site.

I still think that Kate Bush was a mistake, but I respect he decision of a team, inn the case of Bowie, HE WAS CLEARLY INFLUENTIAL ON PROGRESSIVE ROCK, AS A FACT DURING HIS STAGE OF ZIGGIE STARSDUST COULD BE CONSIDERED THE FATHER OF THEATRIC PROG.

No disagreement there (though I support Kate). It's a credit to the site that an artist like Bowie, who is crucial to, but not a part of, progressive rock can be included in a category which doesn't put him in the 'prog' pigeonhole.

asily say that they haven't obviously contributed anything to prog, or at least, have not contributed to its development (which is surely what PP is for, anyway?) - what, for example, has Mike Rutherford's solo career done for prog's development? Kate Bush's? (yeah, I know the 'if X is here, Y should be' argument is off-kilter, but I'm using that rather of an example of a case where I feel that if we applied the definition in too constricting a fashion, we'd have difficulty justifying some of the most obvious inclusions for the genre.

I agree with both of those artists, Kate for her extension of Pfloydian ideas into the realm of art pop, and her role in Gabriel's solo career. My point was that the overly heavy-handed application of that rule would prevent perfectly valid artists being included as much as controversial ones.

In particular,
'Blend 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.' seems to me to suggest that this 'influence on the development of prog' can come simply from being an extension of prog... otherwise, at least, that third condition (and possibly the first) would be somewhat irrelevant.

No, the conclusion defines the degree of closeness they need to have, and in the case of Dire Straits is very shady to say the least

Closeness never equals influence on the development of. So I don't get what you're trying to say here.

And to say, 'source of confusion for the community'... would having a definition saying 'in because Love Over Gold displays overt progressive characteristics' somewhat lessen that (hypothetically speaking, of course), in the same way that the excellent Hendrix-inclusion blurb,

Hendrix influenced Prog in some degree, not enough for me (if you remember i disagreed also), but Dire Straits absolutely not.

That wasn't my point at all. My point was that confusion for the community can be cleared up pretty easily, so it shouldn't prevent an artist who should be here being here by itself.

If all the administrators and the voters of the poll think they don't belong here, well it's clearly a confusion

Community confusion isn't hard to work around or explain.

---

No representative Prog site has added them as Prog in 32 years of existence, despite one of them have added Jerry Lee lewis and William Shatner, and another considers AOR a full Prog sub-genre.

Our rules mention the case of conflictive bands, must be accepted by 100% of the votes of the team, and that won't happen.

Not relevant to whether I support an addition :)

On the other hand. Just googled a generic review site, whaddaya know, about the fifteenth or so review of this:

'A progressive masterpiece, my favourite work form DS. 'Telegraph Road' is the most complex stuff the Strais ever did, thus their best song ever. 'Private Investigations' is a bit strange and dark, but in the end becomes very progressive and a bit anvatgarde too. 'Industrial Disease' is the odd one out track, I like it the least, but the last two pieces are very satisfactory again.

However Dire Straits was never a "mainstream" prog band, this record is defnitely belonging to the collection of the biggest progressive works of all time.'

On about the twelfth.
'Dire Straits go art-rock. It was probably necessary for the band to try something new on their fourth album but I don't like the results. What they do here is not what I want from this band. It all sounds so "tasteful", and I mean in a bad way. In my opinion, the tracks are too long, the soloing is partially pointless and the new keyboard player takes up too much space. And I simply can't stand the nylon string guitar on "Private Investigations". Okay, that's just me, but it isn't exactly rock 'n' roll, is it?'

On the tenth or so
'Musically, this is a MUCH better song than the more commercially appealing BROTHERS IN ARMS'

'If it weren´t for that one throwaway pop song (Industrial Disease) I wouldn´t hesitate to call this one of the best albums of all time. For the most part, it is. It consists of strikingly original compostions and a mature, sober character and mood of a storytelling character. The album is certainly one of the noblest and most ambitious ever released.'

'the band seems to have two sides - the snide hard rock band that is displayed on most of their singles, and the more ornate, cinematic soft-rock/lite-progressive band that fills out the rest of their albums. Love Over Gold represents mostly this second side'

'This album is a real prog blues rock masterpiece!! WOW!'

Etc.

So, you know, someone out there agrees with me in essence, and they're surprisingly easy to find.

