Should there be a new Category?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Help us improve the site
Forum Description: Help us improve the forums, and the site as a whole
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=25861
Printed Date: December 23 2024 at 07:55
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Should there be a new Category?
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Subject: Should there be a new Category?
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 21:13
I've written this suggestion on the "Help to improve the website" section of the forums. Some think its a great idea some think its a not so great idea. Basically a Select Albums Category, will have just the progressive albums of artists whose entire career is too diverse/commercial etc to be considered prog. For example David Bowies 'berlin' albums (Lodger, Low and Heroes) would be under this category while the rest would not be included, the same would go for Miles Davis fusion and would solve the debate with the Beatles since just their proto prog albums would be included while albums like A Hard Days Night would not be included (because they are clearly not prog). This would not mean Yes and Genesis in the 80s would be thrown out of the website, because their foundations are as prog bands, while Davis, Bowie and the Beatles etc roots/foundation is not prog but other style eg rock and jazz. Also Genesis and Yes etc 1980s albums are at the very least prog related. Anyway vote and discuss etc. I just want to see what this website on a whole thinks, I believe this will solve a lot of debate on this website and not reduce its integrity as a prog website.  
ps. Check out the help to improve forum with the similar thread, because there may be some helpful info with this- check out the another crazy idea thread. ------------- |
Replies:
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 21:19
|
Great Idea!
Hopefully those early Rainbow albums would get some recognition. Some Bowie, BOC etc
|
Posted By: Dream Theater
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 21:21
|
I like the idea..
------------- [IMG]http://www.travelwithachallenge.com/Images/Travel_Article_Library/Sacred-Travel/Machu-Picchu-350.jpg"> [IMG]http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a63/panchopc1/machupicchu-1.jpg"> |
Posted By: Mad Bass Player
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 21:25
|
That would actually be pretty cool. Mabey some of Iron Maiden's albums could be on here. ------------- "Mister Fripp, your music is quite different than everything else out there. In one word, how would you describe it?" "Progressive.... yeah, that's it..." |
Posted By: pepo
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 21:27
| And what would be the name for such category, partially prog, temporarily prog, converted to prog, pop-prog or perhaps each problematic group should have its own category as in GEPR. |
Posted By: bhikkhu
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 21:32
|
How about prog albums by non-prog bands. ------------- a.k.a. H.T. http://riekels.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow - http://riekels.wordpress.com |
Posted By: Bern
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 21:34
That's one hell of an idea 
-------------  
RIP in bossa nova heaven. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 21:40
|
sounds like a good idea to me.... anything to get more prog albums,
where they belong... on this site.. even those by traditionally
'non-prog' groups.
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Bj-1
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 21:42
That would have been great! Excellent idea  ------------- RIO/AVANT/ZEUHL - The best thing you can get with yer pants on! |
Posted By: The Rock
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 22:40
Good Idea,I did suggest such a categorie a while ago.
Golden Earring should be on PA,big time!
They could easily fit in the proto,art rock or prog related category.
Why aren't they on PA is beyond me.
Their early albums(1968-77) all contains almost 100% prog.
------------- What's gonna come out of my mouth is gonna come out of my soul."Skip Prokop" |
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 22:50
|
Everyone's pretty much unanimous on this (except one, there's always one). That means it should happen. ------------- |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 22:59
Who will decide what's "prog" and what's not, and how much "prog" content on an album is enough for inclusion? 
(And what the heck is prog, anyway? No two people seem able to agree on that.)
A subjective can o' worms, and it feels like a value judgement, to me (as if "not prog" = "not good enough for us").
 Sorry, I'm the sole "no" vote (so far). I believe that if an artist is here, all of their albums should be here. Let the reviews discuss the "prog or not" thing -- it's a very subjective notion.
 Plus, a LOT of existing reviews would get dumped, as you remove the "non prog" albums. (That's not going to happen.)  ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: AtLossForWords
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 23:03
Then there's no need for you to post this here. Anyone with a strong opinion about this would post there.
