Generally the problem with such questions is that you can't quantify them, so it's not really clear what "more" means. Some things are similar some quite different, but that's not a very exciting answer, is it?

Hi,

I think that "progressive" and a lot of music around had gotten the opinion that a lot of it was done by folks that were musically educated, and they were able to create works that displayed that well.

FOR ME, the punk scene was a direct response to the "educated" side of the music, REMEMBER that is was notes as a lot of "art music" and that kinda takes it away from "the streets" and the folks that do not have the education but have enough gumption to pluck one note (so to speak) long enough to make a song. 

Honestly, I think that punk was a media creation that was handled by the record companies, because the really good acts were all taken up and finding new ones was difficult ... but then, they weren't looking, were they? We're finding more stuff now that was not represented THEN. And you and I know that the record companies went for the money quickly before it dried up! Thus, the likelihood, THEN, that someone would post a review saying how good it was, would likely show up ... but punk had its points, and attitude was an important one, that I think about on the notion of "song" and "lyrics" ... that had become the "thing" then since this was a very clear distinction.

I don't think that most punk musicians were musically illiterate, I really doubt that, although in Penelope Spheris specials, there are moments in the music that suggests it ... or at the very least it was very simplified, so they could play it and get some recognition ... which many of them did get, thanks to the media end up saying that many of the punk works were good, and better than the overblown progressive material.

MIND YOU, that it was not the top level of progressive that was being attacked, though ELP got a lot of flack, but the many other bands of the 2nd tier that were also putting out a lot of material that might have been thought of as not as good, but in the end, 40/50 years later, their musicianship is as good as that of the top tier.

It's a difficult discussion any way we look at it, since the media is the bunch of folks that decided that A was bad, and B was good'er and C was neat and clever. Mostly because some top bands just did not have the time to be interviewed by every Joe, Tom, Dick and Harry out there ... and at that point the lower level groups have a very good chance.

BUT, we're at fault as well ... by not trashing some reviewers for their comments ... for example, one idiot said that Tangerine Dream sounded like washing machine music ... and you now know that person had obviously never heard washing machines, or Tangerine Dream for that matter ... and he should have been removed from his job as a reviewer, since that person, obviously did not listen to music ... I'm guessing they were listening to punk by that time!

Please avoid insulting people like that, especially if they are not around to defend themselves (he left the site ages ago).  That review from Greenback (at least use people's usernames or real names if you know them if you're going to call them out) came from early 2005, and the standards were not good then.  It was later that he was a made a collab, and there were some others who started off very poor but improved..  Many people started off poor, and okay, Zeit was out of his wheelhouse (he was more into the melodic prog side, hard rock, Neo-Prog than the more experimental side).   Anyway, I have not seen him at the forum for a very long time, and he was never one of my preferred reviewers but then we have very different tastes.  That said, to me his Phaedra write-up is one of my favourites because it is so absurd, and it is a funny example from the early days of the site when there were not the standards found later.  Is it an "idiotic" review? One could phrase it like that. Silly? Yes.  Entertaining? I think so.  Useful? Not really.  Good? No. Should have been removed?  Could be?  But I don't like people being called idiots like this, nor saying that people should have been removed for an early review, retroactively in essence, before becoming a collab when there were not the standards we expected later.  One might argue that he should never been a collab but then you probably are not aware of what work he has done for the site to help out. 

I have posted this "review" (more like some performance piece) a few times as an absurd one that I love.

"What a shame! The music consists in 2-3 humming refrigerators at the same time, plus a portative fan that turns back and forth to make the anyway inexistent rhythm, and finally a coming cluster of threatening killer bees!

There are tons of albums better than this one to describe the desolation once you go alone on Mars! The album is even not minimalist!"

I can't tell if he listened to or not from that, but often with such ones people did not give a listen all the way through, and sometimes people just heard the music in the background somewhere.  It's not the product of an active listener, imo.  It's one of those bad commentaries I love from the early reviewing days of this site.  At least one person tried to go back and rewrite their early reviews for being so poor.

Hi,

I was not aware that this was about someone else and a reviewer here on PA. I might have a joke about it, but it is not meant anymore than a sock full of custard thrown at the wall for the sound effect! (Goon joke!)

As a reviewer for foreign film, I have gotten some feedback, and some folks didn't like this or that ... it comes with the territory, however, there is no real need for a response more often than not. I, in fact, even had to correct a couple of reviews, but the handful of these never got any further than the compliments I got from some of my reviews being used on another Film Festival. I was not, in any way shape of form, trying to insult anyone, although I think that TD review is out of line and then some ... but the punk folks perhaps needed more words in the press, other than the folks that were disliking the "art music" and what became known as "progressive". 

I think there were a lot of folks that reviewed things that were around, going back to the Fido days and the various locations where the music was discussed in the 90's, which were very few. None of them that I can remember, made some really poor choice of words as a "review" ... the TD reference was in Melody Maker, for example, in its heyday.