Print Page | Close Window

TOP 100 Progressive Music Albums

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Internal news
Forum Description: Stay informed about the latest updates regarding the site
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8462
Printed Date: October 21 2014 at 21:47
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: TOP 100 Progressive Music Albums
Posted By: M@X
Subject: TOP 100 Progressive Music Albums
Date Posted: July 08 2005 at 06:39

TOP 100 Progressive Music Albums

What do you think about this page and algorithm ...
http://www.progarchives.com/top-prog-albums.asp - http://www.progarchives.com/top-prog-albums.asp

 



-------------
Prog On !



Replies:
Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: July 08 2005 at 07:07

What-we get to vote for maybe, our top 5,and you create a TOP 100 from this?

Yeah,why not Max? Thumbs Up



Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 08 2005 at 07:29

Think about what?

Anyway...I don't think! Tony R says so!

Ha ha  mailto:M@X - M@X so you edit you're Post to make Tony and I look dumb, eh? Well I can edit my Post too so *raspberry* to you!

BTW. New Top 100 Page? Great!



Posted By: nacho
Date Posted: July 08 2005 at 07:48

Come on, you guys, are you short of brain cells in the UK today?

M@x is obviously asking for the top 100 list in the main page after the new algorithm was applied... well, I hope so, I'm also feeling my brain rather empty...

Errr, yes, I like it much more now. Of course, ask every one of us and we'll delete a few and put some others in their place, but on the average I think it's greatly improved.

Keep up the good work!



-------------
Eppur si muove


Posted By: Moogtron III
Date Posted: July 08 2005 at 08:39

It's very good!

It's interesting that the majority of the records included are still from the 'classic' age. Top 10 is purely old stuff, which I personally like: the historic perspective of the contributors is good.

Dream Theater scores high with some albums, the highest on nrs. 11 and 28, and bands like Anglagard, Porcupine Tree, Marillion, POS and Ayreon also have a representative in the top 50.

I like it the way it is now. When I look in the top 10 I immediately approve: this is a good, balanced list. Well done!



Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: July 08 2005 at 14:55

It looks like a pretty good reflection of our overall tastes as a collective. Nicely laid out too mailto:M@X - M@X . I see you've linked to it from the main page, but it's not too clear that you can get the full page version from the link.

I notice that the algorithm has changed again. Can you tell us how the chart is calculated now?



Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: July 08 2005 at 17:41

The edit wasn't there when I checked out his post!



Posted By: Fitzcarraldo
Date Posted: July 08 2005 at 17:42

The page looks good. How about adding a column for the country?

 



Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 08 2005 at 17:48

Now that it's a fully fledged page, I would fancy some inputs at the top of the page to further refine the list ... some checkboxed for the genres and the media type (studio album, live album, DVD) and a drop down for the number of results (50, 100, 250, 500).

That would enable the users to specifically search for the top 50 prog metal live albums, or top 100 symphonic prog DVDs and so on.



Posted By: limeyrob
Date Posted: July 09 2005 at 05:40

Hi

There's always one awkward so and so and this time it is me. I actually preferred your top 500 as per the original listings. This way I could copy it into an Excel file and with a macro separate the artists into one column with the tiles in the next column. It was then easy to colour the albums I had and see at a glance what people were listening to and if I felt adventurous use filters etc to play about with the data. I also started to work on seeing how the albums moved up or down the chart.

Would it be poss to have an option of list or full details please, perhaps start off as before showing the list then have the option of 'show covers' as you have in the review pages?

Don't get me wrong I think they are great additional features and a source of information and I really think this is a superb site.

PS Can you tell me why live albums are not listed?



Posted By: M@X
Date Posted: July 09 2005 at 08:45
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

 

I notice that the algorithm has changed again. Can you tell us how the chart is calculated now?

Sorry It was an error , now the ALGOs are the same,

MikeEnRegalia helped me getting it back to the same results



-------------
Prog On !


Posted By: M@X
Date Posted: July 09 2005 at 09:00
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

Now that it's a fully fledged page, I would fancy some inputs at the top of the page to further refine the list ... some checkboxed for the genres and the media type (studio album, live album, DVD) and a drop down for the number of results (50, 100, 250, 500).

That would enable the users to specifically search for the top 50 prog metal live albums, or top 100 symphonic prog DVDs and so on.

Great suggestion !



-------------
Prog On !


Posted By: M@X
Date Posted: July 09 2005 at 09:00
Originally posted by limeyrob limeyrob wrote:

 

Would it be poss to have an option of list or full details please, perhaps start off as before showing the list then have the option of 'show covers' as you have in the review pages?

 

Ok , great !

 

Done !



-------------
Prog On !


Posted By: philippe
Date Posted: July 11 2005 at 08:42

very nice impressive list for the subgenres!!

However I totally disapprove with the definitive 100 top albums (just a few subgenres are represented, too common stuffs)



-------------


Posted By: philippe
Date Posted: July 11 2005 at 08:48

no Zeuhl, no krautrock, no prog folk, no fusion !!!

humm...all right I admit that art rock, metal prog and symphonic prog rock sell better but...is there an alternative???



