Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General Polls
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 5 stars for prog-related?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic Closed5 stars for prog-related?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Poll Question: Should ratings for prog-related material be capped at 4stars?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
6 [16.22%]
31 [83.78%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author
Message
Logan View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Forum Moderator

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Utopia
Status: Offline
Points: 12244
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 25 2009 at 21:48
Originally posted by Easy Money Easy Money wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:



Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by J-Man J-Man wrote:

Why shouldn't you be able to give a prog related album a 5? Just because it's not full-fledged prog doesn't mean it can't be a masterpiece.


For clarification for those too busy to look:

 

Essential: a masterpiece of rock music

Excellent addition to any rock music collection

Good, but non-essential

Collectors/fans only

Poor. Only for completionists

 

...Prog Related and Proto Prog albums are not rated as PROG albums so you can award 5-stars to Kate Bush's "The Kick Inside" with a clear conscience.

 

 

ClapClapClap
I have to say it.  I really don't like the change as it's limited to rock music. Why not get rid of the rock criterion?  One of my favourite albums in the archives is Miles Davis' Sketches of Spain, but that is not rock, so according to the guidelines I could only rate it 3 or under. Cry Non-rock music is not getting a fair shake.



Hold on Logan, anything can be a great addition to a rock or prog collection. Personally I think having some Sun Ra or Les Baxter is an excellent addition to any collection, rock, prog or otherwise, easy 4 stars. Can a Herbie Hancock album be a prog-rock masterpioece? I think if it uses electronic amplified instruments and amped drums, yes. If it is one of his more jazz albums, 4 is as high as she goes. In other words the incredible Speak Like a Child gets 4, but Crossings gets 5, although on a jazz site they would both get 5s. That's how I see it.


It strikes me as a a kind of stone-age rock elitism. ;)

But I'm fine with rating as you say.  I'd get rid of the rock descriptor from the categories, but...

Even if one does interpret it that way (and I think many would see it differently if they cared enough to care about the descriptions), it's totally unnecessary to have the rock descriptor, and could cause confusion. Aside from jazz, we have folk, as well as more academic music etc recordings.  More important to the ratings to me than getting rid of the word progressive from the Prog-Related and Proto ratings system would be getting rid of the word rock.  I wouldn't mind if it was masterpiece of progressive music.  Right now, for instance, with the changes to PR and PP (removing the word progressive) it looks to me like it's fine to rate non-Prog rock albums 5, but if it's non-Prog and non-rock albums I should not rate it so highly (I don't know how many non-rock albums there in those categories, but as way of example) .  I expect that others would see it the same way.  That to me seems wrong and misguided.  Instead of using miles Davis or ones included in Prog categories, it would've ben better for me to use an artist/band in Proto-Prog or Prog Related (though I don't like the rock criterion for ANY category --  Aranis ain't rock really even if it's included as RIO -- I still think it should be here as it has a rock influence and CAN rock).  A lot of Electronic Prog isn't exactly rock either.  Incidentally, at least Hancock's Crossings is true Prog I would say.

Okay. since Dean was talking specifically about Prog-Related artists and Proto-Prog ones, I should use some ones from those categories, but I'd have to think of non-rock album examples from those categories by bands that had a progressive rock (of whatever variety) phase.  *Looks through PP* Hmmm.... Should be quite few Prog Related and Proto Prog ones that didn't start out doing rock -- or rock and roll. (must be quite a few folk ones), but my brain is frazzled.

Anyway, no time for research, but I would say that early jazz albums of artists included here are essential to the jazz-rock fusion aficionado, but not essential to any rock collection, progressive or otherwise.  It's not really relevant to a rock collection because, it not being rock. it would not be part of the rock collection itself, even if it wiull be relevant to the lperson who has a rock collection.


Edited by Logan - August 25 2009 at 21:54
Back to Top
Man With Hat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Jazz-Rock/Fusion Team

Joined: March 12 2005
Location: Neurotica
Status: Offline
Points: 57820
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 25 2009 at 21:50
And really isn't this a progressive rock archives? Not a rock archives. I don't see how changing it to pure rock is any better for the site. Sure, you're not calling it prog (which is a good thing) in the rating area (and thus not calling it prog by rating either), but if this is truely a prog-rock resource shouldn't the prog play an important part in the rating given?
Dig me...But don't...Bury me
I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive
Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Status: Offline
Points: 33344
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 02:15

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

I have to say it.  I really don't like the change as it's limited to rock music. Why not get rid of the rock criterion?  One of my favourite albums in the archives is Miles Davis' Sketches of Spain, but that is not rock, so according to the guidelines I could only rate it 3 or under. Cry Non-rock music is not getting a fair shake.
The same could be said for Chamber music in ZART, most Electronic Prog and all the metal genres, not just JR/F. I'm sure people will make their own interpretation of the rating descriptors already for those artists - I don't see them being miss-rated because they're not Rock.

Originally posted by SentimentalMercenary SentimentalMercenary wrote:

Well then I'd like to point out that Bon Jovi made a 10mins song called Dry County which could legitimately be called prog by some. I guess you now see me coming with all those 5 stars Bon Jovi albums... Confused
 
 
 
If Bon Jovi ever get into the Archives then go ahead, however he/they won't be getting in just because they made a 10minute song. The criteria for inclusion won't change.
Originally posted by SentimentalMercenary SentimentalMercenary wrote:

Of course, but this is not the point !  The relevant question is if some prog-related albums are as good as the best prog albums...
 
