Led Zeppelin? |
Post Reply | Page 123 8> |
Author | ||||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Online Points: 21144 |
Topic: Led Zeppelin? Posted: November 29 2006 at 20:38 |
|||
Thanks for clarifying that. But by "admin decisions" I wasn't referring to you or any other member of the admin teams of progarchives. I was simply comparing collaborative decisions (majority vote) to those made by a minority (such as an admin, or a team of admins, or a team of collabs). And I certainly didn't mean to criticise anybody.
My opinion is irrelevant here, and I didn't state it. I was simply saying that there are many people who claim that The Doors should be here.
That's precisely the point. On my website I avoid these decisions completely - it's a different system. I'm not implying that it's better, or that it's even good to start with. But I'm implementing it anyway ... we'll see what happens.
But that's also causing some problems ... by adding one band at a time you arouse those who favor the other bands. When Iron Maiden were added some people demanded that Judas Priest should be here if Iron Maiden are here, and they got turned down by SCs and admins, who kept talking about "that's not a reason to add bands" ... Well, I don't have a problem with all of this ... I'm running my own little website and don't let anything bother me. Edited by MikeEnRegalia - November 29 2006 at 20:40 |
||||
Greg W
Forum Senior Member Joined: August 24 2004 Location: Chicago Status: Offline Points: 3904 |
Posted: November 29 2006 at 19:03 | |||
Heh, heh.
At one time this would have shocked me, but not ever since the Beatles have been added.
Personally I think ALL the so-called Proto Prog and Prog Related bands is a bunch of rubbish, but, in the end, who really cares?
I just will ignore the fact they're here and carry on my business discovering REAL prog gems.
My only concern now is placing Proto and Prog related in the top 100. It sort of spoils the wole list by tainting them with non prog or(if you will) proggish pop/rock
|
||||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Online Points: 21144 |
Posted: November 29 2006 at 17:36 | |||
^ Thanks. I'm not saying that my system is perfect ... I'm just removing the need for "admin decisions" and replace them with democratic voting. So there is no person or team to blame ... there are only members, all of them are equal.
Of course this means that the quality of the "collaborative decisions" depends on the quality of the votes. There are some quite peculiar genre assignments on my website, but some others which are quite accurate. The more users participate, the more accurate the system will be. I thought about whether I should remove the prog-related thing from my website a few months ago ... then I realized: It just has a different meaning. It simply means "this is seen as non-prog by many people, but some consider it to be related to prog, and a few even put it on the same level". |
||||
Philéas
Forum Senior Member Joined: June 14 2006 Status: Offline Points: 6419 |
Posted: November 29 2006 at 17:33 | |||
Who said I was stating my personal opinion? I was trying to help the admins maintain some sort of order in this thread.
|
||||
Easy Livin
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin Joined: February 21 2004 Location: Scotland Status: Offline Points: 15585 |
Posted: November 29 2006 at 17:31 | |||
In fact Mike, "The admins" have made very few decisions to date.
Led Zeppelin was approved by M@x (the site owner). The Admin team's only decisions to date have been to admit Iron Maiden, and to reject My Dying Bride. Rainbow were approved by M@x and the Admin team together. And that's the lot.
We have not "refused" the Doors, no one has asked us. Same goes for JP and BS.
We don't admit "any band from any genre" on this site because it is dedicated to prog. The differences arise in people's perceptions of what prog is. For every one person who agrees with your implication that The Doors are equal to or above Led Zeppelin in terms of their prog (related) credentials, there will be someone else who thinks the opposite.
The admin team will simply endeavour to ensure that any proposed prog-related additions meet the criteria of the definition of that category. We readily acknowledge that such a judgement will be subjective, but at least a decision will be reached.
Another side benefit of the process will be that we can ensure if necessary that there is not an overload of prog-related bands being added around the same time.
|
||||
Peter
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: January 31 2004 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 9669 |
Posted: November 29 2006 at 17:25 | |||
Yes, Mike.
I believe that the minute you try to limit inclusion in a music site along sub-genre lines (prog is a subgenre of rock), then you are squarely headed into the realm of the subjective, and headed for controversy and confusion.