There has already been discussion about why we need classification by album methods before. It has interest, but it hasn't really been acted upon. It's a good idea, I think genre classification by album would clear up a lot of problems many members have with the current classification system, but it just simply hasn't been acted on yet. -------------  
"Mastodon sucks giant monkey balls." |
Cheesecakemouse wrote:Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 23:13
|
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.) ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 23:47
sure your entitled to your opinion, this is what make this site so great is differing views.  ------------- |
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 23:51
|
[
There has already been discussion about why we need classification by album methods before. It has interest, but it hasn't really been acted upon. It's a good idea, I think genre classification by album would clear up a lot of problems many members have with the current classification system, but it just simply hasn't been acted on yet. [/QUOTE]
Yeah I'm just trying to draw attention to it, the reason I posted it here was so people could vote on it, also this sub-category of threads trends to gather more interest giving a more general view of the website. Well if you guys have already thought about it I'm sure It'll happen soon, this is just a bit of a nudge in that direction.
------------- |
Posted By: robertplantowns
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 00:02
|
I for one don't understand the obsession with finding out ultimately who's "truly prog" and who's not. It really doesn't matter and it would be a waste of time on this site. Also, isn't the whole point of proto-prog and prog-related categories is that they're NOT prog to begin with, so why should we be verifying their proginess when by the fact that they're in those categories it has already been established? Seems nonsensical to me. It seriously doesn't matter to me whether a band is labeled as prog, if you want to listen to the most innovative and proggy band, that's your choice, and if you want to listen to a band that's barely proggy at al, that's fine too. I think artists should be labeled by what the majority of their output is considered, and let the reviews speak for themselves! I also think this would take a disincentive out of reviews where people speak what they truly feel about the album and its "prog worthiness" rather than simply hitting a button to vote on a PROG FROM 1-10 scale. Maybe I'm the only one in here but this idea sounds ridiculous to me. I VOTE NO
------------- 
|
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 00:24
I consider prog by the albums more than the band, thats the problem if we rely on prog related and proto it leaves many questions unanswered, unfortunately with what you speak of with the reviews is flawed, because if you are saying its the reviews that speak for it that could lead to the problem of allowing every style of music in and just allowing reviews to guide it, that means I could put Boy George(I don't like his music btw) on the website and wait for reviews to sort it out, thats why we have and admin team to sort these things out, and thats why we have these discussions to see if they have any merit, and if the admin like the idea. We can't have Miles Davis or David Bowie on prog related etc because their body of work is too different but some particular albums such as Davis's Bitches Brew anre important Milestones in prog and I believe that more people on this website should find out about it and that people review it, and appreciate it's significance to prog history. ------------- |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 00:36
YEEEEESSSSSS!!!  *Ghost Rider's early-morning scream of approval*
As the mighty Bruce D. would say, "scream for me, PA forum...."  |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 00:43
|
The big question...Who decides which albums are really Prog?
I would love to add Their Satanic Majesties Request (Rolling Stones) as Psychedelic but not so sure how easy will it be to manage albums by absolutely non proog bands.
We have people already asking why is STYX or Be Bop´Deluxe here, imagine if somebody would believe some Earth Wind & Fire or Progressive House album should be added.
The idea is good, but has it's problems.
Iván ------------- 
|
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 00:50
Well I think we still just as many problems now I don't think prog related is perfect, 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, the fact that Bitches Brew by Miles Davis on this site is also a problem, 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. 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. 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. ------------- |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 01:45
-------------
|
Posted By: theBox
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 02:37
|
Brilliant Idea Cheesecakemouse! I voted yes! ------------- |
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 02:43
|
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. ------------- |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 03:04
I get your point, The Beatles are not mainly Prog (Except SPLHCB and Abbey Road) and Genesis is the best Prog band ever (That's what I honestly believe).
But I do believe their albums after Duke should be deleted.
I like the idea, as i said I see no reasoon why Their Satanic Majesties Request is not here, but the risk of some inadequate additions that would attempt against the nature and essense of this site is too high.
