My lesser known and unknown new prog bands thread

 
I don't doubt that many of the collabs are of the same interest, however if a few in power are trying to push their own personal agendas and preferences than it can harm the rest of the collabs and every one else. I am not accusing anyone of this, just that it's a possibility.

Like I said, if I, as a non-collaborator wanted to rate an album a 4, it would not COUNT as a 4. So I am being undervalued for my opinion. I will admit that I have not rated/reviewed many albums for a while so I am not aware if this is still the way ratings are done or not. Please let me know if it's changed. Also, in the past it was fairly easy to submit bands and albums. Nowadays it's very difficult and time consuming and harder to choose a genre so they may get rejected easier.

It's a thing of algorithms being changed, you can receive good answers for what you feel is wrong about ratings.

Crossover Prog is mainly just a name, further evolving into a brand. Of course, a name like Crossover was discussed just like a genre like Crossover was discussed before being created. Again, answers exist. Why isn't it called Progressive Pop/Rock? No clue. I only know why and how has it gone to being called Crossover. Which is just the name of a genre in which the many bands (not just Moody and Supertramp) are part of etc.

Again, they make sense to the collabs, but not to the general public that would come to the site. Even still, some collabs disagree but have been out voted.

If so, we can improve on making the genres clear for everybody. But, please, do tell us where the core of "un-knowers" is in the general public, you can't say nobody understands a genre and not mention who they are.

 
I am saying that if Person X says a band is �Crossover Prog�, the Crossover Prog Team should FIRST decide if it IS prog then second, if it IS that genre. If the team says YES it IS prog but NO it�s NOT Crossover, they should then decide that they think it�s genre X and send it over to that team for review! Why make Person X have to RESUBMIT the band to another Team?? Also if Crossover Team rejects the band JUST BECAUSE IT IS NOT CROSSOVER PROG, but the band IS prog, they need to let Person X KNOW to resubmit.

Sorry, but that's how most of times things are actually done. Team of Genre X DOES decide if a band is prog and fit for Genre X. If Prog, but not good for Genre X, of course it's logically to submit it to another genre, where the band might fit.

It doesn't go anyhow else. Usually, teams within teams discuss, not force the person who suggested them to discuss with each team in particularly.

Again, that is WAY too much work for Person X if they must resubmit just because the CHOSE a wrong genre! If Gentle Giant was not in Progarchives and I submitted them as �Symphonic Prog� THEY WOULD GET REJECTED!! That is ridiculous. That Team should forward the submission over to the appropriate Team (Eclectic Prog in this case), not just reject it and stop there.

Yes. If Gentle Giant were suggested for Symphonic, they would be rejected, the Symphonic  Team would contact the Eclectic Team, which would listen to Gentle Giant and approve it.

That's exactly what you said and meant. So how come you say like it doesn't happen and I say it like it does actually, and plainly, happen??

My main point is that something is very wrong with the site and/or with some collaborators and/or administrators if Erik is forced off the site. In my opinion, he is dedicated to the MUSIC and NOT this site. Nothing wrong with being dedicated to the site but I think some admins are overdoing it with many aspects of this site. I realize nobody made him leave but he mentioned that for the past couple years he has noticed developments on this site that have caused him to lose interest. Obviously he is not talking about losing interest in prog music, but in this site. I am also in the same boat so to speak. I feel that many things with this site are causing true, die hard symphonic prog fans (and others) to lose interest. I personally used to enjoy submitting new bands for approval as well as sending in mp3�s and writing reviews and rating albums. In the past couple years though, the everyday non-collaborator (and in Erik�s case, even some collabs) has been pushed aside and shunned. As a non-collaborator, my ratings are undervalued and my submissions are a low priority.

Of course Erik is dedicated to the music, but I honestly think most collaborator are keen to the same interest, blending everything with the logic of the site (which is not perfect, but is better off improved collectively). I'm not sure how Erik was forced to leave, it was his decision, though, sure, it came after some disagreements and misunderstandings.

If I'd be fair, I'd mention exactly why I think Erik left, because it happened minutes after a dissapointing argument. But better to leave things how he said it: "he doesn't feel the passion and the motivation". It happens. It could be because of some arguments and disagreements, but definitely not entirely.

And that definitely doesn't make the site entirely flawed.

