I love it...
 

I ask ya, where else will you hear Ray Lynch followed by Queen?

Yeah, that's what I'M talking about.

Thanks so much for this site, guys.

Nice to know!
 

Welcome to the WONDERFUL world of AM spedblavio!

Always good to get a new discussion going SO>>>>>>>>>>>

QUEEN PROG???? I DON'T THINK SO!!!!!!

Over to you guys. Take it away...........

Okay, I'll bite. Queen seems to be one of those "kinda sorta" bands like Dream Theater and Queensryche that, while a few individual tracks might be proggy, the band as a whole doesn't fit under the moniker.

Actually, the more I think about it, the less proggy Queen really is. Besides "Bohemian Rhapsody," I can't think of anything else that fits. (Don't cite those ponderous early mini-epics like "Seven Seas of Rhye" or whatever. If you go that far, then we have to include Blackmore's Rainbow, early Styx, and God knows what else.)

you know i'll bite
 

I am not ashamed to admit that I like music considered top-40. I grew up on Yes, Tull, Giant, Crimson, etc. But I still like Styx, Supertramp, Kiss, etc. And, I still love "metal" (Maiden, Sabbath, Priest, and the like).

The reason I get on this soapbox is that there seems to be a want to call the great hard rock of the 70's prog. Queen, Kansas, Tull, Rush, The Who, Zep, ELP - my favorite bands-

NOT PROG!!!!

Not even the 80's stuff - King's X, Queensryche - NOT PROG!

If you only gave me 100 CD's to listen to, probably a good number would be comprised of the above. Or, it would be a good portion of the underrepresented genre, Fusion. But for crying out loud, stop calling 70's rock prog!

I mean even Ambrosia gets played on this station. I really like their first two or three releases, but it's not prog.

Reserve the term PROG for the bands like Flower Kings, Anekdoten, too numerous to mention!

As the great Ian Gillian said, NO NO NO.

How's that for ridin' the fence?

Let me check your list and give you my opinion Keith:

Queen: Except 1 or 2 songs, NOT PROG'
Kansas: Until Leftoverture PROG' after Point of Know Return mainly NOT PROG.
Jethro Tull: Prog, Blues, Rock, Folk, Rock and even Pop depending on the album.
Rush: Not Prog' probably Hard/Classic Rock
The Who: 100% Not Prog', except MAYBE for Quadrophenia, but it's one of my favourite bands.
ELP: 100% Progressive, please remember Karn Evil 9, Tocatta, The Enemy God..., Trilogy, Tarkus, etc. Of course they have some cheese (Love Beach, Works II and In the Hot Seat), but a genuine progressive band.
Led Zeppelin: NOT PROG' great hard rock band.

But I agree with you in the concept, I hate when people say that bands like Journey, Supertramp, Asia, Rush or Styx are Prog', it's not I dislike them, but we can't call them prog'.

Iván

Despite many's opinion, I have a hard time not thinking of Queen as prog.

I can't listen to Bohemian Rhapsody and think... hmmm, yeah, that's not progressive. Their early stuff is also very progressive.

Now, is Another One Bites the Dust progressive - proibably not, but neither is a lot of pop stuff from Genesis, Rush and Yes.

Avian

Agree with you Avian Bohemian Rhapsody sounds prog', it's one of the two songs I mention in my post, but IMO Queen is not a Prog' Band.

Avian said:
Early Genesis is my all time favourite band, but aren't ABACAB (With Earth Wind & Fire), Invissible Touch, Genesis (Shapes), We Can't Dance, etc a full collection of soft pop songs? I also believe ATTWT and Duke are mainly Pop, but those two at least have a couple of good songs. So, Genesis does have a lot of POP stuff.

I believe most Yes albums with Rabin are POP, not as soft and boring as Genesis but 90125, Big Generator and most Union are simply POP.

Rush is not a pop band IMO, a good classic rock band but neither is prog.

But it's only my opinion and maybe I'm wrong.

Iván

???
 

Geez, Ivan, then what is prog?

As for all these bands that that are on the station like Journey, Ambrosia, Toto, Queen, Supertramp, Styx, and others, I don't think that anyone considers these bands progressive in their entirety. The issue in building a playlist is simple.

First, if it's a classically cited "prog band," like Yes or Rush, you have to put everything they ever did on the station, unless it's just so unquestionalbly not prog that there is no debate. In that sense, I think that all Rush should be on the station except their first album, and all Yes should be on the station (etc., ad nauseum).

Secondly, for any band that is not a "prog band" like Yes or KC or Floyd or Genesis, you have to look at individual songs. If you asked Jim, who is ultimately responsible for the library, "is Journey a prog band? How about Queen?", I believe he'd honestly say "no." But just because a band is not progressive on the whole doesn't mean that they don't have a few prog songs (Queen) or even a lot (Journey).