In other words, could a Kate Bush album be as good as, say, Selling England by the Pound per this site's system of values?
Hounds of Love and Aerial probably get close to SEbtP for song structure, music-complexity and musicianship and surpass it in lyric-writing IMO. Those two albums could stand their ground as Prog albums anyway, so whether they are as "good" is purely personal preference.
Originally posted by Man With Hat Man With Hat wrote:

Now I just looked at a prog-related album...and it still has the prog in place. Confused
Which one?
 
Originally posted by Man With Hat Man With Hat wrote:

And really isn't this a progressive rock archives? Not a rock archives. I don't see how changing it to pure rock is any better for the site. Sure, you're not calling it prog (which is a good thing) in the rating area (and thus not calling it prog by rating either), but if this is truely a prog-rock resource shouldn't the prog play an important part in the rating given?

Do people take heed of the start-rating descriptions anyway? Do the people who rated Kind Of Blue with 4 and 5 stars really think it is Prog and Rock? What about all the people who rate Invisible Touch with 4 & 5 stars? If an artist only released one album, then can that album ever be awarded a 1-star rating or 2-star rating? Why do so many people think a 3-star rating means the album isn't that good? By the rating system 95% of the albums here should be "good but not essential"? How can anyone who is not expert in all the subgenres rate any album as 4 or 5 star? How can anyone who is not a "fan" of particular genre award a 1 or 2 star rating in that genre?

It is pretty clear that many, many people do not rate to the literal intepretation of the descriptions, but to whether they like the album or not.




If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
A Person View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 10 2008
Location: MI, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 63909
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 03:03
I don't usually choose music on PA according to the rating, I go buy number of votes, which usually is the highest rating anyway. I'm sure there is a lot of different criteria people have when reviewing an album, so the rating itself is ambiguous unless you read the review.
Back to Top
Logan View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Forum Moderator

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Utopia
Status: Offline
Points: 12244
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 03:36
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

[The same could be said for Chamber music in ZART, most Electronic Prog and all the metal genres, not just JR/F. I'm sure people will make their own interpretation of the rating descriptors already for those artists - I don't see them being miss-rated because they're not Rock.


Of course, Dean, and I mentioned Electronic Prog and Aranis, a chamber music group in avant, as examples in my post to John.  One can extend it to folk and various more "academic music" albums in the archives.  As for metal, I think of that as a sub-category of rock, but that's by-the-by.  Using Miles Davis' album was merely an example.  As I said in my last post, since it grew out of your mentioning the PP and PR ratings descriptions, as well as you mentioning removing progressive from all categories, I should really focus on those "less Prog" categories (though I still think that the rock reference is less than ideal when one has so much non-rock, or less rock, music in different categories).  I wish I hadn't used an example of an album of an artist in a Prog category, but it was the first to spring to mind.  I wouldn't rate Sketches of Spain with a five because it's not Prog (Progressive Rock) in any form.  Instead, I'd rate Miles Davis relevant albums higher.  If I were to rate a band in a Prog category's two albums, both I like equally but one is Progressive Rock and one rock but not Prog, I would rate the Prog one higher to highlight it.  The same rules likely would apply for me for it not being Prog as it not being rock at all.  Never mind the less rock categories for the examples as I think we would all take the nature of a category into account provided we're knowledgeable enough.  Not everyone understands that, though, so I think the descriptions should be as clear as possible.  We also have the issue that we don't all agree on what is Prog, or even Prog-related of course.

Basically, my problem is with being able to rate non-Prog music (as it's often referred to here) high even though it's not Prog (using the PP and PR categories as a guide), but it may appear to someone that if an album in, say, Prog Related, is not Prog (and I consider various albums there to be full-fledged Prog) one can rate it five, but if it's not only not Prog but not rock, one should rate it lower. 

Now, and I'm half-asleep, where I see a problem with thinking that, say, a non-Prog but rock or rock related, and a non-rock album of equal quality should be rated the same (if of equal perceived quality) is because it's far more likely that such a band would have got in on its rock albums -- therefore the rock one is more relevant to the site, and one will find the, at least, quasi-prog or proto prog traits in the rock album, since you can't have true Prog without the rock element (though that rock element need not be that strong or obvious).  I think we have a lot of rock-related music in Progressive Electronic.

Now let's imagine that we have a band in Prog-Related that started off pure country then went electric, and this is where I must illustrate an important flip-side to part of what I was thinking.  Taking the rating description literally

Ultimately, our ratings could be expected to reflect, to an extent, ion what we think could be of particular interest to those who use PA.  I consider Manset's Le Morte d'Orion (an artist in Prog Related) to be Prog, and even if I considered his later stuff to be equally good, I would not rate it as highly because I'd rather highlight the album that should be of interest to people here.

I understand the usefulness of keeping the rock descriptor -- to lessen more people from rating highly albums of the type that are not so relevant to the site, or their category -- for instance instance, a pure folk album with no rock elements in Prog Folk, but I still find it potentially misleading and not correct (exact) enough.  That there are categories where the rock element can be far less important in gaining inclusion for a band or artist only makes that feeling stronger.

Or something like that... Just thinking, and almost snoring, out loud.


Edited by Logan - August 26 2009 at 03:44
Back to Top
UMUR View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 2743
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 03:39
Anything added to PA deserves to be rated for its quality and not for how progressive it is. An inclusion on PA means that the artist has passed an evaluation test and therefore per PA definition is prog or prog related. That artist and the output of that artist should as a consequense of that inclusion be treated equal to everything else included on PA. Rate by quality and not level of progressiveness.
 
If thereīs something I loathe itīs to read reviews where people write that they are going to give a low rating because the album really isnīt prog or really doesnīt belong on PA because itīs not prog. If you feel that some prog-related album deserves a 5 star rating by all means give that album a  5 star rating. Just donīt abuse the 5 star ratings and give all albums you review 5 stars. Now thatīs common sense and normal respect for your fellow PA members.
Back to Top
b_olariu View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: March 02 2007
Location: Romania
Status: Offline
Points: 2832
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 06:22
No, 5 stars is also fair for prog-related material
 
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 29150
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 06:28
this seems a case about worrying about the temperature of the babies bath water...


after they have already sh*t in it...

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by CCVP CCVP wrote:

oh man, some people have A LOT of time in their hands

http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=22562
http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=22649
http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=23141
http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=23387
http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=23877
http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=23469
http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=22956
Yup - he's our Columbian drive-by masterrater
 
 
here's a small example of what we see in the Admin page when looking at one of his IP addresses ... he uses several:
Quote
R # USERNAME ALBUM TITLE RATE COMMENTS POST DATE IP
222762 guizoss Crime of the Century
SUPERTRAMP
1   6/23/2009 4:56:27 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222761 guizoss The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway
GENESIS
1   6/23/2009 4:55:42 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222759 guizoss Live At Pompeii
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:53:48 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222758 guizoss P-U-L-S-E
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:52:58 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222757 guizoss Live At Pompeii
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:52:00 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222756 guizoss A Momentary Lapse Of Reason
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:49:49 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222755 guizoss Division Bell
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:48:49 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222753 guizoss Final Cut, The
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:48:15 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222752 guizoss The Wall
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:47:33 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222750 guizoss Animals
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:45:57 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222748 guizoss Wish You Were Here
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:45:11 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222747 guizoss Dark Side Of The Moon
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:43:53 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222746 guizoss Obscured By Clouds
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:43:11 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222743 guizoss Meddle
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:41:51 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222740 guizoss Atom Heart Mother
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:39:06 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222739 guizoss Ummagumma
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:38:19 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222738 guizoss More
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:36:32 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222737 guizoss A Saucerful Of Secrets
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:35:54 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222736 guizoss The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn
PINK FLOYD
5   6/23/2009 4:34:37 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222187 jhonbeto Ricochet
TANGERINE DREAM
5   6/21/2009 4:40:31 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222185 jhonbeto Rubycon
TANGERINE DREAM
5   6/21/2009 4:36:40 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222183 jhonbeto Phaedra
TANGERINE DREAM
5   6/21/2009 4:31:41 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222182 jhonbeto The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway
GENESIS
1   6/21/2009 4:29:21 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222181 jhonbeto In a Glass House
GENTLE GIANT
1   6/21/2009 4:28:11 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222179 jhonbeto Live At Pompeii
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:20:48 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222178 jhonbeto P-U-L-S-E
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:17:15 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222172 jhonbeto Live At Pompeii
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:11:14 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222171 jhonbeto Division Bell
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:09:24 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222170 jhonbeto A Momentary Lapse Of Reason
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:08:19 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222169 jhonbeto Final Cut, The
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:07:41 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222168 jhonbeto The Wall
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:07:02 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222167 jhonbeto Animals
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:06:21 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222166 jhonbeto Obscured By Clouds
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:05:05 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222165 jhonbeto Meddle
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:03:00 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222164 jhonbeto Atom Heart Mother
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:02:20 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222163 jhonbeto Ummagumma
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:01:34 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222162 jhonbeto More
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:00:53 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222161 jhonbeto A Saucerful Of Secrets
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 4:00:09 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222160 jhonbeto The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 3:59:26 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222158 jhonbeto Dark Side Of The Moon
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 3:56:48 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222157 jhonbeto Wish You Were Here
PINK FLOYD
5   6/21/2009 3:56:03 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222050 liravega P-U-L-S-E
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 8:15:16 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222049 liravega Live At Pompeii
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 8:10:39 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222048 liravega Live At Pompeii
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 8:09:09 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222047 liravega Division Bell
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 8:07:58 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222046 liravega The Wall
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 8:06:00 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222045 liravega Animals
