How to define and classify "Progressive Rock"? - Progressive Rock Music Forum

David_D wrote:

...

One thing, we can agree on here, is that Mosh is "polluting" this thread. LOL

Hi,

Of course ... since you are the GOD of all things progressive, and your musings are so silly ... pollution is only bad when it destroys the idea ... I did not set out to destroy the idea ... it's the thoughts about it that are insane, and not on par with the history of progressive music whatsoever ... your "pollution" is likely more confused than the whole idea and concept of progressive works. You don't even recognize the artistic connections, specially to the early works, which help detail a lot of things ... and your idea and lack of cohesion on the subject of "progressive" anything, is astounding!

Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com

This feels like a good time for a sandwich.

----------
i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag
that's a happy bag of lettuce
this car smells like cartilage
nothing beats a good video about fractions

^Whoops! I think I mistook it for a sandwich. How long does it take for something to come out the other end?

----------
i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag
that's a happy bag of lettuce
this car smells like cartilage
nothing beats a good video about fractions

David_D wrote:

At this point of time, I'm most into that RYM's definition of Progressive Rock and their use of it (labeling) are the most authoritative ones.

Why do I think so? Well, not least because RYM today is definitely the most used site, also when talking about Progressive Rock alone, and PA being only a much smaller brother which can for instance be illustrated by something I've written in another thread:

"If want to compare PA with RYM with regard to numbers of Prog ratings in general, 156 albums have got at least 1000 ratings on PA,

while the same amounts to about 600 albums for RYM's "Progressive Rock" and "Progressive Metal" alone which stylistically seen

is a much narrower perspective than all the albums included on PA.

( https://rateyourmusic.com/charts/top/album/all-time/g:progressive-rock,progressive-metal/pop:5/ ) "

Methodic explanation:

David_D wrote:

A term, and not least in the world of art and music, will usually be defined and used in different ways. When considering which

definition to find the most important and influential, you have not least to look at which one is most used. That's at least

the typical logic of historians.

Anyway, considering the much growing of numbers of Progressive Rock ratings on RYM which shows to me much interest for

the genre, and the site's definition of the genre, I feel now definitely more at ease on behalf of Progressive Rock.

suitkees wrote:

Sorry, my obsession is probably to counter fallacies in reasoning, and I will probably come over as arrogant - which I probably am -, but let's play...

David_D wrote:

A term, and not least in the world of art and music, will usually be defined and used in different ways.

That's a platitude. Which is OK, but it is not saying anything, other than going counter to your obstination to privilege the RYM definition of Prog while dismissing PA's definition...

When considering which definition to find the most important and influential, you have not least to look at which one is most used. That's at least the typical logic of historians.

More than once I had the impression that you made statements in domains you clearly don't master. One of them is philosophy and now historiography. You clearly don't know anything about the "logic" of historians. Even in the natural sciences your statement might be much disputed, but I don't think there will be many historians adopting your populist ideology (because that's what it comes down to). It definitely is not the popularity of definitions that move forward the human sciences, but more their efficiency. In historiography there can be very specific definitions that are not used by many others but that still help us to better understand specific (historical) phenomena. Again, it is not about the popularity of a definition, it is about its efficiency and pertinence in order to better understand (and explain) what happened or what a phenomenon is about. And especially when we want to cut back (historical) phenomena to just one popular definition we will be doing a lot of injustice to both history and historiography.

Anyway, considering the much growing of numbers of Progressive Rock ratings on RYM which shows to me much interest for the genre, and the site's definition of the genre, I feel now definitely more at ease on behalf of Progressive Rock.

So now you're talking "on behalf" of Progressive Rock? But apart from that, it is another fallacy to think that from the number of RYM users you could conclude anything about the popularity of the definition of Progressive Rock RYM is giving - I don't think that the RYM users registered because of RYM's definition of Progressive Rock, let alone voted for it (or against it). Your extrapolations are creating realities that don't exist.

Actually, I think you can play better and more clean than this, Kees, but I guess the circumstances are not the best ones.

I wouldn't mind also to hear Lewian's opinion on the matter, but I guess there's the same problem.

Anyway, it was important for me to explain my present position concerning the definition of Progressive Rock, now I'm most into looking at PA as a site for Progressive Music.

Edited by David_D - September 30 2023 at 02:52

quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond