Revolutionise the site

As I've mentioned in another thread, IMHO, current "progressive rock subgenre categories" in PA are existing roughly for every fan who tries to research his/her taste or fondness, not for us to give a place strictly to a progressive rock artist.

The most important matter for Collabs belonging to subgenre teams is, to make a decision whether a candidate can be thought as progressive firstly, and whether he/she/they can be fit for a subgenre (and no problem if not completely) secondly.

Music leans itself on continuity ... no one here cannot classify it strictly / completely. As other collabs have said they love the current classification, I'm fond of this roughness and flexibility in the current classification of subgenres in PA.

^^ I would have to whole-heartedly agree as well as I said before, if some extra flexibility is required then limited band-tagging could be the solution

I think things work generally pretty well around here. While I understand that many bands have evolved and moved on from some of the sub-genre’s they emerged from, whether they like it or not they are mostly associated with those original genres. I think it helps newcomers exploring an artist for the first time understand where they came from, how they continued on and how they actually progressed. It’s a helpful way in for brand new listeners. Perhaps the bios of bands could be updated over time to mention how the artist has evolved. I think this already happens from time to time.

I don't understand why others have to be so ashamed to have their band/artist linked to a sub-genre they feel is derogatory or insulting to them. I'm sorry, but `neo prog', `crossover prog' etc is not a reason to be offended, and none of the sub-genre's are designed to be a dumping ground for lesser artists. Every one of the existing sub-genres in place are truly warranted, and serve an important purpose.

On a personal note, if the RPI sub-genre were to be somewhat insultingly removed from the Archives, it would seriously lower the site's credibility...Despite some people having hang-up's and resentment over it's use, that sub-genre is recognized AROUND THE WORLD, not just solely for our site - we didn't patent it and create it ourselves, it's a recognized name and description for a particular type of progressive music that has so many original, defining and unique qualities, that's loved by so many people around the world. It was also well in place before the Archives came along. To dismiss it as merely `symphonic prog just sung in Italian' is hugely offensive and all but ignorant. In the 23+ years of collecting progressive music, I've lost count of the amount of RPI albums that sound NOTHING like symphonic albums from the rest of the world. But that's not really what this thread is about, so I'll let that go for now.

Prog Archives is in a hugely valuable position where it is. Don't know if anyone else has noticed, but if you do a general search for a progressive rock artist/album, more often than not the first Google result will be an Archives listing. We have such a wide exposure for our music, and it didn't happen accidently. Through hard work, dedicated Prog aficionados keeping up the quality and content of the site, we've helped contribute to making it the defining progressive rock resource on the internet, and that is through maintaining the system that works so well now. The team bashing/dismissals and personal hang-ups about nagging little unimportant issues that pop up from time to time only risk to ruin the good work and good will of a terrific group of people who are passionately devoted to our favourite musical genre, who work towards keeping up the integrity and status our site has.

Edited by Aussie-Byrd-Brother - January 17 2013 at 17:41

Thanks again for all the comments. Actually, much of this debate has also spilled over into the neo debate on the prog music lounge, so I am going to take my time over the weekend to pull much of the debates together, and then make some suggestions on the back of it.

I've only been a regular here for about a year, so I've held my thoughts to myself until now.  I like how the discussion is going, though.  I am personally undecided on what I would want to do.  I guess what it comes down to is -- a) is the current system really that unmanageable, and b) are the alternatives any more manageable.  By the way I phrased this, you can probably tell that my gut reaction to both is "no", but then again, I really haven't experienced the same frustrations as many more seasoned collabs and other site users have.

With a solution like album-tagging, I can also see a potential for a bunch of new problems associated with that option, even as the current problems are solved.  As for slimming down the number of subgenres, I really have no opinion on that, I don't feel particularly strongly about such labels anyway (other than as a convenience), though Jim's early comment about his team's dedication to RPI really moved me, and I imagine other teams feel a certain pride and ownership of their little specialty areas.

So I don't have a whole lot to contribute to the discussion, it's just that from my perspective, there really isn't a big enough problem to warrant the huge effort it would take to overhaul the system, in favor of a new system with all its inherent flaws.  (Is there a perfect system?  I can't think of one, that's why this topic is so thought-provoking).

I do applaud lazland for starting this discussion and inviting exchange of ideas among everyone, as well as collating and synthesizing our thoughts and ideas.  I'm always very impressed by how dedicated so many of us are to this site.

Warthur wrote: equally I think there are less than we often make out to be (Crossover and Eclectic prog, for instance, are manifestly inventions of this site designed as catch-all categories for the albums which fall between the cracks). I also agree with lazland that it can take unacceptably long for some major new releases to be added to the site, and that being anal about subcategories is a major contributor to the delay. I say that if there's an album which is clearly some variety of prog, it should be added to the site, and if the subgenre teams take too long about deciding where it has to go someone needs to step in and just assign a genre to it.

1)  Yes, that was indeed the purpose of Eclectic and Xover--  to accommodate bands that may fall between cracks.   What's your objection to that?   It serves the purpose for which you seem concerned: making sure prog artists are added to PA.

2)  Unacceptably long to add major releases?   Then, if they've been officially released, add those releases yourself.   As far as I know any member is still allowed to add any proper release of a band that appears on PA.

Atavachron wrote: Warthur wrote: equally I think there are less than we often make out to be (Crossover and Eclectic prog, for instance, are manifestly inventions of this site designed as catch-all categories for the albums which fall between the cracks). I also agree with lazland that it can take unacceptably long for some major new releases to be added to the site, and that being anal about subcategories is a major contributor to the delay. I say that if there's an album which is clearly some variety of prog, it should be added to the site, and if the subgenre teams take too long about deciding where it has to go someone needs to step in and just assign a genre to it. 2)  Unacceptably long to add major releases?   Then, if they've been officially released, add those releases yourself.   As far as I know any member is still allowed to add any proper release of a band that appears on PA.

I don't think the crossover tag should be "reductive" (?)

Well, there has been quite a lot of debate around both the post I initiated here, and the neo post Lucas initiated in the Prog Lounge. This is my initial response. I will post, probably tomorrow now, some suggestions, but I wanted to clarify a few things in this post.

^ but the whole point is that we don't have genres, only have sub-genres, prog is the genre, and this is why I feel reluctant about reducing the numbers - sub-genres indicating some special characteristics, not necessary setting artists in stone of one sub or another