Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Suggest New Bands and Artists
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Swans
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedSwans

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 7>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
HolyMoly View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: April 01 2009
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Points: 26138
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 26 2013 at 13:52
Good news!  I'll get my reviewing gloves on.
My other avatar is a Porsche

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased.

-Kehlog Albran
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 26 2013 at 13:47
Definitely looking forward to the tirade of upcoming reviews for "The Seer" - seeing as so many folks have been itching and gagging for Swans to be addedBig smile
Album of the year 2012 for me.
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
zravkapt View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 12 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6446
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 26 2013 at 13:24
Santa loves Swans. They have been cleared for addition by the Post-Rock Team. The decision was made based on their last three studio albums; since they were suggested I have become familiar with their discography, and I would say even albums like Children Of God and The Burning World have some moments of proto-post-rock (yeah, I just said that). 

A great example of a group who can't be easily pigeon-holed into any one sub on PA, but deserve to be here anyway. I will send Colin a PM just in case he does not see this.
Magma America Great Make Again
Back to Top
calm_sea View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: September 03 2009
Location: Maine, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 60
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 22 2013 at 15:25
I don't consider Swans to be progressive rock from a traditional standpoint, in that they sonically have little to do with the groups the genre name was originally applied to (Yes, KC, ELP, Genesis, etc etc etc etc etc etc).
BUT
Isn't "progressive" music about breaking down musical barriers and genre blending and furthering musical expression?
Swans are a group who have "progressed" throughout their career in the truest sense of the word.  From their punishing, industrialized, brutal beginnings, to their more accessible (yet still very interesting and at times caustic) folkier late 80's and early 90's output, to the more cinematic and atmospheric work they began putting out in the mid 90's until their first hiatus.  The material Gira and company are creating now is wholly psychedelic, experimental, atmospheric, challenging, and yes, progressive. 
I would not think twice if I saw them added to this site either in the prog related, post-rock/math rock, crossover or eclectic prog sections.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 13 2013 at 07:26
Originally posted by seventhsojourn seventhsojourn wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Not all innovative music is Progressive Rock... if it does not comfortably fit into the categories we've got (which are a wide and as catchall as they need to be when you actually look at what "Eclectic", "Heavy", "Crossover", "Prog Folk", "Progressive Metal" and "Jazz Rock/Fusion" are actually defined as here) then frankly, it's not Progressive Rock and we should never agonise over whether they should be here or whether we're missing out when we decide that: "Oh well, they don't fit, ho-hum... what's next on the pile? Brave The Vertigo... yet another bandcamp-band, is this Progressive Rock? Let's give it a spin and find out... "
 
Then how do you account for the proliferation of ''move'' votes and the ping-ponging of artists?
I actually believe that a fair degree of agonising is almost inevitable in making these decisions. Dean, the picture you paint of the evaluation process here is rather simplistic. I guess that was deliberate, but the trouble is it doesn't seem too far removed from the system that by all accounts operates elsewhere and I was only half-joking when I replied to Gulle earlier in this thread. I wasn't around in the early years of PA, but if I'm not wrong artist additions were handled in a much less formal manner in order to build the site. Maybe that's now happening on MMA? Colin mentioned that metal is perhaps easier to identify than prog. I don't know about that. Probably my biggest failing in my role here is my (poor) ability to differentiate between Prog Metal and Heavy Prog, but it seems I'm not alone. In any case, your scenario above... if flippant it certainly sounds like fun. Would that things were like the cosy little music appreciation group you portray.
 
The real situation is of course different and carries responsibility. The first point of contact for the majority of suggestions is this area of the forum, where one person's opinion can see an artist rejected without further evaluation. The pre-evaluation is useful for weeding out candidates that obviously aren't prog, but I wonder how many decent suggestions have been rejected over the years based on one opinion. I do struggle to come to decisions to reject artists because I think it's important, especially for the artist involved. Another point is that, yes, I do agonise over where to pitch some suggestions because, as I alluded to above, there are many artists who comfortably fit Progressive Rock but don't fit comfortably in our subgenres. I try to minimise the amount of unnecessary work for the already overworked genre teams. Have I been pissing my time against a wall needlessly? 
Regarding the evaluation process, we also have the situation where one team member can be responsible for rejecting a band that the other team members have voted in favour of. The fact that one person voting ''no'' on a 4-man team rejects an artist whereas it takes three negative votes on a 5-man team just doesn't feel right to me. By the way, I've read your comments on sampling theory several times (Over The Ocean suggestion thread, page 3, for those interested). I'll admit I am none the wiser, I just can't get my head around it although I do adhere to it during evaluations. My point in mentioning it is that I think the one dissenting voice on that 4-man team who will reject the artist has to be absolutely sure he is doing the right thing. Maybe even agonising over it in the process.
 
Mention of the proliferation of ''move'' votes and the ping-ponging of artists is made a lot (and a lot is made out of it), but how prevalent is this in reality? (Actual numbers, not impressions or gut feelings). When you look at ProgFreak (which even without Symphonic and RPI gives a good overview) you see some "move" votes that are inevitable because the person suggesting the band to a team isn't part of the team, but they generally resolve themselves:
DateUserChartAction
4yWindhawkCrossover-> Added
4yWindhawkCrossover-> Cleared
4ydarqdeanCrossover (darqdean)
4yLoganEclectic (Logan)
4yWindhawkCrossover (Windhawk)
4yWindhawkCrossover-> New
4yclarke2001Eclectic-> Move
4yclarke2001Eclectic (clarke2001)
4yEpignosisEclectic (Epignosis)
4yclarke2001Eclectic (clarke2001)
4yclarke2001Eclectic-> New
(that band still shows on the Eclectic chart as "move" even though they were moved to and added by Crossover soon after - there was no indecision involved here - both teams voted unanimously)
 
I was on the Crossover team (hell, I was the Crossover team for a while) so I know what it is like and I know how easy it is - a band fits or they don't - the only real indecision is with the borderline bands that you personally may feel would be better in another sub but you think that perhaps the other sub won't agree. Placing of bands should be obvious, if it isn't then perhaps we're trying too hard, perhaps the band shouldn't be here at all. If some say the band fits in Eclectic and some say the band fits in Crossover then that is not a band falling between the cracks, or a band that fits in neither sub, it is a band that can fit in either sub - all it takes is someone to flip a coin and make a decision  - if teams cannot resolve that between themselves then I don't see that breaking the system to account for these occasional anomalies is the wisest solution.
 
Yup, in the early days it was a lot more informal and ad hoc, then they didn't need a team to decide whether Yes or PFM were Prog or not and they didn't need a vote to decide where to put them. But once they'd added all the obvious easy bands people started adding not so obvious bands and bands that really shouldn't be here and things got messy. Perhaps with album tagging MMA does not need a team system(though I suspect that eventually they will), album tagging means they can add Rock bands like Fields of the Nephilim because someone thinks that their last album was a bit gothic metal. Personnally I think that's a mistake and not something we should encourage here.
 
I'm bored by the 1-man veto "debate" now - no one understands it so I informally scrapped it last year, you can all go back to the rather silly majority vote system. Three people think the band should be added and two say no - so we add them - how fricken daft is that. Aside from the mathematics of sampling (a team is a small sample of PA members), every addition should be so bloody obvious and so far beyond any shadow of doubt that every person on the team should vote yes. I suspect that in reality most (if not all) additions are by unanimous vote with or without the "rule".
 


Edited by Dean - August 13 2013 at 10:48
What?
Back to Top
seventhsojourn View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 11 2009
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 4006
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 13 2013 at 06:05
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Not all innovative music is Progressive Rock... if it does not comfortably fit into the categories we've got (which are a wide and as catchall as they need to be when you actually look at what "Eclectic", "Heavy", "Crossover", "Prog Folk", "Progressive Metal" and "Jazz Rock/Fusion" are actually defined as here) then frankly, it's not Progressive Rock and we should never agonise over whether they should be here or whether we're missing out when we decide that: "Oh well, they don't fit, ho-hum... what's next on the pile? Brave The Vertigo... yet another bandcamp-band, is this Progressive Rock? Let's give it a spin and find out... "
 
Then how do you account for the proliferation of ''move'' votes and the ping-ponging of artists?
 
I actually believe that a fair degree of agonising is almost inevitable in making these decisions. Dean, the picture you paint of the evaluation process here is rather simplistic. I guess that was deliberate, but the trouble is it doesn't seem too far removed from the system that by all accounts operates elsewhere and I was only half-joking when I replied to Gulle earlier in this thread. I wasn't around in the early years of PA, but if I'm not wrong artist additions were handled in a much less formal manner in order to build the site. Maybe that's now happening on MMA? Colin mentioned that metal is perhaps easier to identify than prog. I don't know about that. Probably my biggest failing in my role here is my (poor) ability to differentiate between Prog Metal and Heavy Prog, but it seems I'm not alone. In any case, your scenario above... if flippant it certainly sounds like fun. Would that things were like the cosy little music appreciation group you portray.
 