-------------


Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 11 2005 at 09:00

Originally posted by philippe philippe wrote:

no Zeuhl, no krautrock, no prog folk, no fusion !!!

humm...all right I admit that art rock, metal prog and symphonic prog rock sell better but...is there an alternative???


Album Nr. 7 is prog folk (Thick As A Brick).

Generally, the albums and genres that you mention have not enough reviews/ratings to make it into the top 100. I have an idea how to improve the situation for "borderline" albums with 20-30 ratings ... I'll PM mailto:M@x - M@x , maybe he likes it.

The problem is not limited to "small" genres like Zeuhl ... the Prog Metal list also favors many Dream Theater albums over Opeth, Pain Of Salvation etc. even if these have average ratings of >4.8.



Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 11 2005 at 09:28
So why can't it just be average rating then?

-------------
Coldness doth get away with the badness. http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 11 2005 at 09:37

If you use the average rating only, you end up with 100 albums that have one or two five star reviews, and your entire list would consist of 5.0 albums ...



Posted By: pero
Date Posted: July 12 2005 at 08:29

 Hi Max,

  You have forgoten to include some great bands like: Focus, Gong.

  Supertramp is not prog at all.

  Zappa: Joe's garage is my favorite

 In fusion, Brand X is no match to Mahavishnu orchestra, Return to forever, Gong, Billy Cobham (Spectrum, Crosswinds) and Herbie Hancock (Headhunters, Flood, Man child), and the king of fusion is Miles Davis.

 E L & P: E L & P (first album) is great and also Brain salad surgery.

 You didn't include Sonic youth also

  King crimson is the best prog band of all times for me, but their best albums are: Larks tongues in aspic, Islands, Red.

 Sorry for my poor English.

  Keep up the good work



Posted By: GoldenSpiral
Date Posted: July 12 2005 at 09:36

I dont think I was looking at the right thing.  how is it possible that DT's live scenes from new york is in the top 10?  DT  deserves at least one top 20 album but certainly not that one.  also, dont include dvd's in the algorithm.



-------------
http://www.myspace.com/altaic" rel="nofollow - http://www.myspace.com/altaic
ALTAIC

"Oceans Down You'll Lie"
coming soon


Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: July 13 2005 at 14:36

Pero,

The chart is not made up by mailto:M@X - M@X , it's calculated based on the ratings people give in their reviews. It's quite a complex calculation though, not just a straight average.

GS, there are options to include a selected genre and/or type only on the chart page. You can customise the selection to see what you're looking for.

mailto:M@X - M@X , The various selection options are great, very user friendly too.



Posted By: pero
Date Posted: August 12 2005 at 06:30

 

  Hi Max,

 In jazz rock/fusion you have mixed everything.

 At first fusion is invented by Miles Davis in late 60.

The musicians from his band: John Mclaughlin, Billy Cobham formed Mahavishnu orchestra

and made exellent albums: Birds of fire, From nothigness to eternity, Live...

Herbie Hancock formed his group and made one of the finest jazz rock albums Headhunters.

Chick Corea and Stanley Clarke formed Return to forever (No mystery, Hymn of seventh galaxy, Returrn to forever...

Billy Cobham made few great jazz rock albums : Spectrum, Crosswinds.

Also the best jazz rock bands are Gong from his middle period: Gazeuse, Expresso, Esxspresso II, and Passport with Klaus Doldinger.

The most of the top 100 jazz rock/fusion albums from your list dont belong there.



Posted By: Rui__
Date Posted: August 23 2005 at 13:32
dont know if has already been said but what about top albums by year?

cheers


Posted By: greenback
Date Posted: August 27 2005 at 01:44
i like the pics! i'm visual! great job max!

-------------
[HEADPINS - LINE OF FIRE: THE RECORD HAVING THE MOST POWERFUL GUITAR SOUND IN THE WHOLE HISTORY OF MUSIC!>


Posted By: Toccata
Date Posted: November 28 2005 at 07:59

What do we think about this page and algorithm?..

The page is wonderful. But what about algorithm? Could you please, mailto:M@X - M@X , reveal it to us. And maybe some of us would have any suggestions.



Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: November 28 2005 at 08:23

^ I don't remember EXACTLY, but it goes a little bit like this:

avg_rating * avg_rating * log(number_of_ratings).



Posted By: kenmeyerjr
Date Posted: December 29 2005 at 15:23
I really think there should be at least one Go album in this list, probably the Live in Paris. With the personnel involved (Winwood, DiMeola, Shultz, Shrieve, Yamashta), it is truly a supergroup of this genre and this is a great record. The two studio albums that preceeded it (Go and Go Too) are also very good. Myself, I would give the live one at least 4 stars and the two studio albums 4 or 3.5 as well. Thoughts? I have never tried to add a release to any of these lists, so excuse me if I am going about it the wrong way.

