What Is a Masterpiece of Progressive ?

The definition changes from person to person, really hard to pin down exactly what makes a masterpiece. I think it has to do with the emotion that is put into the piece of music.

I suspect that you have some favorite albums that are not highly placed in the top 100.  That's the case with me as well, and is probably the same for most of us.  The top albums in the list are the ones that have received the most ratings and/or reviews, so they are not merely great albums, they are also popular as well.  This is the way of top lists - they often represent the most common denominators.  In this case, these are albums most of us are familiar with and represent the foundations of Prog.  Personally, it would gratify me to see one of my favorite bands ever, Jade Warrior, even in the listings, but alas, they are not that well known (but for those who know them, they tend to be rated very high).

trackstoni wrote:     in your opinion , is there's any other way to be more accurate in the ratings of these albums , or we have only to take what's already has been done for many years !

Progosopher wrote:   Lists, like reviews are mere guidelines, maps as it were.  No map, however, is the real territory.

i think it has to do with how much the music in the album teaches you about progressive music and the emotions that The Truth said of course but technique is more important so i think in the court of the crimson king should be on top here not close to the edge IMO

1- a album that don't have much more than 1 or 2  weak tracks
2- a album that reach a wide range of prog rock muscic lover
3- a album that is still interesting over the years
4- a album that is oustanding from a artistic perspective

I think the ratings system is quite accurate here because it has more meanings when there is more ratings. Normally, classing albums have more ratings. People prefer rate albums that they like, and it could be a good start to check the ratings of a album before acutally listen to it. I don't think there is a lot of albums that deserves a five stars that are not on the top 100 list. But in the other hand, if i had to listen to only masterpiece's album i wouldn't listen to a lot of music.


Edited by rdtprog - July 16 2011 at 07:26

I would compare Mastepiece to what we call the "Absolute", meaning not relative or comparative or subject to any limitations, but the irony is that this "Absolute" could not exist without human individuals. So this Absolute is relative...

I don't think you can come with a system that would be better, since there will be faults into any other way of doing it. I have a way to rate music that's a little different than the one used in PA, but I don't think it's better, and I'm sure if I present it to everyone, I would find some people who like it, and others who disagree. PA system is fine, and as somebody mentioned before, it's just a map, a guide, something to give you a reference point to music, not the absolute truth. 

I think it is a very slippery slope, when one gets too focused on the top lists, and starts wondering why that one magnificent record one loves so dearly, isn´t there. It isn´t to say, that it doesn´t belong there, but when you start falling in the pedestal trap, like a lot of people do - also outside PA, the music suddenly turns into some kind of sport. Like the Idols show and what have you not, where music is treated like a tournament, and the ones who usually win, is the kind of person who can sing a billion notes - emulate Mariah Carey down to the t, and furthermore looks like a barbie-doll. How would the music scene today have looked like, if things were the same back when Bob Dylan, Lou Reed, Neil Young, David Bowie and a truckload of other respected artists started out? None of those mentioned were really singers, in fact you could call them anti-singers compared to the sport singers of today, but they had something unique - and ideas that helped spawn most of what we hear today. They wouldn´t have chance in hell today, if we´d treat them the same way we treat those in Idols. If we start treating music like you see a lot of television shows do at the moment - they are doing this in Scandinavia as well, - I´m afraid the future will have no Dylans, Yes, Bowies, Floyds - no real progress and imagination or whatever...  I am not saying the prog scene resembles that scenario yet, although we have our fair share of polls and suspicious threads evolving around the "greatest", but if we are not careful - the music we love so dearly, will take us down that sporty road and become something quantifiable and something you can award a gold medal. This is of course exaggerating a bit, but the key point here is: there are no the greatest - nothing that´s the best, or something along those lines. There´s a lot of music in PA, which I think rival the top 100, but yet are no way near it. That´s because these albums are obscure, and didn´t have the success like Close to the Edge or Dark side of the Moon. The one thing you can do, and for me this is the whole reason of being here, - is to write reviews about music you think others should hear - or you might think has gotten a bad rep, or maybe it is just unfairly obscure.

Guldbamsen wrote: I think it is a very slippery slope, when one gets too focused on the top lists, and starts wondering why that one magnificent record one loves so dearly, isn´t there. It isn´t to say, that it doesn´t belong there, but when you start falling in the pedestal trap, like a lot of people do - also outside PA, the music suddenly turns into some kind of sport. Like the Idols show and what have you not, where music is treated like a tournament, and the ones who usually win, is the kind of person who can sing a billion notes - emulate Mariah Carey down to the t, and furthermore looks like a barbie-doll. How would the music scene today have looked like, if things were the same back when Bob Dylan, Lou Reed, Neil Young, David Bowie and a truckload of other respected artists started out? None of those mentioned were really singers, in fact you could call them anti-singers compared to the sport singers of today, but they had something unique - and ideas that helped spawn most of what we hear today. They wouldn´t have chance in hell today, if we´d treat them the same way we treat those in Idols. If we start treating music like you see a lot of television shows do at the moment - they are doing this in Scandinavia as well, - I´m afraid the future will have no Dylans, Yes, Bowies, Floyds - no real progress and imagination or whatever...  I am not saying the prog scene resembles that scenario yet, although we have our fair share of polls and suspicious threads evolving around the "greatest", but if we are not careful - the music we love so dearly, will take us down that sporty road and become something quantifiable and something you can award a gold medal. This is of course exaggerating a bit, but the key point here is: there are no the greatest - nothing that´s the best, or something along those lines. There´s a lot of music in PA, which I think rival the top 100, but yet are no way near it. That´s because these albums are obscure, and didn´t have the success like Close to the Edge or Dark side of the Moon. The one thing you can do, and for me this is the whole reason of being here, - is to write reviews about music you think others should hear - or you might think has gotten a bad rep, or maybe it is just unfairly obscure. Please don´t turn music into sports!

the closest i can think of is Jeff Buckley who was up their with the Bowies and Dylans, had the tallent and the carracther of a newer artist. almost until he sadly passed away, '
But one can only guess where he would have been today if he had lived after the succes of Grace, and the possible unkown future carear he would have had now... one never know...


Edited by aginor - July 16 2011 at 11:05