Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Proto-Prog and Prog-Related Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Why non-prog bands are in PA and prog-related not?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedWhy non-prog bands are in PA and prog-related not?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
ghost_of_morphy View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: March 08 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2755 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 09 2008 at 01:52
Originally posted by Aeternus Aeternus wrote:

Ok, I agree that I've exaggerated it a bit. But that was my reaction after seeing all those bands here in PA. PA's concentration has went so much over proto-prog bands, I'm afraid PA one day will contain all classical and jazz musicians that inspired prog. And that's not funny.
 
You've exaggerated more than a bit.  The site only has included 32 acts that are considered proto-prog, which is quite a small category as far as the categories go.  (Zeuhl may have less, but that's about it.)  Most of those acts are fairly obscure, all of them are included for good reasons, and I agree with the reasons most of the were included out of the groups I'm familiar with.  
Back to Top
The Whistler View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: August 30 2006
Location: LA, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7113 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 09 2008 at 04:12
Okay, the Who is prog because they wrote rock operas and experimented with synths when only Kieth Emerson would touch 'em, the Doors are prog because YOU try classifying them successfully, and Toto isn't prog because Toto is a dog. Happy?
"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson
Back to Top
Avantgardehead View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: December 29 2006
Location: Dublin, OH, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1170 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 09 2008 at 05:31
Originally posted by Aeternus Aeternus wrote:

Metal Archives contains only metal bands.


Not really. Rush is there and they aren't metal. There are several glam rock bands there like Poison, Def Leppard, etc. as well as several ambient acts and non-metal stuff that gets in under the side-project rule ranging from pop, rock, to ambient.
http://www.last.fm/user/Avantgardian
Back to Top
Sean Trane View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20583 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 09 2008 at 10:02
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

Journey are currently under consideration.

Please see the definitions of the prog related and proto prog categories though. They do not classify these bands as prog.

 

 
This being said, the man has got a point. On the strenghth of two full-blown prog albums (which is more than Zep or Sabbath have done), Journey now deserves inclusion.
 
To me, prog-related changed nature once Zep got included, and therefore Journey's inclusion (a non-no for me) has now become almost urgent.
let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Forum Guest Group
Forum Guest Group
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 09 2008 at 12:09
Originally posted by Avantgardehead Avantgardehead wrote:

Originally posted by Aeternus Aeternus wrote:

Metal Archives contains only metal bands.


Not really. Rush is there and they aren't metal. There are several glam rock bands there like Poison, Def Leppard, etc. as well as several ambient acts and non-metal stuff that gets in under the side-project rule ranging from pop, rock, to ambient.


Rush consider themselves as heavy metal also. Poison and Def Leppard in the most cases are considered as glam metal. You're right about the side projects that some of them aren't metal. But, those side projects, or better to say members of those side projects, unlike here in PA, contribute mainly one their respective metal bands.
Back to Top
Avantgardehead View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: December 29 2006
Location: Dublin, OH, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1170 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 09 2008 at 15:54
Originally posted by Aeternus Aeternus wrote:

Originally posted by Avantgardehead Avantgardehead wrote:

Originally posted by Aeternus Aeternus wrote:

Metal Archives contains only metal bands.


Not really. Rush is there and they aren't metal. There are several glam rock bands there like Poison, Def Leppard, etc. as well as several ambient acts and non-metal stuff that gets in under the side-project rule ranging from pop, rock, to ambient.


Rush consider themselves as heavy metal also.


Slipknot consider themselves death metal and that's not exactly correct. Glam metal is a misnomer because the music (besides the distortion and solos) has very little to do with actual metal.
http://www.last.fm/user/Avantgardian
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 09 2008 at 18:44
Originally posted by Aeternus Aeternus wrote:

Originally posted by Avantgardehead Avantgardehead wrote:

Originally posted by Aeternus Aeternus wrote:

Metal Archives contains only metal bands.


Not really. Rush is there and they aren't metal. There are several glam rock bands there like Poison, Def Leppard, etc. as well as several ambient acts and non-metal stuff that gets in under the side-project rule ranging from pop, rock, to ambient.


Rush consider themselves as heavy metal also. Poison and Def Leppard in the most cases are considered as glam metal. You're right about the side projects that some of them aren't metal. But, those side projects, or better to say members of those side projects, unlike here in PA, contribute mainly one their respective metal bands.


*begins in earnest the 'Rush to Prog-Related' campaign LOLHeart
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65777 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 09 2008 at 19:00
Stern%20Smile




Tongue
Back to Top
ES335 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: December 10 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 168 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 09 2008 at 20:08
Originally posted by Aeternus Aeternus wrote:

Originally posted by Avantgardehead Avantgardehead wrote:

Originally posted by Aeternus Aeternus wrote:

Metal Archives contains only metal bands.


Not really. Rush is there and they aren't metal. There are several glam rock bands there like Poison, Def Leppard, etc. as well as several ambient acts and non-metal stuff that gets in under the side-project rule ranging from pop, rock, to ambient.


Rush consider themselves as heavy metal also. Poison and Def Leppard in the most cases are considered as glam metal. You're right about the side projects that some of them aren't metal. But, those side projects, or better to say members of those side projects, unlike here in PA, contribute mainly one their respective metal bands.
 