For instance, let's look at INVISIBLE TOUCH. I don't see any reason for the songs "Invisible Touch," "Throwing It All Away," "In Too Deep," and "Anything She Does" to be on a prog station. However, no prog station would be complete without "Tonight, Tonight, Tonight," "Land of Confusion," "Domino," or "The Brazillian."

Ultimately, my point is, if every single Led Zeppelin song was added to AM, I'd wonder about the direction of the station. However, I would have no problem with, and in fact lobby for, the addition of about five Zep songs, like "Achilles Last Stand," "Caroselambra," "Kashmir," and "In the Light." If gobs of Grand Funk Railroad were on AM, something's amiss, but if the ONE SONG "Closer to Home/I'm Your Captain were added, I think it could only improve the station.

Now, after adding my two cents, I'm going to go request Journey's "With A Tear."

I would agree that the idea is to find prog music, not necessariy to identify prog bands. it's entirely possible that some of those bands have brought people into the prog camp, by enticing them with pop/prog blends. (I expect that's what happened with me!) :cool:

Nice job, Yesspaz
 

said very nicely. A nicely-crafted argument. The written word is sometimes difficult to convey the point of a discussion - my humble stance (and timid glance) is that there is no need to make the 70's Kings of Rock & Roll progressive in their entirety.

Roger, nice point about the enticement angle. King Crimson was my crossover band.

Ivan, please don't blame EW&F for the Abacab record. It's no secret Phil Collins loves Motown, and that was his push during that period. Especially his solo stuff, very-Motown influenced. So, it goes back even farther than EW&F. I think Rutherford & Banks share in the blame, too. They got lazy. Of course it's not even on the radar screen with the earlier Genesis (yes, even ATTWT & Duke, those records are solid), but still a worthwhile effort.

Include in the prog "Fading Lights" off WCD, too.

That's absolutely true Roger, there are many non Prog' bands that had some prog albums like:

The Who: Quadrophenia and maybe Tommy
Rolling Stones: Their Satanic Majesties Request
Uriah Heep: The Magician's Birthday and Look at Yourself.

I never blamed EW&F RICK (Sorry for the mistaken name), I blamed Genesis, Motown is OK (for those who like it), but you can't mix two bands so diferent and with such opposite styles. Genesis was still considered a prog' band and EW&F was one of the most commercial bands in the market. In this case I blame Phil, because Tony Banks wanted to make the horns with his synth, but Phil insisted to include EW&F, they agreed to admit them in one song only.

I don't think they got lazy, I believe Phil and Mike Rutherford were always POP oriented, remember the main contribution from Mike in W&W was "Your Own Special Way" which IMO is almost as boring as More Fool Me and later Genesis stufff; and Tony left them include more POP stuff in order to save Genesis and earn some big bucks.

Iván

PS: Just saw your reply Yesspaz, and your opinion is valid, but I still think Journey music is not prog' , they have great stuff, but music doesn't need to be prog' in order to be good, and about Invissible Touch, honestly I hate it from the first to the last note.

It's hard for an old dog to learn new tricks, I listen Gabriel Genesis since I was 13, and I can't accept that the same band that created Fountain of Salmacis and Musical Box could ever release Invissible Touch or Shapes. That's why I'm so hard with Genesis, because I love their early stuff so much.

You da Man, Yesspaz
 

Once again, I agree totally with Yesspaz. Well put!!

Ivan, I understand exactly how you feel about Genesis since it is how I feel about Rush. Great and progressive early stuff but very disapointing later (although Vapour Trails was a pleasant surprise).

Avian and Jim: Love hearing prog stuff from bands not considered prog. It gives them depth that I didn't think they had.

disappointments, In a Rush
 

Most bands just plain wear out - the list is endless -

Kansas after Monolith (although a nice rebound on Freaks and Elsewhere). Queen after Jazz. Giant after Missing Piece. Yes in the 80's (another good recovery). Police. Judas Priest. Gong (PM's). Genesis. Aerosmith. Floyd. Saga, etc.....

I'll keep defending Counterparts and Test For Echo - really solid efforts.

The Power Windows to Roll The Bones period was very arid for Rush (even in concert). I still can't get past the muddy sound and the Alex grunge of Vapor Trails. Plus the song structure is disjointed in places. Great live shows, though!

Rush is easily my second-favorite band, after Tull. I always thought that even in their very heavy days, they were way ahead of the curve, and a very clean sounding band. Maybe in 20 years I'll be saying the same thing about Vapor Trails, but for now, they seem to have fallen behind the curve.

A worn out Rush
 

I've noticed the same things with older bands, Rick, but was hoping that Rush would be immune to it. I agree with you regarding Counterparts which, IMO, was their strongest effort since Signals. Lots of fresh ideas, lyrically and musically, that seemed to work. I am not so warm to Test For Echo.

