PA's Top Prog albums schewed towards early days?

jverweij wrote: so basically you are implying that in order for us as an audience to judge an album we actually need to wait a few years, to see where it stands? That is actually something I've not considered, and would certainly explain this :)

Yes. How well a piece of art stands the test of time is often one of the best indications of how well-crafted it really is. Anything can be hugely successful for five minutes, and then disappear when something equal replaces it. The best albums, probably, are those that are remembered fondly in many years to come.

Also, it's easier to analyse particular eras and movements retrospectively than it is when they're actually happening. There are a lot of trends and attributes that separate 60s music from 70s music, 70s from 80s, etc....... but at the time, people probably didn't notice as much...... because they weren't able to just look at the important things that happened, they had to live through it all. In 1969 people weren't talking about progressive rock much....... yet now, when they do, they often refer to that year.

Welcome to PA, J. You ask an interesting question. Well, "prog" is a rock subgenre that is defined by how it sounded and what it achieved in the early 70s, when it had its best moment. Since PA was established everyone rated the classics first because they form the hardcore of (almost) anyone's interest in prog. However, as time passed, people started discovering and rating new prog too, which is why modern albums started getting good positions in the general chart. Once in a while someone starts a thread asking what the hell are those recent albums doing in the chart. 

Personally I think that we are now actually facing the opposite phenomenon: new bands being hyped too much and not deserving the positions they get in the general chart. I mean, Haken made the 32nd best prog album of all time, better than Mars Volta or PT (from the more representative modern bands)? But as I said that's just me.

I would give you the link on the Wayback Machine to see how the chart looked in 2005 or 2006, but unfortunately that website isn't working these days because of maintenance. But you can trust me whn I tell you that was very, very little modern prog compared to what we have these days.

Well of course they are rated higher because of nostalgia, but why should that mean they don't deserve their place?