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 03:13
|
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. ------------- |
Posted By: video vertigo
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 04:03
|
I think the idea is good, but should these bands be allowed into the top albums? I'm already unhappy about the beatles in our top 100, who's next? I like that this site is growing and more info about more types of music are becoming apart of PA, but I'm here for prog 99.98% of the time. ------------- "The rock and roll business is pretty absurd, but the world of serious music is much worse." - Zappa |
Posted By: horza
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 04:09
|
Sounds like a good idea to me. ------------- Originally posted by darkshade: Calling Mike Portnoy a bad drummer is like calling Stephen Hawking an idiot. |
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 04:38
|
[QUOTE=video vertigo]I think the idea is good, but should these bands be allowed into the top albums? I'm already unhappy about the beatles in our top 100, who's next?
Yeah I don't like the Beatles there either, good point. ------------- |
Posted By: Tricalix
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 08:22
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 ------------- I hate signatures. |
Posted By: earlyprog
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 08:23
|
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.
|
Posted By: ANDREW
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 08:24
| Yes, Dark-Prog / Hard-Prog. |
Posted By: plodder
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 08:31
|
More prog genres, just what the world needs. Like more lawyers.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/plodder/?chartstyle=basicrt10"> 
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 08:35
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. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 12:03
|
Sorry, but I believe this to be a purely academic (ie, futile) exercise.
Quite some time ago, before many of you joined, it was decided by "the powers that be" (the owners -- and this site is NOT a democracy; nor am I saying it should be) that once an artist was in, then the entire discography of that artist would be in.
The entire notion of "prog or not/where the cutoff point for an artist should be" is VERY subjective, because "prog" itself is a subjective notion. Unlike, for example, jazz or blues, "prog" is not really a genre, but a subjective value judgement -- it is in the "ear of the hearer," so to speak. (Just think of the wide range of very diverse artists represented here: for example, we have Yes, Deep Purple, Dream Theater, some "death" metal, Talk Talk, Queen, Radiohead, the Beatles, etc, etc. The "connections" or "common ground" among all of those artists are tenuous at best!
Also, consider all of the artists that are regularly held up for potential inclusion: we've had everyone from Talking Heads to Steely Dan to Black Sabbath. Clearly, again, "prog" is a very subjective notion (that is what I mean when I say that it "doesn't really exist") that is up to each of us to privately define. If you think Talking Heads, Sabbath, early Genesis and Steely Dan belong together, then great: burn your homemade "prog" compilation and arrange your collection accordingly (but don't expect others to necessarily "buy into" your vision of "prog").
No, I see partial representation of an artist as just one more thing to argue about, divide us, and make the site even more exclusive (whereas the owners want PA to be inclusive) and elitest.
As another person has suggested above, I think we have too many "hair-splitting," amorphous categories already. As I've said many times, art is not math or science -- our words and "definitions" cannot neatly contain it. It is not an intellectual exercise -- it lives more in the heart of the individual, not the head. All of these "boxes" of words (and words are open to interpretation) we keep designing for the "categorization" of music simply do not work -- except, perhaps, on an individual listener basis. (And that's also the reason to drop the words which accompany the star ratings!)
Let the individual reviews address the (subjective) issues of "progginess!" ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 12:13
|
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 ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: maani
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 13:42
|
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.
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 08 2006 at 19:51
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. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Sacred 22
Date Posted: July 09 2006 at 08:44
| good idea me thinks |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: July 09 2006 at 12:09
Micky, seems you have bad memory, you're part of a team already and you know how much preasure can be placed on us for just changing one band from Symphonic to Neo Prog or Art Rock. We're not eliminating a band, we're not adding a band, we're just changing a genre and still we got some serious debates in the Collaborators and Prog Lounge Forums.
Now multiply that for 10 if you as part of a team don't accept a determined album, you will have a lot of preasure if you refuse to add a hip hop or Disco album to that section.
Now multiply that for 10 again if you add a Rolling Stones, Earth Eind & Fire or Boston album, some people will start to make problems, there are still members making a lot of noise because Kansas is here.
Then, you would need a team not only formed by specialist on one but in every genre, I can't get the difference between RIO and Post Rock or Death Prog Metal and Viking Prog Metal, so you would need at least 10 members.
Now add the time gap, you know we have to stay until 2 am and Raffaella has to wake at 5 or 6 AM to discuss with us. How many members are willing to do that?