To then try to include what had previously been excluded, by coming up with new, imaginary "categories" (that all strangely include the "P" word!) is to deepen the confusion, artificiality and controversy, IMO.
Art resists such narrow categorization. Each listener is unique.
|
||||
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
||||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Online Points: 21144 |
Posted: November 29 2006 at 17:14 | |||
^ the only problems of the prog-related category here are that a) the artists are not properly separated from the prog artists and b) the admins make arbitrary decisions about which bands to add and which not. Example: Iron Maiden get added for no apparent reason (there are as many people in favor of adding Black Sabbath or Judas Priest), and then people asking for similar bands to be added are turned down. Now Led Zeppelin were added and the Doors are refused ... people don't understand it, and why should they - it makes no sense.
That's why on my website I accept any band from any genre - and while browsing the website people can simply filter out non-prog bands or albums, if they're so inclined. |
||||
Peter
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: January 31 2004 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 9669 |
Posted: November 29 2006 at 17:12 | |||
I doubt it.
Prog is an increasingly subjective notion, it would seem. Bands and albums that weren't "prog," at the time, are now. Why is that?
Oh, I get it -- prog just means "good," "above-average," or "interesting."
Now, objectively define those, in a musical context....
|
||||
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
||||
Peter
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: January 31 2004 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 9669 |
Posted: November 29 2006 at 17:06 | |||
Ah, but all late 60s - mid 70s rock is "slightly related" to prog.
Especially the stuff we like.
Prog is related to classic rock -- not the other way around.
Prog is the sub-genre, not rock. It seems to me if we need the Beatles, Doors, Zeppelin, etc, then we just need a rock site -- where the presence of the Beatles, Doors, Zeppelin, Talk Talk, Queen, Radiohead, etc is a given, and prog and metal get listed as a matter of course, because they are well known, accepted off-shoots of ROCK.
It makes sense for a rock site to include prog as one of its subdivisions, but IMO it makes very little sense for a "prog" site to include regular rock as the imaginary, artificial, subjective category "prog related.". Effectively, rock icons like the Doors, Beatles, Purple, etc, become "second class" here -- not qualified for "full" membership (or even five-star reviews, under the current system), but listed nonetheless. That risks looking like a self-serving, cynical grab for membership numbers (and thus advertising dollars), to me.
There is too much subjectivity involved in saying "the Doors are closer to prog than Bowie," in my opinion. On a site that was a broader rock site, though (as opposed to one like this, which is supposedly of a much narrower focus) the exact classification of an artist (especially one like Bowie, who has spanned several classifications in his varied career) need not be a big concern: Doors are filed under "D," Bowie under "B."
The whole notion of "progressive rock/progressive music" is already fraught with subjectivity and vagueness, IMO. To then try to decide what is "related" to this amorphous, seemingly undefinable thing (which means something different now, than it did in its heyday) is a recipe for endless discord and confusion, IMO.
Again, I think the root of the problem is the very notion of "progressive" rock (or music). "Progressive," much like "good" or "bad," is mostly a value judgment IMO -- it is in the "ear of the beholder." (Formerly, it referred to a historical movement, and a certain cadre of artists in rock.)
I think the term has really outlived its usefulness as anything but a way to refer to those old bands. (What is truly "progressive" about repeating formula?)
And I think "prog related" is only useful for starting arguments. Edited by Peter Rideout - November 29 2006 at 18:50 |
||||
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
||||
Philéas
Forum Senior Member Joined: June 14 2006 Status: Offline Points: 6419 |
Posted: November 29 2006 at 15:57 | |||
People! Remember! They are in the Prog Related category, a non-Prog category, so the site does not claim they are Prog, only slightly related to Prog.
Edited by Philéas - November 29 2006 at 15:57 |
||||
Raff
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: July 29 2005 Location: None Status: Offline Points: 24429 |
Posted: November 29 2006 at 12:35 | |||
[QUOTE=Asyte2c00]
^Pute these bands/artsist in first. I sent the material for Japan's inclusion
to PA using the band submission procedure posted in another thread.
