The slow demise of Gentle Giant in the top 100

Interesting point. However, I think the original poster was complaining that the Times Square is presented as a place to look for mountains like Mount Everest. 

Edited by Mr ProgFreak - March 13 2011 at 05:08

Mr ProgFreak wrote: I somewhat agree - on a website like progARCHIVES.com, it would be nice to have a list of the top classic (1970s) prog albums around for newbies to check out. Or make it the top 100 most essential classic prog artists. And by that reasoning it's clear that the original poster simply tries to use the top 100 list for something that it's not.

But who would decide such a list? I'm wary of encouraging any notion of a fixed "consensus" on what is and isn't deemed worthy of someone's attention. The commendable thing about PA's top 100 is that it is an ever-shifting thing, continually reflecting the amalgamated opinions of an ever-shifting and expanding community. It's still incredibly flawed, but at least it doesn't reinforce some kind of indisputable, untouchable received opinion in which album X is forever a "classic" and albums Y and Z shall languish in eternity as "also-rans" regardless of how the community's attitude towards them may shift and develop over the years.

Take my oh-so-beloved Cardiacs for example. When I joined this site many moons ago they were barely ever mentioned and had a very low level of appreciation, even amongst the avant-prog contingent. Their reputation on this site has snowballed in the last two or three years thanks to a few very vocal members championing them and an ever-increasing awareness of the band in the wider music community thanks to the internet and social media in particular. That increased awareness and reputation has resulted in one of their albums finally creeping into the PA top 100. That may infuriate some of the die-hards and purists, but it is at least a better (albeit still ultimately inaccurate) reflection of their current status within this community.


Edited by Trouserpress - March 13 2011 at 05:19

BarryGlibb wrote: I remember when I wasn't even a member of PA but had been looking at the site for a number of years before I joined and Gentle Giant had 5-6 albums in the top 100. Today they have 2 in the top 100 and I'm afraid that Free Hand is sitting precariously at 99 and will soon be pushed out. In A Glass House (at 42) is slowly sliding down the PA charts. Soon there will not be one Gentle Giant album in the top 100, which is outrageous considering their standing in the Prog community. My suggestion is that discussion should commence by the powers that be that the top 100 should be exclusively for albums that have been rated by a large number of individuals, not albums that have only be rated a busload of people. I suggest that albums in the top 100 should have at least 300 people rating it. I understand the algorithm rating but for example at present there are 50 albums in the top 100 that each have 300 members or less rating them; some even as low as 29 - 80 PA members rating them. Surely something must be done. Otherwise how are Prog youngsters ever going to revere Prog legends such as Gentle Giant if they end up not having one album in the top 100 in PA? Can we get something done about this?

The algorithm already very much weights in favor of number of reviews.  For example:

23		4.37 | 572 ratings QWR = 4.3383	Moonmadness Camel	Symphonic Prog Studio, 1976	Buy
24		4.56 | 75 ratings QWR = 4.3373	Sing To God Cardiacs	RIO/Avant-Prog Studio, 1996	Buy

No disrespect intended to the OP, but for someone so concerned with Gentle Giant's place in the top 100 chart, you've only rated their albums:

GENTLE GIANT Acquiring The Taste (rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Civilian(rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Free Hand (rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Gentle Giant | review
GENTLE GIANT GG At The GG(rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Giant For A Day (rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Giant On The Box(rating only)
GENTLE GIANT In A Glass House(rating only)
GENTLE GIANT In A Glass House(rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Interview(rating only)
GENTLE GIANT King Alfred's College Winchester(rating only)
GENTLE GIANT King Biscuit Flower Hour Presents(rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Live In Stockholm '75(rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Octopus(rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Playing The Fool - The Official Live(rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Scraping The Barrel(rating only)
GENTLE GIANT The Missing Piece (rating only)
GENTLE GIANT The Power And The Glory (rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Three Friends (rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Totally Out Of The Woods (rating only)
GENTLE GIANT Under Construction(rating only)

Ratings are weighted one time, while a review is rated ten times.  If you truly wanted to "protect" GG's place in the top 100 (a silly goal, but there we are), then surely you would have begun writing reviews rather than creating a thread to overhaul the algorithm.

Barry, I'm afraid I agree with Henry and some other posters here. If you love Gentle Giant (as I do) I guess you had moments when you were listening their music and thinking 'oh my God, this music is out of this world, nothing can be compared to thier complexity and imagination' or something like that (at least I had such moments). However, it's just an list generated automatically by math calculations.

While there's no denying ProgArchives is one of the most relevant things among Internet Prog Community, I'd say GG are treated well and people are aware of them: they're popping up frequently in forum discussions, and they're widely acknowledged as one of the most influential (one of the best if you want) prog bands in history. They are a household name, they are one of the most important names in Eclectic Prog (along VDGG and King Crimson) and will remain so in forthcoming years. Top 100 and similar lists just won't do certain artists justice.


To put it up in another way: while a prog newbie who stumbled upon ProgArchives might be fooled by a Top 100 list as a god-given ultimate list at first; he or she, if continues to lurk on our forums, will very soon become aware of GG appreciation. And written words mean much more than listed numbers.

I think Barry raises a point worthy of discussion. Not specifically about Gentle Giant, whom I personally feel are much less relevant in the history of prog than they are now credited with, but as regards the balance of high ratings vs. volume of reviews.

Mr ProgFreak wrote: I somewhat agree - on a website like progARCHIVES.com, it would be nice to have a list of the top classic (1970s) prog albums around for newbies to check out. Or make it the top 100 most essential classic prog artists. And by that reasoning it's clear that the original poster simply tries to use the top 100 list for something that it's not. Which is perfectly understandable, but obviously can't work.

Slartibartfast wrote: You will see an inevitable decline in the ratings for the artists that no longer make new music.  It's really no big deal.

^ This.

I miss Gentle Giant but I don't lose any sleep over them only having one album in the Top 100.

BarryGlibb wrote:   Henry I don't think I like being dissed like this. I happen to have gret admniration for Henry Cow, Fred Frith etc. So you have good taste. I put this post up in good faith, just trying to contribute to the PA community. You seemed to like my Under appreciated Prog Spoon Player thread and I thought I had an ally. Not sure if that is so now.. I just feel that the top 100 is being infiltrated by albums that are only being rated by a few people (<100) that is all. And I put Gentle Giant in there as an example.

Easy Livin wrote: I think Barry raises a point worthy of discussion. Not specifically about Gentle Giant, whom I personally feel are much less relevant in the history of prog than they are now credited with, but as regards the balance of high ratings vs. volume of reviews.   My concern on the volume front is that if I review a "popular" album and give it 1 star, I would not want that review to count towards the albums "popularity". I believe the algorithm we have offers a fair balance. M@x and a number of noted site members spent a lot of time looking at the best algorithm, and I think they got it right.   As i say though, it is a topic worthy of review from time to time.