Boston???

Every once in a great while I think of a band that I just assume is included here only to find out that they are not.   In the past, those bands have included:

Personally, I'd favour them (strange that until I voted there were no Yes votes). I believe a number of their tracks and albums have a relationship with Prog. "Third stage" for example is a complete concept album with some well structured songs.

I say No. Once Boston are In, that will open the door for the likes of Journey, Toto and Phil Collins, which will lead to the likes of Chris DeBurgh and Barry White. Before you know it we will be crawling around on our hands and knees flinging our own s**t at our PC monitors.

I think that Boston would fit PR well, but am inclined to vote no as I tend to think that if a band ain't Prog enough to be seriously considered for a real Prog category, then it ain't proggy enough for this site.  And I can't think of Boston as more than Prog-Related (even if I consider it to be definitely suitable for Prog Related due to some albums/ songs) unlike some bands in PR which I  consider to have true Prog albums and some which are borderline Prog/Prog Related cases (which may fit Crossover, or may be considered for "stronger" Prog categories -- sorry can't think of a better way to put it now).

But I won't vote.  Prog or bust[on]! haha


Edited by Logan - November 11 2007 at 16:33

Ghost Rider wrote: . As to Xover, I am not sure the team would agree.

ahhhhh....


no.

They are the icons of AOR, that disqualifies them, it's just better POP than the average but nothing more, no way they should be added.

The Doctor wrote:   I've never been much of a Boston fan, but at the same time, can see that they took a lot of their influence from some of the heavier prog bands, so prog-related is probably a good place for them.  They are definitely not prog though, xover or otherwise.

exactly .. though there will still be people that say they should be here because they aren't prog


If they don't want these bands suggested.. they should have the damn Prog RELATED category.. but since they do... they should be there. 

^ it's a good thing then we still have members here ...and an admin team that actually evaluate groups fairly without just hearing a name and a label and voting based on that hahahhah.  How many groups have failed such polls Ivan.. only to be voted in by a panel of objective people... the admins.   Those polls are worthless ... always have been.  We had people that wanted ELO not in PA's at all... why... because they thought of the group as a disco group. Enough said on the polls.   Obviously the admins have never put this up to a vote.  They should.. if only to have the definitive word on this.. so they aren't suggested yet again. 

E-Dub wrote: I fear we would be loosening it up a little too much if we allow Boston in. Personally, I like the band, but just because they have a big sound doesn't really make them prog. I voted no. E

that door has been flung wide open Eric...   lets face it.... PR additions are 'if x then y'.. because they are not .. and can not be judged individually.  Simply because you are not talking about adding a group IF they prog.. or rejecting a band because they are not prog.  That is black and white has has nothing to do with any other group.   PR is different... you are talking shades of prog.. and once the benchmark is established.. especially with well known groups...  you either appear to be playing favorites.. or just doing a shoddy job if you pick and choose who is added or not.  You have to ask... is Boston as Prog Related as some addtions ...if they are ...they should be here.. simple as that.  IF not.. they shouldn't be.

For what it's worth.. there were those who warned about the door being thrown open.. but the site is to be inclusive.. so that is what we have here. 


Edited by micky - November 11 2007 at 19:30

^ exactly.... lots of things to dicuss... other than tossing stupid labels around


let's start with that bullsh*t about Boston being proggier than Deep firckin Purple