That makes me very sad

I rate the debut 4 stars and Killers 5--  they are masterpieces of progressive rock, or in the case of PA, Prog-Related masterpieces.   Either way, vote your conscience and back it up with a passionate or convincing reviewing and you can rate anyone however you please.

I have seen a lot of times when people would rate a "prog related" album lower because it is not progressive enough. This is really a shame, that's why we have the "prog related" sub genre, for bands who have little to do with prog rock but still have the connection and produce high quality music, we should rate them acording to it's genre and the quality of the music.

Edited by sagichim - April 05 2012 at 13:47

True. So let's move it elsewhere. As in Prog-Related and Proto-Prog lounge.

I've always felt uncomfortable about reading reviews here stating that the number of stars given is lower than they would be because an album is (apparently) not prog (enough).

This is a grave injustice towards any album/artist and reflects badly on this site and the reviewers themselves  (pompous twits).

Any album on this site should be eligible for any rating between 1 and the full 5 stars, regardless. Its presence on this site alone should dictate that option.

Sorry, I dodn't understand why you feel you can't rate them higher.

The ratings description for the prog Realted category where Iron maiden presides is:

Essential: a masterpiece of rock music(38%)

Excellent addition to any rock music collection(31%)

Good, but non-essential (8%)

Collectors/fans only (15%)

Poor. Only for completionists (8%)

One doesn't have to rate according to whether it's Prog (often a subjective evaluation anyway)', and if your concern was that it's metal rather than rock, well metal is a subset of rock. Just because this is Prog archives doesn't mean you have to rate based on perceived Prog quotients.  Just rate based on how much you like the album.

 My problem with the ratings guidelines is that it mentions rock.  In the prog categories they mention progressive rock in the descriptions, and I believe that they once had progressive rock in the ratings guideline for Prog Related. They got rid of the word progressive, but they kept the word rock.  I think it should just be music.  If anything, I would rather they changed it to progressive music than get rid of the word progressive and keep the word rock, not that I really think one should attempt to rate an album by how progressive (adjective) it is, nor how Prog (noun) it is.

EDIT: or maybe it was progressive music before, and then they changed it to rock.  Still, I prefer just music.  I wouldn't want to rate a great non-rock album lower just because it's not rock, and it might be amazingly progressive.


Edited by Logan - April 04 2012 at 16:16

I'm sure the guide was written different for Prog Related at one time. But now it is back in line with the rest of the site I see.

akamaisondufromage wrote: What happens if you give them more than 2 stars?

I try to maintain the "integrity" of the site's rating system when I give stars to albums that I
personally enjoy, but don't necessarily think fit under the PROG umbrella for most listeners.

Granted, there does appear to be plenty of questionable 5-star PROG masterpieces around here
... so maybe I'm taking the rating system too literally.
   




Edited by altaeria - April 04 2012 at 14:49

What happens if you give them more than 2 stars?

Then don't. Or rate the music for what it is.