Nu Prog? WTF

^we each define our own reality ... 

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^we each define our own reality ...

ahhh....  never forget though,  that some realities are more grounded in the realities of others

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ any fool can create a wikipedia entry.

^ my reality has no knowledge or acknowledgement of Wikipedia.  Only of fools who do....

MikeEnRegalia wrote: is your reality based on anything tangible at all?

very much so..... we can discuss it in private of course....

MikeEnRegalia wrote: What I mean is that the phrase "New Prog" is not used widely. But the wikipedia page makes it appear like it is ... and by the power of wikipedia and the fact that many people trust it blindly, the phrase might become real.

that is why I have no use of it.. and have never referenced  the damn thing... whatever useful correct info they MIGHT have.. can be found elsewhere without doubt of it's authenticity.  I remember the kids here created a Velvet Room entry there.... I trust nothing there.. anyone who does.. is the fool you correctly pointed out. 

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ agreed. Wikipedia is great for presenting verifiable facts, but not opinions. That doesn't mean that genre descriptions or definitions on wikipedia pages generally suck ... but the opinions should be backed by sources, which is simply not possible for such a new genre. For example, you could claim that King Crimson is an Art Rock band when you find many sources (old and new magazines/reviews) which support that statement.

had to quote you..the arrows were driving me batty hahhaha

I couldn't agree more.  What we deal with here in PA's and with prog in general is opinions. We just had some 8 pages (or so) of discussion about what was best for the site.  We are in the position to give because a) we care about the site, b) know enough about prog to make us dangerous, and c) have opinions and the fortitude to stand by them. Was your opinion/proposal  wrong.. no... was mine.. no.  It is ALL opinion.  The same as whatever Wikipedia says... that said...I'd sure as hell consider what you thought more than something on some site like that.  If people want to know about prog they come here...  If people read something on the internet, especially a site like Wikipedia and believe it to be a fact...  they get what they deserve I guess.  

micky wrote: If people read something on the internet, especially a site like Wikipedia and believe it to be a fact...  they get what they deserve I guess.

Agreed ... it's the same as believing all you read in newspapers.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: micky wrote: If people read something on the internet, especially a site like Wikipedia and believe it to be a fact...  they get what they deserve I guess.   Agreed ... it's the same as believing all you read in newspapers.

or what our governments tell us .....

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ unfortunately none of these bands sound like or are influenced by Nu Metal, which makes it even worse.

And it makes it worse how?

MikeEnRegalia wrote: It just doesn't add up. "New Prog" just means prog by a new generation of musicians ... there is no connection to Nu Metal nor is there any particular bias towards indie/alternative.

I certainly hear Indie style.  Of course anytime any new sounding rock that comes out I lean that way. Some of the music I have listened to sounds like it has Grunge roots, thus Nu Metal. We can't call it Grunge Prog.