Do PA proggers have the right prog balance?

Brilliant tracks. Definately prog too

Snow Dog wrote: Either Dr Prog is trolling or just taking the piss. Ignore him is best.

I don't think he understands the internet enough to troll.  Pretty sure he's just genuinely a raving looney.

infandous wrote: Dr. Prog appears to be having a conversation with himself, for all that he seems to care or pay attention to the replies. We have thoroughly established that he is not only a troll, but a troll with very little understanding of music, let alone what makes great prog music. But I did get a good laugh from the harsh but funny responses he elicited.  A pointless thread to sate his obviously over inflated ego.  And I'm being nice here.

dennismoore wrote: A few pages back I posted as having an interest in this thread as I liked its premise.  I don't think the ratings here on PA are objective either, and I thought this was one of the few threads in this place that really went to the heart of progressive music.

I'd really like to hear your proposal on how to make our ratings objective. 

dennismoore wrote: Epignosis wrote: because a certain someone (namely, you), has not reviewed them (or anything else, for that matter).    Now hold on a dog-gone minute hoss.   I just had a PM conversation with somebody else about a certain "somebody else"(that would be you.) who was very kind and sent me a link to download his recent record(yours).  I promised to review it after I have had time to listen to it at least twice.  I heard it once, I have no time for hearing music because I have a toddler at home, that was a miracle, beleive me. So as soon as I can hear it some more I will be honored to post a review of it.   I will review it but the truth be known, I am a little afraid.  There are some real ruffians around here and I hope they don't attack me too hard when I do put out said review.   But you gave me a great idea.  Perhaps I should review Glass Hammer - If and Mystery - One Among The Living. I need to get out my old typewriter and see if I can find a fresh ribbon.

I have two toddlers, a baby on the way, and 64 students.  And I still indulge in my music addiction! 

Seriously though, don't be nervous about what others will think when you review something.  Getting hate PMs for having a controversial opinion is like badges of honor. 

At least I know I bring traffic to the site.  One person actually joined PA just to send me a nasty PM because of a review I had posted. 

Epignosis wrote: dennismoore wrote: A few pages back I posted as having an interest in this thread as I liked its premise.  I don't think the ratings here on PA are objective either, and I thought this was one of the few threads in this place that really went to the heart of progressive music. I'd really like to hear your proposal on how to make our ratings objective.

I would too.  It's a topic that has long interested me, though more with film reviews with "star" ratings.  I used to feel that star should be abolished altogether, by the way.

I feel like a hypocrite talking about this stuff, since although I did write some film reviews, I have barely reviewed music since I don't feel like I have enough knowledge when it comes to music theory or as musician to write anything half-decent.  Although ratings are going to have a significant and inherent subjectiveness about them, I think one can rate to an extent within fairly objective frameworks of analysis (that framework should be spelled out in the review).  I have rated strictly according to my tastes here other than when I made some reviews and tried to be a little more objective (more objective within certain stated parameters). I might rate an album 5 where I don't find all the tracks that great if there is music there that I find so good that I find the album utterly essential.  I love Geinoh Yamashirogumi's Osorezan album particularly for the A side, but if I reviewed and rated it, I would be forced to factor in the B side more (mind you, that would be subjective evaluation still, so it's not simple).

Especially when it comes to live performances, I feel that one's rating can reflect how well something was recorded, and how well it was played (were there mistakes).  Additionally, one often can rate based on compositional skills from a compositional standpoint if one takes into account the artists' stated intent from a fairly objective standpoint beyond just if one likes it.  A very analytical critique is more likely to generate a more objective (within one's possibly subjective framework I concede) rating.

Some opinions are more valid than others. If the review illustrates a good understanding of music theory and technique, the reviewer is clearly knowledgeable about the musical idiom/ style/ scene that the music comes from, and can compare it to similar works, and place it in a historical context, then it seems to me much more likely that there will be more objectivity when it comes to the rating as well as the review than with someone who is not familiar with the style, doesn't know the artist's other works, and works by related ones, to compare it to, is not familiar with the influences, has limited familiarity with music etc.  If one doesn't get the music and has not become acclimated to the idiom, it's harder to even try to be somewhat objective.

