Prog Related/Proto Categories - A Rethink

This was something which was proposed and discussed around the time the Beatles were added. M@x was and is totally committed to including a band's entire discography if they are added.

thankfully this was shot down in flames...  if is effort enough to decide who is prog or not ...and where they go.

just who  would decide which albums are suitable for this site.. and which aren't.. .. plus lemming... it sort of misses the whole point of the site.... exposing people to music....   I sure as hell love Let's Dance as much as Station to Station.  They are different... sure.... but what kind of egghead is so narrow minded to reject an album simply because it is not prog...  the Beatles are an extreme case because everyone knows them.. and all their albums.. but this site.. .forget the same old same old's of the big 5..   this site is for finding the groups you DON'T know... discovering new music...   take someone here who who really does not know Bowie... gets Station to Station and loves it...  gets the 'Berlin Trilogy'... loves it... yet if  right-wingers  of the PA's world had their way for example.. his discography would stop there... but  for one who wanted  to explore Bowie further who like Bowie the ARTIST..  and could give a flying flip about subjective labels others ..... some group of people he doesn't know, have decided that only some of his albums are 'prog enough' to be on this site.. but only cares about finding good music.. .. .where then would they go...  to another site ..that is where they go..


Edited by micky - June 25 2008 at 19:41

darqDean wrote: To paraphrase what I said in the 'other' thread where this subject was last aired - Collabs & Admins decide which artists to add - let the whole membership decide which albums are Prog by allowing them to review the whole discography.

exactly....  which is the point I failed to drive home in my last post...   having the reviews (well the good reviews that don't trash an album simply because it isn't 'prog' ) of those albums... like Let's Dance in my Bowie example  will tell him if that album is one he will want.  Some here take all the labeling and categoriizing WAY too far... 

as a wise admin told me once...  there is nothing more important on this site, that we as collabs do, than serving the users of the site.   The day Lemming, or anyone else  convinces me that is a  'good thing' to have partial discographies here I'll flap my gums till they are blue about changing it.  but they can not .. because it is not a good idea at all.  Should people only have a portion of the story about the artist?  (remember.. these categories are NON-prog categories they are added in.. anyone is a fool if they to look at them as such and demand that albums by non prog artist.. be judged like  prog artists)  As I posted in Kotros' "PA's is dead' thread...  that boils down to a 'should those categories be here or not'  and that is up to the owner.. and the owner is not.. and should not change his mind.  Very often what you all see as non-prog... someone with as much intellect as you may see as prog.. or very strongly related.  The site is inclusive..  from artists.. to albums.. to reflect ALL the different notions of prog.. and related.. that is the strength of the site. 


Edited by micky - June 25 2008 at 20:31

I'd like to add something to the debate, though I feel most of the really relevant things have already been said. A really 'professional' reviewer, when dealing with an album that is obviously not prog, but nevertheless musically valid, should be able to point out aforesaid album's strengths, and especially those points that can (and very often will) appeal to prog fans. 

PP and PR albums form quite a big slice of the pie chart of my reviews, and in quite a few cases the albums in question had very little, if any, 'prog quotient' as such. However, they are excellent albums, in some instances real masterpieces, and essential listening for any rock fan - hence the top rating. What I did (and other fellow reviewers did as well) is to point out in the final paragraph whether the album had any prog elements, and explain why I rated it so highly. Giving a good album a low rating just because it is not prog, or because one doesn't agree with the band's presence on the site, is very unprofessional, and rather immature as well - at least in my view of things.

I consider the proposition to have a lot of merit but methinks it would result in a huge tin container of nightcrawlers being unsealed and all of us know how hard it is to get the genie back in the bottle...

ExittheLemming wrote: Easy Livin wrote: This was something which was proposed and discussed around the time the Beatles were added. M@x was and is totally committed to including a band's entire discography if they are added.   Feel free to discuss the proposal of course, but candidly I have to warn that there is little prospect of it being implemented. That's fair enough as long as it was given due consideration previously. BTW although it may not be any of my business (after all I don't own the site) are you able to advise Max's rationale at arriving at this decision ? Thanks for taking the trouble to respond Bob (Appreciated)

Well, one obvious problem is that once discographies can be added partially there would be *huge* discussions about which albums to add and which to skip. And we're talking about a *lot* of albums ...

A problem I see (well, not see, but can imagine happening) is that while a non-prog may be a masterpiece, should we still give it 5 stars here given the rating guidelines? Some reviews seem to adhere to the guidelines, and others don't. I suppose there isn't really a way to correct this which is unfortunate.

To be honest I don't think the Admins would be best qualified to do this. Speaking for myself, I don't pretend to have any greater (or even equal) expertise on such issues than any other member here. If we were to go down such a route, a panel of experts might be the best way.

Round and round we go. Rate the album based on its' progness, but you still rate the album based on its' appeal to you. Include/exclude prog related (and realistically, even those bands in the "accepted" truly prog genres" ) albums based on several hundred differing opinions & measurements. Then top it all off with another thread on how to "objectively" measure progressiveness (apologies to Mikeenregalia).
Can we just refer to the existing (and too often changing) definitions and accept that not everything that gets into PA is going to fit our own little world view of prog ?
Like, hey, I don't see why Deep Purple is proto-prog, and thus allows the old folks an outlet to rave about basically hard rock, heavy metal albums like Machine Head & Maide in Japan. I love them. But apart from being part of the "progressive" music scene in the early 70s, they are not prog. In the same way that Zep, Sab, Moody Blues, and more than a few others are blindly accepted as prog or prog related, while  more obscure acts get "carte blanche" admission, 'cause the rest of us can't make a reasonable disagreement as to their inclusion based upon the fact that only 3 people at PA actually have heard them, or in some cases, even heard OF them.
If anything, let's rethink the concept and go whole hog on a separate section that distinctly and clearly says "THIS IS NOT A PROG GROUP, NOR HAVE THEY RELEASED A TRULY PROG ALBUM, BUT THEY MAY BE OF INTEREST TO PROG MUSIC FANS !" That way, if someone wants to argue as to their inclusion on a prog site we can smash 'em over the head with the very concise & clear definition of the "genre/category/type.
I agree with Bowie/Black Sabbath/BOC/ and many other Prog related situated bands. The description of the sub-genre is easy enough for me to understand. And the site's goal makes it understandable as to why PA wants to include these acts in its' database.
So, if you don't understand the concept of being "the most inclusive prog site", then go. Anywhere. Else. Please. Now.
There is no pressure/intimidation/insinuation that that prog related or even proto-prog are tags that even remotely confer some sort of "progressive" value or qualification to the respective musical groups referred to.
O.K. .... NO REALLY .... O.K. .... 'NUFF SAID. IF NOT, IS IT A CASE OF NOT 'NUFF OF A REAL LIFE TO KEEP YOU BUSY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!