-------------
If you like art of musicians, check my site (the music section) and tell me what you think! http://www.kenmeyerjr.com


Posted By: ZBY147
Date Posted: January 10 2006 at 14:23
WHERE IS IRON MAIDEN , BLACK SABBATH, LED ZEPPELIN..?-  BETTER PROG THAN  ALL PROG-METAL < id="kpfLog" src="http://127.0.0.1:44501/pl.?START_LOG" onload="destroy(this)" style="display: none;"> < ="text/">


Posted By: The Green Tank
Date Posted: March 19 2006 at 21:30
Wow, Close to the Edge has been knocked off the top spot. This is the first time I've seen that happen.

-------------



Posted By: Ghandi 2
Date Posted: March 19 2006 at 22:37

Yay! It actually went back up for awhile, but now it's back down.



Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: March 21 2006 at 20:27
Originally posted by Ghandi 2 Ghandi 2 wrote:

Yay! It actually went back up for awhile, but now it's back down.

but that wasnt the intention behind your review was it...?



Posted By: Ghandi 2
Date Posted: March 21 2006 at 21:21

No no, of course not. In fact, I'm shocked you could even suggest such a thing! :P

Seriously though, it wasn't.



Posted By: proglamaniac
Date Posted: July 06 2006 at 03:21
I'm new here so I'm not sure if this is the right place to post a reply, but here goes...
 
I'm responding to the top 100 proto-prog list.  Out of 100 albums, I counted 33 for Deep Purple.  Are you on drugs or just clueless on the subject of proto-prog?
 
33 albums constitutes 1/3 of the entire list, and over half of those are compilations, live recordings 20 to 30 after their prime period (1968-74), and greatest hits.  You gotta be kidding me!
 
All 100 entries were covered by a total of... get this... 13 bands.  If I'm not mistaken, I'm pretty sure there were more than 13 proto-prog bands from the late 60s to early 70s, which is the time period in which the term "proto-prog" (proto meaning 'before') would be applicable.  Anything after 1973 is not proto-prog, because by 1973 the progressive rock movement had matured well beyond its early infancy stage.  Would you call Lark's Tongues in Aspic or Passion Play proto-prog?  I wouldn't.
 
There were a few entries that should be there: Vanilla Fudge, Procol Harem, Arthur Brown.  But Pan & Regaliz?  The Collectors?  It's a Beautiful Day is a good inclusion, but Iron Butterfly was west coast psychedelic rock, not proto-prog.
 
Here's a few suggestions:
 
Indian Summer - s/t 1971 Neon (same label as Black Sabbath's debut)
Still Life - s/t 1(Vertigo 1971)
Catapilla - s/t (Vertigo 1971)
Catapilla - Changes (Vertigo 1972)
Spring - s/t (Neon 1971... early Mellotron masterpiece!)
Czar - s/t 1971
Cressida - s/t (Vertigo 1970)
Cressida - Asylum (Vertigo 1971)
Atomic Rooster - s/t 1970
Atomic Rooster - Death Walks Behind You 1970
Affinity - s/t 1970 Vertigo (Vertigo had a TON of great proto-prog acts on its label)
Tonton Macoute - s/t (Neon 1971)
Web - I Spider (Polydor 1970)
Samurai - s/t (Greenwich 1971)
Van der Graaf Generator - The Least We Can Do is Wave to Each Other (Famous Charisma 1969)
Van der Graaf Generator - H to He Who Am the Only One (Famous Charisma 1970)
Van der Graaf Generator - Pawn Hearts (Famous Charisma 1971)
T2 - It'll All Work Out in Boomland (Decca 1970)
Renaissance - s/t (Island 1969)
Renaissance - Illusion (Island 1971)
Rare Bird - s/t (Charisma 1969)
Rare Bird - As Your Mind Flies By (Charisma 1970)
Raw Material - Time Is... (Neon 1971)
Ramases - Space Hymns (Vertigo 1971)
Quatermass - s/t (Harvest 1970)
Nektar - Journey to the Centre of the Eye (Bacillus 1971)
Morgan - Nova Solis (RCA 1971)
McDonald & Giles - s/t (Atlantic 1970)
Marsupilami - s/t (Transatlantic 1970)
Marsupilami - Arena (Transatlantic 1971)
 
Where's all the King Crimson?  They belong in the art rock category, but surely their early albums helped define a new genre.  In the Court of the Crimson King practically created the term progressive before anyone knew what that was, clearly a "proto" band that became the blueprint for countless imitators that followed.
 