Now, add the risk of opening the door for absolutely each and every band in the musical spectrum, from Motown to Madonna (Some people claim that songs as "Like a Prayer" are related to Prog, this would be chaotic
Now add all the accurate points Maani and Peter made like the divisive factor, you will have 100 posts asking if A or B album is Prog of not and if the team has the bad luck to disagree with the opinion of the fans of determined band and/or album you would have a civil war on hands.
No, this would never work.
Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: July 09 2006 at 12:12
| Madonna "Like a Prayer" related to Prog?!! That really made me laugh! |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: July 09 2006 at 12:20
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 09 2006 at 13:21
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Besides... it's time for the game!Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: July 09 2006 at 19:56
Well Micky I understand you can't remember this because you had some problems and not working with the group for a couple of weeks when this happened.
All this because ONE BAND not removed or added to/from Prog Archives, only changed from Symphonic to Art Rock
I can't talk for everybody, but at least for me it's a lot of work that I do with pleasure (And I know you too), we sacrifice family and even work time what again I do happilly because I love PA and Prog.
No, it diddn't opened, but The Beatles have some Prog elements in a couple of albums plus it was a special case and ELO was added by mistake against what all polls said. Imagine if the team by one or two votes adds a Rap, Hip Hop or a Disco album, that would create chaos. The addition of Radiohead caused a big problem but probably you won't remember it because you weren't a member yet.
Small details? Micky we are currently three working, one member resigned even before the team was created, two weren't able to be a part, one is missing and one member only contributes with his wise advice when asked. I had to choose a completely new team and despite this we are still currently three when we are 5 in reality.
I consider this reunions useful maybe because we all enjoy our company is the reason why we're still working, but remember Raffaella wakes at 5 or 6 am to meet us and we have to stay until well after midnight.
Then forget ityou will never make ten persons to agree about a non Prog band, you would be lucky if you get more than 50%.
Everybody here agrees about change Micky, but not everybody will agree about the same changes.
It's fun have a debate with you, something I had forgotten since we work together in the Symphonic team....I missed them, sadly we agree most of the times with the changes that have to be made inside Symphonic sub-genre.
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: July 09 2006 at 22:02
|
Look I'm not trying to cause more trouble than this website, I just wanted to see where people stand on such issues, with the issues such as Madonna; thats really extreme cases 99% would not agree with such a thing. What someone said earlier about me not appreciating how there'll be a problem what level of prog will an artist need to be included on this website, is a fair comment. There will always be problems no matter how things are categorised, the arts are almost impossible to categorise efficiently,there are always those falling between the cracks, and always a frustration that others are not included and why others are, its a system and like all human systems its flawed. My frustration is the exclusion of Miles Davis but I do appreciate the can of worms it'll open if he was included, no one will ever be 100% satisfied with this website, but as they say 'if it aint' broke don't fix it.' So of course it isn't perfect, and it will never be perfect, and so there'll always be debates in the forums, most liely till the end of time or the end of the internet. Oh well.
------------- |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 09 2006 at 23:00
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Mandrakeroot
Date Posted: July 10 2006 at 05:35
This is my opinion!!!
------------- 
|
Posted By: S Lang
Date Posted: July 11 2006 at 06:15
|
There are obviously difficulties with finding a way to feature John McLaughlin, Jack Bruce, Miles Davis, etc. on the Archives. It can be argued forever, but considering that we are talking about legends ignored, it's just untenable.
There's got to be a way to do it.
|
Posted By: Phil
Date Posted: July 11 2006 at 07:45
|
Excellent idea, cheesecakemouse, I do think albums like Bowies "Heroes" or "Low", Miles Davis' Bitches Brew, maybe some of The Flaming Lips, ought to be recognised as being "progressive" or having prog-like themes. Perhaps this is the way to do it. I certainly feel the wholesale inclusion of some artistes is not really appropriate.
