Collaborators’ TOP 20

The ProgArchives Home Page displays the "TOP 20: Collaborators' most popular progressive rock albums". It is derived from Collaborators' star ratings irrespective of whether a Collaborator has posted a review to go with his/her rating.

Question: Should a rating without a review count in deriving the Collaborators' TOP 20?

Boy the above question sounds nerdy, but I'm asking it because e.g. PINK FLOYD's "Meddle" is higher up than "DSOTM" but the reviews by Collaborators for those two albums appear to indicate the opposite. Personally I'd prefer the TOP 20 to ignore Collaborators' star ratings unless they have accompanying text.

I notice that the only ELP album in there was just about hanging on to No20 when I last looked.If changing the system gets it further up the chart then I agree

Any chart is going to have its shortcomings, but I think the one on the home page is a pretty good reflection on our collective tastes, if the forum is anyhting to go by.

No great hangups about whether or not a review is submitted with the star rating to count. Personally, I cannot see the point of just giving a rating, it's writing the review which is the enjoyable bit anyway. Writing the review should help to lead you to the appropriate star rating.

THIS ONE IS FOR THE NON-SPEAKING ENGLISH MEMBERS (BUT THOSE WHO WILL UNDERSTAND THIS WORDS): I KNOW SOME OF YOU GUYS DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO WRITE SOME WORDS IN ENGLISH WHILE REVIEWING SOME OF YOUR FAVORITE ALBUMS...AND JUST CAST YOUR VOTE AND NO REVIEW ABOUT THE WHYS OF YOUR RATING. MY ENGLISH IS NOT PERFECT, THANKS TO THIS WEBSITE I'M IMPROVING MY COMPRENHENSION, BUT IF YOU HAVE TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE ALBUM OR GROUP YOU LIKE, JUST WRITE IT IN YOUR NATIVE LANGUAGE, THOUGH IT'S SAID THAT YOU SHOULD WRITE YOUR OPINIONS IN ENGLISH, PROGARCHIVES DOESN'T BAN YOUR REVIEWS EITHER IF THEY ARE IN SPANISH OR IN OTHER LANGUAGE. I MADE SOME REVIEWS IN  SPANISH, BUT FROM NOW ON I'LL DO IT IN ENGLISH, BY THE WAY, SOME OF MY SPANISH REVIEWS HAVE BEEN DELETED FROM THE WEBSITE , BUT NO MATTER, WRITE ABOUT YOUR TASTES ON PROGRESSIVE MUSIC... I GLAD TO BE A NEWBIE REVIEWER  I THINK THE COUNTING STARS SHOULD GO ACCORDING WITH THE CRITICS YOU READ ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR ALBUM.

diddy wrote:   But there's maybe one point of just giving a star rating without a review: I can imagine very well that it might be not very easy for someone to write a review for one of the "big ones"...there are more than 30 reviews, some of the authors have seen the band live...what should a 20 year old proghead tell THEM about Foxtrot just to name an example? Or better (because reviews are mainly for people not knowing the band) wich information could he add, after 30 reviews? I haven't written a review for one of these albums yet...and I for one don't know if I'm going to do so. If there's someone who anyhow wants to contribute something I don't know why he should't rate the album without the review...I don't do so but I think it's a point because I know the problems with reviewing albums like Foxtrot...

All reviews are equally valid. As one of the older ones, I value the opinions of "20 year old progheads" immensely. Sometimes, the affection us older ones have for our "favourites" may unintentionally inhibit us from writing about them objectively. Many of us have fond memories attached to those albums. To read reviews written without that "baggage" can be as enlightening and informative as a historical appraisal.

Because some of us have listened to albums such as "Foxtrot" constantly for over 30 years for example, we perceive that they have not aged. It can be very interesting to hear the views of someone who is listening to them for the first time in 2004.

 Never hold back, diversity of views and perspectives is what this site thrives on.

All:

First, let me say that I agree that ratings should not be included without an accompanying review.  True, it might take a bit of time to write text reviews for 20 or 30 albums, but that is not an excuse.  If necessary, write a short review; after all, one can say alot in two or three well-chosen paragraphs.

That said, I believe there are two factors involved here.  First, unless I am gravely mistaken, the majority of "collaborators" are "older."  Yes, there are some "youngsters," ()  but most of the collaborators lived through the early years of prog.  Thus, we are more familiar with the "seminal" bands (Pink Floyd, Moody Blues, King Crimson, Jethro Tull, Yes, Genesis, Gentle Giant, ELP, VDGG), and they (and a few others) hold a special place in our hearts.

Which leads me to the second factor: history.  Although many neo-prog bands are exceptionally talented re composition, musicianship, production, etc., there is no question that all of them were influenced by one or another of the seminal bands listed above, to various degrees: i.e., it is rare that a "neo-prog" band adds anything truly "new" to the prog-rock "lexicon."  Given this, I have stated many times that, for me, the "success" of a neo-prog band is dependent on how well they "filter" those influences, and what comes out the other end.

Many neo-prog bands "wear their influences on their sleeves."  And although even some of these bands are quite good (and listenable, depending on your tastes), they suffer from a lack of "creativity" (which is not the same as originality"; one can be "creative" even with obvious influences).

However, some neo-prog bands are more successful at filtering their influences, and come out with music that is "creative," possibly even (in some sense) "new" and/or interesting - and, if they're really good, something exciting, compelling or even extraordinary.  And although these bands are few, they do "get their due" here on Progarchives, at least as far as I have seen.

