Should there be a new Category?

More prog genres, just what the world needs. Like more lawyers.

I'm unsure until someone convince me of the need for this. How many albums do you expect in this new category? if under 10 then perhaps it's not really worth the energy.

[QUOTE=video vertigo]I think the idea is good, but should these bands be allowed into the top albums?  I'm already unhappy about the beatles in our top 100, who's next? 

I think the idea is good, but should these bands be allowed into the top albums?  I'm already unhappy about the beatles in our top 100, who's next?  I like that this site is growing and more info about more types of music are becoming apart of PA, but I'm here for prog 99.98% of the time.

Cheesecakemouse wrote: Ivan Melgar, the difference with groups like genesis is that their foundations are prog, the beatles wern't, also even their more commercial albums were prog related eg Dominoes, Second Home by the sea. That is the difference Yes and Genesis are prog bands the Beatles wern't. This is what I'm saying; non prog bands/artists like the Beatles and Miles Davis has some prog albums, put them and exclude their non prog because its irrelevent, Genesis and Yes pop music has relevance to many prog fans although usually in the more negative area and againthere are still prog - related material in it.

Brilliant Idea Cheesecakemouse!
I voted yes!

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: The big question...Who decides which albums are really Prog?   I would love to add Their Satanic Majesties Request (Rolling Stones) as Psychedelic but not so sure how easy will  it be to manage albums by absolutely non proog bands.   We have people  already asking why is STYX or Be Bop´Deluxe here, imagine if somebody would believe some Earth Wind & Fire or Progressive House album should be added.   The idea is good, but has it's problems.   Iván

Edited by Cheesecakemouse - July 08 2006 at 00:51

RycheMan wrote: Great Idea!   Hopefully those early Rainbow albums would get some recognition. Some Bowie, BOC etc

YEEEEESSSSSS!!!

*Ghost Rider's early-morning scream of approval*

Mad Bass Player wrote: That would actually be pretty cool.  Mabey some of Iron Maiden's albums could be on here.

As the mighty Bruce D. would say, "scream for me, PA forum...."




Edited by Ghost Rider - July 08 2006 at 00:39

I for one don't understand the obsession with finding out ultimately who's "truly prog" and who's not.  It really doesn't matter and it would be a waste of time on this site.  Also, isn't the whole point of proto-prog and prog-related categories is that they're NOT prog to begin with, so why should we be verifying their proginess when by the fact that they're in those categories it has already been established?  Seems nonsensical to me.  It seriously doesn't matter to me whether a band is labeled as prog, if you want to listen to the most innovative and proggy band, that's your choice, and if you want to listen to a band that's barely proggy at al, that's fine too.  I think artists should be labeled by what the majority of their output is considered, and let the reviews speak for themselves!  I also think this would take a disincentive out of reviews where people speak what they truly feel about the album and its "prog worthiness" rather than simply hitting a button to vote on a PROG FROM 1-10 scale.  Maybe I'm the only one in here but this idea sounds ridiculous to me.  I VOTE NO

Peter Rideout wrote: I'm not trying to be difficult or contankerous, but I think this idea would only lead to more "prog or not"/"WTF is prog?" arguments.   (You see, prog does not really exist.)