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 8:04:01 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222043 liravega Dark Side Of The Moon
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 8:01:05 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222042 liravega Meddle
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 7:59:35 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222041 liravega Atom Heart Mother
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 7:58:56 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222040 liravega Wish You Were Here
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 7:58:02 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222022 ariel777 P-U-L-S-E
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 5:32:01 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222018 ariel777 Stratosfear
TANGERINE DREAM
5   6/20/2009 5:23:20 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222017 ariel777 Rubycon
TANGERINE DREAM
5   6/20/2009 5:22:32 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222016 ariel777 Phaedra
TANGERINE DREAM
5   6/20/2009 5:21:55 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222015 ariel777 Equinoxe
JARRE, JEAN-MICHEL
5   6/20/2009 5:20:28 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222014 ariel777 Oxygene
JARRE, JEAN-MICHEL
5   6/20/2009 5:19:03 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222011 ariel777 Live At Pompeii
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 5:11:23 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222010 ariel777 Live At Pompeii
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 5:10:38 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222008 ariel777 The Wall
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 5:09:41 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222005 ariel777 Atom Heart Mother
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 5:07:01 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222003 ariel777 The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway
GENESIS
1   6/20/2009 5:03:05 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222002 ariel777 In a Glass House
GENTLE GIANT
1   6/20/2009 5:00:19 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222001 ariel777 Aqualung
JETHRO TULL
1   6/20/2009 4:59:04 PM EST 201.244.39.24
222000 ariel777 Meddle
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 4:55:42 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221999 ariel777 Animals
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 4:53:20 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221998 ariel777 In The Court Of The Crimson King
KING CRIMSON
2   6/20/2009 4:50:17 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221997 ariel777 Foxtrot
GENESIS
1   6/20/2009 4:45:37 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221996 ariel777 Thick As A Brick
JETHRO TULL
2   6/20/2009 4:42:51 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221995 ariel777 Dark Side Of The Moon
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 4:42:05 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221994 ariel777 Selling England By The Pound
GENESIS
2   6/20/2009 4:38:28 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221993 ariel777 Close To The Edge
YES
1   6/20/2009 4:32:29 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221992 ariel777 Wish You Were Here
PINK FLOYD
5   6/20/2009 4:29:03 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221868 newyorkcity Rubycon
TANGERINE DREAM
5   6/19/2009 7:16:23 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221867 newyorkcity Phaedra
TANGERINE DREAM
5   6/19/2009 7:15:41 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221866 newyorkcity Ricochet
TANGERINE DREAM
5   6/19/2009 7:14:21 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221865 newyorkcity The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway
GENESIS
1   6/19/2009 7:13:00 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221864 newyorkcity In a Glass House
GENTLE GIANT
1   6/19/2009 7:12:17 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221863 newyorkcity Aqualung
JETHRO TULL
1   6/19/2009 7:11:35 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221862 newyorkcity Meddle
PINK FLOYD
5   6/19/2009 7:10:52 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221860 newyorkcity Animals
PINK FLOYD
5   6/19/2009 7:09:26 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221859 newyorkcity In The Court Of The Crimson King
KING CRIMSON
1   6/19/2009 7:08:44 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221858 newyorkcity Foxtrot
GENESIS
1   6/19/2009 7:07:57 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221857 newyorkcity Thick As A Brick
JETHRO TULL
1   6/19/2009 7:07:00 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221856 newyorkcity Dark Side Of The Moon
PINK FLOYD
5   6/19/2009 7:06:07 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221855 newyorkcity Selling England By The Pound
GENESIS
1   6/19/2009 7:05:21 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221853 newyorkcity Wish You Were Here
PINK FLOYD
5   6/19/2009 7:04:31 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221851 newyorkcity Close To The Edge
YES
1   6/19/2009 7:02:01 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221816 powell29 Phaedra
TANGERINE DREAM
5   6/19/2009 12:13:06 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221815 powell29 The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway
GENESIS
1   6/19/2009 12:10:54 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221814 powell29 In a Glass House
GENTLE GIANT
1   6/19/2009 12:09:48 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221813 powell29 Aqualung
JETHRO TULL
1   6/19/2009 12:08:12 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221812 powell29 In The Land Of Grey And Pink
CARAVAN
1   6/19/2009 12:07:17 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221811 powell29 The Perfect Element Part 1
PAIN OF SALVATION
1   6/19/2009 12:05:29 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221810 powell29 Meddle
PINK FLOYD
5   6/19/2009 12:01:34 PM EST 201.244.39.24
221808 powell29 Nursery Cryme
GENESIS
4   6/19/2009 11:54:57 AM EST 201.244.39.24
221807 powell29 Fragile
YES
3   6/19/2009 11:53:42 AM EST 201.244.39.24
221806 powell29 Moving Pictures
RUSH
5   6/19/2009 11:52:57 AM EST 201.244.39.24
221804 powell29 Red
KING CRIMSON
5   6/19/2009 11:51:14 AM EST 201.244.39.24
221803 powell29 Animals
PINK FLOYD
5   6/19/2009 11:49:50 AM EST 201.244.39.24
221802 powell29 In The Court Of The Crimson King
KING CRIMSON
3   6/19/2009 11:47:24 AM EST 201.244.39.24
221801 powell29 Foxtrot
GENESIS
1   6/19/2009 11:45:55 AM EST 201.244.39.24
221800 powell29 Thick As A Brick
JETHRO TULL
1   6/19/2009 11:42:41 AM EST 201.244.39.24
221798 powell29 Dark Side Of The Moon
PINK FLOYD
5   6/19/2009 11:30:02 AM EST 201.244.39.24
221797 powell29 Selling England By The Pound
GENESIS
2   6/19/2009 11:26:43 AM EST 201.244.39.24
221795 powell29 Wish You Were Here
PINK FLOYD
5   6/19/2009 11:23:32 AM EST 201.244.39.24
221794 powell29 Close To The Edge
YES
2   6/19/2009 11:20:34 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198062 postage21 Crime of the Century
SUPERTRAMP
1   1/9/2009 10:41:46 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198061 postage21 Depois Do Fim
BACAMARTE
2   1/9/2009 10:40:52 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198060 postage21 Playing The Fool - The Official Live
GENTLE GIANT
1   1/9/2009 10:39:49 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198059 postage21 Elegant Gypsy
DI MEOLA, AL
2   1/9/2009 10:38:36 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198058 postage21 A Farewell to Kings
RUSH
1   1/9/2009 10:37:26 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198057 postage21 Fragile
YES
1   1/9/2009 10:36:08 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198056 postage21 Storia Di Un Minuto
PREMIATA FORNERIA MARCONI
2   1/9/2009 10:35:07 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198055 postage21 Live At Pompeii
PINK FLOYD
5   1/9/2009 10:33:43 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198054 postage21 Made In Japan
DEEP PURPLE
5   1/9/2009 10:32:48 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198053 postage21 Nursery Cryme
GENESIS
3   1/9/2009 10:31:01 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198052 postage21 In a Glass House
GENTLE GIANT
2   1/9/2009 10:30:23 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198051 postage21 Quadrophenia
WHO, THE
1   1/9/2009 10:29:38 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198050 postage21 The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway
GENESIS
1   1/9/2009 10:28:49 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198049 postage21 The Doors
DOORS, THE
3   1/9/2009 10:28:06 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198048 postage21 Boris
YEZDA URFA
1   1/9/2009 10:27:09 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198047 postage21 Felona E Sorona
ORME, LE
2   1/9/2009 10:26:10 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198046 postage21 Memento Z Banalnym Tryptykiem
S.B.B.
1   1/9/2009 10:25:12 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198045 postage21 Abbey Road
BEATLES, THE
2   1/9/2009 10:24:16 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198044 postage21 Ocean
ELOY
2   1/9/2009 10:23:31 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198043 postage21 Unquestionable Presence
ATHEIST
1   1/9/2009 10:22:43 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198042 postage21 Scenes From A Memory Metropolis Part II
DREAM THEATER
1   1/9/2009 10:22:02 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198041 postage21 Queen II
QUEEN
1   1/9/2009 10:21:23 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198040 postage21 Second Life Syndrome
RIVERSIDE
1   1/9/2009 10:20:46 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198039 postage21 Enigmatic Ocean
PONTY, JEAN-LUC
1   1/9/2009 10:20:07 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198038 postage21 Red Queen to Gryphon Three
GRYPHON
1   1/9/2009 10:19:22 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198037 postage21 A Trick Of The Tail
GENESIS
1   1/9/2009 10:18:42 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198036 postage21 Blå Vardag
ATLAS
1   1/9/2009 10:18:01 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198035 postage21 Phaedra
TANGERINE DREAM
5   1/9/2009 10:17:23 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198034 postage21 Arbeit Macht Frei
AREA
2   1/9/2009 10:16:44 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198033 postage21 Images And Words
DREAM THEATER
2   1/9/2009 10:16:12 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198032 postage21 Il Passo Del Soldato
NUOVA ERA
1   1/9/2009 10:15:24 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198031 postage21 Lady Lake
GNIDROLOG
1   1/9/2009 10:14:45 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198030 postage21 Voyage Of The Acolyte
HACKETT, STEVE
1   1/9/2009 10:13:42 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198029 postage21 Leftoverture
KANSAS
1   1/9/2009 10:13:06 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198028 postage21 Anabelas
BUBU
2   1/9/2009 10:12:31 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198027 postage21 In The Court Of The Crimson King
KING CRIMSON
2   1/9/2009 10:11:12 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198026 postage21 Foxtrot
GENESIS
1   1/9/2009 10:10:20 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198025 postage21 Animals
PINK FLOYD
5   1/9/2009 10:09:38 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198023 postage21 Dark Side Of The Moon
PINK FLOYD
5   1/9/2009 10:08:58 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198022 postage21 Meddle
PINK FLOYD
5   1/9/2009 10:08:14 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198021 postage21 Atom Heart Mother
PINK FLOYD
5   1/9/2009 10:07:38 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198020 postage21 Wish You Were Here
PINK FLOYD
5   1/9/2009 10:07:03 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198019 postage21 Close To The Edge
YES
1   1/9/2009 10:06:34 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198018 postage21 Thick As A Brick
JETHRO TULL
1   1/9/2009 10:06:05 AM EST 201.244.39.24
198017 postage21 Selling England By The Pound
GENESIS
1   1/9/2009 10:05:28 AM EST 201.244.39.24
196681 alfacentaury Yessongs
YES
1   12/31/2008 5:54:01 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196680 alfacentaury The Best Band You Never Heard In Your Life
ZAPPA, FRANK
1   12/31/2008 5:53:17 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196679 alfacentaury The Great Deceiver: Live 1973 - 1974
KING CRIMSON
1   12/31/2008 5:52:21 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196678 alfacentaury Made In Japan
DEEP PURPLE
5   12/31/2008 5:51:27 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196677 alfacentaury Archive - Volume 1: 1967-1975
GENESIS
1   12/31/2008 5:50:39 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196676 alfacentaury Voyage Of The Acolyte
HACKETT, STEVE
1   12/31/2008 5:49:14 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196675 alfacentaury Blackwater Park
OPETH
1   12/31/2008 5:48:32 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196674 alfacentaury The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway
GENESIS
1   12/31/2008 5:47:46 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196673 alfacentaury Blå Vardag
ATLAS
1   12/31/2008 5:46:54 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196672 alfacentaury A Trick Of The Tail
GENESIS
1   12/31/2008 5:46:12 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196671 alfacentaury Sleeping In Traffic: Part Two
BEARDFISH
1   12/31/2008 5:45:29 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196670 alfacentaury Anabelas
BUBU
1   12/31/2008 5:44:49 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196669 alfacentaury Leftoverture
KANSAS
1   12/31/2008 5:44:11 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196668 alfacentaury Light of Day, Day of Darkness
GREEN CARNATION
1   12/31/2008 5:43:32 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196667 alfacentaury Phaedra
TANGERINE DREAM
5   12/31/2008 5:42:56 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196666 alfacentaury Revolver
BEATLES, THE
1   12/31/2008 5:42:12 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196665 alfacentaury The Black Halo
KAMELOT
1   12/31/2008 5:41:27 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196663 alfacentaury De-loused in the Comatorium
MARS VOLTA, THE
1   12/31/2008 5:40:45 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196662 alfacentaury Valentyne Suite
COLOSSEUM
1   12/31/2008 5:40:08 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196661 alfacentaury Live At Pompeii
PINK FLOYD
5   12/31/2008 5:39:24 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196660 alfacentaury Atom Heart Mother
PINK FLOYD
5   12/31/2008 5:38:43 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196659 alfacentaury Meddle
PINK FLOYD
5   12/31/2008 5:37:54 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196658 alfacentaury Godbluff
VAN DER GRAAF GENERATOR
1   12/31/2008 5:37:11 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196657 alfacentaury Animals
PINK FLOYD
5   12/31/2008 5:36:35 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196656 alfacentaury In The Court Of The Crimson King
KING CRIMSON
2   12/31/2008 5:35:58 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196655 alfacentaury Dark Side Of The Moon
PINK FLOYD
5   12/31/2008 5:35:19 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196654 alfacentaury Foxtrot
GENESIS
1   12/31/2008 5:34:45 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196653 alfacentaury Close To The Edge
YES
1   12/31/2008 5:34:09 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196652 alfacentaury Thick As A Brick
JETHRO TULL
1   12/31/2008 5:33:36 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196651 alfacentaury Selling England By The Pound
GENESIS
1   12/31/2008 5:33:01 PM EST 201.244.39.24
196650 alfacentaury Wish You Were Here
PINK FLOYD
5   12/31/2008 5:32:18 PM EST 201.244.39.24




the ratings here are completely useless... .write reviews instead....
Back to Top
ExittheLemming View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 7676
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 07:57
I welcome the changes to the ratings descriptions as they go some way towards promoting 'organic' brilliance over 'brilliance with additives' LOL
Back to Top
TheSubhuman View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: July 19 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 24
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 08:07
You know what, every time I see a thread like this, I can't help thinking of the adepts of a religious cult trying to keep heretic influences away. For crying out loud, all other prog websites have oodles of reviews of albums that do not qualify as prog (at least not 100%), and would not dream of having 'ghetto' ratings or definitions for any of them. If you don't believe me, have a look at the likes of ProgressiveEars or Sea of Tranquillity, to name but two.

This obsession with not allowing anything 'non-prog' contaminate the purity of the site is ridiculous, as well as detrimental - there was nothing like that in the Seventies that you love so much. As far as I am concerned, I would NEVER write any review for a site that forced me to rate a prog-related album lower than a prog one - especially an album that is widely recognised as a masterpiece. But then, fanaticism has never been my thing.
Back to Top
UMUR View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 2743
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 08:27
Originally posted by TheSubhuman TheSubhuman wrote:

You know what, every time I see a thread like this, I can't help thinking of the adepts of a religious cult trying to keep heretic influences away. For crying out loud, all other prog websites have oodles of reviews of albums that do not qualify as prog (at least not 100%), and would not dream of having 'ghetto' ratings or definitions for any of them. If you don't believe me, have a look at the likes of ProgressiveEars or Sea of Tranquillity, to name but two.

This obsession with not allowing anything 'non-prog' contaminate the purity of the site is ridiculous, as well as detrimental - there was nothing like that in the Seventies that you love so much. As far as I am concerned, I would NEVER write any review for a site that forced me to rate a prog-related album lower than a prog one - especially an album that is widely recognised as a masterpiece. But then, fanaticism has never been my thing.
 
AmenClap
Back to Top
SentimentalMercenary View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie


Joined: August 12 2009
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 66
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 09:03
Originally posted by UMUR UMUR wrote:

Anything added to PA deserves to be rated for its quality and not for how progressive it is. An inclusion on PA means that the artist has passed an evaluation test and therefore per PA definition is prog or prog related. That artist and the output of that artist should as a consequense of that inclusion be treated equal to everything else included on PA. Rate by quality and not level of progressiveness.
 
If thereīs something I loathe itīs to read reviews where people write that they are going to give a low rating because the album really isnīt prog or really doesnīt belong on PA because itīs not prog. If you feel that some prog-related album deserves a 5 star rating by all means give that album a  5 star rating. Just donīt abuse the 5 star ratings and give all albums you review 5 stars. Now thatīs common sense and normal respect for your fellow PA members.
 
I am not advocating a particular position here, even though I may have a slight preference. I am merely investigating on an issue that I find a bit puzzling.
 
I am 100% in agreement with your first paragraph. It makes perfect sense. Once an artist has met the threshold for inclusion in PA, we consider his/her work prog-related and thus, he/she is to be rated under the same system.
 
Your second paragraph reaches to the "cultism" phenomenom that is often met in progressive music circles and which is denounced in a post below. I am only halfway behind it. Only for the sake of this discussion, allow me to use Beethoven's Symphony no.9 as a perfect instance of a widely known musical masterpiece. I think (personal feeling) that many pundits would agree that since the modern era, most (if not all) that's been produced in music pales in comparison to this work of art with regard to complexity, composition, etc. Now, if those pundits would then disagree to rate on the same level/scale works done by Black Sabbath, Queen or Iron Maiden, should we accuse them of some illegitimate cultism?
 
There is something special in prog music that has us all gathered here and that we all (?) regret that so many people have yet to discover or understand. Is it not a denial of this "something special" that we shall work with a system that holds as the same ordinary rock and prog rock?
 
Thanks for you input by the way. Appreciated.
Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell.

- Karl Popper
Back to Top
rushfan4 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 22 2007
Location: Michigan, U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 50335
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 09:13
I'll be honest in I liked the old rating system.  In my interpretation, a prog-related album could not be a 5-star album because by PA definitions, an album from a prog-related artist was not a prog rock album and thus could not be a prog rock masterpiece.  Just because it wasn't prog rock didn't mean that it couldn't qualify as a 4-star album, because there certainly could be non-prog albums that were an excellent addtion to any prog rock collection.  The newer separate rating system for prog-related albums means that I will have to go back and change a couple of my reviews or delete them entirely since they were written with the old rating system in place.  Angry  Oh well, it is what it is.  Good thing that I don't have 2000 reviews that are now wrong because of this change. LOL 
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 29150
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 10:22
I did like the old way myself... but oh well. TImes change... best way to tell you are getting old is when you start bitching about the way things used to be LOL
Back to Top
SaltyJon View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 08 2008
Location: Monterey, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 28543
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 11:14
Originally posted by SentimentalMercenary SentimentalMercenary wrote:

Originally posted by SaltyJon SaltyJon wrote:

No way.  Some prog-related albums are, as was previously said, better than some prog albums. 
Of course, but this is not the point !  The relevant question is if some prog-related albums are as good as the best prog albums...
 
In other words, could a Kate Bush album be as good as, say, Selling England by the Pound per this site's system of values?


In my view, Wishbone Ash's "Argus" is at least as good as several of the "best" prog albums.
Back to Top
Logan View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Forum Moderator

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Utopia
Status: Offline
Points: 12244
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 12:26
Originally posted by rushfan4 rushfan4 wrote:

I'll be honest in I liked the old rating system.  In my interpretation, a prog-related album could not be a 5-star album because by PA definitions, an album from a prog-related artist was not a prog rock album and thus could not be a prog rock masterpiece.  Just because it wasn't prog rock didn't mean that it couldn't qualify as a 4-star album, because there certainly could be non-prog albums that were an excellent addtion to any prog rock collection.  The newer separate rating system for prog-related albums means that I will have to go back and change a couple of my reviews or delete them entirely since they were written with the old rating system in place.  Angry  Oh well, it is what it is.  Good thing that I don't have 2000 reviews that are now wrong because of this change. LOL 


Where it gets really confused, though, is that an album by an artist in Prog-Related can be considered Prog.  In the case of Manset, for instance, he was moved to Prog-Related because he was only deemed to have one Prog album, and some prog-related material on others.  One could consider Wishbone Ash's Argus Prog, and mnay consider albums by Alan Parsons Project Prog.  Various bands have been moved out of Prog-Related into Prog categories (particularly Crossover I think).  It's not an artist that is Prog, it's music that is, and what is Prog and not Prog can be subject to individual interpretation/ biases.  If albums were tagged Prog rather than artists, it would clear up some confusion.

I'm also wary of the non-Prog/ Prog divide that some people place on albums and bands in the archives.  It's often Prog by degree, and much of that depends on individual perception.  I don't exactly think of Prog-Related as a non-Prog category, more a lesser Prog category.

My big problem with the original proposal is that I expect we would find a system where it would not be posible to rate any album in Prog-Related five stars, but I think that we should, at the least, be able to rate albums that we think are Prog in Prog-Related five stars.

Originally posted by UMUR UMUR wrote:

Anything added to PA deserves to be rated for its quality and not for how progressive it is. An inclusion on PA means that the artist has passed an evaluation test and therefore per PA definition is prog or prog related. That artist and the output of that artist should as a consequense of that inclusion be treated equal to everything else included on PA. Rate by quality and not level of progressiveness.
 
If thereīs something I loathe itīs to read reviews where people write that they are going to give a low rating because the album really isnīt prog or really doesnīt belong on PA because itīs not prog. If you feel that some prog-related album deserves a 5 star rating by all means give that album a  5 star rating. Just donīt abuse the 5 star ratings and give all albums you review 5 stars. Now thatīs common sense and normal respect for your fellow PA members.


One thing that we should not confuse is progressive (adjective) and Prog (noun).  Prog need not be progressive, and non-Prog can be very progressive.  I actually factor in progressiveness as a sign of quality or virtue.  I'd be more likely to rate an innovative album higher than a cliché Prog-by-number albums.

I'd like a system here similar to Prog-Freak where ratings consider various qualities (I haven't been using progfreak for it because, admittedly, I'm more interesting in exploring the notions than applying them).  One of those could be progressiveness/innovation, another could be Prog by degree.  It could include technicality, complexity and compositional skill, historical importance, enjoyment factor, production, how well it compares to others in the category etc.  One could have five or ten fields with ten points points for each criterion to consider then divide it and round up or down, or something like that.

Yeah, maybe that would be over-analysing music but I think it would provide a better framwork for rating than what we have.
Back to Top
Man With Hat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Jazz-Rock/Fusion Team

Joined: March 12 2005
Location: Neurotica
Status: Offline
Points: 57820
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 23:52
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

I have to say it.  I really don't like the change as it's limited to rock music. Why not get rid of the rock criterion?  One of my favourite albums in the archives is Miles Davis' Sketches of Spain, but that is not rock, so according to the guidelines I could only rate it 3 or under. Cry Non-rock music is not getting a fair shake.
The same could be said for Chamber music in ZART, most Electronic Prog and all the metal genres, not just JR/F. I'm sure people will make their own interpretation of the rating descriptors already for those artists - I don't see them being miss-rated because they're not Rock.

Originally posted by SentimentalMercenary SentimentalMercenary wrote:

Well then I'd like to point out that Bon Jovi made a 10mins song called Dry County which could legitimately be called prog by some. I guess you now see me coming with all those 5 stars Bon Jovi albums... Confused
 
 
 
If Bon Jovi ever get into the Archives then go ahead, however he/they won't be getting in just because they made a 10minute song. The criteria for inclusion won't change.
Originally posted by SentimentalMercenary SentimentalMercenary wrote:

Of course, but this is not the point !  The relevant question is if some prog-related albums are as good as the best prog albums...
 
In other words, could a Kate Bush album be as good as, say, Selling England by the Pound per this site's system of values?
Hounds of Love and Aerial probably get close to SEbtP for song structure, music-complexity and musicianship and surpass it in lyric-writing IMO. Those two albums could stand their ground as Prog albums anyway, so whether they are as "good" is purely personal preference.
Originally posted by Man With Hat Man With Hat wrote:

Now I just looked at a prog-related album...and it still has the prog in place. Confused
Which one?
 
Originally posted by Man With Hat Man With Hat wrote:

And really isn't this a progressive rock archives? Not a rock archives. I don't see how changing it to pure rock is any better for the site. Sure, you're not calling it prog (which is a good thing) in the rating area (and thus not calling it prog by rating either), but if this is truely a prog-rock resource shouldn't the prog play an important part in the rating given?

Do people take heed of the start-rating descriptions anyway? Do the people who rated Kind Of Blue with 4 and 5 stars really think it is Prog and Rock? What about all the people who rate Invisible Touch with 4 & 5 stars? If an artist only released one album, then can that album ever be awarded a 1-star rating or 2-star rating? Why do so many people think a 3-star rating means the album isn't that good? By the rating system 95% of the albums here should be "good but not essential"? How can anyone who is not expert in all the subgenres rate any album as 4 or 5 star? How can anyone who is not a "fan" of particular genre award a 1 or 2 star rating in that genre?

It is pretty clear that many, many people do not rate to the literal intepretation of the descriptions, but to whether they like the album or not.
 
I'm not going to erase any of this...just address the points to me.
 
For which albums...I'm just going down the list of recent reviews on the PR page. So far I've looked at Gilmour's On A Island, Steve Vai's Fire Garden, Vangelis' Albedo 0.39, Sabbeth's Live At Last, Wishbone Ash's Argus...Perhaps I'm just looking in the wrong spot? (I'm looking all the way at the bottom of the page where the star distrobution/meanins are)
 
As for your other point, I agree that people don't read the meanings and if they do completely ignore them. I'm guilty of this too, I'm sure. Perhaps its because theres alot of discontinuty between the meanings. I mean theres much ground between excellent addition to a prog rock collection and, simply, good. For one, the top two specify prog rock by name and the other three disregard it completely. (Should we just assume the words prog-rock should appear in the definitions?) Ditto between Good and Collectors/Fans only. What about average albums?
 
Perhaps there should be definition changes in general, not just to the PR/PP sections. I'm not an expert on rating things (on any site) but I would think that rating things according to how much that individual likes that specific thing would be the general rule of thumb. AKA there wouldn't be this system like we have here that emphsizes essentialness and the like. (Although admittedly I kind of like our system here, I just wished it was adhered too more often.)
 
Though theres probably nothing to be done about people ignoring the details, even if the site makes it blatenly obvious what each mean, people will still assume what they want about it.
Dig me...But don't...Bury me
I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive
Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.
Back to Top
Man With Hat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Jazz-Rock/Fusion Team

Joined: March 12 2005
Location: Neurotica
Status: Offline
Points: 57820
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2009 at 23:54
Also, a side question:
 
Was there a thread saying that there was a change of definition for the PR/PP albums?


Edited by Man With Hat - August 26 2009 at 23:55
Dig me...But don't...Bury me
I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive
Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Status: Offline
Points: 33344
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 27 2009 at 03:50
Originally posted by Man With Hat Man With Hat wrote:

Also, a side question:
 
Was there a thread saying that there was a change of definition for the PR/PP albums?
Yes, it was in the post where M@X announce a number of changes to the system such as the change in review weighting for non-collabs and the removal of weightings on ratings-only for collabs.




If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Status: Offline
Points: 33344
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 27 2009 at 04:02
Originally posted by Man With Hat Man With Hat wrote:

For which albums...I'm just going down the list of recent reviews on the PR page. So far I've looked at Gilmour's On A Island, Steve Vai's Fire Garden, Vangelis' Albedo 0.39, Sabbeth's Live At Last, Wishbone Ash's Argus...Perhaps I'm just looking in the wrong spot? (I'm looking all the way at the bottom of the page where the star distrobution/meanins are)
Originally posted by Man With Hat Man With Hat wrote:

Ah, got it - that's an error, I don't know if M@X can fix that - I'll ask. If you look at the histogram of votes for the album the word "Progressive" does not exist. Also the tagline under the album cover pic says:
 

3.51 | 107 ratings | 21% 5 stars

Excellent addition to any
rock music collection

  
As for your other point, I agree that people don't read the meanings and if they do completely ignore them. I'm guilty of this too, I'm sure. Perhaps its because theres alot of discontinuty between the meanings. I mean theres much ground between excellent addition to a prog rock collection and, simply, good. For one, the top two specify prog rock by name and the other three disregard it completely. (Should we just assume the words prog-rock should appear in the definitions?) Ditto between Good and Collectors/Fans only. What about average albums?
Originally posted by Man With Hat Man With Hat wrote:

That disparity between the 5 defs bothers me too, not sure what we can do about that other than throw the defs out the window and start again.
 
Perhaps there should be definition changes in general, not just to the PR/PP sections. I'm not an expert on rating things (on any site) but I would think that rating things according to how much that individual likes that specific thing would be the general rule of thumb. AKA there wouldn't be this system like we have here that emphsizes essentialness and the like. (Although admittedly I kind of like our system here, I just wished it was adhered too more often.)
 
Though theres probably nothing to be done about people ignoring the details, even if the site makes it blatenly obvious what each mean, people will still assume what they want about it.
One of the problems with any textual definition is that a) it is open to interpretation and b) it may lose meaning in translation completely for non-English speakers. I'm sure some of our serial-raters cannot read the defs anyway and just rate 1-5 on whether they like it or not.




If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.203 seconds.