Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - stop the "Neo" prog label ?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic Closedstop the "Neo" prog label ?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 14>
Author
Message
octopus-4 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
RIO/Avant/Zeuhl Team

Joined: October 31 2006
Location: Italy/UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6110
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:02
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by Roxbrough Roxbrough wrote:

What about stop all labels and just listen to music?

See the debate on Improve The Site (Revolutionise the Site). That is precisely what I am arguing, but, aside from a couple of hardy souls, I am very much alone.

Well as you know I  am very much behind you. And I would get rid of the Neo tag also.

I know mate, and it is appreciated.

And, referring to Dean's post, I fail to see how getting rid of the sub-genres would turn us into rateyour music.com. It would still be Prog Archives, because we would only allow prog music and prog related here. 

Also, if I were searching for something, I would not search for Genesis under symphonic prog. I would search for Genesis. I also don't buy this argument that the sub-genres help people buy or listen to similar music. If, say, we take Genesis as an example again, and you look at the top symphonic albums, you would come across The Flower Kings. Similar? A million miles apart, aside from being in the same sub-genre here. It does not follow that if yo like Genesis, you will like TFK. Also, the label itself is ridiculous. You and I are fans of latter day Genesis, but symphonic? Might as well call the dog the cat.

Neo, the subject of this thread, is the most ridiculous label, alongside crossover. Both are, these days, merely receptacles for stuff other teams don't want in many cases. Not all, but certainly many. All neo prog ever was is the name given to a bunch of bands who took up prog in the eighties, virtually all of whom make music now which bears little or no relation to that stuff. There is no such thing as a definitive version of neo prog. Such a thing never, ever, existed, not then, and certainly not now.

Prog is a label as well. It describes something different from pop or new-age or world music. If you get rid of subgenres you still have genres. What's the right level of classification?

In Nature, should you stop at Family, Genre or Specie? 
Labels are conventions. If you dislike Neo it can probably be replaced by something else. The fact is that it describes something. Think to Cantor, a genre is a closed set. If neo is closed, changing its name doesn't change its nature.


Curiosity killed a cat, Schroedinger only half.
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Errors & Omissions Team

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32925
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:04
^But neo doesn't describe it's bands well.
Coldness doth get away with the badness.
Back to Top
Horizons View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Post/Math Rock Team

Joined: January 20 2011
Location: Somewhere Else
Status: Offline
Points: 15083
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:05
I don't really agree with New Wave of Prog. I honestly think that the bands in neo should be moved into crossover, symph, or heavy depending on the band. 
I Will Write Peace All Over Your Wings And You Will Fly Around The World
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Errors & Omissions Team

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32925
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:06
Originally posted by Horizons Horizons wrote:

I don't really agree with New Wave of Prog. I honestly think that the bands in neo should be moved into crossover, symph, or heavy depending on the band. 

Probably right for more modrn bands. But those erli eighties bands could certainly be in a genre called Newe wave.
Coldness doth get away with the badness.
Back to Top
Gerinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 3574
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:07
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

 I know mate, and it is appreciated.

And, referring to Dean's post, I fail to see how getting rid of the sub-genres would turn us into rateyour music.com. It would still be Prog Archives, because we would only allow prog music and prog related here. 

Also, if I were searching for something, I would not search for Genesis under symphonic prog. I would search for Genesis. I also don't buy this argument that the sub-genres help people buy or listen to similar music. If, say, we take Genesis as an example again, and you look at the top symphonic albums, you would come across The Flower Kings. Similar? A million miles apart, aside from being in the same sub-genre here. It does not follow that if yo like Genesis, you will like TFK. Also, the label itself is ridiculous. You and I are fans of latter day Genesis, but symphonic? Might as well call the dog the cat.

Neo, the subject of this thread, is the most ridiculous label, alongside crossover. Both are, these days, merely receptacles for stuff other teams don't want in many cases. Not all, but certainly many. All neo prog ever was is the name given to a bunch of bands who took up prog in the eighties, virtually all of whom make music now which bears little or no relation to that stuff. There is no such thing as a definitive version of neo prog. Such a thing never, ever, existed, not then, and certainly not now.
Sorry Steve but I can't agree, regardless of their limitations (which everybody should be well aware of), sub-genres as they are are useful.
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: 33334
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:07
Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

^But neo doesn't describe it's bands well.
That's going back to the adjective use of the word used in a subgenre name and its noun use - Neo Prog is just a name, it does not need to be decriptive. Symphonic Prog is just a name, I've yet to hear a Prog symphony.




