Prog-related - suggestion

Seeng the way there are many different bands in prog-related, pursuing quite different styles, wouldn't it be worthwhile considering expanding the prog-related branch?

Windhawk wrote: Seeng the way there are many different bands in prog-related, pursuing quite different styles, wouldn't it be worthwhile considering expanding the prog-related branch? What would seem natural to me, was that each specified genre - apart from proto prog of course - would have a sub branch with prog related, i.e. prog related metal, prog related space/psychedelic and so on. Interesting, but since, mainly, all prog-related are united by one common detail (they're non-prog bands that, however, reached tangency, influence or certain aspects/elements with the prog movement), I hardly see the need to diversify. Of course, you can't imagine Bowie with Iron Maiden in the same category, but that's more of a reason why the actual music and style doesn't primarly, or at least it does in the direction of "common things with prog".   Then the teams checking out the various artists could place bands in related if they feel the music isn't "progressive" enough to belong in the main category; yet too "progressive" to be coined mainstream.   I've personally got no reasons to dust away bands from Eclectic into Related, except if the bands don't fit a prog-genre in any way (and that makes the Related). Viceversa, when bands are suggested, if they're not right for Eclectic, or for any other prog genre, but only work in Related, it almost never happens that the Team accepts that band in prog genres, henceforth in Eclectic. Besides, the step of prog rock in which progressive movements get in contact with "mainstream" was clearly defined as Crossover. Related is the other way around: non-prog bands getting, however, in touch with some aspects, link of progressive music.

I think that having a prog-related (and proto-prog) category for each of the prog genres would be too much. However, it might make sense to split prog-related into prog-related rock and prog-related metal, now that more prog-related metal additions are planned.

chopper wrote: I think we should be concentrating more on prog bands and less on prog related.

Amen.

I think that there is far more emphasis on prog bands but most of these basically go unnoticed.  It is the prog related or controversial bands that get all of the "press" here in the forums.  The forums would definitely not be nearly as interesting without the prog-related and other controversial bands.  I think that generally these prog-related and controversial bands are brought up for prog categories and when such bands are determined not to be prog enough they can either be completely rejected or added to the site in a prog-related category.   

NaturalScience wrote: chopper wrote: I think we should be concentrating more on prog bands and less on prog related. Amen.

and your prayers have been answered here at PA's ....  we spend 99% of our time doing just that.  However since related is here.... it is a valid discussion to see if in fact some purpose might be found with it.. since the owner wants related here. 

again though...  if nothing is to be done which is probably the way it stands.. who wants to waste a bunch of time here ON a non-prog category.....  a simple tweak to the related category makes it MUCH better  for the site... call it what it is... influenced by prog.  There are a lot of people here..... how many can actually debate the nuts and bolts of how a particular band WAS influenced.  Would immediately zap 90% of complaints... when you ask someone directly who is bellyaching about an addition.... or questions it.... 'well Joe.... just how are they not influenced by prog'... try asking them the current way... and it just doesn't cut through the crap the same way.  Which has always been the problem with the Related sub....