Zeppelin. Good band. have everything by them. Not for PA though.
[/QUOTE] Sorry for reacting late, but as some of you know I was away for professional reasons, so I missed the whole backlash of LZ's addition. First of all, I'd be grateful if you could avoid using those huge fonts next time, as it makes reading difficult, as well as creating problems to those who have a a slow connection. As to Japan... We have been discussing the matter in the Collabs section, but it seems most people are against the addition. Some have even suggested adding Human League and Visage if Japan are added... Therefore, I think it would be better for the time being to avoid throwing fuel on to the fire of controversy. Personally, as one half of the Art Rock team, I like the band and think they wouldn't be a bad addition at all (Micky is much less familiar with them, so he left the matter in my hands). In any case, I thank you for sending us the relevant material, which we hope may be used in the future. |
||||
AngleofRepose
Forum Senior Member Joined: November 01 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 173 |
Posted: November 29 2006 at 12:15 | |||
What a poor decision. It's painfully misleading to people trying to come to this website and understand progressive rock. That is what is wrong with it.
|
||||
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member Joined: April 05 2006 Location: New Zealand Status: Offline Points: 1751 |
Posted: November 24 2006 at 15:44 | |||
I think this debate has run its course.
|
||||
|
||||
akin
Forum Senior Member Joined: February 06 2004 Location: Brazil Status: Offline Points: 976 |
Posted: November 24 2006 at 15:24 | |||
This kind of thread is really useful? I doubt.
|
||||
Freak
Forum Senior Member Joined: July 12 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 304 |
Posted: November 24 2006 at 12:36 | |||
I guess this means there are going to be a lot of new prog fans in the world!
|
||||
|
||||
Kimoi
Forum Groupie Joined: November 24 2006 Status: Offline Points: 84 |
Posted: November 24 2006 at 11:03 | |||
This site is here to make money, Nothing wrong with that. My picks of Throbbing Gristle, Nurse With Wound, Cabaret Voltaire, Floh de Cologne are so far down the list you may as well pull an arse-hair out and call it your first born
Edited by TheProgtologist - November 24 2006 at 19:45 |
||||
6↑↑9
|
||||
yarstruly
Forum Senior Member Joined: September 29 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1322 |
Posted: November 24 2006 at 10:44 | |||
Good Call! They deserve to be here!
|
||||
Facebook hashtags:
#100greatestprogrockchallenge #scottssongbysong #scottsspotlight |
||||
Sasquamo
Forum Senior Member Joined: September 26 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 828 |
Posted: November 24 2006 at 08:54 | |||
Why don't you identify the various styles fused by the really popular prog then? |
||||
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator Prog Folk Joined: April 29 2004 Location: Heart of Europe Status: Offline Points: 20239 |
Posted: November 24 2006 at 05:12 | |||
Look, I fought against Zep's inclusion because I thought it was bringing nothing needful to the site (as with previous controversial inclusions it usually berings more harm than good), but now that it is in, (and rightly placed in prog-related) I am certainly not fighting it anymore. But even if there are ten tracks that are proggy (and so far I fully defend 7 or 8 of them), it is still not much (and not enough IMHO) to warrant their inclusion. But I have winged reviews of Zep's album in the last 24 hours just to legitimize their inclusion.
|
||||
let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
||||
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member Joined: April 05 2006 Location: New Zealand Status: Offline Points: 1751 |
Posted: November 24 2006 at 03:05 | |||
What you just said there is a pre-concieved notion about my opinions. After all you can't read my mind.
Anyway you mustn't consider VDGG prog because they arn't as complex either.
In the end all the prog bands that you consider non prog because they are not complex is infact consistant with LZ being here, since you must take this into consideration why don't you write a thread about how you think less complex prog such as Krautrock, much of Space rock/psychodelia, Electronic Prog should not be in the archives rather than target LZ. Edited by Cheesecakemouse - November 24 2006 at 03:40 |
||||
|
||||
Post Reply | Page 123 8> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |