Should there be a new Category?

Cheesecakemouse wrote:   Well I think we still just as many problems now I don't think prog related is perfect,   Neither do I, buit it's good enough.    Also Art Rock section has its problems - yes King Crimson belongs there but I don't think Van Der Graff Generator does etc so there are still disputes,   My team sent with unimous votes VDGG there, because it has many of many genres.   I still think a strict criteria still should apply, infact I think It'll improve everything a lot we can dump all the Beatles early stuff, they certainly don't belong on this site.   Also Genesis lets say after Duke would be great, but it's an opemn door that I don't totally like.     Its down to the question is this particular album prog? if it is it belongs here if not it doesn't. I'm not talking about AOR stuff like Greendays latest album, I'm talking about pure prog here.   You, me and some other members of course will do their bestr, but already there's people talking about Progressive Rap or Hip Hop every week, people asking to add Meatloaf (One of my favorite bands but not Prog).   When there's an open door, people abuuse, that's a fact, the additions were oipened for a while to anybody and it was a disaster, so it had to be closed again.   Its basically kicking out all the dead wait that isn't prog on this website like the non prog Styx albums? while having classic prog albums that are here.   The policy ofhis site is not to remove bands once they are inside and less when there are revoiews, something with what I agree.   If it's done, it has to be very limited, not everybody should be allowed to add their favorite album.   Iván

Ivan Melgar, the difference with groups like genesis is that their foundations are prog, the beatles wern't, also even their more commercial albums were prog related eg Dominoes, Second Home by the sea. That is the difference Yes and Genesis are prog bands the Beatles wern't. This is what I'm saying; non prog bands/artists like the Beatles and Miles Davis has some prog albums, put them and exclude their non prog because its irrelevent, Genesis and Yes pop music has relevance to many prog fans although usually in the more negative area and againthere are still prog - related material in it.

Ivan,Genesis is my favourite prog band, but I think that post Duke albums need to be there because there are some prog-related material on them, also stuff like 3 sides live has some classic tracks like the Musical box on it.

Edited by Cheesecakemouse - July 08 2006 at 03:22

Sounds like a good idea to me.    

Peter Rideout wrote: I'm not trying to be difficult or contankerous, but I think this idea would only lead to more "prog or not"/"WTF is prog?" arguments.   (You see, prog does not really exist.)

Exactly.
Let's talk about how good music is, and not how prog it is.
Cause I don't see the sense of doing that

Yes, Dark-Prog / Hard-Prog.

earlyprog wrote: I'm unsure until someone convince me of the need for this. How many albums do you expect in this new category? if under 10 then perhaps it's not really worth the energy.   In addition, it wil further dilute this site by shifting the focus away from the truly progressive artists.

I can think of half that number in the pure jazz category right off the top of my head....  factor in rock... it would far surpass 10.. might even approach the 100's. 

points well made Peter....  

the only way I could see to work... if the 'powers that be' wanted it... would be not to have a mass inclusion of albums... that would be chaos.. and lead to many problems that you mention, but to have a 'team' who would be responsible for individual album inclusions.  The team would consist of a wide range of ages and interest and reflect all the notions of what is and is not prog.  The site great as it is.. cannot remain static.. in order to make it even better... sometimes you need to be a bit bold and go for the gusto and including obvious prog gems that are not here is one way to do it.  How many more stupid PM or best Genesis album threads can you or anyone else bear to stand.  It might shake things up a bit.. and when it settles.. we may have a  even BETTER site to discuss our beloved prog

maani wrote: All:   I find it interesting that all of the "oldest" members - Peter, Ivan, Video Vertigo - are the ones trying to explain why the idea is probably not a good one.   As another veteran member (and one of the first, if not the first, admin), I must agree with them.  In fact, it was I who first brought up this idea over three years ago - before many of the "debated" bands were included (Radiohead, Queen, Beatles et al).  At that time, I suggested a category for prog (or proggish) albums by non-prog groups.  I was thinking of everything from Revolver, Pepper and MMT by The Beatles, to Original Soundtrack and How Dare You by 10CC, to English Settlement and Mummer by XTC, etc.  I even argued that the inclusion of Supertramp was a mistake, since only their second album and Crime of the Century could truly be considered "prog" or "proggish."   My suggestion met with an approximately equal amount of support and rejection.  But it was the wisdom of veterans like Peter and Ivan that convinced me I was going down the wrong road, for the very reason that Peter makes clear (and that cheesecakemouse seems to be missing or ignoring): how does one determine which albums by which groups are "prog" or "proggish" when no "conclusive" definition of "prog" can be agreed upon?  And even if such a definition could be generally agreed upon, how does one determine the "degree" of "proggyness" of a particular album? What are the parameters?  Who decides?   Peter, Ivan and VV (among others) are correct: this idea - which is admittedly well-intentioned and even, to some degree, well-argued (just as mine was) - is an unnecessary and potentially divisive one - more divisive than most of you are able to see right now in your well-intentioned, but ultimately limited, focus on the seeming merits of the idea.   Peace.

I see where you and Peter specifically are coming from... but if you could answer me this and I'll sit down quietly and shut my big yapper hahaha.... would not those problems be solved by a 'crack' team of S.C.'s from range of ages and tastes who would then decide what is to be added and what is not.  Would and should have no more division or rancor then normal admissions by the various teams have already. 

micky wrote: I see where you and Peter specifically are coming from... but if you could answer me this and I'll sit down quietly and shut my big yapper hahaha.... would not those problems be solved by a 'crack' team of S.C.'s from range of ages and tastes who would then decide what is to be added and what is not.  Would and should have no more division or rancor then normal admissions by the various teams have already.

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 09 2006 at 12:12