Jonesy - No Alternative (Dawn 1972)
Jade Warrior - s/t (Vertigo 1971)
Jade Warrior - Released (Vertigo 1971)
High Tide - Sea Shanties (Liberty 1969)
High Tide - s/t (Liberty 1970)
Bo Hansson - Sagan Om Ringen (Silence 1970)
Gracious - Gracious! (Vertigo 1970)
Gracious - This is...Gracious!! (Philips 1972)
Gnidrolog - Lady Lake (RCA 1972)
Gentle Giant - s/t (Vertigo 1970)
Gentle Giant - Acquiring the Taste (Vertigo 1971)
Fields - s/t (CBS 1971)
Fantasty - Paint a Picture (Polydor 1973... it's in the same sound/style)
Ekseption - s/t (Philips 1969)
Ekseption - Beggar Julia's Time Trip (Philips 1970)
East of Eden - Mercator Projected (Deram 1969)
Colosseum - Valentyne Suite (Vertigo 1969)
Colosseum - Daughter of Time (Dunhill 1970 in the US Sequel in UK)
Circus - s/t (Transatlantic 1969)
Brainchild - Healing of the Lunatic Owl (A&M 1970)
Beggars Opera - Act One (Vertigo 1970)
Beggars Opera - Waters of Change (Vertigo 1971)
Beggars Opera - Pathfinder (Vertigo 1972)
Trees - On the Shore (1970)
Soft Machine - Third (1970)
 
Okay, I guess you get the idea... There were a TON of great proto-prog bands, and I'm only scratching the surface here. 
 
I have to admit the symphonic and art rock top 100 lists are pretty comprehensive, and I even found a few titles I'd not heard of before.  Cudos to the contributors of those lists!
 
Whoever did the proto-prog list needs to take proto-prog 101.  Classes now forming...
 
prog on!
 
 
 


-------------
I love poetry, long walks on the beach, and poking dead things with a stick.


Posted By: Joolz
Date Posted: July 06 2006 at 03:57
^^^^^

erm, no, the Internal News forum isn't the place to discuss these things. But, as you've raised them, a couple of observations ....

1 Those lists are generated automatically from ratings and therefore reflect the preferences of members and reviewers.

2 Currently, genres are only assigned to bands, not to individual albums. Many of those names on your list are assigned to full prog genres which is why they do not appear in Proto Prog.

EDIT: oh - PS:

3 The database is still being populated and there are currently many anomalies. These are being or will be addressed by Collabs as time allows.


Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: July 06 2006 at 11:36
Nice answer Joolz.Thumbs Up


Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: July 06 2006 at 20:03
And interestingly enough, 37 of the 39 bands mentioned are already listed here with over 1,800 reviews posted (as Joolz says, under their proper genres), and the two that aren't (The Web and Brainchild) are somewhat represented by Samurai and Greenslade, and both have been mentioned in the forums.

A pretty good quality-control check for the Archives. A big hand for our genre groups and all the collabs who review admissions!

Proglamaniac - welcome to the Archives. Pull up a chair and take some time to look around, particularly at the album/review archives.



-------------
"And all of it was made for you and me, ‘cause it just belongs to you and me - so let's take a ride and see what's mine."

Iggy Pop


Posted By: proglamaniac
Date Posted: July 06 2006 at 21:25
Thanks for the welcome.  I've been a non-lurking member of your sister/brother site progressive ears for a few years now, and I've been using progarchives as a reliable resource for prog about the same.  I've learned of many bands and albums from this site that I might not have had progarchives not been here.  I've been a diehard progger since the early 70s when, still in my teens, I was exposed to Genesis, King Crimson, ELP, Yes, and all the great bands that were popular at the time.  And that was notable, because one could hear a track from Yes Fragile on FM one moment, followed by a Black Sabbath or Blue Oyster Cult track and then maybe Foghat or Elton John.  Those days have changed, of course.  Dramatically, and not for the better.  Thank God for the internet, the bridge that connected all of us!
 
I think I understand that many, if not most, of the bands/albums I listed are already reviewed.  It's possible I misunderstood the purpose of a top 100 proto-prog list.  Let's see how close I am...
 
The purpose of a top 100 genre list, in this case proto-prog, is to list the best 100 albums that genre had to offer.  That seemed pretty clear to me, but by all means correct me if I'm wrong.  If that's the case, and I believe it is, how does 33 of the 100 albums end up coming from one band?  Deep Purple, whom I am a BIG fan (MK II mainly) put out some 4 studio albums and 1 great live album from 1970 to 1974 when Gillan and Glover both left the band before Burn.  That makes 5 albums.
 
Proto-prog is a sub-genre of progressive rock that generally refers to bands in the late 60s and early 70s that played a more sophisticated rock music but was not necessarily "progressive".  Look anywhere on the 'net and you'll read names like Cressida, Spring, Gracious, Colosseum, Manfred Mann, Gnidrolog, Indian Summer, Still Life, and so many of their kind it's fairly obvious to anyone who takes the time to read up on this early movement (which is generally considered to have had its beginning in Great Britain).
 
Not one of those bands or their albums are mentioned in the top 100 proto-prog list, yet Deep Purple has 33, only a handful of which were actually recorded before 1972!  They had 3 or 4 albums before 1970 and another 3 or 4 after, which in my count comes to 8 at the most, not 33.  How many reviews do you suggest I read before that improbable figure begins to make sense?  Or is it because the other 28 Deep Purple albums that make up the bulk of that list aren't reviewed that qualifies them for inclusion?  If that's a primary criteria, then wouldn't the Carpenters or Blood, Sweat & Tears be on that list, since they have not been reviewed?
 
Admittedly, I'm not the most tactful person on the planet and for that I'm truly sorry.  I don't wake up each morning thinking of ways to piss people off.  The only reason I joined this forum was from shock.  You guys can run your site any way you like, but if want input from folks who might know a thing or two about the whole genre of progressive rock music, I'm available and I'd love to share what I know.  After consuming prog ravenously for over 35 years, I might just know a thing or two.
 
Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers.
 
Maybe you can explain to me why Deep Purple has 33 albums in this list and classic proto-prog bands like Cressida, Gracious or Spring have 0.  Please explain to me how a live album by DP recorded in 2001 qualifies as proto, when a classic album by Still Life recorded in 1971 on the Vertigo label does not.  Hey, I'm not trying to crap in your corn flakes here.  I guess I could have tempered my comments a bit so I didn't sound like I thought the people who created the list were idiots.  I'm sure there's a good reason.  I just didn't see one at the time.  But I'm all ears.
 
Enlighten me.  This might be fun.  Or maybe you'll tell me that David Bowie's latest album is proto-prog, and I'll just go find another forum to join.  It's no sweat off my balls.
 
Oh, I almost forgot.  Web is actually Samurai, they just changed their name. While they may be the same band with a new name, Brainchild has nothing to do with Greenslade.  Lennie Wright of Web and Samurai did produce Brainchild's album, which explains why they share a similar sound/style, not to mention the album cover design too.  But Dave Lawson left Samurai to form his own band: Greenslade.  So, saying that covering Greenslade amounts to covering Samurai or that covering Samurai is the equivalent to covering Brainchild is like saying Allan Holdsworth is Canterbury because he played on a couple albums with Bill Bruford, who happened to play with National Health and Gong for a short time.  Rich Wakeman was a guest keyboardist on a couple Black Sabbath albums, so does that make him a metal keyboardist?
 
In the words of our beloved Mike Meyers who played the host of "Cawfee Tawk" on SNL, "Talk amongst yourselves..."
 
prog on!


-------------
I love poetry, long walks on the beach, and poking dead things with a stick.


Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: July 06 2006 at 22:18
Charmed, I'm sure!

I don't really know anything about Samurai, Greenslade, The Web, or Brainchild, so you have me there. I am at the mercy of the various reviews and band bios here for Samurai and Greenslade, and a few forum posts, both sources which link the four bands (hence my obviously misguided assumption).

Anyway, your description of the various 'Top-100' listings is pretty much correct. However, as Joolz said, a lot of the bands you have called out are actually listed here under other genres (Art Rock, Symphonic, Prog-related, Jazz/Fusion, Canterbury, etc.), so they may show up under one of those genre's Top-100 lists.

The algorithm used to determine placement in the various Top-100 lists is based on the weighted ratings of the people who have reviewed the respective albums (you can find the formula listed at the top of each list). There are not nearly as many albums (or reviews) of Proto-Prog as there are of some other genres, so you will find that nearly all the albums in this category have made their way onto that list. If you look at Art Rock, Symphonic, or Metal, for example, you'll see that the bar is quite a bit higher for making it on to the list.

Hope that helps.


-------------
"And all of it was made for you and me, ‘cause it just belongs to you and me - so let's take a ride and see what's mine."

Iggy Pop


Posted By: Joolz
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 09:19
Proglamaniac

I think, to be fair, the Proto Prog definition on PA is slightly misleading -

Proto-Prog definition

Rock Bands in existence prior to 1969 that influenced the development of progressive rock. The late 60's was a predominately experimental period for music. These bands were moving in a stream that eventually led to prog. The influence could have come from new sophisticated forms of writing and playing music, recording techniques, new instruments and vocal harmonies to name a few. Some of these bands became progressive rock bands themselves others did not.

This implies that bands in existence before 1969 will be defined in Proto Prog, but of course, the way it is implemented on PA is that those which continued into a full Prog career are assigned to a full Prog sub-genre, eg King Crimson, VDGG etc, which only leaves those which did not do so, eg Beatles.

Notice, also, the year 1969 - ALL of the albums you list in your first post are from 1969 or later and would therefore be deemed to be AFTER the Proto Prog period.

Joolz


Posted By: peace_echoe
Date Posted: January 12 2007 at 23:10

1-ALL THE PROGRESSIVE GERMAN ROCK            2-ALL THE PROGRESSIVE ROCKS 3-ALL THE ROCKS 4 ALL THE METAL BANDS[ELOY-E.L.P-CAMEL-GROBSHNITT-ARCHIVE-NEKTAR-OPHELIAS DREAM-MEREDITH MONK............



-------------
slow motion...


Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 13 2007 at 01:10
Originally posted by proglamaniac proglamaniac wrote:

Thanks for the welcome.  I've been a non-lurking member of your sister/brother site progressive ears for a few years now, and I've been using progarchives as a reliable resource for prog about the same.  I've learned of many bands and albums from this site that I might not have had progarchives not been here.  I've been a diehard progger since the early 70s when, still in my teens, I was exposed to Genesis, King Crimson, ELP, Yes, and all the great bands that were popular at the time.  And that was notable, because one could hear a track from Yes Fragile on FM one moment, followed by a Black Sabbath or Blue Oyster Cult track and then maybe Foghat or Elton John.  Those days have changed, of course.  Dramatically, and not for the better.  Thank God for the internet, the bridge that connected all of us!
 