BTW I didn't read all of what's gone before but...Madonna???!!!
|
Posted By: bhikkhu
Date Posted: July 11 2006 at 07:56
Yes. Madonna can be submitted, along with any other candidate. Then she will be immediately rejected. ------------- a.k.a. H.T. http://riekels.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow - http://riekels.wordpress.com |
Posted By: Rocktopus
Date Posted: July 11 2006 at 08:11
Also: Pretty Things(SF Sorrow), The Who, Small Faces (Ogden Nut Flake), Miles Davis, Herbie Hancock, Bee Gees: Odessa, Joni Mitchell, Rolling Stones(At His Satanic Majesties Request), Black Sabbath, Iron Maiden, Metallica, Tim Buckley mm..., have all made an album or two that has a natural place here. Still can't see any good reasons why they shouldn't. Who'll decide what? That's a question than can be asked for every inlusion. Why is this more relevant here? ------------- Over land and under ashes In the sunlight, see - it flashes Find a fly and eat his eye But don't believe in me Don't believe in me Don't believe in me |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: July 11 2006 at 10:37
Do you really think their presence here is going to "make or break" these artists?
 Are you, I and all not still free to like/listen to them?
Surely most people here (who have attained the age of reason) are familiar with Bowie?
 The arguing would be ENDLESS: "How could you only list Low, Heroes and Lodger? Have you even HEARD Outside? It is way more proggy than those! Why, I oughtta...." (blah blah blah de freakin' BLAH!)  ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: July 11 2006 at 18:04
|
I think that the Admin/Collabs concerns are legitimate, maybe we could try this on trial and if it fails then no need to worry, I guess it just depends if its worth all the trouble getting it up and running if its only for a short time? ------------- |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: July 11 2006 at 18:23
|
No Raindance, there's nothing on trial here, once a band or album has been added, there's no turning back, that's the policy of the site.
BTW: Look some posts above, there's one member asking for The Bee Gees already, no album by this POP/Disco icons gets even remotely close to Prog.
Already other members have requested on other threads since a couple of years:
1.- Chicago
2.- Boston
3.- Journey
4.- Mountain
5.- The Cure
6.- Talking Heads
7.- Meatloaf
8.- Vanessa Mae
9.- Elton John
10.- Earth Wind & Fire
We have to deal with this, it's somehow easy to ignore this incredible requests, but it would be almost impossible to deal with hundreeds if not a thousand albums that sooner or later will be requested.
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: July 11 2006 at 18:28
Yeah theres no way the Cure or Talking Heads should be included, great bands but definately not prog, I'm saterting to the floodgates that will be opened, the system isn't perfect with no Miles Davis, but I'm starting to think that allowing him in will cause a lot of problems with other requests. ------------- |
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: July 11 2006 at 18:42
The arguing if some artists in specific genres deserve to be there in the first place happens everyday too
 |
Posted By: Rocktopus
Date Posted: July 12 2006 at 04:47
Odessa is a concept double album from '69, not too far from the sound of Moody Blues, and equally progsounding. ELO's debut has nothing to do with their later Discovery album, and you can' dismiss Genesis' Foxtrot because of We Can't Dance. Same thing here. You obviously haven't heard this album, but that kind of details rarely stops you from having strong opinons. ------------- Over land and under ashes In the sunlight, see - it flashes Find a fly and eat his eye But don't believe in me Don't believe in me Don't believe in me |
Posted By: S Lang
Date Posted: July 12 2006 at 05:11
|
[QUOTE=Ivan_Melgar_M, once a band or album has been added, there's no turning back, that's the policy of the site.
Maybe it's time to change that attitude?
Already other members have requested on other threads since a couple of years:
1.- Chicago
2.- Boston
3.- Journey
4.Mountain - Yes, please!
5.- The Cure
6.- Talking Heads
7.- Meatloaf
8.- Vanessa Mae
9.- Elton John
10.- Earth Wind & Fire
|
Posted By: toolis
Date Posted: August 22 2006 at 07:43
|
if an artist's or a band's discography consists of e.g. 8 heavy metal albums and 1 heavy/progressive metal album, i don't think that it matters to me... i am a huge Maiden fan myself but seeing 'Seventh Son' in the PA isn't exactly what i'm looking for... |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 22 2006 at 17:02
-------------
|
Posted By: crimson thing
Date Posted: August 22 2006 at 17:33
|
I'd be in favour of a selected albums type category, but with a few caveats.
