Petition to take Radiohead off Progarchi

i think they should be taken off now, its an insult to such a great band for people to be sl*gging them off and giving them 0 stars just cos they aint prog. they aint prog, this is a prog site, why are they here?

this is jus becoming an embarresment now, its making the site look bad, too many negative responses, dont you think we can jus call it day and end all this crap. The only way is to get rid of em.

^ even though their lyrics and music (for the most part, although not true on a few albums) are blues based, ive always thought of Zeppelin as a sophisticated or "avant garde" rock band. If we use the Radiohead example again: most of their discography( except two albums) isnt considered prog by most of the members,  why isnt a band like Zeppelin (who have at least three "Progressive" albums) listed on the archives? it's a question id like answered.

 

Neither Led Zeppelin nor the Boomtown Rats were 'indie' - what was your point?

 Why cant folk accept that Radiohead have written some very proggy songs and some very good Krautrocky songs (many of which are as good as anything made by the long-established stalwarts in the archives).  Yes, they have come up the ladder and established themselves as indie-crooners, but two of their albums do stand out in their catalogue.

 If we're judging bands only on their ENTIRE creative output and want them admonished as an 'Indie' band, then I demand Genesis and Kansas be removed forthwith as pop fodder.

Wrath_of_Ninian wrote:   Neither Led Zeppelin nor the Boomtown Rats were 'indie' - what was your point?  Why cant folk accept that Radiohead have written some very proggy songs and some very good Krautrocky songs (many of which are as good as anything made by the long-established stalwarts in the archives).  Yes, they have come up the ladder and established themselves as indie-crooners, but two of their albums do stand out in their catalogue.  If we're judging bands only on their ENTIRE creative output and want them admonished as an 'Indie' band, then I demand Genesis and Kansas be removed forthwith as pop fodder.

Accually, Ninian: If you took the time to accualy LOOK at the Genesis discography before making such a post, you would have seen that they only have 6 albums that would be  considered "pop", as opposed to 12 that are prog: Therefore; your point is invalid.

Regarding Kansas, as im not a big fan i am not fit to comment on their discography.

I will speak in favor of Radiohead.

In fact, I will argue that their situation is almost identical to that of Talk Talk--a band that started out as 80s synth pop, but turned in the space of one or two albums into true prog. This is exactly what Radiohead has done, and if Radiohead is taken off, then I think Talk Talk will have to go too, and numerous other bands that may have followed a similar path into the genre.

I'd also like to add that I am ALSO not amused with the protest-voting that's going on with Hail to the Thief and OK Computer. I don't like HttT all that much, but I at least tried to be respectful to those who might disagree, and to treat the album even-handedly, pointing out good where there's good, in addition to bad where I think there's bad.

Edited by FloydWright

the musical box wrote: Wrath_of_Ninian wrote:   Neither Led Zeppelin nor the Boomtown Rats were 'indie' - what was your point?  Why cant folk accept that Radiohead have written some very proggy songs and some very good Krautrocky songs (many of which are as good as anything made by the long-established stalwarts in the archives).  Yes, they have come up the ladder and established themselves as indie-crooners, but two of their albums do stand out in their catalogue.  If we're judging bands only on their ENTIRE creative output and want them admonished as an 'Indie' band, then I demand Genesis and Kansas be removed forthwith as pop fodder. Accually, Ninian: If you took the time to accualy LOOK at the Genesis discography before making such a post, you would have seen that they only have 6 albums that would be  considered "pop", as opposed to 12 that are prog: Therefore; your point is invalid. Regarding Kansas, as im not a big fan i am not fit to comment on their discography.

No need to 'look' as I am now the proud owner of said albums (up to Wind & Wuthering).  However, I don't see why it invalidates my post - my point being that because Genesis have at least ONE album that is NOT considered prog, it would appear to deem them worthy of the slating afforded to the Oxford Whingers, who also have a few clangers in their back catalogue. 

Radiohead have made two prog albums, and the rest are arguably indie.  I wasn't arguing about ratios, but rather that Radiohead HAVE produced a prog work and yet they still are being vilified because their other albums are not deemed prog.  All I was doing was extending the argument to Genesis - though obviously not as clearly as I thought....

I'd be all for Zeppelin coming on board - though they'd probably have to clear it with the ghost of Peter Grant first....  

The problem is obvious. What the hell is prog?

ARGH!! I'm SO SICK OF THIS RADIOHEAD CONTROVERSY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wrath_of_Ninian wrote: the musical box wrote: Wrath_of_Ninian wrote:   Neither Led Zeppelin nor the Boomtown Rats were 'indie' - what was your point?  Why cant folk accept that Radiohead have written some very proggy songs and some very good Krautrocky songs (many of which are as good as anything made by the long-established stalwarts in the archives).  Yes, they have come up the ladder and established themselves as indie-crooners, but two of their albums do stand out in their catalogue.  If we're judging bands only on their ENTIRE creative output and want them admonished as an 'Indie' band, then I demand Genesis and Kansas be removed forthwith as pop fodder. Accually, Ninian: If you took the time to accualy LOOK at the Genesis discography before making such a post, you would have seen that they only have 6 albums that would be  considered "pop", as opposed to 12 that are prog: Therefore; your point is invalid. Regarding Kansas, as im not a big fan i am not fit to comment on their discography. No need to 'look' as I am now the proud owner of said albums (up to Wind & Wuthering).  However, I don't see why it invalidates my post - my point being that because Genesis have at least ONE album that is NOT considered prog, it would appear to deem them worthy of the slating afforded to the Oxford Whingers, who also have a few clangers in their back catalogue.  Radiohead have made two prog albums, and the rest are arguably indie.  I wasn't arguing about ratios, but rather that Radiohead HAVE produced a prog work and yet they still are being vilified because their other albums are not deemed prog.  All I was doing was extending the argument to Genesis - though obviously not as clearly as I thought.... I'd be all for Zeppelin coming on board - though they'd probably have to clear it with the ghost of Peter Grant first....

Another flaw in the genesis argument was that there was a major change in the membership of the band, it was in fact a different Genesis altogether. They lost thier leading man. radiohead, although they are evolving musically they are not going through any drastic changes, so the argument doesnt hold over to well.

I listened to Kid A a few times, and am now convinced of radioheads justfication as a prog group.

as for led zepplin PLEASE NO. ill keep any other comments to myself unless someone makes a thread.

Wrath of Ninian wrote:

If we're judging bands only on their ENTIRE creative output and want them admonished as an 'Indie' band, then I demand Genesis and Kansas be removed forthwith as pop fodder.

I'm making this post not because of Radiohead, but because Genesis was mentioned. I'm not going to talk about the trascendence of Genesis in Prog' history but only will refer to the number of albums, not mentioning any compilation, only original productions and Live albums:

100% Progressive Albums:

1. Trespass
2. Nursery Cryme 
3. Foxtrot
4. Live
5. SEBTP
6. The Lamb
7. ATOTT
8. W&W
9. Seconds Out (Not my cup of tea but absolutely prog')
10. Archives I

Partially Prog or Transicional (I hate all but that doesn't matter):

1. ATTW3
2. Duke
3. 3 Sides Live (Almost 50% is progressive)

Not Prog:

1. FGTTR (Even though is not a cheesy POP album)
2. ABACAB
3. Genesis (Shapes)
4. Invisible Touch
5. We Can't Dance
6. The Way We Walk I
7. The Way We Walk II (Even when has 20 minutes of Prog and it's really part of the first album separeted for commercial reasons)
8. Archives II

So we're talking about ten 100% Prog albums, three partially Ptrogressive, and 8 Not Prog'.

From where did you took the numbers Wrath?

If we do the same with Kansas, the differences would be higher in favour of Propg' albums, because all the pop they dod was in the 80's and we're talking about 3 albums from more than 15.

Iván