Hello Proglamaniac and welcome to participate, I also been a member of Progressive Ears for many years and my respect for that site is great, but due to my collaboration in Prog Archives plus the "real life" leaves me little time to visit it.
 
I agree with most of your concepts about the radio days, despite that in Perú Prog was very rarely in the FM. I am a Prog maniac since 1976 and yes Internet has made us realize wer're not so few as most of us once believed. 
 
I think I understand that many, if not most, of the bands/albums I listed are already reviewed.  It's possible I misunderstood the purpose of a top 100 proto-prog list.  Let's see how close I am...
 
The purpose of every list is only a reflex of the ratings the reviewers have given to the albums, the fact that an album is N° 1 or 200 doesn't mean it's better or worst, only that more people rated it with a high average.
 
The purpose of a top 100 genre list, in this case proto-prog, is to list the best 100 albums that genre had to offer.  That seemed pretty clear to me, but by all means correct me if I'm wrong.  If that's the case, and I believe it is, how does 33 of the 100 albums end up coming from one band?  Deep Purple, whom I am a BIG fan (MK II mainly) put out some 4 studio albums and 1 great live album from 1970 to 1974 when Gillan and Glover both left the band before Burn.  That makes 5 albums.
 
  1. Our top 100 chart has no quality reference purpose, it's only the average of the ratings given by the members and visitors to the albums.
  2. Our site for good or bad is band oriented, in other words a band is located in one sub-genre and all their discography attached to them, that's why you will find Genesis as Symphonic and We Can't Dance included as part of their discography despite it's bland POP.
  3. If we are allowed we will make some changes in Symphonic that will alow to be more clear about the different genres that the bands have crossed.
  4. Deep Purple is a popular band so more people reviews and rates the albums, that's the reason why so many DP albums are in the chart, not because hey are better or worst.
  5. No member, Collaborator, Administrator or even the owners decides which band reach the charts, the position is only the consequence of a complex average of all the ratings given to a determined album. 
  6. The algorithm to calculate the general rating of an album and it's position in the list evaluates different aspects, a rating without review has a very low weight, being that if you don't review and album, we have no way to know if you have really heard it or just a fanboy trying to manipulate the top 100 list (we had many of those  sadly).
  7. A visitor's review has less weight than  a Collaborator's because the site has a special trust for them, the number of reviews has also a weight being that there are albums rated by two or three persons with 5 stars and of course there's no possible trust in an average obtained from such a short number of ratings.
So, there's nothing we can do to change the charts except rating more and higher an album and hope more people does the same, but of course if an atempt to manipulate the charts is discovered, the review and the rating are deleted.
 
Proto-prog is a sub-genre of progressive rock that generally refers to bands in the late 60s and early 70s that played a more sophisticated rock music but was not necessarily "progressive".  Look anywhere on the 'net and you'll read names like Cressida, Spring, Gracious, Colosseum, Manfred Mann, Gnidrolog, Indian Summer, Still Life, and so many of their kind it's fairly obvious to anyone who takes the time to read up on this early movement (which is generally considered to have had its beginning in Great Britain).
 
Agree that the notion of Proto Prog is a bit obscure in Prog Archives, but mailto:M@X - M@X constant changes are done to improve it plus the work that the Collaborators and Administratord also make, will help to improve constantly the site.
 
It's also important to notice that most sub-genres have a team in charge of it, like my team does with Symphonic, but Proto Prog has not a team in charge yet, so the amount of work in this sub-genre is smaller than in others.
 
Well being that we have different sub-genres, the location of the bands is different here like in the case of the ones you mention:
  1. Cressida is in Symphonic: Post 70's and the most suitable genre is Symph
  2. Spring is in Art Rock: Because the definition of this sub-genre has changed from being an eqyivalent to what we call Prog Related to the actualWink  http://www.progarchives.com/subgenre.asp?style=3 - http://www.progarchives.com/subgenre.asp?style=3  if the Proto Prog definition doesn't change, I will probably ask the Art Rock Team this band for Symphonic.
  3. Gracious is in Symphonic for the same reason as Cressida.
  4. Colosseum is in Jazz/Fusion
  5. Manfred Mann is in Art Rock: I believe it should be in Prog Related, not Prog but almost in short terms, but it's not my call
  6. Gnidrolog is in Art Rock and I agree in this case.
  7. Indian Summer is in Art Rock and I'm not familiar with them so I can't give an opinion.
  8. Still Life idem as previous but I agree with you, if it wasn't for the date of the release, this one could be a clear case of Proto Prog

So maybe our perspective is different but all this bands are included.

BTW: Ghost Riider and Micky formed one of the most recent teams in charge of Art Rock and you will  surely see changes soon.
 