I think the definition of "metal" has changed with time. When I was in high school, Creem and Circus used to do "Special Heavy Metal" issues and Rush was always included, along with Zep, Van Halen, Heart and other bands no one thinks of as metal since Metallica, Megadeth, Antrax and other bands of that generation re-wrote the metal rule book.
Back to Top
akin View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 06 2004
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 976 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 10 2008 at 07:29
I have a list of more than a hundred bands that are not included in PA and that I consider more prog than Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Beatles, Doors, Who, Iron Maiden, Journey. And a thousand that are more prog than Toto. 
Back to Top
Cristi View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover / Prog Metal Teams

Joined: July 27 2006
Location: wonderland
Status: Offline
Points: 46450 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 10 2008 at 12:34
Originally posted by Aeternus Aeternus wrote:

I think that everyone knows that a lot of the bands that are in PA aren't Prog at all; examples include, among others, The Beatles, Black Sabbath, The Who, Iron Maiden, Led Zeppelin, The Doors, etc... Journey, or Toto, have more prog elements that all those bands together. Is it fair that the Beatles are in PA and Journey not?
 
   well, I think Beatles, Who, Zeppelin and Sabbath deserve to be on PA simply because of their diversity, noncomformity, they were ahead of their times, they had the courage to experiment.
   Iron Maiden was an influence on a lot of prog-metal bands, that's why they deserve a place here; even The Doors, I don't have a problem with them being here, their first two albums show experiment and progression. Also Celebration of the Lizard is a brilliant epic, played only live - if that song ain't progresssive, i don't know what is.
    As much as i love Journey and Toto, they don't belong on a prog site; I don't think Asia or GTR belong here, but that's another story; both Toto and journey show great skilled musicianship but it's not enough to consider them as prog-rock or prog-related.
 
   feel free to contradict me if i'm not making much sense.
Back to Top
Easy Livin View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 10 2008 at 16:05
Originally posted by akin akin wrote:

I have a list of more than a hundred bands that are not included in PA and that I consider more prog than Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Beatles, Doors, Who, Iron Maiden, Journey. And a thousand that are more prog than Toto. 
 
Have you posted it in the forum then? If so, where is it please?
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65777 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 10 2008 at 17:06
Originally posted by akin akin wrote:

I have a list of more than a hundred bands that are not included in PA and that I consider more prog than Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Beatles, Doors, Who, Iron Maiden, Journey. And a thousand that are more prog than Toto. 


I don't understand your point... Zep, Sabbath, Doors, Who, Maiden, all PROG RELATED or Proto--  of course there are hundreds of bands more progressive that aren't on PA, and there always will be... 







Edited by Atavachron - January 10 2008 at 17:07
Back to Top
akin View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 06 2004
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 976 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 14 2008 at 08:29
My point is that according to each own's opinion, there will ever be many prog or prog-related bands not included in PA that are more prog than those included in PA. My intention with my post is to show that everybody can come with an argument of this kind about one or more bands he/she considers more prog than the others included here.

And I don't believe that after four years in this site, the arguments for doubtfully prog/prog-related mainstream bands to be included in PA are the same, but the topics always receive much attention, while arguably obscure prog/prog-related bands are overlooked.
Back to Top
Mandrakeroot View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member

Italian Prog Specialist

Joined: March 01 2006
Location: San Foca, Friûl
Status: Offline
Points: 5851 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 14 2008 at 10:59
I think it is very difficult to say what bands are really Prog-Related bands and what not.
 
Certainly in this category are cases like Wishbone Ash, Deep Purple or Rainbow (rather than the Queen) that were 100% Prog album and in general could be considered 100% Prog. This is not the problem. Rather, we should consider what was the Prog (in all its exception) in the 70's: a more complicated music of POP, often deliberately. So let's see if we might well consider prog everything produced in the 70's that is more complicated of Boston (I quote at random...) not necessarily with odd or compounds times, but simply requires more listen to be understood. Certainly this is not the case today. So how? If bands include only taking into account the definition that you gave in the 70's, we would have hundreds of Prog bands that today would laugh. Conversely if we use only modern conception of the term Prog Rock too many bands remain outside. I think we should apply whenever a definition from time to time more just for the individual band.
 
So that The Who, The Beatles or Iron Maiden, Black Sabbath or Blue Oyster Cult are in PA is the son of the historical period in which these bands have worked. And although it may seem strange they were considered Prog when they are formed.
Back to Top
Easy Livin View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 14 2008 at 14:16
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

Originally posted by akin akin wrote:

I have a list of more than a hundred bands that are not included in PA and that I consider more prog than Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Beatles, Doors, Who, Iron Maiden, Journey. And a thousand that are more prog than Toto. 
 
Have you posted it in the forum then? If so, where is it please?
 
NudgeBig%20smile
Back to Top
hasheten View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2008
Location: nowhere
Status: Offline
Points: 53 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 17 2008 at 21:20

I second that.  The audasity to consider such AOR trash as Journey or the even more annoying Toto on such a prestigious site such as PA is utterly unthinkable.  You might as well propose legalizing child pornography because that is the kind of twisted peversion you are suggesting.  If you don't understand the basic principals of Proto-and prog-related then you have no buisness making ANY new band suggestions.  While I agree that early Beatles and Who was nothing more than innovative pop/rock, it's what those seminal bands evolved into that makes them Proto-Progressive.  Again what you propose is just peverse.
the new food bible for anarchist cookbooks (check me out on blogger)
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65777 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 17 2008 at 21:28
 ^ relax, it's just a conversation
Back to Top
hasheten View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2008
Location: nowhere
Status: Offline
Points: 53 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 17 2008 at 22:27

sorry
the new food bible for anarchist cookbooks (check me out on blogger)
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 17 2008 at 22:46
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

Originally posted by akin akin wrote:

I have a list of more than a hundred bands that are not included in PA and that I consider more prog than Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Beatles, Doors, Who, Iron Maiden, Journey. And a thousand that are more prog than Toto. 
 
Have you posted it in the forum then? If so, where is it please?
 
NudgeBig%20smile


and a bump...LOL
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.133 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.