The X and Y Argument

So why shouldn't that argument apply? I mean if X is suitable for PA and Y is just as suitable, then why exclude Y?

My example (and I'm sure there could be millions of others) would be City Boy and Angel.

Now I tried making my case with Angel a while back to no avail. Someone then later compared them to City Boy who is under Prog-Related (don't know the validity of that comparison btw). But if that comparison is true and it really doesn't matter, then doesn't that make Angel (Y) prog enough to be prog related like City Boy (X)?

So while I can understand why people don't like the X and Y argument, I want to know why it can't be valid.

Because everyone uses that arguement and it can easily be pulled apart.


Iron Maiden is here, they were NWOBHM like Judas Priest, so where's Priest?


the arguement can be used if it has further points and is used as a backing point as opposed to the main point, it's actually one of the things that helped get Coheed and Cambria out of PR and into Xover (see 3). There's nothing inherently wrong with it, people just use it incorrectly all the time.





PS - this thread should be moved to "Help us improve the site" or "general discussions"

just an example that's commonly used, was definitely not stating it as fact.

While there are obvious similarities between Band X and Band Y, it is the differences between them that mark them as being unique. More often than not it is one or more of the traits that Band X has that Band Y does not have that gained them admittance to the archive and the reason why Band Y will not be admitted.

There any many bands out there and these bands may(or had) issue a album which can be categorized under a certain genre. From my point of view probably will be better to categorize a band with more than one particular genre if necessary. Also probably it is a good idea to label an album as having a particular influence. For example Frank Zappa is shown here under RIO/ Avant Prog label. But for sure his vast discography is much more than this.
For example I almost sure that King Diamond with his conceptual albums may be considered progressive to some extent even if his music is mostly heavy metal and he is not present on this side but Metallica or Iron Maiden are. So we have on this site albums like St. Anger from Metallica but not Keeper of the Seven Keys from Helloween.

"If X is here, then why not y?" is a valid question, but the "if x is here then y not why?" is less useful. ;)

Too many people have said that if  x is in, then y (being a very different case and with little relation to x) should be in too. 

"If band A is here, then band B should be here" arguments can be perfectly valid.  I think that way commonly.  The argument is stronger when band B is similar in many ways to band A, of course.  Sometimes a band in the archives of very questionably proggy status is used to justify a very different band musically, and sometimes people go so far as to say, "Band A is hardly prog and it's in, this is more prog, so of course it should be here". 

Perhaps band A shouldn't even be in.  It somewhat bugs me when people try to justify the inclusion of a band/artist by comparing it to one that they don't think has sufficient prog merits.

An "if apple X is here, then apple Y should be here" is far better than "if apple X is here, then orange Y should be here" even though one can compare in terms of quantity of prog traits; however, the comparison is more worthwhile when the bands are stylistically similar/ have a similar compositional approach.

Considering that prog and prog-related can be nebulous concepts and reliant on subjective constructs, prog quality/ quantity comparisons between bands can further muddy the waters.

If Band 1 is in the Archives and Band 2 is similar to Band 1, then Band 2 should be in the Archives.  If Band 3 is similar to Band 2, then Band 3 should be in the Archives.  ...  If Band N+1 is similar to Band N, then Band N+1 should be in the Archives.  If Brittany Spears is similar to Band N+!, then Brittany Spears should be in the Archives.  By the property of Mathemtical Induction, Brittany Spears should be in the archives.  QED.

If you want to argue that Band X should be in the Archives, then I think it is best to list the prog characteristics that Band X has.  If you can't list them, then Band X doesn't have those characteristics, and therefore shouldn't be here.  It seems to me that if the best argument you can make is that Band X sounds like Band Y, then Band X isn't really prog (otherwise you would have a better argument).  Or at least that's the way I see it.

These are all very good points, got some good replies. I'm glad I started this thread! And trust me I understand where most of you are coming from, I myself try not to use that argument but in one case (so far and hopefully never again) I had no other defense (the band imho was denied due to misconceptions..or maybe I'm just bitter..) and it already seemed like they made up their minds so I figured, "what the hell I might as well try every argument that I can find!" Which is a shame because I tried hard to point out the prog characteristics in that band; and yes there are some, if not a lot, or I wouldn't have even bothered but it was pointless. But in the end that band is prog in my mind and that's good enough for me!

Well I'm satisfied with these answers, definitely going to rethink my position on this.

Thanks people!