Should Iron Maiden have been put on the A

^ the cold and objective world of database queries ...  not the album is wrong, but the SQL query!

toolis wrote: "Seventh Son.." is already in No 174, surpassing tons of true prog albums... no comment...

Sigh.

The overall top100 is a SUPERFICIAL rating system. It compares apples and oranges and throws it all together into a fruit salad. You tell me which is better: The highest ranked Zeuhl album or the highest ranked Prog Metal album. Well the top100 has already decided, but to actually say that one album is better really doesn't make too much sense. They have entirely different goals and their music leaves not too much to be compared. I'm trying to direct you toward an argument that might actually get some consideration, because comments like this will get you nowhere. I would argue to throw away the whole top500 thing if people like you are getting so bent out of shape about it. It doesn't mean that much anyway. It makes more sense to have top100 in individual sub-genres.

And another flaw with your line of thinking: Inidividual albums are written to be progressive, not bands. Don't believe me? Ok, then try to claim that Yes or Genesis' whole catalogue is progressive, and you'll have the whole site laughing at you. Just because Iron Maiden isn't a prog rock band doesn't mean that can't write a progressive album, and apparently many people believe this to be a very progressive album.


Listen to MikeEnRegalia, he knows...

sorry, but I don't think it was a particularly good idea...

To me, the real issue is not the presence of any one band like IM. Rather, it is "does metal belong on a progressive rock site?"

Cheesecakemouse wrote: I think the problem lies with the concepts behind metal bands, quite often they are not as intellectual and more image conscious(eg skinheads etc) than prog bands like Genesis. Although this is not the 100% truth I think this is the general image that metal has been portrayed to the public. Noise and posing are often the priorities in metal bands rather than creativity and musicianship. To me a most of the 80s metal bands had more in common with punk than rock - loud, image consciuos and promoting the the impression that it appeals to the lowest common denominator of the public. I think this is why people are opposed to IM on the archives. But good or not if they are prog related they are prog related. I guess the general impression I get is that people who want to look tough and violent listen to metal, just like some of the early punk listeners. While prog is less image conscious and more cerebral.

Peter Rideout wrote: To me, the real issue is not the presence of any one band like IM. Rather, it is "does metal belong on a progressive rock site?"[IMG]height=17 alt=Ermm src="smileys/smiley24.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle>   (Is it "prog," or is it just "prog as far as metal goes?")   I'm not saying yes or no, but that seems to be the fundamental issue: how broad is your definition of "prog?"   The definition of the site's owners obviously does include metal, so, given that, then I can't see how people can justifiably whine about the continued inclusion of metal bands. Like it or not, metal is here on PA, and it has been here from the start.   If it REALLY bothers you that metal is here, you should perhaps leave and start your own "pure" prog website. [IMG]height=17 alt="Stern Smile" src="smileys/smiley22.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle>

Do my eyes deceive me??

What kind of weird alternate reality have I stumbled into??

I never thought I would see the day Peter.

SolariS wrote: toolis wrote: "Seventh Son.." is already in No 174, surpassing tons of true prog albums... no comment... Sigh.The overall top100 is a SUPERFICIAL rating system. It compares apples and oranges and throws it all together into a fruit salad. You tell me which is better: The highest ranked Zeuhl album or the highest ranked Prog Metal album. Well the top100 has already decided, but to actually say that one album is better really doesn't make too much sense. They have entirely different goals and their music leaves not too much to be compared. I'm trying to direct you toward an argument that might actually get some consideration, because comments like this will get you nowhere. I would argue to throw away the whole top500 thing if people like you are getting so bent out of shape about it. It doesn't mean that much anyway. It makes more sense to have top100 in individual sub-genres. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- all i'm asking is the same thing i asked in "Help Us Improve The Site" forum: exclude proto prog and prog related bands from the list... this site has began to get disoriented... ------------------------------------------------------------------------- And another flaw with your line of thinking: Inidividual albums are written to be progressive, not bands. Don't believe me? Ok, then try to claim that Yes or Genesis' whole catalogue is progressive, and you'll have the whole site laughing at you. Just because Iron Maiden isn't a prog rock band doesn't mean that can't write a progressive album, and apparently many people believe this to be a very progressive album.Listen to MikeEnRegalia, he knows...

    

i respect everybody's opinion that "Seventh Son.." is a prog album... but i disagree... just because some people say so doesn't mean that i have to agree too.. it's just a matter of opinion...
    

Edited by toolis - October 11 2006 at 02:40

^maybe..

^still, you have to understand that seeing an IM release in there, among all these prog albums...i don't know, i've always considered IM to be a NWOBHM legend with its leader to be a big prog fan...

    

Edited by toolis - October 11 2006 at 03:24

IM are not as prog-related as MANY other bands that aren't here... YET.
    
Just about all NWOBHM bands are prog-related in some way, for a start.

Iron Maiden should not be here - the "prog-relation" is tenuous to say the least.

Where are the MELLOTRONS???

    

Edited by Certif1ed - October 11 2006 at 03:42