If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator

Crossover Team

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 5839
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:09
Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Originally posted by Horizons Horizons wrote:

I don't really agree with New Wave of Prog. I honestly think that the bands in neo should be moved into crossover, symph, or heavy depending on the band. 

Probably right for more modrn bands. But those erli eighties bands could certainly be in a genre called Newe wave.


Yeah, it would be consistent with NWOBHM as well the bigger New Wave scene of the 80s, which did influence neo prog at the time.  I
Back to Top
lazland View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 7345
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:12
Originally posted by Gerinski Gerinski wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

 I know mate, and it is appreciated.

And, referring to Dean's post, I fail to see how getting rid of the sub-genres would turn us into rateyour music.com. It would still be Prog Archives, because we would only allow prog music and prog related here. 

Also, if I were searching for something, I would not search for Genesis under symphonic prog. I would search for Genesis. I also don't buy this argument that the sub-genres help people buy or listen to similar music. If, say, we take Genesis as an example again, and you look at the top symphonic albums, you would come across The Flower Kings. Similar? A million miles apart, aside from being in the same sub-genre here. It does not follow that if yo like Genesis, you will like TFK. Also, the label itself is ridiculous. You and I are fans of latter day Genesis, but symphonic? Might as well call the dog the cat.

Neo, the subject of this thread, is the most ridiculous label, alongside crossover. Both are, these days, merely receptacles for stuff other teams don't want in many cases. Not all, but certainly many. All neo prog ever was is the name given to a bunch of bands who took up prog in the eighties, virtually all of whom make music now which bears little or no relation to that stuff. There is no such thing as a definitive version of neo prog. Such a thing never, ever, existed, not then, and certainly not now.
Sorry Steve but I can't agree, regardless of their limitations (which everybody should be well aware of), sub-genres as they are are useful.

And I don't regard something with limitations as being particularly useful. Those limitations, IMHO, make them extremely non-useful..


In Lazland, life is transient. Prog is permanent.
Back to Top
lazland View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 7345
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:14
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

^But neo doesn't describe it's bands well.
That's going back to the adjective use of the word used in a subgenre name and its noun use - Neo Prog is just a name, it does not need to be decriptive. Symphonic Prog is just a name, I've yet to hear a Prog symphony.

But, Dean, surely the whole point of these labels here is that they are descriptive, or supposed to be. You look for an act under neo, and you follow that description to find what you might like. If they are not, after all, descriptive, then there is absolutely no point to them whatsoever.


In Lazland, life is transient. Prog is permanent.
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: 33334
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:17
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by Gerinski Gerinski wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

 I know mate, and it is appreciated.

And, referring to Dean's post, I fail to see how getting rid of the sub-genres would turn us into rateyour music.com. It would still be Prog Archives, because we would only allow prog music and prog related here. 

Also, if I were searching for something, I would not search for Genesis under symphonic prog. I would search for Genesis. I also don't buy this argument that the sub-genres help people buy or listen to similar music. If, say, we take Genesis as an example again, and you look at the top symphonic albums, you would come across The Flower Kings. Similar? A million miles apart, aside from being in the same sub-genre here. It does not follow that if yo like Genesis, you will like TFK. Also, the label itself is ridiculous. You and I are fans of latter day Genesis, but symphonic? Might as well call the dog the cat.

Neo, the subject of this thread, is the most ridiculous label, alongside crossover. Both are, these days, merely receptacles for stuff other teams don't want in many cases. Not all, but certainly many. All neo prog ever was is the name given to a bunch of bands who took up prog in the eighties, virtually all of whom make music now which bears little or no relation to that stuff. There is no such thing as a definitive version of neo prog. Such a thing never, ever, existed, not then, and certainly not now.
Sorry Steve but I can't agree, regardless of their limitations (which everybody should be well aware of), sub-genres as they are are useful.

And I don't regard something with limitations as being particularly useful. Those limitations, IMHO, make them extremely non-useful..
Where is it non-useful? If you think that removing subgenres does not result in rateyourmusic then you have imposed a limitation on which bands can and cannot be included. We have the same limitation with or without subgenres.
 
 




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: 33334
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:24
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

^But neo doesn't describe it's bands well.
That's going back to the adjective use of the word used in a subgenre name and its noun use - Neo Prog is just a name, it does not need to be decriptive. Symphonic Prog is just a name, I've yet to hear a Prog symphony.

But, Dean, surely the whole point of these labels here is that they are descriptive, or supposed to be. You look for an act under neo, and you follow that description to find what you might like. If they are not, after all, descriptive, then there is absolutely no point to them whatsoever.
The name is not indicative of the bands included - no one reads the subgenre descriptions, especially of subgenres that exist outside the rarified atmosphere of the Prog Archives (ie look up Neo Prog on wikipedia, rym, allmusic and [this is a kicker] The Urban Dictionary). Our description of the Neo Prog subgenre was significantly altered by Olav from Drew's earlier re-write of the original definition to make it a broader category - I actually think it is one step too far spreading the subgenre into areas that were originally the sole domain of Crossover (Art Rock).




If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
lazland View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 7345
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:24
I'm sorry, Dean, no I have not. The only limitation there would be on a site without sub-genres would be.....is it prog, or not? If yes, then it is in, of not, then no, unless it is prog related.

You must be aware that there are many instances here where collabs agree that an artist is sufficiently prog to belong here, but then enter into an anal debate about where. If they cannot agree where, the artist does not get on the site, a ridiculous state of affairs. Either that, or they get put into Crossover or Eclectic (usually). 

As it is, sub-genres impose far more limitations. They also make no sense, especially since at least two of them are entirely inventions of our own making.


In Lazland, life is transient. Prog is permanent.
Back to Top
lazland View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 7345
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:27
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

^But neo doesn't describe it's bands well.
That's going back to the adjective use of the word used in a subgenre name and its noun use - Neo Prog is just a name, it does not need to be decriptive. Symphonic Prog is just a name, I've yet to hear a Prog symphony.

But, Dean, surely the whole point of these labels here is that they are descriptive, or supposed to be. You look for an act under neo, and you follow that description to find what you might like. If they are not, after all, descriptive, then there is absolutely no point to them whatsoever.
The name is not indicative of the bands included - no one reads the subgenre descriptions, especially of subgenres that exist outside the rarified atmosphere of the Prog Archives (ie look up Neo Prog on wikipedia, rym, allmusic and [this is a kicker] The Urban Dictionary). Our description of the Neo Prog subgenre was significantly altered by Olav from Drew's earlier re-write of the original definition to make it a broader category - I actually think it is one step too far spreading the subgenre into areas that were originally the sole domain of Crossover (Art Rock).

I agree wholeheartedly with your last sentence. My own feeling at the moment is that, when I try to summarise all of this debate in the other thread, which I am hoping to do this weekend, I will at least try to seek a consensus for a rationalisation of the varying sub-genres, and top of that list must be an art rock category encompassing all of those elements that we split up and invented.

You and I are both old enough to remember that is what it was called in those days anyway.


In Lazland, life is transient. Prog is permanent.
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator

Crossover Team

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 5839
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:28
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:


You must be aware that there are many instances here where collabs agree that an artist is sufficiently prog to belong here, but then enter into an anal debate about where. If they cannot agree where, the artist does not get on the site, a ridiculous state of affairs. Either that, or they get put into Crossover or Eclectic (usually). 



I agree quite a lot with this because I have observed this happening on suggestion threads.  Well intentioned, of course, but the pedantry just gets in the way ultimately.  It's more important whether an artist is prog because that decides whether it belongs in PA or not...not whether it's prog metal or eclectic or whatever, that cannot and should not hold back its inclusion.   


Edited by rogerthat - January 18 2013 at 19:49
Back to Top
Gerinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 3574
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:45
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by Roxbrough Roxbrough wrote:

What about stop all labels and just listen to music?

See the debate on Improve The Site (Revolutionise the Site). That is precisely what I am arguing, but, aside from a couple of hardy souls, I am very much alone.

Well as you know I  am very much behind you. And I would get rid of the Neo tag also.

I know mate, and it is appreciated.

And, referring to Dean's post, I fail to see how getting rid of the sub-genres would turn us into rateyour music.com. It would still be Prog Archives, because we would only allow prog music and prog related here. 

Also, if I were searching for something, I would not search for Genesis under symphonic prog. I would search for Genesis. I also don't buy this argument that the sub-genres help people buy or listen to similar music. If, say, we take Genesis as an example again, and you look at the top symphonic albums, you would come across The Flower Kings. Similar? A million miles apart, aside from being in the same sub-genre here. It does not follow that if yo like Genesis, you will like TFK. Also, the label itself is ridiculous. You and I are fans of latter day Genesis, but symphonic? Might as well call the dog the cat.

Neo, the subject of this thread, is the most ridiculous label, alongside crossover. Both are, these days, merely receptacles for stuff other teams don't want in many cases. Not all, but certainly many. All neo prog ever was is the name given to a bunch of bands who took up prog in the eighties, virtually all of whom make music now which bears little or no relation to that stuff. There is no such thing as a definitive version of neo prog. Such a thing never, ever, existed, not then, and certainly not now.
I don't like to repeat myself in one thread but this this time I will: I have no problem with the Neo tag and I think it's useful to identify a certain style of Prog, or at least where did a band originate from 

The fact that some bands originally tagged as Neo have evolved to other styles which have little or nothing to do with Neo right now is another matter, applicable to so many bands in any other sub-genres.

We only need site users to understand what Sun-Genres mean, a guidance for which style did bands began their output with. If they eventually changed their style don't worry, Prog fans will learn about it.

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: 33334
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 11:53
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

I'm sorry, Dean, no I have not. The only limitation there would be on a site without sub-genres would be.....is it prog, or not? If yes, then it is in, of not, then no, unless it is prog related.

You must be aware that there are many instances here where collabs agree that an artist is sufficiently prog to belong here, but then enter into an anal debate about where. If they cannot agree where, the artist does not get on the site, a ridiculous state of affairs. Either that, or they get put into Crossover or Eclectic (usually). 

As it is, sub-genres impose far more limitations. They also make no sense, especially since at least two of them are entirely inventions of our own making.
To be candid, I think you're wasting your time (and as someone who's wasted a considerable amount of my time on this over the past four years I speak from experience - any motivation or enthusiasm for change has long gone). Subgenres exist, that's pretty much immutable, and they exist outside the PA - sure we invented some for our own amusement, but they are slowly gaining acceptance outside the PA too - newbies come here and do (appear) to know these invented subgenres just as well as they know established ones (like Neo Prog and Canterbury) - the logic of those subgenre and category splits is easily understood and appreciated. We can change the name of Neo Prog but that won't be of any use as the name will persist without our involvement.
 
I think the cases of bands being excluded from here because teams don't agree is grossly overstated, and the notion that Xover or Eclectic is the dumping ground is an exaggeration. I would prefer some teams to be a little more inclusive, but I see no reason to break the system to make that happen.


Edited by Dean - January 18 2013 at 11:55




If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
apps79 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Neo Prog Team

Joined: March 15 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1316
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 12:13
If we should stop the Neo tag, then we should stop at least 50% of the site's genres...Neo Prog refers to a period of time, Italian Prog refers to a country, Eclectic/Crossover etc. refer to mix of styles, practically they are all non-existing.

Again, all genres should be limited to a small number of categories refering to the existing music styles...Symphonic/Classical, Jazz/Fusion, Folk, Psych etc. that's my point of view.
When the power of love overcomes the love of power,the world will know peace...

listen to www.justincaseradio.com , the first ever Greek Progressive Rock radio
Back to Top
Warthur View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 06 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 531
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 12:47
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Neo, the subject of this thread, is the most ridiculous label, alongside crossover.
Now, come on, firstly if we want to talk subgenres which don't really make sense what about "eclectic" - a term which literally means "a grab-bag of miscellaneous stuff". There's no one "eclectic prog" sound or scene, it's literally just the "uncategorisable" section. (I stress that I agree completely with you about crossover too, despite having served on the crossover team - the definition of the subgenre, as with eclectic, is completely artificial and was basically made up for the purposes of categorising stuff on the site.)

The difference between crossover/eclectic and neo is that neo at least used to mean something and arose in common prog discussion circles to mean that thing rather than being invented from whole cloth for the sake of a categorisation system. Although the definition of the "neo" sound is, I will agree, now very murky, I do remember a time when it was fairly consistently used to refer to the early 80s prog acts which emerged from the scene for which the Marquee served as a focus, and for acts which are influenced by those earlier acts to an extent that their sound clearly evolved from an attempt to walk in the footsteps of IQ, Marillion, Pendragon, or some other band from that crew. Like Canterbury, it does at least describe a scene, even if we can argue over whether it describes a sound.

I do think there is a legitimate debate to be had when it comes to the organisation of this site as to whether the subgenres we use should reflect sounds, scenes, a mixture of both or neither and good on you for opening that debate, but I don't think the term "neo" is as absolutely useless a term when used in discussing prog as "crossover" or "eclectic". I can talk with people about prog on other fora and if they wheel out "neo" we all know what is meant. If someone starts talking about crossover/eclectic then unless the other participants are aware of the categorisation scheme on this site the result is bafflement.
Back to Top
lazland View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 7345
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 13:28
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

I'm sorry, Dean, no I have not. The only limitation there would be on a site without sub-genres would be.....is it prog, or not? If yes, then it is in, of not, then no, unless it is prog related.

You must be aware that there are many instances here where collabs agree that an artist is sufficiently prog to belong here, but then enter into an anal debate about where. If they cannot agree where, the artist does not get on the site, a ridiculous state of affairs. Either that, or they get put into Crossover or Eclectic (usually). 

As it is, sub-genres impose far more limitations. They also make no sense, especially since at least two of them are entirely inventions of our own making.
To be candid, I think you're wasting your time (and as someone who's wasted a considerable amount of my time on this over the past four years I speak from experience - any motivation or enthusiasm for change has long gone). Subgenres exist, that's pretty much immutable, and they exist outside the PA - sure we invented some for our own amusement, but they are slowly gaining acceptance outside the PA too - newbies come here and do (appear) to know these invented subgenres just as well as they know established ones (like Neo Prog and Canterbury) - the logic of those subgenre and category splits is easily understood and appreciated. We can change the name of Neo Prog but that won't be of any use as the name will persist without our involvement.
 
I think the cases of bands being excluded from here because teams don't agree is grossly overstated, and the notion that Xover or Eclectic is the dumping ground is an exaggeration. I would prefer some teams to be a little more inclusive, but I see no reason to break the system to make that happen.

Just back from having a couple of pints, having fought my way bravely through the snow.

I agree, Dean. I am very likely wasting my time. It is absolutely and utterly certain that there will be no consensus here, that much is obvious. I can be accused of many things, but stupidity is not one of them.

One of my faults, though, and one thing I can be accused of, is a certain kind of dog after a bone behaviour. I am, in my own mind, absolutely convinced that the way we organise ourselves here is counter productive. This is a view shared, btw, by a number of posters, so I am not alone. No, there is no consensus, but it is clear that there is disquiet amongst many.

I will not repeat the PMs we have exchanged recently. That would be wrong. However, I will say one thing openly and publicly, and that is to have any chance of real credibility, the teams responsible for "running" certain teams here must accept and realise that the results of their deliberations, and the debates those deliberations prompt, belong to the site as a whole, not just themselves. I am absolutely fed up with being lectured about my opinions, and also being subjected to such anal retentive pedantry, whilst also being told to mind my own business at the same time, and I am not on my own.

There has to be a realisation that this is a music site. It is not an empire building or corporate business. It has to be realised that opinions and interpretations are just those. No one person, or persons, should have a veto on what can, or should, be placed on the site. There simply has to be more flexibility in adding artists. Perhaps the answer is to get rid of "specialist" teams, rather than sub-genres, and open up the entire categorisation process to the collab collective?

I still stand by my comments regarding the sub-genres themselves, but you are right, it probably won't change. What can change, though, is the processes within those sub-genres.

You are, of course, fully aware of what I speak of here.


In Lazland, life is transient. Prog is permanent.
Back to Top
lucas View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 06 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 7942
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 18 2013 at 15:31
Thanks to all for your contribution, I didn't expect so many reactions on this topic.
As I explained, I rather tend to agree on the use of labels as they help giving a general picture of the music, but they also tend to confine an artist/band's music to a "category" they cannot escape from in the press, while their music could be much more colourful in essence and well, eclectic...(cf H-era Marillion).
"Magma was the very first gothic rock band" (Didier Lockwood)
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 14>
  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 0.141 seconds.