Not being facetious, but why exactly do you think this album is "important". What is the basis for your assumption? Have they really released anything worthwhile in the past 10 years?

TheGazzardian wrote: Collaborators in general have been selected because they tend to explore more obscure music and can help shine a light beyond the music everybody already knows about. They often (but not always) tend to prefer music they've never heard of vs the 11th album by a band everyone already loves, especially if that band has not evolved in a notable way since their 10th album.

AFAIAC, I don't think the obscure nature of the music being reviewed is a factor for becoming a collab.... At least not a first or second factor, for sure. It's more to do with the quality of what's said

But yeah, what's the point of listening and reviewing the 25th Tangent or 349786th TFK album, when there is so much more different and "out of aural comfort zone" to be listening to out there

TheGazzardian wrote: Because activity on this site is dwindling slowly, so the number of active collaborators who still review / rate albums is dwindling slowly, so the list is more susceptible to the tastes of a smaller and thus less representative group of people, who aren't interested in that album.

 

This^   

Michael,  both labels have their own pages on Bandcamp, even if you don't buy digital you may stream  the albums (like you didn't already know this - but others may not !)

In response to those that objected to my use of "important", all I can say is that any release by Andy Tillison is important. It is all a matter of taste and opinion but I know that Andy Tillison is one of today's most important commentators on social and political issues through his lyrics. But for me, the joy is his music. He is a master of melody within vast complex compositions that often require several listens to be fully appreciated. So I used the word "important" to prompt a response and accept that many would not agree. But there are many that would.

Aussie-Byrd-Brother wrote: Also, it's very easy for the busier reviewers to simply...burn out. A mix of being at it too much, seeing their efforts on the front page washed away in an hour by an overexcited string of freaking Dream Theater reviews or simply hitting that dreaded `writers block' that can take a little bit of time to snap out of...lots of things that brings momentum crashing down.

Yeah, all of those (except being present on the front page >> never cared about that) are indeed factors for a certain form of weariness, and also the amount of time spent to review

But in my case, I stopped cold turkey after the theft of my laptop in the trunk of my car. Had no back-up, and lost my novel-in-progress

Yeah, I cringe when re-reading my reviews... Not so much at how I feel about the album (generally I stand by it... especially for those stinking TFK albums), but the grammatical mistakes, typos and sentence structures.

Tapfret wrote: I actually joined PA 11 years ago because it was a gateway to the obscure stuff. And from a reviewing and exposure standpoint, I'd much rather see the lower budget acts getting the benefit of the volunteer work. But honestly, I have seen nothing to hint at a bias one way or the other from collaborators/reviewers, present or past.

Well, indeed, it's the opportunity to shed some light into obscure corners (usually the older/70's stuff) that prompted me to become collab and team-member, but at one point comes the Q: why am I spending so much time for such little results? Have I not got anything better to do with my life (like living it, for ex)? etc..

OK, I've gotten many thanks for whatever it is I've done here, but the grander prog public still has never heard of JDDG or Comus, let alone more modern artiste like PG Six or Espers.

I have offered, before, to do reviews, but I wanted to be selective, as much as possible, specially when in a couple of instances, it was suggested that the albums to review, we actual dupe'd copies that were released in Mars and Venus, so the band could not get a nickel. AND, I happened to have been aware of this for a couple of bands, and ended up not reviewing anything after that. It simply was not fair to the bands in question.

I have reviewed a few albums and posted them, but the general response to the reviews here, is often ... something that is really sad, since a person searching for ITCOTCK and seeing that there are 117 reviews, and the majority of them do not qualify ANYWHERE as a review, and should be moved somewhere else, into an area called "opinion", because it would be taking away from the album and the band.

The harshest thing to see, for example, is TFTO, when a great review makes it nice, and the next "review" right under it, has 7 lines and calls it meandering trash ... and that's called a "review"?

I agree that everyone's opinion is valuable in some way, and I do not wish to diminish that trashy review that much, but his comments need to be in an area where "opinions" are shared, not in a review section.

