Top 100 all-time as rated on RYM and PA

David_D wrote: Due to several reasons, I can't discuss those things with you, moshkito, but you certainly seem to misinterpret my whole approach to "favourite" lists. I've written about it in the "Prog fans in our 60's" thread (more than one post) if it may interest you   - and if you don't find my reasons good enough, then we just disagree about it because I can't really see  anything wrong about them.  If you want to do something for socialism, I'm not the right one to hit on the head.

Edited by David_D - March 01 2022 at 02:23

Edited by David_D - March 05 2022 at 16:54

Philchem8 wrote: Firstly, with respect to the list itself, I do think it provides a credible ranking of the best prog albums,

Philchem8 wrote: Just to raise a few considerations though. It seems that the definition you have used to consider albums and bands for inclusion in this list is a relatively wide definition, which is ok by me, but this means that several of your most highly rated albums may not be considered real "prog-rock" by others. For instance, while the albums by Miles Davis, Black Sabbath, Godspeed You Black Emperor and Captain Beefheart may be highly appreciated, you will not find them on Prog Magazine's list - I think because many prog fans, rightly or wrongly, do not consider them to be "prog-rock". Conversely, some may consider Radiohead's OK Computer to be prog enough to be considered, but I noted it was not your list even though I think it is the #1 album on RYM. I do not want to take issue with the definition here, but just point out how relevant it is in determining the albums that make up any list of this kind.

richardh wrote: I think this is very pertinent , and also I struggled to find any Led Zep in the list. They would probably be the most important rock band of the last century and certainly were very progressive (if not ''prog'') in those key 1967-1971 years.

Edited by David_D - March 04 2022 at 15:02

richardh wrote: Its actually very hard to differentiate between progressive music and prog rock other than looking at the years when prog happened.

Edited by David_D - March 05 2022 at 04:23

David_D wrote: richardh wrote: but that's entirely subjective, my point being that trying to compile a list objectively is actually impossible when you are still making decisions about what is 'progressive' or not. I certainly won't claim that the choices for my list are done entirely objectively, that's never possible (or you tell me in which way), but I'd say they are fairly objective when done on basis of my Progressive Rock definition, plus how PA and RYM had classified the albums in question. David_D wrote: "The definition for Progressive Rock, I've been used as a basis for this list, is following: 1. be a synthesis/fusion of Rock (significantly present) and at least one of other "main genres":  Classical, Jazz, Folk, electronic avant-garde or other avant-garde, AND 2. be rather complex or at least to some extent experimental in another way than #1." Besides that, richardh, I don't think that you'd find any critic who would classify Led Zeppelin as Progressive Rock.

In my opinion, while Led Zeppelin has several songs that would qualify as progressive rock, as a band, I don't think they are usually considered to be progressive rock. They are not usually define as such in rock guides and one does not normally see their albums among the best prog-rock albums lists (for instance see the 100 best prog albums on this site). However, I think it is certainly possible to justify a definition of prog-rock that would include LZ. As someone else said, any definition needs to be flexible to accommodate changes and evolution in styles. On the other hand, I don't think a definition should be entirely subjective, or else what are we talking about? How can we communicate about music if all definitions and categories of music are entirely subjective? This brings me to a thought I had when I first joined this site in October of last year. It's a great site, but for a place that is a primary internet resource on progressive rock, it's a little surprising not to find, if not a definition, at least an agreed understanding of what this site considers to be progressive rock. The home page refers to a few guides and that's fine, but what does the site itself think? I realize it would of course be very difficult for everyone here to agree on a very specific definition, but just pointing out something that I think could be considered at least by the managers or old timers of this site. To his credit, David has tried to come up with, and stimulate discussion on, a definition (I refer to his thread on how to define progressive rock). But this definition does not have any official status on this site.
Anyway, I agree it's impossible to have an objective definition. In the end, as long as we recognize the limitations of whatever definition we use or whatever list we decide to make, and we are conscious and transparent about the criteria we use, that's the best we can do, and then people can agree to disagree!

richardh wrote: ^ yep but the point of the thread is to try and gain a more objectively determined ranking based on having more ratings (RYM has that obviously). The problem is when you decide where the artist boundaries are and suddenly it falls apart. IMO

Edited by David_D - March 11 2022 at 12:51