I think the dissapointments towards how this site works don't really come only from "die-hard symphonic rock fans", as you've said it. A bit hard to think symphonic rock fans are mis-treated, in a site and a community where everything can have its pros and cons, in the views of many, many fans.

About shunning and being pushed away, you're gonna have to speak louder up with the right people, in the right places. I personally don't know exactly what you mean, can't comment.

Also, all the new genres are ridiculous. Why can�t the Moody Blues or Supertramp just be Progressive Pop-Rock? Why �Crossover Prog�? What is that? Nobody except for those at this site would know what Crossover Prog means. That�s just one example of the new genres being way too difficult to understand. Eclectic prog? Again, it�s a made-up title that means nothing to anybody, even progressive rock veterans unless they go and read the definition and even then, it�s up for interpretation, even among the admins! I understand that if you have only a few genres that you will have thousands of bands under one genre that may be different sounding than another but even VDGG sounds different than Gentle Giant though they are both considered �Eclectic Prog�.

Well genres like Crossover Prog, Heavy Prog and Crossover Prog were created to split Art Rock, I wonder if you thought Art Rock was okay as a genre, when in fact it was a filthy incoherent mess, burdened with tons of music of different styles and totally different progressive music/directions.

Other than that, I think you (and all others who feel the same) could find answers when putting questions. We have thoroughly discussed all the new genres, up until we decided they make sense.

My first suggestion is to not think too semantically, nor too individually. Thus, don't think Moody Blues are Crossover Prog and not Progressive (Pop-Rock) and also don't think Moody Blues are everything Crossover Prog is all about. Instead, just think naturally, Moody Blues are progressive, by being in a full-prog genre, and are best-fitted in Crossover, which is a genre of more mainstream or lesser pure progressive music.

About Eclectic, the name is actually as clear as many others (though some could argue); as far as the content goes, it's even better (though you are right, it is a genre with a heavy, difficult range): pure-progressive music, with some qualitative characteristics of what the old Art Rock was, comprising bands with many styles (in and out) or with a complex or artistic chemistry. Sounds good, sounds even wonderful (but, okay, that's me being an Eclectic fan ).

Every  genre has definitions, nobody is totally counting on them when listening to a music, nevertheless you can't put pop where there's rock, jazz, avant-garde, etc. The Eclectic definition is short and concrete, while the music database tries to talk for itself.

Again, it's not in the names. Music is taken at a high price, style defines a bit of the community, the quality of prog become very rewarding.

Lastly, if somebody was to send in a request for a band submission and has to choose the bands genre, it�s very difficult to choose which is correct. If the admins disagree with the submitter (and many times even themselves), WHY do you REJECT the submission just because you disagree with the requested genre!?!?! Can�t you just accept the submission under a genre of the admins choice instead of total rejection? I understand if you think the band is not prog in any way, but if you decide they are prog but not in the requested genre, the band should be accepted into a genre of the admins choice. Not simply rejected.

Here's where you exaggerate, I'm sorry.

First of all, the admins can only decide what band is accepted into Prog Related. We have bunch of collaborators, each signed to one or more teams, they handle, appreciated and decide.

"WHY do you reject the submission just because you disagree with the requested genre?!"

BECAUSE WE DISAGREE WITH THE REQUESTED GENRE. It's not fit for that genre. Occasionally, it's not prog rock either.

Com'on, the way things should go with additions and appreciations is becoming old-rooted. Person X suggests a band for inclusion, many times he suggests a genre, then Team X appreciates the music, accepting or rejecting to that genre.

These discussions aren't rigid, sometimes both the person and the Team can revise or debate their choices.

"Can�t you just accept the submission under a genre of the admins choice instead of total rejection?"

Tell me, please, good reasons why a band should go through being appreciated through 13 genres of this site, if it plays seemingly music of just one genre, still it isn't good enough to be accepted under that genre? From what I understand, if Symphonic Team rejects band X (suggested by Person X), that band X should further be submitted to Post-Rock, Avant-Rock, Indo, Electronic, maybe Crossover, eh what the heck Eclectic too, just to not get rejected.

Finally, if a band is prog, but not for a genre, there are chances it can be prog into another genre. In that case, the debate goes on.

"The band should be accepted in a genre of the "admin"'s choice. Not be rejected"

Well this kind of "acceptancy" is usually the case of a Team approving a band for a genre. If it's rejected, it mostly mean it isn't fit for that genre. If it can go into another genre, it can be further suggested. If not, not.