AND, this is the problem with a "database" ... there is no one monitoring these things, and the general rule is that everything fits, regardless, and you end up with a lot of garbage in the middle of really neat and well done, reviews.

The really good reviewer is not afraid to say that something is not great ... my examples would be something like GENTLE GIANT ... I like their stuff, but it is difficult to review without using the silly/bizarre and stupid "progressive" definitions, and say ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the band and the music. It is not one of my favorite bands, but I will NEVER EVER not admit that their musicianship is probably the best in our whole/complete listing other than the King Crimson of these days.

I think it's a matter of respect and love for the music. There are a lot of "progressive bands" that for my tastes are on the listing, but they do nothing for me, but I will never say that they are not worthy of their work, because if that were so they would not be there, or have tried.

I have offered to help in this area, but there are many folks in PA that prefer to let things stay as they are ... I'm not sure that "cleaning up" is going to help, but basically, the listing is getting to long and repetitive, that it is just like another top ten out there, and as such, it will eventually die to the "forgotten top ten", because no one votes or listens to it anymore.

All reviews should stick to the main listing of the albums ... period ... and not the re-releases of things, unless the "remastered" versions have something to offer, which, I would append to the main review, rather than create a completely different review.

One example of this, and it is the hard part of all this, is Tangerine Dream, where some remasters are very different than the original LP's in the way they used to go around your ears ... in the LP's things always went left and right and right and left and then some ... in the remasters, these movements are behind your head and the sense that something moves across your head is not quite there, and for me, for example, took a heck of a lot out of "Mysterious Semblance for the Strand of Nightmares" ... and I'm not sure that this is good for the work itself, although I could say I have heard at least 4 different Turandot's and like them all, but none of them top off Renata Tebaldi.

It is a topic that probably should be discussed, but before we continue, this place has to define ... DATABASE ... and ART .... because that is one thing I believe they are afraid to do.

The number of "collaborators" has dwindled because the very group here is not willing, to discuss and define who they could/should add to their listing. Not to mention that too many of those folks take things personally, and do not like one person or another, and continually find time to comment on that person, instead of accepting the different point of view ... and for this reason that person can not "collaborate" because he/she is not one of the kissers of the institution's main folks.

These things will only last as long as the folks in charge want them to. Many can say that some of those folks are dwindling, and yes, many of us are getting older (I'm 68!), but heck ... guess what ... I got time on my hands! 

It is no secret and I think that it is in Sociology 101 at every school ... 1% of the folks control 99% of the money in the country ... and PA and database like things, have the same problem ... control by that 1% and sometimes, those folks change and it is then a democrat, and next year a republican ... and while we think things changed, in the end ... they are the same ... just forgotten!

I for one totally appreciate the remaining collaborators.   34 Euros?  And I thought the export prices to USA were exorbitant.   I can't imagine juggling a full time job while simultaneously keeping up with all the releases,  and writing bio's and reviews.         

And imho the review by a collab/expert...(whatever an expert is btw.)..carries no more weight when I read one.

I hope the membership isn't dwindling.....but being an old guy I know all of the old stuff anyway and much of the new....though I don't actively seek out new obscure bands anymore. If someone mentions a band here...I ck it out.

But....the best way to find out is simply to find a sound clip and listen for yourself.

^ Wow, triggered were we?

LOL...what is that..?

Harley Davison's got panhead engines. 

Or alternatively the PAN-ocene epoch! 

I'm ready to be a part of the official band. Here's a video of me playing the PAN-FLUTE!!!!!!

I think PAN-dora's box has been opened!

Wow, what an inappropriate typo - I should have said an "insightful" review by Aussie-Byrd-Brother. MInd you the thread seems to have incited a curious debate but I meant no offence by my stupidly careless typo.

Tapfret wrote: I did listen to The Tangent - Proxy uninterrupted today. Some really enjoyable compositions. Way more interesting than the previous album. Unfortunately I find the vocals to be extremely awkward

Yeah, Andy is not easy.

... now looking for some pan-fried pan-cakes for my pan-head ...

1)  Barney cracks me up

2)  I believe that The Tangent is important simply because of the historical relevance of Andy Tillison within the prog community.  I think if the album is awful and just a repeat of his career, it should get awful reviews, but I think from his historical significance, it's important.

3)  That being said, for something to be reviewed, you need to have a collaborator that actually wants to review it.  I realize we got one review while the thread was going on, but the point is still valid.  If it's only interesting enough to merit one collaborator taking interest in it, then something is missing the mark.

4)  Don't look at me cause I'm not reviewing it. . . . :)

IF, anything, I would like to see some reasonable guidelines for a review, to prevent people from writing 2 paragraphs and making it obvious they did not give the album a good listen, or at least a sincere review, to help the album.

I really think that many of the small reviews do not belong there ... again, they should be in a section called "Opinion", separated from bonafide reviews that deserve the credit and attention.

I also do Foreign Film reviews (I don't do mega movies just like I don't top ten here!), and have done that for 30 years ... and many of them are listed at the IMDB location for quite a few films ... but here, sometimes I feel that I do not want to place my review in there, because many of them, next to it, would take away from the album ... and to me, that is the part that hurts what we want to promote ... "progressive music" ... it was not a "popular" thing at the start, and with a few fanboy exceptions, it continued to be under the radar, and us simply writing and promoting the "top ten", is sad, and not a great way to present the music we love.

You really think that the Romantic Period in Music has reviews that are one paragraph that says that it is all meandering solo stuff, and borderline progressive? It doesn't even talk about the different movements and parts of the piece!

 

 

 

Logan wrote: Various of my favourite reviews both in music and film have been concise.  ... I personally have found writing film reviews easier as I have a background in film studies and it's easier to talk the language for me and it's easier to talk specifics beyond opinion when it comes to film for me and to create a good framework and approach for the review. I like film essays which look at films from a particular perspective (say ideological, historical etc.) Music generally seems more nebulous to me. Hell, I can barely even compose this post now as I'm lacking focus.

Don't go reading GODARD ON GODARD, or RICHARD PINHAS on HELDON and his music.!!!!!

Funny that you compare these two ... for me, there is no "difference" per se, although in my reviews I can discuss music, cinematography, acting, and directing choices, where in a "music review" this is much more difficult and there is a lot less to work with ... 

Actually, for me, it's not that difficult, because I get images in my head and they tend to illustrate the place and the words very clearly ... for example ... there isn't a single band from the early 70's in Canterbury that does not clarify the "college series" (as I call it), and the music that came out of it all, which of course, had started in the 60's anyway. But, it's illustration shows a lot of the things that inspired many folks, from artists, to writers (specially!) to other forms of art which went on to create things like Henry Cow, Art Bears, and what I call the "eccentric" crowd of English bands, going as far as Third Ear Band.

Specially in London, the amount of history in the other arts, help explain a lot more and make things clear in a lot of music. People tend to dismiss such things as "Tonite We All Love in London" ... but no one comments some far out bits ... John met Yoko there ... Robert Wyatt "probably" got pissed off and upset with the crowd ignoring his band and started a 1,2,3 that became very famous for his band, all the actors and actresses around, which you know they were all comingling and having fun as youngsters, just like we would. And then the number of writers present every where ... and while no one on this board gives a hoot about Ginsberg (not quite the poetry style I like and write), when you hear his own reading ... it sends shivers up your spine, and all of a sudden, a song by King Crimson, a song by Credence Clearwater Revival, a song by the Edgar Broughton Band and many other things, take on an importance, that is readily ignored and dismissed out right here on PA by many folks ... and some of them not intentional, I grant you ... but very little art ... in history of the arts ... was not a part of its environment, and does not show so much of its influence, and we would have a hard time writing about many of these.

This makes, for example, the writing of a review for SELLING ENGLAND BY THE POUND very difficult ... because all of a sudden, no one understands the analogy of the lawnmower and they think that a guitar and a loud organ is what made this music progressive, which is ridiculous and naive ... and PG admits there are some political statements there (there had been before, and there are many more in TLLDOB), but they did not wish to be considered a lefty or a righty ... and just kept is hidden under some symbolic gestures and thoughts ... not very original, really, but interesting anyway!

The hard part, is folks, today, explaining and discussing some material by Iron Maiden, or Dream Theater, or Pineapple Thief, or Steven Wilson ... as more valuable than just pop music, since the "content" in these is simply personal, and the "meaning side" of it is not as valid within a social context ... SW does not write because society is wrong ... he writes because he believes he is right and .... and this is a very hard falacy to get around ... I like SW a lot, but his lyrics and comments leave me cold ... in fact, sometimes I think he is just being a "bad boy" for the sake of it. Which is really strange when considering that he has had the chance to see/read/hear so many more things and learn so much more from so many other artists ... I mean SW with KS? ... well, they did not have a lot to talk about, but the best part of those sessions did not even feature SW, which suggests he had no idea anyway, or was too busy to realize what he could learn.

Logan wrote: ... It's up to the audience if they value that review. There are many very poor small reviews to be sure, and some of those were made by Collabs in the early days (a couple by me later on) and still get special prominence on the review pages ... ...

AND ... that is exactly what was said at KTYD about all the different and unknown bands in 1974 when Guy Guden came on. 

This is a self-fulfilling idea to pat one's back. In the end, this is the lazy way to get things done. That's not to say that all of the short ones are bad or not clear ... that's not true ... there are many very good reviews ... but that's like trying to explain GODARD in one sentence ... or HERZOG ... or FELLINI ... or BUNUEL ... and this is the kind of thought that hurts the arts in general ... and in the end, Space Pirate Radio and Guy Guden are remembered by many fans ... STILL ... although these past few years, things have tapered off ... and I think Guy may not be doing as well physically. Not to mention how much music is remembered that we discuss here!

WHAT MADE PROGRESSIVE and helped create what we love, was ... above all ... the feeling that we have to change things ... and Revolution #9 was telling you that if you were revolting without a proper replacement, you can count me out ... that is quite mature in my book! But, here, and specially in the "reviews" section, the aesthetics and beauty of the art is missing ... and you know what it feels like to me? ... the beautiful house that has a few pictures in the hallway on the way to the kitchen. One is a 16x20 of a tomato. The next one is a 16x20 of an onion ... and all of a sudden it is all Andy Warhol making fun of our knowledge of what an art is ... 

AND WE DON'T GET IT?

One other thought ... but some might not like it ... that EACH REVIEW has to be OK'd by 3 of the reviewers. And if it gets rejected the person gets a nice email stating that their review was not up to standards and that the Board of Reviewers has rejected it as a review ... 

The review section being opened to every one and their sister is ... asking for a lot of bad stuff in there.

Yeah there are some reviews that are waaaay to critical of something I love and their points are bullsh*t to me.  Everyone's a critic.  The fun of posting reviews here is opinionating.  Just do it.  Let yourself free.  If someone thinks you're full of it, so be it.

Great advice.

What i would like to see is some sort of way the readers could rate a reviews relevance by voting on it much like a Facebook like. Then an alogrhythm would keep the relevant reviews longer on the homepage while the two liner of no content would be flushed down the list. That way nobody would be censored but would be rewarded by writing relevant content to see their words stay still a little longer.

^ Great idea: merit-based.   Problematic because feelings will be hurt and unexpected results will occur.   Maybe a trial run.

It would be nice if people had the humility to consider that when they listen to an acknowledged classic album and think it's terrible their opinion might not represent the absolute truth, but I think the blowhards are entitled to express their views too...as long as they write enough to constitute some sort of review of what is on the plastic.

BTW anyone who gives Trout Mask Replica 1 star needs to be hunted down and tarred and feathered 

Reviews are something that is not exactly necessary for anything, except it is someone's opinion.

The history of reviews in film and even music, and much of the arts, has always been a spotty affair ... you know how many people made fun of Andy Warhol? Well, I don't have to tell you that he ended up being bigger than all of us combined, even with bad reviews. Same thing for Picasso, who once asked if the review was on a piece of _____________ (manners Moriarty, manners!) ... and somewhere along the way, for you to find your own VIEW and IDEA of what you really think, you need to formulate it on your own.

As an example, I read some film reviews, only AFTER the film, never before. In the earlier days, I did not need to have someone tell me about Bunuel, Godard, Russell, Truffaut, Fellini ... because I knew that I was more familiar with these folks than most reviewers, who often (just like here) did not even sit through the whole film.

I have no bone with someone saying that 2001 is a piece of over rated pretty picture crap ... which happened, and that was a time when film was changing into a very BIG visual meaning, that became very important for several years (same thing in the early progressive music!), until many folks got tired of it, and even said and wrote that LAWRENCE OF ARABIA was an hour too long, and that 2001 was made for a stoned audience and had no meaningful thoughts or ideas ... it was just a series of vignettes, with a story that really did not add up.

Music reviews here, are OK with me, but when looking at one album that has too many of them, my feeling is that the addition of reviews on it should be CLOSED, and the only "reviews" added to it would have to be approved by a group of Admins. This probably would happen once or twice a week, maybe even month ... we don't need another review of ITCOTCK, but I would welcome a really well written one to the listing, which has too many reviews and many of them probably are not quite ... a review.

I would caution one thing, though ... a review written 50 years later, and many times it is not researched and the person reviewing it, has no idea what he/she is saying. I saw someone comment on CTTE and it said ... it had no beat to tap to, and the lyrics stunk. That is NOT a review, and should not be listed as a review, and it's the same thing as anyone today trying to review THE RITE OF SPRING, or CARMINA BURANA, and just write that one is a mess, and the other is a copy of Magma ... c'mon, it doesn't matter who you are at PA ... that is not appropriate and should not be shown, thus the idea/thought that all reviews need to be double checked by some admins on PA.

The problem? Volunteers. Which sometimes tells you that it means I only do this or that and I ignore the rest! Not my cup of tea. And that would mean, without proper "supervision" that a lot of sections end up left behind and have no attention paid to them whatsoever ... thus, it is a lot easier (and lazy!) to speak of free speech and let everything be posted as a review, than make a call on the quality of the reviews and what they should represent.

We need to help make "progressive music" better and more appealing. That does not mean that a review that does not like it, but is well written can not pass the mustard and custard. It will ... but in the end, that review is not attracting more listeners ... it's helping people not have an open mind when listening to the piece of music, and the same thing happened to film for many years. It has stopped now, because no one knows John Who, from Jane What?, and their reviews are not as valuable or important, since most of them do the same film ... so you want another review of AVATAR? After the 247 of them? What for? NO ONE IS GOING TO READ THESE AT ALL!

I really can not say how to improve it, other than making the art look better and more important. The wide open spaces for "bad reviews", for me, is the part that tend to bring down the work, and this happened in my lifetime a lot ... I saw it on Picasso, I saw it on Rudolf Nureyev, I saw it on Misha (you can that dance?), I saw it on Bob Fosse when someone said sex has no place in dance, I saw it on Fellini, I saw it Kubrick, I saw it on David Lean (way too long, and I'm tired of Julie Christie!), I saw it on Bergman (specially! How can anyone like that boring crap!) ... and its endless and later I got to see first hand how our loved music was ignored and disrespected by folks that had no taste in music, and above all, did not care about anything except getting some free dope and picking up yet another girl at the station!

Somewhere along the way, history is going to show this stuff up ... and folks ... progressive music has stood up and was noticed, and here we are ... and ITS TIME WE STOP BEING LAZY ABOUT IT, AND IMPROVE ITS STATUS FOR HISTORY'S SAKES. 

Just remember how many artistic communities and such went by wayside down the river to nothing ... 

LOL!!! Perfect!

I especially loved the responses to M27Barney's first post! Tapfret and SillyPuppy probably could still be going on about that one! 

 

I tend to regard progressive rock as an attitude rather than a type of music. That's why progressive rock encompasses so many disparate types of music.

 

 

 

It is both. Rock can (and does) progress towards many different directions, but not all of them are Prog Rock, in fact most of them are not.

One column on the left side and one on right. Would need site to be redesigned. 

Yep, i know it will never happen 

^ There is a 'Like' option as well as 'Share', but they do seem underused. ~