| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Snow Dog 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
 Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:30 |
I think anyone against Queen being here are on a losing battle. This is from our own archives
Art Rock
A name that is used to refer to early explorative work that had roots in popular music.Very structured and even adventurous, sometimes hard or heavy, sometimes mellow, strong melodies, good hooks are an integral part of most of the material. Bands in this category can and have produced material falling into other categories as well. There may be moments of outright progressive rock but with more of a pop influence and certainly a tendency towards shorter songs.
To me it begs the question, is Art Rock really Prog?
|
|
|
 |
Ammadon
Forum Newbie
Joined: May 20 2005
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 7
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:29 |
|
On the subject of the controversial Queen issue, I think there should be begun a family of "Archives" sites. The first, I think, should be Metal Archives.com, for Prog Rock's raunchier/more evil cousin. Afterwards, there should be a Punk Archives.com, another one for Fusion, and whatever follows should be up to the discretion of the admin. Any crossovers should be okay. Also, Post-Punk and New Wave should also be included in the Punk archive.
Edited by Ammadon
|
|
Trust me, I know what I'm doing (taps side of nose.)
|
|
greenback
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: August 14 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3300
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:28 |
i do not know many songs of queen:
only we will rock you, radio gaga, we are the champions, and obviously bohemian rhapsody.
if many of their songs are like bohemian rhapsody, then this would proudly justify their presence here.
|
|
[HEADPINS - LINE OF FIRE: THE RECORD HAVING THE MOST POWERFUL GUITAR SOUND IN THE WHOLE HISTORY OF MUSIC!>
|
|
philippe
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 14 2004
Location: noosphere
Status: Offline
Points: 3597
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:24 |
^ Queen is just a bad exemple that we don't need to follow
|
|
|
|
Heptade
Prog Reviewer
Joined: May 19 2005
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 427
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:23 |
|
There's lots of stuff on this site that's not "prog" in the narrow sense...
especially lots of psychedelia that's not even proto-prog, just rare and
obscure...I mean, you might as well put the Jefferson Airplane up, they
were plenty progressive.
However, I don't really see why anyone should care. If Queen did some
proggy stuff, why the heck not? Consensus among thousands of readers
is impossible. Just ignore what you don't like!
|
|
Arteum
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 06 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 184
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:22 |
 Ed_The_Dead wrote:
GIVE ME MAIDEN!!!!!!!!!!!! IF QUEEN ARE IN, SO DO MAIDEN DESSERVE IT!!!!!!!!!! |
Yeah, I'd say Maiden are more prog than Queen  "Seventh Son" and "Brave New World" are pretty good proggish metal.
I am against Maiden being on progarchives, of course, although I like them very much. But if Queen's here anyway ...
|
|
nimrodel
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 07 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 1217
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:21 |
Snow Dog wrote:
nimrodel wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
nimrodel wrote:
i can honestly say that the prog music wouldnt be where it is now or where it was in the 70 without queen. |
I'm incredulous at that statement..WHAT?????? Are you serious?????? I'm sorry I, I........pour me drink someone please!
|
*pouring a drink for you*
|
cheers, skol, salute.......thats better!
|
that was guinnes you wanted?
lets say KIPPISTÄ like we finss do.
|
|
We want... a shrubbery!
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:20 |
nimrodel wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
nimrodel wrote:
i can honestly say that the prog music wouldnt be where it is now or where it was in the 70 without queen. |
I'm incredulous at that statement..WHAT?????? Are you serious?????? I'm sorry I, I........pour me drink someone please!
|
*pouring a drink for you*
|
cheers, skol, salute.......thats better!
|
|
|
|
Dick Heath
Special Collaborator
Jazz-Rock Specialist
Joined: April 19 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 12802
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:19 |
nimrodel wrote:
i can honestly say that the prog music wouldnt be where it is now or where it was in the 70 without queen. |
Sorry, but I have to ask your reasons and for examples, because I don't agree at all - I worked from 1972 to 1976 in one of the bigger UK university's Ent Groups - who had the now current President of Warner Records as it chair. Queen became increasingly influential in the rock pop scene yes, but prog.....................
|
|
nimrodel
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 07 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 1217
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:18 |
Snow Dog wrote:
nimrodel wrote:
i can honestly say that the prog music wouldnt be where it is now or where it was in the 70 without queen. |
I'm incredulous at that statement..WHAT?????? Are you serious?????? I'm sorry I, I........pour me drink someone please!
|
*pouring a drink for you*
|
|
We want... a shrubbery!
|
|
philippe
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 14 2004
Location: noosphere
Status: Offline
Points: 3597
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:18 |
The day Maiden and others will be here, I will leave the place 
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 20596
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:18 |
philippe wrote:
^Let me laugh loud
prog music wouldnt be where it is now or where it was in the 70 without Miles Davis, Terry Riley and Ravi Shankar.
|
You can add them, I wouldn't mind their addition. Adding Miles Davis would not mean that every Jazz artist can be included, and adding Queen doesn't mean that every Glam Rock artist can be included. I don't see a problem ...
|
|
|
|
Ed_The_Dead
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 29 2005
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 4928
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:17 |
GIVE ME MAIDEN!!!!!!!!!!!! IF QUEEN ARE IN, SO DO MAIDEN DESSERVE IT!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:15 |
nimrodel wrote:
i can honestly say that the prog music wouldnt be where it is now or where it was in the 70 without queen. |
I'm incredulous at that statement..WHAT?????? Are you serious?????? I'm sorry I, I........pour me drink someone please!
|
|
|
|
philippe
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 14 2004
Location: noosphere
Status: Offline
Points: 3597
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:13 |
^Let me laugh loud
prog music wouldnt be where it is now or where it was in the 70 without Miles Davis, Terry Riley and Ravi Shankar.
|
|
|
|
Dick Heath
Special Collaborator
Jazz-Rock Specialist
Joined: April 19 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 12802
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:11 |
Really. A daft move. I can hear people laughing at the credibility of the site already.
So let's open the door to every band of any type. Wishbone Ash is more proggie, so is Spooky Tooth. Why haven't we got that section that I've long called for, that permits the odd one or two albums by bands which fits a tight description of prog, without having the lot. Queen's discography does not have the majority of albums in the prog category - glam rock (as they rightly said last Sunday on Top Gear) and rock pop.
|
|
nimrodel
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 07 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 1217
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:09 |
|
i can honestly say that the prog music wouldnt be where it is now or where it was in the 70 without queen.
|
|
We want... a shrubbery!
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 20596
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:08 |
|
Let me put it another way: Maybe you don't like Queen and don't share my point of view regarding Queen II, but each of us should have a band or an artist that only has some progressive albums, and who could now be included. If I had to choose whether more or less artists should be included, I'd choose MORE anytime.
Edited by MikeEnRegalia
|
|
|
|
Arteum
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 06 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 184
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:06 |
Snow Dog wrote:
If they are going to have Queen here, then all their albums should be listed, the same as all the other bands here!
Personally I have NEVER described Queen as Prog, and I won't start now.
|
You are right. Because if now we start selecting prog albums it will wreak havoc on progarchives. It's pretty clear where classical ELP ends ... but at least one of their later albums includes prog elements ... And where to stop listing GENESIS albums? Which albums to drop? I think "Calling All Stations" is prog whereas "We Can't Dance" is proggish pop.
And, as I said before, Queen is just a borderline band ... it belongs to neither prog nor rock, in my view.
Edited by Arteum
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 13:06 |
I always thought that Queen is not a Progressive Rock band in the whole sense of the word, even when I agree that has more Prog oriented albums than Styx or Radiohead, but I don't disagree with their inclusion because they were revolutionary in many aspects and that's one of the charactaristics of Prog'.
Iván
|
|
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
QUEEN on progarchives
