Regressive archives???

I've just re-read all four pages of this thread and can find nothing that screems Progsnobishness to me - have people been editing their posts to remove such inflamatory comments, or are my perceptions of this phenomina different to everyone else?

darqdean wrote: I've just re-read all four pages of this thread and can find nothing that screems Progsnobishness to me - have people been editing their posts to remove such inflamatory comments, or are my perceptions of this phenomina different to everyone else?   Anyway, that aside...   The review ratings in the PA are with respect to an albums Progishness® - therefore Holidays In Eden for example, (which I think is a damn fine album btw just not a particularily prog-oriented), deserves its three stars (remember 3-stars = Good, but non-essential) - three stars does not (necessarily) equal a bad album - just one you wouldn't recommend to another Progger. For me, the simple fact that Marillion's follow-up album, Brave, courts 4 and 5 star reviews placing it higher than the Pre-Hogarth era, Fugazi, highlights the complete lack of regressive thinking within the archive.

Until now I can’t understand if mgallard came here to give us a lecture about how open minded you are if you like CAS, We Can’t Dance and No Jacket Required or as an emissary of Hit & Run records to boost the sales of 5.1 Genesis late albums, or is simply a stubborn guy that doesn’t like to accept he screwed it  and tries to cover this facts changing names,  calling everybody who doesn’t agree with him Progsnob and forgiving us for our sins against the holy trinity (Banks, Rutherford and Collins with the Earth Wind & Fire Phoenix Horns as cherubs blowing trumpets).

 

At the end….Who cares?

 

Nobody will teach us here what freedom is, we are used to say loud and clear what we like and what we don’t like, this won’t change.

 

Few sites allow every visitor to review and rate an album without any censorship (unless there’s abuse of course), when in the Genesis Forum some members started to write they were not happy with a reunion without Gabriel and Hackett, there was a letter by Phil Collins telling us we were jeopardizing the chances of a reunion. But here we receive reviews saying for example that ELP are overblown and self indulgent arrogant or that Wakeman is a pompous egomaniac and nobody says a thing, and it’s ok for us, that’s what we pretend, absolute freedom of opinion.

 

Nobody can ask us to be more open minded and allow more freedom.

 

This is a serious DISCUSSION FORUM, not a fan club, we are not forced to like everything listed, some will like Symphonic, others Prog Metal, some will like both.

 

I’m really tired of people rubbing in our faces that they are so open minded because they like Rap or Hip Hop or Invisible Touch and we are close minded Progsnobs because for we don’t.

 

Lets remember that Prog Archives is a progressive Rock website and it’s absolutely normal that the vast majority comes here because we like Progressive Rock, so why in hell can’t we say loud and clear that Prog is our music?

 

There are millions of mainstream sites where, people go to say EMINEM is the best thing since chocolate cake and ice-cream were invented, but I haven’t read  anybody calling them EMINEMSNOBS or POPSNOBS or RAPSNOBS.

 

Why should we be ashamed to like a genre more than others? And the worst thing is that they come here, to our house to tell us how arrogant we are because we know what we like and what we don’t like.

 

Lets go on with the discussions, that’s why we are here.

 

