micky wrote: I went into  the audience when this thread lost any semblance of meaning... like 5 pages ago  We didn't need this thread to show how was the most stubborn here at PA's hahahha.

Let's get back to basics:

Fans of music and critics usually come up with names to categorize movements in music that seem to be distinct, or have some sort of inter-community, or both. This is done because the people categorizing them like doing so and it's helpful to newbies. There may be other more selfish/whatever reasons. Now it seems the musicians being categorized together may or may not like it. They probably don't like being limited in any way whatever the case. They can do whatever they want, maybe taking left turn musically in response to this categorization. No matter, the organizers will amend the genre they belong in, remove them from it, or do something else to make them fit. This is the natural way of things. Critics and fans don' t categorize musicians for musicians' sake, they do it to have a sense of accomplishment and to help out newbies.

Can we at least all agree on this?


Edited by stonebeard - November 03 2007 at 20:35

prog-chick wrote: Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:   Prog Chick, the bands make music, the sites and the critic makes the structures, in this moment we are the N° 1 site, so we make the structure of our site.   For example in the case of Symphonic we coined the term 90's Symphonic ............................................................   ..................                                 oops sorry fell asleep..........            this is lucdicrus!

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 03 2007 at 20:47

prog-chick wrote:   It only works if every user has an understanding of what on earth you are talking about, when I first found PA I had NO IDEA what all these genres were, (I still don't in regard to many of them) I certainly had not heard the term NEO prog before, despite having cd racks groaning with stuff apparently from the genre.

^ ok, how about this:

prog-chick wrote: Been reading the argument abou the definition of Neo Prog.........I am sorry I slipped into a coma a couple of times, but when you boys have finished arguing about it and reach a conclusion, be sure to e-mail all the bands and tell them what they should be doing, because god forbid that they slip outside of the rulings YOU decide!!!   utter twaddle.

Prog Chick, the bands make music, the sites and the critic makes the structures, in this moment we are the N° 1 site, so we make the structure of our site.

 

For example in the case of Symphonic we coined the term 90's Symphonic Renaissance in January of this year referring to the movement in Sweden of 1991 and surprisingly found many sites using this term now, so we must be doing something well, if I remember well HT told me that even in a recent Prog Festival the term was used.

 

So people trust Prog Archives and follows what we say, our reviews are copied in hundreds of places daily, our biographies are used even in the official sites of the bands, so with this position comes a responsibility, to make things properly, and if we don’t start to give Neo Prog it’s right place, it will never have it.

 

Now working with Symphonic was easier, if you ask any Symph band, they will accept the Symphonic denomination with pleasure, but if you ask Neo Prog artists, 5 or 6 out of 10 will say the they play Symphonic, because Neo Prog carries the stigma of being "B" class Prog, and placing it outside the Neo Prog structure only contributes to make this problem worst.

 

Despite whatever Mike says, this chart:

 

1. Progressive Rock
   1. Canterbury
   2. Crossover
   3. Eclectic
   4. Symphonic
   5. etc.
2. Progressive Metal
   1. Classical (or whatever) Prog Metal
   2. Experimental/Post Metal
   3. Tech/Extreme prog Metal
3. Neo Prog
4. Fusion

Places Neo Prog outside the parameters of Progressive Rock and doesn’t help to clean the image of the sub-genre as a 100% Prog category in the same level of Symphonic, Folk or Canterbury.

 

That’s why we are cleaning band by band expending hours of family or free time and even if our friends believe we are crazy for “wasting” our time, and despite more than 50% of the biographies don’t exist or are one sentence long, and that’s why we care (well, also because we enjoy doing it )..

 

prog-chick wrote:   It only works if every user has an understanding of what on earth you are talking about, when I first found PA I had NO IDEA what all these genres were, (I still don't in regard to many of them) I certainly had not heard the term NEO prog before, despite having cd racks groaning with stuff apparently from the genre.

 

It's weird, because I'm in Prog since the 70's and remember the term Neo Prog being used almost two decades before Prog Archives was founded.

 

We didn't invented this terms, they exist, we onñy use them in the way we believe it's more proper.

 

prog-chick wrote:  What if a band has half an album that sounds neo and half that sounds symphonic, what if their next album gets all a bit metal or something?

 

That's why there are two sub-genres named Eclectic and Crossover, that reunites the bands with a versatile career that crossed several sub-genres

 

prog-chick wrote:  Just think ,if you put them into boxes, do you expect them to stay there? and is that why some many folk don't like the new album by 'x' band, because a change of direction, a new musical thought has them in an opposing box?   at this rate each band will either make just one album, or (and some bands do do this and it makes me weep) just quite simply make the same album over, and over and over again......... just so they fit in the box.

 

That's why I sent a PM to M@X about a week ago with the proposition to keep the bands in a Mother sub-genre but adding extra tags to every album when he talked me about this problem:

 

I recommend to keep a main or MOTHER GENRE, that is the one that the band followed more and it’s the one most people will recognize, here are two examples:   Genesis Biography Progressive music main sub-genre: Symphonic Prog Country: United Kingdom Official website: http://www.genesis-music.com Era: Classic School: British     Karda Estra Biography Progressive music main sub-genre: Symphonic Prog Country: United Kingdom Official website: http://www.kardaestra.co.uk/ Era: 90’s Renaissance School: Ethnic Symphonic   Now, the albums can be found with their respective bands as always, only with a new line added (highlighted in red)   GENESIS Foxtrot (Studio Album, 1972) Album Sub-Genre: Symphonic   GENESIS Duke (Studio Album, 1980) Album Sub-Genre: Symphonic – Neo Prog – Prog Related   GENESIS Invisible Touch (Studio Album, 1986) Album Sub-Genre: POP

 

So we think in thiose problems also.

 

Thanks for your comment.

 

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 03 2007 at 13:42

prog-chick wrote: Been reading the argument abou the definition of Neo Prog.........I am sorry I slipped into a coma a couple of times, but when you boys have finished arguing about it and reach a conclusion, be sure to e-mail all the bands and tell them what they should be doing, because god forbid that they slip outside of the rulings YOU decide!!!   utter twaddle.

Yeah, yeah, I know, it's all subjective. However, this is a database. In order to make it navigable, there must be a structure. So these discussions are necessary.

Been reading the argument abou the definition of Neo Prog.........I am sorry I slipped into a coma a couple of times, but when you boys have finished arguing about it and reach a conclusion, be sure to e-mail all the bands and tell them what they should be doing, because god forbid that they slip outside of the rulings YOU decide!!!

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ I never suggested that anything about Neo Prog should be changed. Why this paranoia?

It's not paranoia. The precedent has been set. You split one sub-genre, and that chart of yours implied another radical view.

I don't like this talk of neo prog being seen as a subgenre of sumphonic prog. First of all, neo prog was the symphonic prog of the 80s, and would only be distinguished by its typical traits after the 80s. But even then, the styles moved away from the 80s sound. In fact, it might not be a bad idea to make 80s neo prog seperate from other genres, because it is vastly unique. Many bands carried over from the 80s to the 90s, though, so I don't think it's a workable idea. Food for thought, though.