Not one of those bands or their albums are mentioned in the top 100 proto-prog list, yet Deep Purple has 33, only a handful of which were actually recorded before 1972!  They had 3 or 4 albums before 1970 and another 3 or 4 after, which in my count comes to 8 at the most, not 33.  How many reviews do you suggest I read before that improbable figure begins to make sense?  Or is it because the other 28 Deep Purple albums that make up the bulk of that list aren't reviewed that qualifies them for inclusion?  If that's a primary criteria, then wouldn't the Carpenters or Blood, Sweat & Tears be on that list, since they have not been reviewed?
 
I think you don't know that the site decides which bands go to a determined sub-genre, Carpenters are not in the data base of Prog Archives, so they could never appear in a chart.
 
Check: http://www.progarchives.com/subgenre.asp?style=37 - http://www.progarchives.com/subgenre.asp?style=37  and you will see which bands are included by Prog Archives until today in Proto Prog, no other band or album by a different band can be rated as a proto Prrog album (This list will grow).
 

Proto-Prog bands/artists list

Bands Country
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2768 - BAKERLOO http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=206 - United Kingdom
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2407 - BEATLES, THE http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=206 - United Kingdom
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=1501 - BROWN BAND, THE ARTHUR http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=206 - United Kingdom
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2336 - COLLECTORS, THE http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=37 - Canada
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=1969 - DEEP PURPLE http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=206 - United Kingdom
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2772 - DOORS, THE http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=197 - United States
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=1815 - GILES GILES & FRIPP http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=206 - United Kingdom
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2415 - GODS, THE http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=206 - United Kingdom
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2273 - H.P. LOVECRAFT http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=197 - United States
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2428 - IRON BUTTERFLY http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=197 - United States
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=1397 - IT'S A BEAUTIFUL DAY http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=197 - United States
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2546 - JEFFERSON AIRPLANE http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=197 - United States
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2282 - KALEIDOSCOPE / FAIRFIELD PARLOUR http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=206 - United Kingdom
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2383 - MÁQUINA! http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=207 - Spain
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2372 - PAN & REGALIZ http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=207 - Spain
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=1105 - PROCOL HARUM http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=206 - United Kingdom
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2352 - QUIET WORLD http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=206 - United Kingdom
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=933 - SALAMANDER http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=206 - United Kingdom
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2643 - SPIRIT http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=197 - United States
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=2568 - SWEEt**tER http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=197 - United States
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=1552 - TOUCH http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=197 - United States
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAND.asp?band_id=866 - VANILLA FUDGE http://www.progarchives.com/bands-country.asp?country=197 - United States
 
Admittedly, I'm not the most tactful person on the planet and for that I'm truly sorry.  I don't wake up each morning thinking of ways to piss people off.  The only reason I joined this forum was from shock.  You guys can run your site any way you like, but if want input from folks who might know a thing or two about the whole genre of progressive rock music, I'm available and I'd love to share what I know.  After consuming prog ravenously for over 35 years, I might just know a thing or two.
 
By the contrary, the opinions help us improve.
 
Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers.
 
Maybe you can explain to me why Deep Purple has 33 albums in this list and classic proto-prog bands like Cressida, Gracious or Spring have 0.  Please explain to me how a live album by DP recorded in 2001 qualifies as proto, when a classic album by Still Life recorded in 1971 on the Vertigo label does not.  Hey, I'm not trying to crap in your corn flakes here.  I guess I could have tempered my comments a bit so I didn't sound like I thought the people who created the list were idiots.  I'm sure there's a good reason.  I just didn't see one at the time.  But I'm all ears.
 
Again, because the charts are only a reflex of how many people have given high ratings to a determined album of our data base, here's no explanation for so many DP albums, we include the complete discography of the band and the people rate them.
 
For example, my team is in charge of Symphonic, most of us believe HYBRIS should be in the top 10 if not in the top 5 (It's lower in the chart), but there's not a thing we can do because the system adds the ratings, uses the  algorithm  and gives a cold number and an average that has not necesarilly relation with the quality of the album.
 
The chart only says that more people believes Closre to the Edge deserves 5 stars.
 
Enlighten me.  This might be fun.  Or maybe you'll tell me that David Bowie's latest album is proto-prog, and I'll just go find another forum to join.  It's no sweat off my balls.
 
Bowie is not in the site
 
Oh, I almost forgot.  Web is actually Samurai, they just changed their name. While they may be the same band with a new name, Brainchild has nothing to do with Greenslade.  Lennie Wright of Web and Samurai did produce Brainchild's album, which explains why they share a similar sound/style, not to mention the album cover design too.  But Dave Lawson left Samurai to form his own band: Greenslade.  So, saying that covering Greenslade amounts to covering Samurai or that covering Samurai is the equivalent to covering Brainchild is like saying Allan Holdsworth is Canterbury because he played on a couple albums with Bill Bruford, who happened to play with National Health and Gong for a short time.  Rich Wakeman was a guest keyboardist on a couple Black Sabbath albums, so does that make him a metal keyboardist?
 
This site is pretty new, dates from 2004, and some bands were added by members who made a bio without verifying it, that's why the addition of bands has been restricted to special collaborators and higher ranks.
 
