Uriah Heep e Hawkwind for Proto Metal
Printed From: MetalMusicArchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Suggest new bands/artists to MMA
Forum Description: Suggest, create polls, and classify new bands you would like included on Metal Music Archives
URL: http://www.MetalMusicArchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=398
Printed Date: 25 Apr 2024 at 9:39pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 10.16 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Uriah Heep e Hawkwind for Proto Metal
Posted By: 1967/ 1976
Subject: Uriah Heep e Hawkwind for Proto Metal
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 11:03am
|
Uriah Heep and Hawkwind are in too Metal guide for not to be in this site. Who do you think about these inclusions? ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: The T 666
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 11:42am
|
Uriah heep could have a slight chance (I wouldn't include them but The teams might come to that decision.). I don't see Hawkwind as anything remotely metal though. Not at all. ------------- 
|
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 11:57am
|
Uriah Heep should definitely be in proto-metal IMO. Hawkwind has absolutely nothing metal about them. ------------- Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 12:02pm
|
I would have nothing against having both included in Proto. ------------- http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE! https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM |
Posted By: 1967/ 1976
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 12:39pm
|
Hawkwind have metal fans... So I think that Hawkwind have a chance to be included here. Uriah Heep performs Proto Metal in 70's as plays Prog in 70's! -------------
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 1:28pm
|
Like others, I agree with Uriah Heep, but not with Hawkwind. They are psychedelic, not metal.
------------- Those who know what's best for us must rise and save us from ourselves. |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 2:12pm
| Do you want my personal opinion? We have to be careful not to go the same way as PA. I have more or less abandoned the site after yet another spate about a controversial addition. Life is hard enough for everyone without creating unpleasant situations in an environment that should provide fun and relaxation. For the time being, until the site is settled and we have attracted more members, let's keep things as they are. You all know the consequences of not setting boundaries right from the very beginning. |
Posted By: The T 666
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 2:26pm
|
Exactly. Let's add METAL bands because this is a METAL website for METAL fans. Once we've added all the real metal bands, we can start considering this difficult decisions... If a band has metal fans it doesn't mean it's metal. If a band has zero metal fans but their music is evidently heavy metal, then it is a metal band. -------------
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 3:12pm
|
couldn't agree more... Hawkwind has zilch in common with the site... Uriah Heep is another matter and probably should be here... but let's worry about the detailed accents AFTER the main course has been served... getting real metal bands added and placed.. after that... guns away debating all the fricking metal related acts. To be honest.. wish that never raised it's ugly head here... but I guess the site has to be inclusive in that way. It can wait though.. the site isn't going to lose prospective members because Uriah Heep hasn't been added yet  |
Posted By: PROGMAN
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 12:29am
|
yes for Uriah Heep (maybe Proto-Metal). Hawkwind had their hard rock moments (irony is they seemed to be more harder after the Lemmy era, but not much hard rock) , but more associated with Space Rock. "Night of the Hawks" is definately a hard rock number. |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 7:10am
| OK, now I will say it more clearly, since it seems my earlier post did not come across. As a moderator, and one of the people in charge of the Proto-Metal team, I am not going to support any addition that may prove controversial in the early days of the site. On PA there are people suggesting Bob Dylan for addition, and that is happening because no one put clear limits to what was suitable and what wasn't. We want to attract new members, and will not do so if our addition policy is unclear from the start. When things are settled, then we will deal with all the 'grey areas'. |
Posted By: The T 666
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 7:16am
|
100% support for that view of things -------------
|
Posted By: Reed Lover
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 7:40am
|
There is nothing remotely controversial about Uriah Heep as proto-metal as they were in the vanguard of the heavy rock movement in the early 70s. Hawkwind? Umm, no. They weren't even guitar driven.... |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 7:44am
not controversial for addition TO proto-metal...  here sees they are a no-brainer for that.what is controversial is the existence.. or more to the point... an emphasis on adding those bands so early.. when the emphasis should be on adding real metal bands.and getting those bands (and albums) placed correctly. |
Reed Lover wrote:Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 7:49am
This site is called METAL Music Archives, and heavy rock is not metal. Mind you, my stance has nothing to do with my personal preference - as you should know, I am a huge fan of heavy rock, much more than of any of the extreme varieties of metal. Anyway, as the name says, Proto-metal is for bands that were influential on the formation of metal, and I don't really think Uriah Heep fit that bill. |
Posted By: Reed Lover
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 7:53am
From your own MetalMusic guide...  ...it continues:
Uriah Heep were very much blues rock/psychedelic rock heavy rock, a more melodic Sabbath type but heavy rock nonetheless methinks. Neither Led Zep nor Purple were "Heavy Metal" by your rational. |
Posted By: Reed Lover
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:05am
From Wikpedia, the same article that is the source for your Metal definition:
Game, set and match, I think. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_music#cite_note-82 - |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:08am
not so fast... the ump called your return out..
ace down the middle... game..set ...match http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_music#cite_note-82 - |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:12am
|
I seem to remember someone saying, 'Let's add REAL prog bands'... Well, just replace 'prog' with 'metal', and here you are!
|
Posted By: Reed Lover
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:13am
|
Well it is on your About Metal Page: http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/metal-music.aspx - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/metal-music.aspx which links directly to the article I quote above. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_music - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_music Anyone reading that will expect the likes of Uriah Heep and Budgie to be here, wouldnt they? Not controversial at all. These ARE and always have been Proto-Metal bands (without that descriptor, of course). This is not an issue of broad inclusivety, it's not even up for debate surely? |
Posted By: Reed Lover
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:16am
Nonesense. Read my post above. Any band mentioned in the "Definition of Prog" at PA were added at the outset. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:17am
ahhh... forget game, set, match... make that ...checkmate |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:19am
| hence... 'controversial'... the admin team agrees they can wait to decide on Uriah Heep.. and for what it's worth. I agree... |
Posted By: Reed Lover
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:19am
Again, did you even read my post? I made a mistake in calling Heep "proto", but that's about it. These aren't really Proto anything, they are early Metal bands. Maybe you could bring a "specialist" into the debate? |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:22am
| psst.. Tony.. I agree with you they need to be added....however I agree that it is a decision that can wait. |
Posted By: Reed Lover
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:32am
|
This is a Metal Music Database not a Metal Music Mag. What is important, for the database, is an accurate record and history that people will find useful as a research resource. Otherwise you have nothing better to offer than what is already available elsewhere. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:38am
preaching to the choir..  . You know what I think of these sites being 'archival' in nature..as opposed to being just reflections of a select few's opinion. They'll be added... but understand what the site is trying to do... get people other than PA'rs to join. That means an emphasis on real metal.. and you know exactly what I mean by that.
|
Posted By: The T 666
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:40am
|
Again, we'll focus on METAL first, proto and borderline cases second. That decision has been reached. We want to attract METAL fans to this website. Uriah Heep may have been called metal back in 1900 if you want, they're not a METAL band. Soon, we have a database that's complete enough, we'll focus on cases like this. Again, once we have put an emphasis on this website's actual main genre. -------------
|
Posted By: Reed Lover
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:44am
Good luck with that... |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:46am
|
Neither Rome... nor PA's were built in a day.. if you build it... they will come |
Posted By: Reed Lover
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:48am
I admire your optimism. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 8:50am
and I LOVE your cynicism |
Posted By: PROGMAN
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 11:56pm
|
interesting views. one day eventually UH could get here, which I am ok about, but as others say the metal bands need sorting out first. |
Posted By: 1967/ 1976
Date Posted: 12 Apr 2010 at 2:11am
|
Uh or not Uh here... For me UH is METAL and not Prog... ...But this is only my wiew about UH music. -------------
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 12 Apr 2010 at 4:13pm
just sit tight Mandy Understand what the site is doing.. and it's first priorities. UH will be added.. I'm quite sure of that... just down the road a bit.  |
Posted By: 1967/ 1976
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 2:07am
The problem is simply for me: Banana is not an apple!!!   !!!I didn't hurry. However, this case is illustrative of Proto Metal. Use aptitude or real musical expression to judge what is or isn't Proto Metal? (Which, then, is actually a real genre?) -------------
|
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 4:24am
|
I think neither is an emergency for inclusion
Heep seems fine for quick addition and Hawkwind can wait a few months (or years)
as Raff says >> not now ------------- my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicted musicians to crazy ones.... |
Posted By: alberto mu�oz
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 1:43pm
And BTW why we need to suggest this bands that already we can review in PA???
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 2:09pm
|
Alberto, this is NOT PA, and we have members who are not PA members. We Admins have already had our say as concerns this kind of suggestions, but we did so without putting down the person who suggested them. The tone of your post is unnecessarily belligerent, and we don't need stuff like that in the early days of the site. Edit: Anyway, since we have made it clear that this is not the time to start evaluating anything potentially controversial, we have decided to close these threads for the time being, since they will not get any attention from the genre teams, yet may cause unnecessary tension among forum members. We will reopen them when the time is right. |