New web-site name
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=33623
Printed Date: April 25 2024 at 01:51
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: New web-site name
Posted By: ZowieZiggy
Subject: New web-site name
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 16:40
|
I have been an extensive user of this wonderful web-site (IMO).
I posted some messages ages ago (in 2005).
I started the reviewing process quite recently (yesterday I posted my 170th review).
Frankly, I really did not believe that I would submit a poll one day. But the idea grew in me today when I posted a reply on this forum about Led Zep or the Purple.
So, here is my feeling :
When I discovered the site, it was 100% prog.
Since 2005, I have noticed some deviation (which I do not necessary believe incongruous) and I believe it would be more credible to call it RockArchive.
It would broaden its scope.
We just would need to add several genres to the current ones.
Switch some bands form one section to another. That's it.
We would avoid the useless questions : is this one prog ? How many prog songs have this band produced ? etc.
Trying to convince us that all those bands are "prog" or "prog related" (that's the trick : let's call them prog related to ensure we can justify the entry) is not really useful (IMO).
I have been fan for more than thirty years of LedZep, Purple, Santana, Roxy, Tramp etc.
These bands were never considered as prog. Why should they be all of a sudden been "Prog-related" ? I don't know. What I know is that they are "Rock-related". On the other hand I am found of true prog rock (name the bands that I love would be quite an excercise : I would probably end up with about three hundred of them).
What do you guys think about the idea ?
Take care. ------------- ZowieZiggy |
Replies:
Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 16:46
|
Rock Archives is too wide a genre (have you considered how many rock sub-genres there are?). I like this site to remain Prog Archives. It is mostly about Prog (except for that little section or two called proto-prog and prog-related). |
Posted By: erik neuteboom
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 17:06
|
When I joined this site in early 2004 it was clearly ProgArchives.com,
in my opinion since last year it has turned into
ProgMusicArchives.com ....
 |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 17:14
|
What's wrong with ProgMusic Erik? I love the classic symphonic prog,but if that sound stayed the same and remained unchanged for almost 40 years it would be extremely boring.Music evolves,and instead of listening to the same crusty,stale old tunes over and over again I would much prefer to follow this wonderful music as it PROGRESSES,no matter what form it takes. -------------  |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 17:15
|
And to answer the topic creator's question,I don't think the name should be changed to RockArchives. ------------- |
Posted By: eugene
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 17:15
It would be a good name for a great site, provided there would be no "proto-remotely-related-nothing-to-do-with-prog" bands.
As to RockArchives - no, - as there are many very prog no-rock bands here to my delight.
------------- carefulwiththataxe |
erik neuteboom wrote:Posted By: erik neuteboom
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 17:42
Don't get me wrong, ProgMusic is OK but I am really disappointed that this site has turned into such a broaden oriented site, rather than trying to extend the source of progrock. From the moment mailto:M@X - M@X decided to add The Beatles this site has turned into a ProgMusic Pandora's Box, what's next after The Beatles, Iron Maiden, Led Zeppelin, The Doors ..... that's only a matter of subjective conclusions. I have no probem with The Stranglers, Al Stewart, Alice Cooper and Black Sabbath because, in my opinion, their inclusion is not less acceptable than Magnum, Osibisa, Iron Maiden or Radiohead. I don't see more progressive elements in their music than the aforementioned bands or do I miss something  ...
|
Posted By: Man With Hat
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 17:48
|
No. It should stay what it is. Sure its swayed a little with alot of the new additions, but the core of this site is prog, and I hope that never changes. ------------- 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. |
Posted By: glass house
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 17:52
|
Sure there are additions I don't agree with but I still find some really good prog whether it is old or new.
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 19:23
|
Imagine having the site named RockArchives... that would mean here we cover ALL rock? The same problems we usually have ("does X belong in PA? Is Y prog enough? What are prog genres? Does Z belong to this or that genre"?) only MULTIPLIED BY TEN.... And we would have to include bands like the rolling stones, u2, depeche mode, and MILLION others.... not that I don't like them, but those are not prog, but they would have ALL THE RIGHT to be included because they actually PLAY ROCK, and if the site's name is rock archives....tsk tsk tsk But that's not the main reason. I guess the owner and creator wanted a PROG website, and we have a beautiful prog database... so all the fairer that the site's name reflects the spirit it carries. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 03:15
|
This is a similar question to one raised on quite a few occasions by one of the oldest members of this forum, and I'm against it for pretty much the same reasons as cited above by The T. By keeping Progarchives, the potentially immense database is kept in check by the prefix "prog"; if this were to be removed, the whole feel of the archive would change and it would become just another music database. Sure, the feel of the archive has changed in the last three years, but it is still the best place to come if you like your rock that little bit 'different', and if you are a prog rock fan, you're guaranteed to find some obscure gem here you wouldn't have known about otherwise (not to mention someone to chat about it with). Another argument is that by keeping "prog" in the title, it could be said it prevents the Forum being flooded with the kind of people who make some punk & metal forums so unpleasant. -------------  Jon Lord 1941 - 2012 |
Posted By: video vertigo
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 03:17
|
I have no problem with Prog-related being here but most of the bands that are prog-related I have no idea how the conclusion was made I believe many were added because Prog fans mainly enjoy a band so they concluded that good music must clearly be related somehow to prog which doesn't make sense. ------------- "The rock and roll business is pretty absurd, but the world of serious music is much worse." - Zappa |
Posted By: laplace
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 03:20
|
I initially assumed that this thread was started as a sarcastic way of highlighting the site's dubious direction but the way you're all responding in no irony makes me think that it was sincere. and that scares me ------------- FREEDOM OF SPEECH GO TO HELL |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 03:23
| ProgMusic is indeed a decent name, but that would lead us into such deep waters I don't know if it would work. If it is decided that the site should *become* a general progressive music website than maybe, but if that happened, it would include everything from Bartok to Louis Armstrong to the Beach Boys. |
Posted By: The Whistler
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 03:25
|
And J.S. Bach!
Seriously, I think we should admit Bach. He was pretty sweet. ------------- "There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 03:37
If we became RockArchives, presumably we'd then have "Rock related" and "Proto rock" categories, to gather in every other piece of music ever made!
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 03:43
^  Exactly... we'd be looking at cave music made with sticks and stones |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 15:47
Proto-rock? As Atavachron said, music made in caves. But rock-related? Man! That would force us to include here Timberlake, Aguilera, Spears. Many of their songs are just rock songs made poppier! -------------
|
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 15:52
| Why not change the name to Archives? That way we could include everything! |
Posted By: Chris H
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 15:58
|
I think it's treason!
Instead of changing the name to make bands like Zep and Maiden and Purple fit in, why not just remove them? ------------- Beauty will save the world. 
|
Posted By: Spacemac
Date Posted: February 12 2007 at 20:54
| ProgArchives.com is better |
Posted By: Chris H
Date Posted: February 12 2007 at 20:55
|
If it was rock archives, that would mean Green Day would have to be included ------------- Beauty will save the world.
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: February 12 2007 at 21:04
|
Preposterous.
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: moreitsythanyou
Date Posted: February 12 2007 at 21:08
No. It's not Pop Archives  -------------  <font color=white>butts, lol[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Cygnus X-2
Date Posted: February 12 2007 at 21:09
Correction, it's not sh*t Archives.  ------------- 
|
Posted By: rileydog22
Date Posted: February 12 2007 at 22:19
 -------------   |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: February 12 2007 at 23:56
But then you couldn't keep on refusing to include Amorphis, you b*****ds! 
No, seriously, don't change the name, for you would also change the game. (man am I lame today!)
-------------
|
Posted By: andu
Date Posted: February 13 2007 at 07:35
|
This matter has already been discussed.
There has not been any change to what&why is considered prog. The site just started acknowledging the sorroundings of prog. Prog is not a flower grown in the dester, you know... ------------- "PA's own GI Joe!" 
|