The real situation is of course different and carries responsibility. The first point of contact for the majority of suggestions is this area of the forum, where one person's opinion can see an artist rejected without further evaluation. The pre-evaluation is useful for weeding out candidates that obviously aren't prog, but I wonder how many decent suggestions have been rejected over the years based on one opinion. I do struggle to come to decisions to reject artists because I think it's important, especially for the artist involved. Another point is that, yes, I do agonise over where to pitch some suggestions because, as I alluded to above, there are many artists who comfortably fit Progressive Rock but don't fit comfortably in our subgenres. I try to minimise the amount of unnecessary work for the already overworked genre teams. Have I been pissing my time against a wall needlessly? 
 
Regarding the evaluation process, we also have the situation where one team member can be responsible for rejecting a band that the other team members have voted in favour of. The fact that one person voting ''no'' on a 4-man team rejects an artist whereas it takes three negative votes on a 5-man team just doesn't feel right to me. By the way, I've read your comments on sampling theory several times (Over The Ocean suggestion thread, page 3, for those interested). I'll admit I am none the wiser, I just can't get my head around it although I do adhere to it during evaluations. My point in mentioning it is that I think the one dissenting voice on that 4-man team who will reject the artist has to be absolutely sure he is doing the right thing. Maybe even agonising over it in the process.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 12 2013 at 12:32
Ermm even Lars Ulrich can manage that.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Wink
What?
Back to Top
Triceratopsoil View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18016
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 12 2013 at 12:21
Originally posted by seventhsojourn seventhsojourn wrote:

Thanks, but the one clearly fitting metal album... how is that decision reached? Do teams vote, etc.?


For borderline decisions, yes.  I think usually "metal or not" is easier to determine than "prog or not," though
Back to Top
Man With Hat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Jazz-Rock/Fusion/Canterbury Team

Joined: March 12 2005
Location: Neurotica
Status: Offline
Points: 166178
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 12 2013 at 11:53
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:



Not all innovative music is Progressive Rock... if it does not comfortably fit into the categories we've got (which are a wide and as catchall as they need to be when you actually look at what "Eclectic", "Heavy", "Crossover", "Prog Folk", "Progressive Metal" and "Jazz Rock/Fusion" are actually defined as here) then frankly, it's not Progressive Rock and we should never agonise over whether they should be here or whether we're missing out when we decide that: "Oh well, they don't fit, ho-hum... what's next on the pile? Brave The Vertigo... yet another bandcamp-band, is this Progressive Rock? Let's give it a spin and find out... "


Dig me...But don't...Bury me
I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive
Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 12 2013 at 11:20
Post 30000Party
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 12 2013 at 11:14
Not all innovative music is Progressive Rock... if it does not comfortably fit into the categories we've got (which are a wide and as catchall as they need to be when you actually look at what "Eclectic", "Heavy", "Crossover", "Prog Folk", "Progressive Metal" and "Jazz Rock/Fusion" are actually defined as here) then frankly, it's not Progressive Rock and we should never agonise over whether they should be here or whether we're missing out when we decide that: "Oh well, they don't fit, ho-hum... what's next on the pile? Brave The Vertigo... yet another bandcamp-band, is this Progressive Rock? Let's give it a spin and find out... "
What?
Back to Top
lazland View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 13634
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 12 2013 at 11:00
Originally posted by seventhsojourn seventhsojourn wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Dean is absolutely spot on when he says that album tagging will not stop debates or arguments about adding artists to the database.

It would, however, stop the ridiculous situation we have that every single album by an added artist is de facto treated as a prog album. For no better example, I give you Miles Davis, who has 1940's albums available to review on a prog site, for heaven's sake.

Of course, the real root of the trouble we have here is this silly and pedantic sub genre split we have, most of which bear no relation to reality whatsoever, except in our little world. I have, of course, gotten into more than a little trouble for pointing this out beforeLOL
 
Steve, imo the real root of the problem is we are simply adding far too many artists. This is growing by the day. Soon we will need sub-subgenres. See also pianoman's post above.

Not an unfair point, Chris. When I originally volunteered to be a member of the New Suggestions Team, I anticipated a little bit of fun and an interest in hitherto obscure bands. It turned out to be akin to a full time job, with piles of suggestions daily. My proper job and family simply did not allow the time necessary to do it justice.