There are albums I think underrated by individuals who clearly lack the context, the experience, and the taste to judge the works in more than a very superficial and subjective manner.  I'm fine with people rating based solely on taste, but if it comes from someone that is unfamiliar with the style/scene, or just hates that style of music, then that rating will be of less value to me and is likely to be based on more blatantly subjective reasons.  I come across reviews which are factually inaccurate as well.  We all have our biases, of course.

I once suggested, though I'm really not keen on the idea as I don't think it would work well, that instead of just the one rating box to tick off, PA utilise various ratings boxes for each album (progfreak does that), and then the average rating could be calculated based on various criteria.  I don't remember the criteria I had before, but something like: 1. enjoyment; 2. how it compares to similar ones of its style; 3. how it compares to others by the band (if heard); 4. innovation/ progressiveness/creativity; 5. familiarity with the style, and additionally a box which states roughly how many times they have listened to the album, which needn't factor into the rating, or something like that to help the raters to think about more than just how much they like it but to consider the album's context (how it relates to others of similar style).

dennismoore wrote:   I will review it but the truth be known, I am a little afraid.  There are some real ruffians around here and I hope they don't attack me too hard when I do put out said review.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: dennismoore wrote:   I will review it but the truth be known, I am a little afraid.  There are some real ruffians around here and I hope they don't attack me too hard when I do put out said review.   Not at all, when i reviewed and rated  Tales From Topographic Oceans (Two Stars) I expected a furious attack that never happened, Iván

That's only because I never read about this substandard 2 star disgracing of the great Tales From Topographic Oceans.

Katie bar the door, this is gonna get ugly!      

Dean wrote: Hmmm... *dons his semi-serious hat*   Well, no, not really. Ratings are subjective, even those that purport to be objective will always have a subjective bias, we are assessing a relative quality that has no absolutes - they are indefinable in absolute objective terms because they contains emotion and feeling in with the highly unacedemic and purely subjective measures of musicianship and composition (we are not judging bad music here - bad music is rare and often a joy to behold, and most of us are unqualified to assess musicianship and composition objectively) - it is never about absolute objectiveness, (in case you missed the bulletin) it's about relative popularity... it's what you like and what lots of other people like too - underrated and unappreciated just means it's not that popular, it doesn't mean everyone else thinks it stinks.   From my time here I have learnt that most Prog Metal fans have a better understanding and appreciation of Prog (both classic and modern) than (pure) Prog fans do of metal (either Prog Metal or just metal in general). As a member of the geriatric crowd, I like to think I can appreciate both in equal measures so I can't see that as a youth-thang. And looking at the charts I can't say I see an overriding bias towards metal ... what have we got? Opeth Still Life at 34 and Dream Theater Images and Words at 44 - not really threatening the almost exclusively Trad Prog of the top 20 are they.   So, is the OP a lunatic? Mr... Real Name: Not Given...! Okay let's call him Tim, it's so much more informal and friendly than Dr (which I think that is a mail-order doctorate anyway.. $30 off eBay) Prog (who has an "odd" perception of Progressive Rock, even for someone as open-minded as I)... 'twas an ill-fitting nom de plume if ever there was one, Tim is more apt methinks... He's not a lunatic, he's a very naughty boy. He's found a few artists he really likes and thinks everyone will like them just as much as he does. So when they don't then obviously everyone is to blame - their crime of this century is liking other artists and albums just a bit more and the rationale for that is they just haven't listened well enough or do not appreciate melody or some other plucked-from-the-ether reason that is based upon nothing more than a wild stab in the dark.   Sure there are better other forums to discuss politics or religion or sexual preference but question whether they are better - those places are full of Prog-hating arses whose opinions are ten-a-penny and barely worth the admission fee. Their opinions do not interest me, the opinions of fellow proggers do, even those I disagree with.

After reading such a well composed reply, though I can't decipher the underlying logic in most of this, I will admire and compliment on the style of your writing.  It is enjoyable if not cryptic in its own way.  Before I continue with a reply, one question please:

Is this the Tim you are referring to?