It's very patronising to suggest that general music fans know nothing (and lastly, those are reviews on a site, not the express views of that site) about progressive rock. After all, prog rock is part of general music. At least some of them indicated grounds of reference for progressive rock, and a few suggested a preference for progressive rock. Some prog rock sites may well have different criteria for addition to us (for instance, a site which says that a band can be included only on the balance of their career couldn't possibly include Dire Straits as a prog band, otoh, our system quite reasonably could). I don't know. Also, given you're denying that these prog sites (with AOR and William Shatner what have you) are credible, if they were on the other side, you'd probably ignore them, too.

Is not an obscure band that could had been forgotten or lost in time, on the contrary, everybody knows about their existence

Yes, but the view of their existence is coloured by their otherwise mainstream career. It could well be that the progressive elements of it (i.e., mostly Love Over Gold) were dismissed

That's exactly my `point, in 32 years no Prog site has added them, that's clear enough for me, all the sites consider that even that album is not enough excuise to add them.

No, it's not even close to your point. I was speaking about a biased view against the progressive aspects and elements of their music.

81.87% of the voters in a poll consider them not part of Prog Archives

But they weren't, they clearly said NO. Guessing will take you knowhere, the people talked with the nuumbers, 18 said no, 4 said yes.

People also talked with the posts, yes? If someone says they don't think a band should be here, but they think that band has a prog album, their 'no' is invalid in the context of whether they support a band addition. Also, talking up 18 people as 81.87%, while technically accurate, 18 is hardly representative of a majority view.

Has been rejected six times

We are loosing time in a 5 pages thread about a band that has been rejected six times.

Lets remember, you need one person to suggest, but you need many more to reject.

Iván

The few are sometimes right, or at least reasonable, the conception of progressive is always changing, and the interpretation of a band's material in retrospect is a crucial part of creating genre definitions and understanding. Preventing re-suggestion would, at best, be overkill, and at worst, cause a rigid non-recognition of changing views. I would, maybe, support the idea of leaving the existing suggestion thread open and not allowing the opening of a new one so that the idea of the band's merit for inclusion can still be discussed once it's been rejected/accepted, because then people can then register their changing views without necessarily re-suggesting a band.

You really don't need all that many folks to reject an addition, and at least putting in and defending the suggestion takes a surprising amount of effort. Frankly, it's not been the same person suggesting it every time.

And frankly, if we were that worried about losing time trying to put square bands into round genre holes, we wouldn't be on PA anyway LOL

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 11 2009 at 03:36

Love over Gold is a fine album, with prog aspects. But are the longer songs prog in length only. Is it possible that they are really just extended jams on the basic melody ? We're not talking Dancing with the Moonlight Knight or 21st Centruy Schizoid Man, now are we ?

I can say, pretty confidently, that I'm sure they aren't. There's a bit of a jam (even that's pretty well arranged, but it could be improv) towards the end of Telegraph road, but otherwise, I think, they're all pretty clearly not just jams.

Non commercial approach - lead off single (yes, a non-edited single release) Hotel California - 6 minutes 30 seconds. Album bookended with the Last Resort - 7:28. Indeed , this song can be considered a mini-suite.
Longer format of songs - see above.

Not exactly as clear as the running times of LOG. I think we can also say that the standards for a 'non-commercial' approach were slightly different in '76 and '82... one of the criteria in which context is pretty important.

So , it is entirely possible that Love over Gold doesn't quite make it over the line into prog. And a long way from "full blown prog".
In fact, I'm still trying to figure out how Tunnel of Love & Romeo and Juliet are prog ??????

I'd have given those two the nod for vaguely 'related', but I wouldn't call either of them (ok, maybe for the former, just about) 'prog'. Making Movies is one of those albums I could have called vaguely related (but nothing clear)... I suppose it's what I think Ivan thinks LOG is (I don't know, maybe he thinks there's no connection at all).

Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: May 11 2009 at 04:06

Everything is prog related.

-------------
if you own a sodastream i hate you

Posted By: npjnpj
Date Posted: May 11 2009 at 08:53

Hang on a moment, this whole thing is off-kilter.

Instead of discussing whether the band is prog, this discussion is about whether 1 (one!!!) of their albums can be considered prog or not, and this is supposed to be the basis on which their inclusion would be considered?

Sorry, that's just not enough!