Progressive vs. Prog ... the revised theory

The recent additions and discussions (Metallica, Miles Davis, Herbie Hancock, Steely Dan) got me thinking again about a theory that I developed a few months ago. On this website - and most others - only one criterium is used to describe the prog status of a band or album ... it's either less or more prog. Unfortunately reality is much more complex than that. The solution that I came up with attempts to make those discussions more manageable by introducing two different criteria:

1. Progressive Approach (is it truly progressive)
2. Prog Style (does it sound like established prog rock/metal music)

The idea is that for each album/artist we try to determine whether it meets those two criteria independently of each other, and then establish rules based on those findings.

Please have a look at this diagram:



The dashed line symbolises the threshold between what we could add as prog related at best (to the left of the dashed line) and the music we could add as prog (to the right of the dashed line). It is angled a bit because we tend to give the more progressive music a bonus ... of course some people would not do that. Some others might also decide to angle it even more, so that the most progressive music out there would not have to be in any prog style to be added. And of course some demand a threshold in the other domain (progressive approach) as well. BTW: The albums which I put in the diagram are only meant to be examples to illustrate the general principle ... of course you could put those bands anywhere you think they belong.

Now ... am I totally "out there" or can some of you see some sense in this?


Edited by MikeEnRegalia - August 24 2008 at 13:21

Waste of time and energy...  all this effort to demonstrate what?

Is music, you should enjoy it whatever is prog or not.

 

chaos8619 wrote: Waste of time and energy...  all this effort to demonstrate what? Is music, you should enjoy it whatever is prog or not.

No-one would argue with your second sentence, but I'd hope everyone would take issue with your first. We're human because we ask questions. How can such analysis be worthless?

I don't know...

I think, no matter, whatever kind of diagram you draw, it all will remain too subjective anyway. First, everyone will argue indefintely, whether an album has a prog-touch or prog-style...  Then where to put an album what must not belong neither to prog nor to related? Into that small lower left angle? then we'll have to add abut 60% of world's recorded output I think..

And... Hope Metalica will never be added.... Unless they turn Post Rock

Anyway nice try to sum up the things, can agree in som of the aspects.

This is a good theory. A lot of bands that get a lot of controversy seem to end up in the upper-left hand corner, which is why people don't think they belong here.

I think it is an excellent idea, but a personal one - i.e. it is an idea we each can all use (probably already do if we stop & think about it too long....) but with our own parameters and limits - all of us carry our own personal model of what constitutes Prog Style and Prog Approach, where the boundaries lie and either whether the axis are linear or logarithmic. Therefore I don't think it cannot be used as a general panacea to all our ills, but it is one that each of us can adapt to our own needs.

russellk wrote: Not 'out there' at all. This diagram is an excellent tool in helping people see the factors involved in answering the age-old question "What is Prog?" Of course, individuals will argue that the dashed lines should be at different angles or further away from the axes, or even that one axis or the other ought not to exist. But I think it expertly summarises the conditions that exist on PA at present. Congratulations, Mike. I hope it enjoys a better fate than my venn diagram!

I really liked your venn diagram ... but I guess it was a bit too technical, just like this idea.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: topofsm wrote: This is a good theory. A lot of bands that get a lot of controversy seem to end up in the upper-left hand corner, which is why people don't think they belong here. Good point. There simply are those who care much more about the progressiveness than the actual style of the music, and those which care mostly about the style, or at least see a "compatible" style as an absolute "must". I guess it's impossible to combine those two points of views with a rigid genre system in which a band is either "prog", "prog-related/proto prog" or "not prog". There are basically two alternatives: Either add them and live with constant complaints from those who don't agree with the style, or don't add them and live with the constant complaints from those who don't mind the style.   The only thing is that is there are bands like Meshuggah that sound NOTHING like Close to the Edge or Foxtrot and would belong only in the most upper-left part of the graph, past the dotted line, yet people don't have a problem with them here. I don't know ... there was major resistance when they got added. So far most of the controversial additions caused a lot of complaints shortly after the addition went through, but the forum quickly returned back to normal after a few weeks.   Also, if there's any band that sounds as proggy like CTTE or Foxtrot, but doesn't revolutionize music or do anything new to be progressive, they don't get very much debate, they seem to belong here just fine. So I beleive that the lines should definetely be at a much sharper angle. This problem is addressed by how I implement it on my website ... I'm not asking people to draw those lines, I'm asking them where to place the music (left/right/top/bottom). That way all the assignments can be combined easily, as they already contain those subjective differences.

good thesis Mike, I'm not big on systems but this one is broad and flexible enough to be applied

^ let me give you an example of how this works by assigning tags:

We use a range from 0 to 10 for each tag (progressive approach, prog style), 4 is the threshold for related, 6 is the threshold for "full" (top/right sector).

Using this schema, I would submit the following values:

Meshuggah - Destroy Erase Improve: 6/4
Metallica - Master of Puppets: 6/2
Dream Theater - Images and Words: 6/8
Dream Theater - Octavarium: 4/8
Queensryche - Operation: Mindcrime: 2/4
Genesis - Foxtrot: 10/10
Art Metal - Art Metal: 8/2
GY!BE - LYSFLATH: 6/2
Radiohead - Kid A: 8/2
Radiohead - OK Computer: 6/4
Iron Maiden - Powerslave: 2/4
Queen - Queen 2: 8/6
...

You disagree with those values? I hope so ... but the more people join in assigning the values, the more accurate the system can be in modelling the general opinion on the question.

Now imagine that we all would submit tags like that for our favorite albums (ideally: to all albums we know, as we listen to them for the purpose of reviewing). I think that the results would be very interesting, and it's not much work.

The cool thing is: As soon as those tags have been submitted, users could choose between different modes. For some - as you said above - a high progressive approach value is sufficient for listing something as prog, regardless of the style. For others the style is the most important thing. And there are those who demand both a progressive approach and a prog style. All that can be taken into account by the system.