New subgenres?!?!

I agree with the division of the Art Rock sub-genre, but I think we should discuss the sub-genres name, by now it sound more like a description than a real name.

Angelo wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: BTW: Tell me one Prog site (respectable of course) that doesn't use sub.genres, Well ... my website kind of qualifies, since you can use it not caring for sub genres at all (you can browse it using base genres only). But you do allow them to be specified Besides, you can do the same on PA, by just using the alphabetical index.

What I meant is that on my website you can browse by base genre ... you can list all prog rock albums, all prog metal albums, all prog-related jazz stuff, all non-prog pop etc.. ... but you can also list specific sub genres like RIO, Krautrock, Sludge Metal etc. or even narrow it down to "Experimental Pop", "Atmospheric Sludge" or "Prog-Related Hip-Hop". Anything goes!


Edited by MikeEnRegalia - August 21 2007 at 18:25

^^^ There's a thread in the collab session about it. Avant-prog is another genre that is in need of splitting, but it's better to keep it secret. 

But the first and foremost reason subgenres exist is to acquaint the uninitiated to a broad form of music. Tags can do the same thing. In fact,  tags can include subgenre names and more, so they're more versatile than simple subgenres.

Sean Trane wrote: What I don't get is that the name Art Rock was to disappear. It wasn't supposed to be that way!!! I thought that all three genres where to be called Art Rock and then have Heavy , Eclectic and Crossover coming after it!   As in Art Rock/heavy Prog Art Rock/Eclectic and Art Rock/Crossover

I also help it will turn out like this Hugues, I think that losing the "Art Rock" tag completely would be a prejudice,  "Art rock" is history and we need to find a way to deal with it (the tag, not the history ).
BTW I was fine with Art Rock; it sounded cool and, although it had it's faults like being very vast and many bands within it sounding totally different, it had one major advantage which we overlooked: it did fit all those bands, a thing I find important and which is now less likely to happen. We may have open a can of worms; what I mean is that for example I had in mind some bands for addition into Art Rock, where they could fit perfectly, but now, the more I think, I can't find them a place in either Crossover/Eclectic/Heavy! The new categories are more specific and narrower, and my feeling is that there are  consequently many bands that simply do not fit these new narrow categories, which would lead to making some new categories to fit those bands... which would lead to further more categories... which would go ad infinitum... which is definitely not something the site needs.
I'm not complaining, just trying to give some hints; IMO what I described could be avoided by tagging the categories like Hugues suggested. I support the Art Rock team and I'm sure it's all for the better.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:   BTW: Mike, in your site you can create labels, Tags, Moods, Sub Genres, etc ad infinitum, so your site doesn't qualify. Iván

Well, you *can* assign a dozen tags to an album but you don't have to ... and even when people assign many tags to an album, other users can still browse the general tags. My site adapts to the user ... although it still looks too complicated (but I'm working on that).

I would like to know why all the art-rock bands were placed under crossover for the time being?   I know they are all going to get moved eventually, but why not just place them all in eclectic prog instead. It would seem less would have to be moved that way, not to mention making the site look better overall. 

memowakeman wrote: I know there are a lot of things to do with this new genres, but please someone move Paatos from heavy Prog, why are they in Heavy prog? Could someone explain this  please?

Sckxyss wrote: Excellent.. now, how about breaking the geography barrier and combining Italian symphonic and other symphonic into one   Many of the canterbury scene bands could also be put into one of the other genres based on their music style, not location.

I definitely agree that Italian sympho is not a necessary category on the site, but I'm not so sure about Canterbury.  They're a mix between Fusion and what we now call Crossover, and so they wouldn't really be a comfortable fit in fusion, and they would be an awful fit in crossover. 

MadcapLaughs84 wrote: Could the bands just be placed in the same category (Art Rock) until you, Collaborators, agree with the definitions, genre names and the bands that should be included.   I think this sudden change caused a little mess, but it's for good.