Regarding Vapor Trails, maybe it is the overwhelming sense of optimism in the lyrics and how I relate it to Neil's tragedies and the healing that he went through that makes me so fond of this effort. Having said that I also understand your complaints of their new sound. I, personally, don't like the sound of a Telecaster, which was the guitar of choice for this recording. But I also think that Alex had so many ideas that he threw out and, for whatever reason, Geddy Lee was unable to piece it together in as coherent a fashion as before. His bass playing, on the other hand, is outstanding throughout.

Rush reply
 

My 15-year old loves TFE, and I can't get him to listen to Counterparts yet. I almost agree with the strongest since Signals, but Grace Under Pressure is awesome.

Speaking of Neil - have you read the Ghost Rider book he did? Is it a worthwhile fathers day present from my family to me? My oldest son also checked out Merely Players from the library, and that seems to be another choice.

Your explanation of the Telecaster makes me think I need to listen to the CD again. I think I got turned off initially by the sound because I thought, oh no not Rush getting grungy too! I'll give it a another shot.

New Rush generation
 

So neat to hear stories about our kids getting into the music that we love. My 11 year old son loves Counterparts especially the angry bass on the opening tack. He also likes Permanent Waves. My 2 nieces, 10 and 12 years old, surprised me by saying that they love Freewill and Necromancer! Those are priceless gifts.

Regarding his new book, I have not read it but I heard mixed reviews. I think that as a Rush fan that it would be good reading although his other book, the Masked Rider, was a bit of a disppointment. I was turned off by how much he complained about some of the other riders. The real touching part was at the end of the book when he described how nice it was to meet his wife in Paris knowing that his wife died shortly after.

>>>King Crimson was my crossover band.

KC and Yes brought me into the fold. Before that I thought Black Sabbath, GFRR, and (god help me) Black Oak Arkansas were happenin', with-it bands. "Close to the Edge" took me to a new place, and "USA" tore my head off and put it back on askew. (The USA album was the first album I ever heard my mom characterize as "devil music." But to give her her due, she liked "Tales from Topographic Oceans.")

My 15-year old stepson likes Djam Karet, KC, and Pink Floyd, along with the usual Rammstein/Insane Clown Posse dreck. Unfortunately, he has recently developed an obsession for "99 Red Balloons" in all of its thousand incarnations. If I hear that song one more time, someone's going to jail.

A new category...
 

Perhaps we prog fans simply need a new category to destinguish those bands/songs/albums that skate on the edge of the prog lake, without the courage or conviction to head straight for the thin ice out in the middle and risk falling into the cold depths of mediocrity, obscurity, or--heaven forbid--unmarketability.

My suggestion is to refer to such works like later Genesis (and Yes), Supertramp, Asia, Queen, BOC, etc. as Prog Lite.

Prog Lite - (prŏg' lît'). adj. : 1. an example of music from a progressive artist that does not measure up to their standard progressive offerings. " 'Owner of a Lonely Heart' is Prog Lite." 2. an example of progressive music from an artist that is not usually progressive. "Supertramp's 'Fool's Overture' is remarkably Prog Lite." 3. sl. a possibly derogatory term that refers to someone of something that does not perform to usual standards. "Your mamma's cooking was really Prog Lite this evening." "My girlfriend was really Prog Lite last night in bed."

Maybe this can provide the focal point we need to continue this endless debate.

With that said, the mention of Rainbow earlier inspired me to make a possibly heinous request. I personally feel that 2 Rainbow songs, "Stargazer" and "A Light In The Black," might fit well here at AM. They both have some killer keyboard parts (and Dio used to be an opera singer!).

So here's to Prog Lite: tastes great AND less filling!

Prog Lite!
 

Excellent observation Powerslave!!!!!

oh no here we go again
 

Powerslave, you should recognize that reference as Dio from "Neon Knights". Very interesting about the Rainbow references. Stargazer I can see, but A Light In the Black is just a tune with a long jam in the middle. And Fools Overture is just a bloated tune - at least 5 minutes of it is just background stuff.

Please, please, PLEASE promise never to mention Asia with any of the above bands.

BOC is an interesting reference. A lot of prog-type qualities, but still just a rock & roll band. And a damn good one too. Still very good live, too.

Your definitions 1 and 2 are total opposites - I am still scratching my head over that. I may never figure it out!

I happen to think Iron Maiden is much more progressive than those ordained prog-rock metal bands like Ice Age. But as I've said over and over, I have no particular hankering to hear it on Aural Moon (but you could request Seventh Son of A Seventh Son and I wouldn't complain).

Any finally, I feel that Black Sabbath (from Paranoid to Heaven & Hell inclusive) is a very progressive band. Especially the Sabbath Bloody to Never Say Die period. Any hey, isn't that Wakeman and Don Airey on keyboards?

Keep it coming - I find this topic interesting (even though the vast majority will find it exasperating).