Iván

darqdean wrote: I've just re-read all four pages of this thread and can find nothing that screems Progsnobishness to me - have people been editing their posts to remove such inflamatory comments, or are my perceptions of this phenomina different to everyone else?   Amen, people is only expressiing their opinions.   Anyway, that aside...   The review ratings in the PA are with respect to an albums Progishness® - therefore Holidays In Eden for example, (which I think is a damn fine album btw just not a particularily prog-oriented), deserves its three stars (remember 3-stars = Good, but non-essential) - three stars does not (necessarily) equal a bad album - just one you wouldn't recommend to another Progger. For me, the simple fact that Marillion's follow-up album, Brave, courts 4 and 5 star reviews placing it higher than the Pre-Hogarth era, Fugazi, highlights the complete lack of regressive thinking within the archive.   Why Darqdean?   Some bands reach their peak early in their careers and then go downhill, others keep improving, people like Brave more than Fugazzi, it's simple taste.   Progressive Rock doesn't have to progress, it's only the name of a genre with certain characteristics, not an adjective that qualifies the approach of the band towards music.    Yes was Prog in the 70's and Magenta who play more or less the music of the 70's are also Progressive Rock band because they are part  of this genre.   Anglagard in the 90's played the music of the 70's refusing to use any instrument not availlable in the 70's and they were a fabulous Progressive rock band.   I always use this example: Modern Classical Music was Modern in 1900, in 1950, today and will still be Modern (with capital M) in the XXX Century, because it's a name of an era.   You can say as an adjective, hey that band has a modern approach to rhythm, but then you're not talking about Modern Classical Music.   The same is with Progressive Rock, I can say REM was a progressive (with low case) band in 1990 because they were ahead of most mainstream, but they were not part of a genre called Progressive Rock and I'm just qualifying their approach towards music.   If a band makes a song with similar structure to lets say The Musical Box, with a lot of similaritries to it, it will be a Progressive Rock song, maybe not a masterpiece (maybe even bad) of course not original, but will still be part of the genre.   I'm not a particular fan of Marillion, but I like "Script for a Jester's Tear" much more than any later album, and this doesn't make me regressive, it only means I have a different taste.   Cheers   Iván

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 31 2007 at 15:19

I forgive you all. One day you will see the light. I'll pray for that day. You all don't get it do ya. All good prog groups become pop in the end cause $ in the real God.

Anyway, now seriously, don't turn this into something personal, I am more open-minded, you aren't or are, whatever.

What I find pathetic is that people let their rationality become controlled by that irrational fear of something "popular". It's normally expressed as "Oh, X group is now famous, or they had a hit single, or they made a poppy song, ie.: they sold out", but anyway, some people like to be pathetic too... so good for them!

M.

PD: BTW, I am famous enough already, so I don't need to even have a name on ProgArchives if it was me you were referring to, or was it Ibán? or, Mr. T, are you just trying to be funny?

Oh no! The  F word has been suggested .
I can`t believe I`ve read all four pages.

All I care about is that quite a few bands that I really dig, new , old , jazz, rock whatever, are represented here. If Alvin And The Chipmunks were here They`d definitely be getting a review from me. Seriously I`d be the first one to submit a review.

And talk about being in it for the money my heroes from my tender years are making a movie and they`ve gone Hip Hop.

                                    



Edited by Vibrationbaby - July 31 2007 at 16:12

God, how do I keep getting drawn into this? It's like a scab I keep picking. No one said that when a band achieves financial success that they sold out. They did, however, sell out when they abandoned their sound and purposefully sacrificed their integrity to make hit music. It is not a sin to receive lots of money (this is not the indie rock archives), but I reserve the right to listen to what I want. I enjoy good pop. For example, I believe Michael Jackson and Prince have made some of the best music of all time, regardless of genre. Both are androgynous, somewhat racially ambigous, and both have made money that is measured in the s**tloads. Genesis cannot compare to those two artists when it comes to pop material (doesn't make Genesis bad, but it's true). From Fleetwood Mac to Arcade Fire, I'll listen to a band provided they are good. I don't consider your attacks personal, mainly because you make up comments to critique. I'd take it personally if you actually addressed what we say instead of either making something up, or actually quoting us, then ignoring the quote to say teh smae thing over and over again.

1- Right and 2- Right 3- Right too.

M.

StyLaZyn wrote: The T wrote: [But you act like the Moral Righteousness Authority that has come here to show us that that is wrong because...you say so???     DUDE!!!  You're confusing him with me.

Edited by The T - July 31 2007 at 17:03

Yawn , reply To the Mr. T post (just in case)

Edited by mgallard - July 31 2007 at 17:03