Having said all that, I believe that those of us from the "old school" are not so much "denying" the excellence of neo-prog bands (certainly most (or all) of us see the exceptional merits of bands like Marillion, Dream Theater, Spock's Beard, Anglagard, and many early and neo-prog Italian groups), but rather have a difficult time "taking them on their own merits," since, by their very nature, they are filtering the influence of one or more of the seminal prog groups.

I agree that this may be an impediment to reviewing neo-prog with the same "ear" as we (i.e., the "older folks") do with seminal prog.  And I, personally, have been making efforts to listen for and find the "new masterpieces" (as our good friend Peter Rideout puts it) among neo-prog groups and albums.  And I strongly urge my "older" colleagues to do the same.

However, although I consider Dream Theater's "Scenes From a Memory," Spock's Beard's "The Light," and Ark's "Burn the Sun" (among others) to be candidates for "new masterpieces," I gave them each four stars rather than five because, although they are clearly exceptional, even highly "creative" works, they could not have existed without the prior works of the seminal prog bands that those groups (and others) were filtering.  This seems to be one (and possibly the primary) reason why we "older folks" have a hard time giving five stars to neo-prog albums.  And as you can imagine, it is something extremely difficult to "get around" and ignore.

Comments?

Peace.

richardh wrote: I notice that the only ELP album in there was just about hanging on to No20 when I last looked.If changing the system gets it further up the chart then I agree

Me too Richard... !!!

James,

I think the TOP 20 (which can be expanded to a TOP 50 by clicking on a link at the botom of the list) *is* important. Not to you or me perhaps, but to new visitors to this site who are looking for information on the genre and would like to discover more about it. It is conceivable that someone visits ProgArchives who has little knowledge of the genre but wants recommendations on which albums he/she should buy to 'get into' the genre. The TOP 20 list is a good - and simple - place to start.

That's one of the reasons why I suggested a TOP 10 to MAX@ in the first place, although I wanted it to be based on *all* of the thousands of reviews posted in the ProgArchives, not just Collaborators' reviews, but was overruled on the basis that spammers might try to influence the rankings. I find the Collaborators' TOP 20 much less interesting than a TOP 20 derived from *all* reviews posted, because it's much less indicative of the true popularity of albums. Back in June this year the TOP 50 based on *all* reviews, not just Collaborators' reviews, looked like this:

Column 1 : RV
Column 2: Nb. of rates
Column 3: CD ID
Column 4: CD TITLE

477 159 3777 Train Of Thought
336 84 1827 Close to the Edge
288 72 1510 Selling England By The Pound
264 66 1829 Relayer
260 65 1672 Scenes From A Memory Metropolis Part II
244 61 1662 Images And Words
244 61 2 Foxtrot
224 56 1440 Dark Side of the Moon, The
224 56 1825 Fragile
212 53 1828 Tales From Topographic Oceans
204 51 1511 The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway
196 49 1443 The Wall
196 49 3 Nursery Cryme
192 48 1903 In the Court of the Crimson King
188 47 1911 Red
184 46 1826 The YES Album
184 46 328 Mirage
180 45 329 The Snow Goose
180 45 1441 Wish You Were Here
180 45 1442 Animals
168 42 1512 Wind And Wuthering
164 41 1433 Piper at the Gates of Dawn, The
164 41 2019 Thick As A Brick
160 40 2448 Trespass
160 40 3070 2112
160 40 330 Moonmadness
160 40 5 A Trick Of The Tail
156 39 1438 Meddle
156 39 3076 Moving Pictures
156 39 2177 The Power To Believe
156 39 2018 Aqualung
152 38 3073 Hemispheres
148 37 1513 Second Out
144 36 1437 Atom Heart Mother
144 36 1995 In Absentia
144 36 1909 Larks' Tongues in Aspic
140 35 1914 Discipline
140 35 2022 A Passion Play
140 35 1666 Awake
140 35 1623 Six Degrees of Inner Turbulence
140 35 327 Camel
136 34 1905 Lizard
136 34 1872 Brain Salad Surgery
132 33 1754 Script for a Jester's Tear
132 33 1831 Going for the One
132 33 3075 Permanent Waves
128 32 1833 Drama
128 32 1863 Tarkus
128 32 621 The Seventh House
128 32 890 Misplaced Childhood

It's much more interesting - and representative - than the Collaborators' TOP 50 in my opinion.

Anyway, back to my original question at the beginning of this thread, I'm glad to see that most of you agree that Collaborators ratings should not be counted in deriving the TOP 20 unless the rating is accompanied by a review.

And to diddy, who asks "...what should a 20 year old proghead tell THEM about Foxtrot just to name an example?" I would say: "Anything you want!" In my opinion reviews should focus on the music and how you feel about it, so that anyone who does not know the album (well, or at all) can decide whether or not it is worth getting. You don't need to be an expert in GENESIS or have been to GENESIS concerts to review "Foxtrot". So don't worry, diddy, write your review of Foxtrot and any other 'great' albums. Tell us how the music moves you, what it makes you think of, how it sounds to you, etc. Us old farts are also interested in the opinion of youngsters!

I don't!!  ELP is way underrated, BSS should be in the top 10 and Trilogy is missing.  That in itself is a sin!!

threefates wrote: I don't!!  ELP is way underrated, BSS should be in the top 10 and Trilogy is missing.  That in itself is a sin!!

No.