Exciting News: New sister site for METAL online !

ExittheLemming wrote: Perish the thought that I infer something that you ain't implied but are you saying that you consider all the metal sub genres on PA as not 'real' prog ? If so, then what are they doing here ? (or is PA perhaps guilty of just 'keeping up with the Joneses' as you state ?) Apologies for being so abrasive (I'm old and Scottish, a deadly cocktail) but despite Max's protestations to the contrary earlier in the thread, this new website represents for me, a tacit admission that the 3 metal sub genres on PA have no business being there (even post/math rock is borderline IMO) and are probably the source of some of the fiercest and infantile bickering that has on occasion sullied/energised the forums. (Apart from the arguments I start obviously )

Apologies for chopping off the rest of your post, Iain, but I hate unnecessary quote pyramids. Personally, I don't believe the creation of MMA is an admission of anything - neither do I believe that the bickering on PA has ever been solely caused by the existence of Prog-Metal. I remember very nasty arguments concerning the addition and/or presence of artists that have absolutely nothing to do with metal (like Dead Can Dance or The Decemberists, or Radiohead before them), or even the merits of ELP. I have been a member of PA for longer than you have, and remember seeing the tail end of the so-called ELP wars. You are far too smart to fall into the trap of mistaking your own tastes (which are legitimate, of course) with fact... Scrap the whole of the three PM subgenres, and you'll see people getting at each other's throats in order to prove that Band X should retire, or that Y is a better player than W.

We could of course go the other way Mr. Lemming - and include all the genres Lucas was kind enough to list into PA ;-)

If you'd prefer that :-)

Dean wrote: ExittheLemming wrote: Dean wrote: I don't see a problem. The reviews across both sites will be different as the PA reviews should have a Prog bias and I would imagine that the MMA reviews will have a Metal bias. It may reduce the volume of PM bands added here as the bulk of the eval/additions effort will be put into the metal site, but I see no reason/point in scrapping PM from here completely. Prog Metal will always be Prog to me. A 'prog bias' would only be required/countenanced if the artist was either in Prog Related, Proto or at a pinch Crossover surely ? The reviews will have a bias, not the artists/albums. You can review "Invisible Touch" with a Prog bias or a Pop bias and the rating will reflect that.

I understand that perfectly Dean but the reviewer will only feel they might exercise such a bias for specific reasons:

1 - A Prog artist making an album that could be considered contrary to or out-with an agreed progressive style (like you say a Pop album that if reviewed on a Pop site would not be requiring of any
'Prog/Jazz/Cajun/Skiffle/Calypso' bias)
This dovetails into another niggle of mine that if say, the Osmonds made just one fully fledged Prog album, their entire discography is admitted. (but I've already posted on Prog Related and Proto on a per album basis before and I admit, it's not relevant for someone like Genesis)

2 - An artist classified as 100% Prog but in reality is tantamount to a sub genre of Metal. Here the bias of the prog reviewer is effectively created by PA placing the artist in what is IMO the wrong 'slot'

I'm not tying to undermine the new site cos if ya loves metal, it's probably hog heaven and I wish it every success (shame I don't like metal but... hey ho)

ExittheLemming wrote: Dean wrote: ExittheLemming wrote: Dean wrote: I don't see a problem. The reviews across both sites will be different as the PA reviews should have a Prog bias and I would imagine that the MMA reviews will have a Metal bias. It may reduce the volume of PM bands added here as the bulk of the eval/additions effort will be put into the metal site, but I see no reason/point in scrapping PM from here completely. Prog Metal will always be Prog to me. A 'prog bias' would only be required/countenanced if the artist was either in Prog Related, Proto or at a pinch Crossover surely ? The reviews will have a bias, not the artists/albums. You can review "Invisible Touch" with a Prog bias or a Pop bias and the rating will reflect that. I understand that perfectly Dean but the reviewer will only feel they might exercise such a bias for specific reasons: 1 - A Prog artist making an album that could be considered contrary to or out-with an agreed progressive style (like you say a Pop album that if reviewed on a Pop site would not be requiring of any 'Prog/Jazz/Cajun/Skiffle/Calypso' bias) This dovetails into another niggle of mine that if say, the Osmonds made just one fully fledged Prog album, their entire discography is admitted. (but I've already posted on Prog Related and Proto on a per album basis before and I admit, it's not relevant for someone like Genesis) 2 - An artist classified as 100% Prog but in reality is tantamount to a sub genre of Metal. Here the bias of the prog reviewer is effectively created by PA placing the artist in what is IMO the wrong 'slot' I'm not tying to undermine the new site cos if ya loves metal, it's probably hog heaven and I wish it every success (shame I don't like metal but... hey ho)

It is difficult to make any viable parallels or analogies here - Invisible Touch was a bad example because I wasn't paying attention - it's not a Prog album.

It think it is much easier to say what it metal than what is prog.

If you don't even know what is metal, please go away 

Edited by The T - March 31 2010 at 11:26

Tool.

prompts three questions:

Epignosis wrote: Dean wrote: prompts three questions:   who said it's name-calling? who says it's inappropriate? who is this intolerant "we" you are referring to? Prompts a fourth: Where's yer sense of humor man?    And yes, I said humor.  No U.

In exactly the same place yors is

That was British Humour that I got.  Maybe there is hope for me.