Ratings based on progressiveness?

JLocke wrote: Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:   The second question is: Is Who's Next a great addition for a PROG collection?...I answer: It's a great addition for a MUSIC or ROCK collection, but not necesarilly for a Progressive Rock Collectio, because I don't know if every Prog fan will like it.   Well, not ever prog fan likes Pink Floyd music, either. But Pink Floyd is almost universally considered ''Prog''. So, you're still in danger of not lining up your opinion with everyone, because, well, it's not even possible. The purpose of the review is to express your own opinion of something, and for me, it should be regardless of genre.

thellama73 wrote: it isn't proggy enough. If it isn't prog, it shouldn't be on the site in the first place, but in any case I will mention that in the body of the review. So there!

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - August 01 2010 at 22:29

Chris S wrote: ^ No but I would not have different music collections littered throughout my house just because someone deems what is prog or what is jazz etc? I mean would you have the Who in a different room? I have Duran Duran Rio in my music collection for example under D, near Dixie Dregs I am actually being silly now, but i respect your opinion so will bow out gracefully

I can relate to the original question posed here - but it seems fair to allow for this. If a perceived lack of progginess, or perhaps an "ordinary" sound is what made the reviewer enjoy the disc less, then so be it a lesser rating. Someone else might take off a star for a mastering issue if they are an audiophile, while others might believe that the music itself is what should be reviewed. It's hard to say what is a superficial quality to one listener or another (except maybe for really non-music related things such as packaging, cover art, failure to include lyrics, etc. - it would be kind of lame to take off stars for these things)...

jplanet wrote: I can relate to the original question posed here - but it seems fair to allow for this. If a perceived lack of progginess, or perhaps an "ordinary" sound is what made the reviewer enjoy the disc less, then so be it a lesser rating. Someone else might take off a star for a mastering issue if they are an audiophile, while others might believe that the music itself is what should be reviewed. It's hard to say what is a superficial quality to one listener or another (except maybe for really non-music related things such as packaging, cover art, failure to include lyrics, etc. - it would be kind of lame to take off stars for these things)...

I haven't posted reviews on PA for a while, but I write regularly for another site, and I can tell you that the reason why I take off stars (or half-stars, since we use them on Progressor) are generally the following, in no particular order:

a) weakness at the compositional level, especially as regards lack of cohesiveness in the song structures;
b) when vocals are present, vocals that are not up to scratch (very frequent);
c) bad overall sound quality/poor recording;
d) overt derivativeness (I have reviewed my share of clones of any given prog band, old and new).

Of course, a lot comes down to personal taste, but, when you have to review albums you are not familiar with, you learn to be objective. In any case, since on Progressor we get to review a lot of stuff that is not conventionally 'prog', docking stars because of that is generally not an issue. However, in the past couple of months I have given a very low rating to an album because it had nothing to do with the purposes of the site - it was basically elevator music sounding at times like the soundtrack to a Seventies softcore movie.

jplanet wrote: I can relate to the original question posed here - but it seems fair to allow for this. If a perceived lack of progginess, or perhaps an "ordinary" sound is what made the reviewer enjoy the disc less, then so be it a lesser rating. Someone else might take off a star for a mastering issue if they are an audiophile, while others might believe that the music itself is what should be reviewed. It's hard to say what is a superficial quality to one listener or another (except maybe for really non-music related things such as packaging, cover art, failure to include lyrics, etc. - it would be kind of lame to take off stars for these things)...

I honestly don't take stars for recording, Nursery Cryme's production sucks, but the music is outstanding.

Dean wrote:   The review guidelines make it very clear that voicing an opinion on a band addition in a review is not permitted - regardless of how honest you think you are being.

Tacky and bad form.  Once an artist is admitted review them for their own merits whether you consider them prog or not.  Feel free to ignore them if you don't think they belong here.  Progressiveness is extremely subjective.  Granted it is one of those things that some of us have a lot of fun dicussing.

Dean wrote:   In this thread you have said "The Who shouldn't be here at all(IMO of course)" ... that is an opinion regarding the addition of a band that you disagree with made in the forum - in a thread that is not about The Who, or Proto Prog,

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Dean wrote:   In this thread you have said "The Who shouldn't be here at all(IMO of course)" ... that is an opinion regarding the addition of a band that you disagree with made in the forum - in a thread that is not about The Who, or Proto Prog,   I know hat as usual you will try to find contradictions, but this is not a  a normal case, I'm not asking for The Who to be fdeleted or protesting against them , I was just giving a specific example of how I believe it's correct to rate a non Prog album according to our systemn and following the guidelines..   And obviously you know it's not a normal case because you say "in a thread that is not about The Who, or Proto Prog" the problem would had been if I started a thread about The Who not belonging here (or joined another), but as you well know it's not the case, I explained why I can give 3 stars to a non-prog album acording to the guidelines.   And about my honesty, I don't think I'm honest, I'm an hopnest person and you don't have reasons to doubt this.   Iván

I have got to say I love you guys  If  ever we needed a crack team of lawyers, you guys would not miss a trick.