tired of Tech/Extreme Prog choking up the site ?

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ Talking about accusing others of being single minded ... how can you know whether your average "progmetalhead" doesn't also listen to some of these other genres you listed?

Excactly!

schizoid_man77 wrote: Rocktopus wrote: And maybe the reason it because of the large amount of suggested metal that doesn't belong here, suggested by clueless teens.   Wow, this is how I feel about a good percentage of this sites users. Clueless people who just join for Yes, and Genesis, making poll's comparing the two, adn bashing metal cause they cant cant their close minded heads out of the frikken seventies.   No, I'm not tired of tech metal or any metal choking up this site, actually I'd like to see so much more discussion about metal here (except Opeth). I dont know about you, but seventies music actually bores me now compared to prog metal.

Most prog metal will never catch up with the forward thinking music of the 70's. So the fact that it bores you, is probably because you're impatient. 

Funny, all these progmetalheads accusing everyone who doesn't like their kindergarten version of prog of being closeminded.

I rarely accuse you of the same for not bothering about; free jazz, post bop, spectralists, exotica, cinecitta-soundtracks, ye-ye girls, avant-pop, hip-hop, chewing gum pop or electroacoustic music etc....

schizoid_man77 wrote: My last fm top ten most listened bands...   Ulver-Avant garde, electronic, black metal, ambient Cult of Luna-Post metal, Sludge, experimental, prog metal Maudlin of the Well-Avant Garde metal, prog metal Sigur ros-Post rock, experimental(Holy sh*t, first one) Agalloch-dark metal, doom metal, experimental Isis-Post metal, sludge, post rock (holy sh*t, second one) *shels-Post metal, prog rock, acoustic Kayo Dot-Avante Garde, Avant Garde metal Pelican-Instrumental metal, sludge, post metal Talk Talk-Synth pop, experimental, post rock (holy sh*t, third one)    Funny thing about Talk Talk is that they're last album was made in 1991, and their 1988 album is my favorite one. Another thing, this site dosent even recognize this group as a post rock band.   True as my chart goes on, more post rock comes up, a lot more. Also true, My charts have pretty pathetic numbers, and are no credible source of what I listen to. This what I listen to on the computer, and what I listen to on the computer is what I listen to in my car, in my room, and on my MP3.   Basically Josh, you just have a problem with me, so you try and attack me with some lame arguments (thats right I said attack) that only proved my point:    your top artist on last.fm is currently Ulver, is it not?   Note a post rock band.   Can I then accuse people of being stuck in the post-rock aisle?   If you wanna get me upset, just listen to a bunch of post rock bands, and write a bunch of 1 star reviews on them, regardless of what you hear (not that you'll listen anyways). I'm sorry if I upset you about the whole STC thing, but talking with a bunch trolls got annoying. Take your personal problems somewhere else. Fail.

Yes I'm sure talking about STC in this thread is the appropriate place.
What I believe Josh was trying to do was offer a counter argument to yours. Everyone has their tastes. Everyone has their own little corner of this site that they care about whether it be discussing Yes and Genesis or Cult of Luna or Magma or any other band. You can't fault people for having tastes so if people want to talk about prog metal, let them. Who are we to stop them?

stonebeard wrote: el böthy wrote: I think someone´s got his period fyi: that doesn't happen to men.

FYI We're not so sure.

Ian, I wasn't accusing you of being stuck in the post-rock aisle. I think you may have read my post wrong. I am not making this a personal debate. And, lest we escalate further, I am not going to counter your "arguments". I'm not even going to restate the argument(s) you apparently misinterpreted because I think I articulated them fine the first time.

Edited by darqDean - June 23 2008 at 11:01

The T wrote: ^^ Perfect. The original premise is false. Tech/extreme is not choking up any website. So to create good discussion as you suggest, the thread could have even been called "Is tech/extreme prog?" or something like that. Then you would've had mostly only good answers... (a few "what the hell do you thin you are" would have appeared of course)... but with an incendiary title as "Tired of extreme/tech choking up the site?" you can expect replies of any kind....   Because by saying "you tired of X" you're in a way implying YOU are tired. The thread thus looks more like a way to vent frustration and to encourage others to do so, which only calls for the use of negative energies. Why don't say, just simply, "do you think tech/extreme is prog?". Even though the final answer is given (that genre is here... to stay...) a musical discussion would follow... you ask for positive arguments, positive reactions, positive in the sense that they express something instead of appealing to the probable frustration of others.... The thread is created in a negative way, to fuel negative feelings (not negative as in bad but as in negative, don't add anything, substract. Act out of repulsion, not out of reasoning.   So I'm only answering and providing evidence about your initial post and the title of this thread. If people hate the genre, why should I care? Tastes are tastes.... But, again, the spirit that I feel fueled the creation fo this thread forces me to say tech/extreme is not choking up any site...