For example, to sidestep the argument that noone can find an all encompassing definition of prog, you could call the new category "Notable albums of potential interest to progfans" (although I'm sure someone could find a snappier definition.) That way, you wouldn't have to thread each candidate album through the eye of a prog needle, merely establish that it had something going for it, along with, of course, a modicum of musical talent....
Then, you follow micky's insisitence on a heterogeneous vetting team, and invite suggestions. (I am assuming, maybe naively, no difficulties in getting volunteers...)Hopefully, you then get an eclectic mixture of interesting albums, not necessarily great albums with vociferous champions, but an interesting lucky dip for anyone who occasionally gets the urge to listen to a band outside their ("their", meaning both the band's and the listener's) normal range.
------------- "Every man over forty is a scoundrel." GBS 
|
Posted By: eduardossc
Date Posted: August 25 2006 at 03:06
| I voted Yes. There should be a category for prog that has the structure and basics of pop. There you could find the very best regarded album in the site "Close to the edge" as "Prog-pop". Or should it be "Pop-Prog"?. You could also find any Spock's beard and The flower kings album as "Easy listening prog", or as "Elevator prog", or "Medical clinic's waiting room prog". |
Posted By: crimson thing
Date Posted: August 25 2006 at 06:00
|
^ Elevator Prog" is an inspired category..... ------------- "Every man over forty is a scoundrel." GBS
|
Posted By: progressive
Date Posted: August 25 2006 at 12:31
|
so genesis and yes would be in there? i didn't get it.
Why would the name be "Select Albums"? it's stupid.
genre should be considered to albums, then. It would be good to have many genres per band. It would be easier to find bands (meaning albums) from other categories. Categories shouldn't be the thing to lock it. They're just for search, right? And it's nice to put things in boxes, but.. Well, there could be categories where bands go under, but syles should get under bands, too.
Description of a band or genrewould still be relevant. Band could be different styles, but you want some bigger picture of it. Maybe the band stands in time where there were other bands who had something very like the same, but who still are in other categories..
I also think that there could be more non-prog bands, little proggy. It just should be mentioned. For example Genesis' not-so-prog albums could appear somehow differently in the list.
------------- 
► rateyourmusic.com/~Fastro 2672 ratings ▲ last.fm/user/Fastro 5556 artists ▲ www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=4933 266◄ |
Posted By: akin
Date Posted: August 25 2006 at 12:38
No, It would increase the debate over which album is progressive and which is not. And to be honest, Yes and Genesis albuns from the eighties should be removed also. If it is to put only prog albuns, it should be valid to every band. |
Posted By: Epitath
Date Posted: August 25 2006 at 19:20
|
sounds like a great idea! Its great that people improve the site :) ------------- 
|
Posted By: Seyo
Date Posted: August 26 2006 at 17:29
|
Yes, for all the bands from prog-related and proto-prog category, only selected albums should be included in PA, not their entire discographies!
The obvious example which "sticks to the eyes" is The Beatles, like "With the Beatles" or "Hard Days Night" are absolute redundancy on this site!
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 26 2006 at 20:11
 We should all decide - collaboratively.  ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to: 
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 26 2006 at 21:45
There would not be anything better for me than adding:
But still I have my doubts about being this an open door. If the majority decides to do it, I'll of course accept it and collaborate in the possible, but still not 100% sure.
We have already Varuious Genres where an Andrew Lkloyd Webber album has been added, so there wouldn't even be need for a new genre.
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: August 26 2006 at 21:54
|
I really like this idea. You can't call a band prog by an album or two that are so...but it's only fair those albums get recognized. |
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: August 30 2006 at 19:03
Well yeah if Various genres can be used in that sense as you mention with Andrew Lloyd Webber (and adding Miles Davis etc), Ivan, then I'll be satisfied. ------------- |
Posted By: Rocktopus
Date Posted: August 30 2006 at 19:53
------------- Over land and under ashes In the sunlight, see - it flashes Find a fly and eat his eye But don't believe in me Don't believe in me Don't believe in me |
Posted By: PROGMAN
Date Posted: September 01 2006 at 20:46
|
What about this as a Genre!! "Brief Prog" or "One Off Prog" ------------- CYMRU AM BYTH 
|