The top 100

dream_orchestra wrote: OK then, shouldn't ratings be based on sales rather than paoples own opinions. As sales don't lie.

Sales are good indicators of popular music- Prog is not popular. I think ratings based on how the listerner percieves the music is much more appropriate for this type of music. If it was based on sales there would be genesis - we can't dance and yes - 90125. These are not the best representations of bands that do/have based their works on composition.

Most of us don't care about sales and would agree that these are not true indicators of a bands best output.

[edit] If you are truly interested in progressive music take note that there is a respected history behind it and don't just dismiss a work because it is 30 years old. Take the time to explore some of these 'classics' and you may find something that you will treasure as much as the rest of us.


Edited by cobb

Since when were LInkin Park prog...oops forgot they are American..so anything goes.

dream_orchestra wrote: OK then, shouldn't ratings be based on sales rather than paoples own opinions. As sales don't lie.

Yeah, let's go ahead and put Linkin Park at the top of the charts, because sales are *obviously* proportional to quality.  Dumbass.

Dream_orchestra- you are confusing how the ratings work on this site. They are generated, automatically, from reviews on the works which are submitted by the members of the site. There is no little group of people cloistered together, deciding on who should be in the list. This is the only site I know that does this reasonably fairly. There is some bias, but if enough reviews are submitted the bias will even out to a true accounting

Look at the top 100

 

Apart from music lovers.

But what people?

Artsy Fartsy????

Strange description in a prog' site, that's the way POP lovers use to call all Prog' Rock.

That's the problem when people mix quality with their own taste, I dislike most King Crimson  (For example) but I would be a prog' ignorant to say they are mediocre, they are all excelent musicians, the fact I dislike their music is just a matter of personal taste.

Iván

Genesis had a sound (or "mood" if you like) about them that has become synonomous with progressive rock.  There's much more to prog than that, I know, but it's just that a lot of people like that sound (myself included), so their albums get high ratings.

Now ELP are another of my favorite bands, but they're all about technique.  That doesn't cut it for some.  I like them, prog wouldn't be the same without them, but I can see why Genesis recieves more favour. 

Just my take on the issue.  

It's easy to see that prog's 3 greatest (Yes, Genesis & Pink Floyd) are very high in the list and with several records in the top 100. That fact is absolutely ok and earned, because they are representative for prog in it's most important, defining individualitistic aspects. For example: Yes - the virtuosity; Genesis - the lyricism - Pink Floyd - the monumentalism.

The list is based on ratings and I think that the chosen ones are objectively seen as perfect as it gets (in prog's point of view). There aren't a couple of people who rate them so extensively often and high, they are just very popular and enjoy a high status to prog-listeners and fans, or music-lovers in general. There are also several people out there who complain about them and think they are overrated, but they seem to lack the "masterpiece-ear" and can't hear the timeless genius inside of the music. I absolutely agree, that music is still a matter of taste, but with the top ranked albums on here there are only few people, who give them few or zero attention - the most know what it's all about and don't think it's hype - so that must speak for the over-the-top quality of the records.