Pianoman's post is a good one, I agree. Progressive rock is evolving, and will continue to do so......this is one (amongst a few others) reason why I continue to hold the opinion that fewer sub genres might be better, rather than agonising over which sub genre is a good, or in many cases, convenient fit. 
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org

Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!
Back to Top
seventhsojourn View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 11 2009
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 4006
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 12 2013 at 01:30
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Dean is absolutely spot on when he says that album tagging will not stop debates or arguments about adding artists to the database.

It would, however, stop the ridiculous situation we have that every single album by an added artist is de facto treated as a prog album. For no better example, I give you Miles Davis, who has 1940's albums available to review on a prog site, for heaven's sake.

Of course, the real root of the trouble we have here is this silly and pedantic sub genre split we have, most of which bear no relation to reality whatsoever, except in our little world. I have, of course, gotten into more than a little trouble for pointing this out beforeLOL
 
Steve, imo the real root of the problem is we are simply adding far too many artists. This is growing by the day. Soon we will need sub-subgenres. See also pianoman's post above.
Back to Top
Smurph View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 11 2012
Location: Columbus&NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 3167
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2013 at 18:14
Originally posted by pianoman pianoman wrote:

Progressive music has grown beyond the current sub-categories that are set up on the site, and therefore some modern progressive bands are not included because they "don't belong" or don't fit into the neat categories as they are defined. In 50 years from now, the categories we have now may not describe 80% of the progressive music being created during that time.

So are we always going to be denying the innovative music, or are we going to keep the site dedicated to progressive music only defined from a certain moment in time (the way it seems to work now, for the most part).

But... I think it covers most of the new progressive bands around.

What other modern prog bands aren't being included?
Back to Top
pianoman View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 28 2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 793
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2013 at 17:43
Progressive music has grown beyond the current sub-categories that are set up on the site, and therefore some modern progressive bands are not included because they "don't belong" or don't fit into the neat categories as they are defined. In 50 years from now, the categories we have now may not describe 80% of the progressive music being created during that time.

So are we always going to be denying the innovative music, or are we going to keep the site dedicated to progressive music only defined from a certain moment in time (the way it seems to work now, for the most part).

Edited by pianoman - August 11 2013 at 17:43
Back to Top
Einsetumadur View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: September 24 2008
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 265
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2013 at 16:34
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Of course, the real root of the trouble we have here is this silly and pedantic sub genre split we have, most of which bear no relation to reality whatsoever, except in our little world. I have, of course, gotten into more than a little trouble for pointing this out beforeLOL


I'm gonna take this as a warning for myself. Wink
All in all each man in all men
Back to Top
lazland View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 13634
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2013 at 15:50
Dean is absolutely spot on when he says that album tagging will not stop debates or arguments about adding artists to the database.

It would, however, stop the ridiculous situation we have that every single album by an added artist is de facto treated as a prog album. For no better example, I give you Miles Davis, who has 1940's albums available to review on a prog site, for heaven's sake.

Of course, the real root of the trouble we have here is this silly and pedantic sub genre split we have, most of which bear no relation to reality whatsoever, except in our little world. I have, of course, gotten into more than a little trouble for pointing this out beforeLOL
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org

Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!
Back to Top
seventhsojourn View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 11 2009
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 4006
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2013 at 15:07
Thanks, but the one clearly fitting metal album... how is that decision reached? Do teams vote, etc.?
Back to Top
Pekka View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 03 2006
Location: Espoo, Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 6442
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2013 at 14:27
Originally posted by seventhsojourn seventhsojourn wrote:

^ It would also be so much easier if, when someone suggested a new band, we simply said ''add the band.'' Wink
 
Seriously though, David, are you able to describe the evaluation process on JMA and MMA? I've had a cursory look at both sites and can't find the info. 
 
 
 
In MMA if a band has released even just one clearly fitting metal album, then it's enough to earn their entry to the site. If their 25 other albums happen to be jazz or folk or anything, they can be labeled "non-metal", and they're (as of yet) unreviewable and unrateable. If they have covered many different metal genres during their career, they might have a few albums that are labeled "power metal", some that are "thrash metal" and so on. So MMA does not assign a band to a chosen subgenre, but the band's releases are tagged with the appropriate subgenres.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2013 at 13:14
Album tagging would not stop these type of suggestion threads nor would it stop arguments and disagreements. There are many suggested bands that would not get added even with album tagging. The "one album" rule should be enough - if there is doubt based upon that one album then album tagging would not save it. If Lonesome Crow is the indisputable Krautrock alum that some people say it is then they should be added regardless, however, it is not indisputable and that's where the problems start.
 


Edited by Dean - August 11 2013 at 13:58
What?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 7>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.148 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.