Artists considered prog on here but not elsewhere

Hi,

Well, not sure about the bills, but it certainly helped add up the money in the coffers!

Taunting is, for me, tough ... me taunting DE because of Ian and JT is the same as he taunting me about AD2. It gets nowhere in 3 seconds flat before you type anything. And tomorrow another innocent fan adds another log to the fire that is still smoldering some, and it flares up all over again!

I do not dislike RUSH, however, when compared to the early "progressive" work and its time, place, and meaning, the band RUSH is not as valuable and important as many of the others. THAT is not to say they are not good and did not create good things ... they were excellent, and created many things that are remembered and still appreciated! Although I still say that they did not exactly stand up to the prime examples of progressive music, though their work deserves, at least, a prog-related something or other.

The tough issue is that this is all done by ALBUM and this needs to be changed to ARTIST so that we at the very least appreciate the artist's work in their ENTIRETY instead of just one song from one album! This would help define a lot of PROGRESSIVE music a lot better and take away the middling examples that don't make sense ... like calling a band "symphonic" simply because they have keyboards, and heck, even Pink Floyd is symphonic, so is Banco, and AD2 and Can or the Grateful Dead! But that designation has simply shown how little folks that "created it" don't know music history to create something that the music is not! And the band's next album is not either!

I think the re-definition, with music history in mind, makes a lot better sense and it would put PROGRESSIVE MUSIC in the MAP, instead of it being relegated to a bunch of folks that don't know music (geeks?) who are simply making it "known" that they dislike the classical music iron clad definitions that always hate new music! AND, of course, electric music has been hell on most orchestral anything, up to and including a synthesizer replacing whole parts of the orchestra, which makes it even worse for academia ... they know they are doomed, but 500 years of music history is not going down the tubes as fast as we think, and we need to wake up to that ... that some geeks think they know music better and call something "symphonic" when it has keyboards and they don't even know what the terms mean, specially when the album has 8 or 10 songs at about 4 minutes each ... so much for a "symphonic" idea, which was reserved for pieces that were much longer and better defined within music, which many geeks refuse to accept and work with!

Changes, are always, it seems, very unpopular. However, the changes that WORK and make sense, usually end up surviving the whole thing and make all of it stronger. I'm not sure that PA is doing that well, and tomorrow another website that does not like PA will create a new name for something or other within Progressive, and fans decide that it makes better sense than so much non-sense at PA. Those things happen in life, and you only have to look at your daughters and sons to see it, and shake your head ... it's their life and you can not change it!

I'm not sure it matters that one site has it and another doesn't. What matters is how each side arranges and defines their database and information. I think PA has undergone too many changes and too many people that had different ideas and tomorrow this band will be accepted as pre-post-alt-prog ... and here we go again, defining a piece of music that does not say anything about the actual music ... it might define a specific time and place, but you still don't know anything about its music!