when over 1500 people visit the Poll I call that a very good discussion and so far very civil ...  champagne anybody ? 

^^ Perfect. The original premise is false. Tech/extreme is not choking up any website. So to create good discussion as you suggest, the thread could have even been called "Is tech/extreme prog?" or something like that. Then you would've had mostly only good answers... (a few "what the hell do you thin you are" would have appeared of course)... but with an incendiary title as "Tired of extreme/tech choking up the site?" you can expect replies of any kind....

schizoid_man77 wrote: Rocktopus wrote: And maybe the reason it because of the large amount of suggested metal that doesn't belong here, suggested by clueless teens.   Wow, this is how I feel about a good percentage of this sites users. Clueless people who just join for Yes, and Genesis, making poll's comparing the two, adn bashing metal cause they cant cant their close minded heads out of the frikken seventies.

I've heard talk of this "stuck in the 70s" crap too much.

- This is not a personal attack, I am merely using examples. I am speaking in general, and when I say "you" I don't necessarily mean schizoid_man77 -

Progressive Rock was a 70s movement. It began in 1969. It ended in 1977. That's it. That's fact. Current or modern bands that are a little out there, or non-commercial, or produce long, or complex songs are now tagged prog. They are not Progressive Rock. They were not in the 70s movement. They aren't even related. Is Wolfmother a 'classic rock' band for being inspired by Zeppelin? Hell no, they're not involved in the drugged up hippie 60s and 70s movement. So when people complain that modern bands don't belong here, they aren't stuck in the seventies, they're just interested in the preservation of musical history.

Also, why is being stuck in the seventies a crime? Ian, your top artist on last.fm is currently Ulver, is it not? Tell me, have Ulver released an album this year? No, they haven't. Their most recent release was 2007. In fact, I notice you listen to a lot of albums released in 2007. I accuse you of being stuck in 2007! Come on, Ian, that music is a year old! The same stuff will never be made again, you have to move forward. It's all about the future. I mean, you really shouldn't enjoy that dated stuff, it's so primitive, so unsophisticated. I figure the obvious retort is something like "one year and thirty five are very different, Josh, don't be a child," so I'll save you the trouble.

One year ago and thirty five are very different, Josh.

A valid argument! If then, one year old music is still infantile, and thus credible as 'new music', then what age defines when young music becomes old? Is there a line? Does twenty years of withering make music invalid? If that's the case, 18 years from now you could still enjoy your Shadows of the Sun, but the second you count down to New Year's...ten...nine...eight...seven...six...five...four...three...two...one...BANG! Well I guess you can throw out that old crap, now. It's twenty years old, God forbid you listen to that ancient stuff when there's new music to listen to instead! The natural reply would be something like "Well obviously there isn't a definite age that defines what is old stuff." Fair enough. I agree with you (provided you agree with me, see?)

So now I raise the question again. What's wrong with being stuck in the seventies? If we can't decide on a specific age that music becomes obsolete, then stuck in the seventies merely means stuck in the past. With that in mind, as soon as an album is released it become obsolete. It's all about the future, is it? What's to come is more important than what you have, is it?

Clueless people join ProgArchives for Yes and Genesis? Of course they do. That's what Progressive Rock is. This new stuff is something different, with maybe a few comparable elements. So why do you blame them? This is a progressive rock website, man.

adn bashing metal cause they cant cant their close minded heads out of the frikken seventies.

Assuming you meant "can't get their closed minded heads", then I have this to say. Music's age means nothing. Accusing someone of being 'stuck in the 70s' is merely accusing them of enjoying primarily - maybe even exclusively - bands from one particular genre. Can I then accuse people of being stuck in the post-rock aisle?