Last year in May we were one of the first teams to check band by band all the database (In our case the original 519 bands of Symphonic), after several months we retired 150 bands (Sent them to other sub-genres) and asked for 30 or 40 bands to be added to Symphonic, still we're making bios of almost unknown bands that we have to research, sometimes buying the albums, but this is not an easy work, it takes time, but don't worry, each day will be better.
 
BTW: Where did you found this info, I checked the small but accurate bio of Samurai by Sean and the excellent bio of Greenslade by Erik and this is not mentioned.
 
If you read it in a review in the front page, this is responsability of the reviewer.
 
Keep proggin
 
Iván
 


-------------


Posted By: sospiri
Date Posted: February 08 2007 at 14:21
I worked with both Lennie Wright and Don Fay as long ago as 1962 in a band at Poole Harbour Yacht Club - rather different stuff to what they did with Samurai and Web. Don Fay is now back in the UK after a spell in Australia and lives somewhere in the New Forest area so I am told.
 
The purpose of this posting is to enquire if anyone knows whether Lennie Wright is still alive. I understand that he lived in the Norwich area for many years and had a son, Louis Wright, who is apparently no mean vibes player. However, I have been unable to find any mention of Louis via the search engines and no one in Lennie's original stamping ground of Bournemouth seems to be able to confirm whether he is alive or dead. I'd love to know - just for old time's sake!


Posted By: Seyo
Date Posted: July 11 2007 at 05:16

SPLIT ENZ "Split Enz" ratings distribution

3.84 / 5
(1 ratings)
Essential: a masterpiece of progressive music (100%)
100%
Excellent addition to any prog music collection (0%)
0%
Good, but non-essential (0%)
0%
Collectors/fans only (0%)
0%
Poor. Only for completionists (0%)
0%
I don't understand this new calculation algorhythm. How could it be that only one rating of 5 stars produces the average rating of 3.84 ?! Wacko


Posted By: 1800iareyay
Date Posted: July 19 2007 at 20:11
mailto:M@x - M@x , the problem I have with a weighted system is that every few onths the list will drastically alter, which will lead to at least three forum threads on how the site as a whole has failed and how could you even think of putting yadda yadda yadda at No. 1 as if you yourself made the list. I'd like to think my hard work is rewarded with a little weighting, but I think more harm than good will come of it.


Posted By: eduur
Date Posted: July 21 2007 at 16:00
Can anyone EXPLAIN how the new ranking system works?
Just give me a formula, the link to wikipedia doesn't help much in explaining
why e.g.  Los Aivas (nr. 37) isn't Number One...


Posted By: Desoc
Date Posted: July 23 2007 at 15:43
If anybody cares to give eduur a reply, I would also appreciate it. Because I simply fail to see the (probably easy) method being used based on the Wikipedia article. An example:

We have 5 albums:
Album A, average 4,38, 58 votes.
Album B, average 4,11, 32 votes.
Album C, average 4,42, 29 votes.
Album D, average 3,82, 44 votes.
Album E, average 4,58, 20 votes.

The Wikipedia article seems to imply that I should multiply the average rating (the grade in the article) by the number of votes (the number of students) and then divide it by 183, which is the total number of votes. But this basically only ranks the albums by the number of votes, which is the opposite of what was supposed to happen. So... how's it calculated?


Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 23 2007 at 15:57
Short explanation:

Suppose that the average number of ratings for an album in the archives is 10. Also suppose that the total average rating is 3.80:

N=10
R=3.80

now we have an album which has only one rating of 5.0:

n=1
r=5.00

The weighted average is:

avg = (N*R + n*r) / (N+n)

In this case:

avg = (10*3.80 + 1*5) / (10+1) = 43/11 = 3.91

Let's look at another album which also only has one rating, but 1 star instead of 5:

avg = (10*3.80 + 1*1) / (10+1) = 39/11 = 3.55

Now let's look at an album which has 20 five star ratings:

avg = (10*3.80 + 20*5)/(10+20) = 138/30 = 4.60

Or an album which has 20 one star ratings:

avg = (10*3.80 + 20*1)/(10+20) = 58/30 = 1.93


See? Albums with only one rating start at the total average an slowly work their way up or down the chart as the number of ratings increases. The more ratings an album has, the more it's computed average matches the "real" average ... the less ratings an album has, the closer the weighted average "sticks" to the total average.




Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 23 2007 at 16:08

^ of course that does mean that no band will ever score a perfect "5" - but that's no bad thing Wink



-------------


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman


Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: July 23 2007 at 17:19
Thanks Mike, it was beyond me to explain!!Embarrassed


Posted By: 1800iareyay
Date Posted: July 23 2007 at 19:40
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

Short explanation:

Suppose that the average number of ratings for an album in the archives is 10. Also suppose that the total average rating is 3.80:

N=10
R=3.80

now we have an album which has only one rating of 5.0:

n=1
r=5.00

The weighted average is:

avg = (N*R + n*r) / (N+n)

In this case:

avg = (10*3.80 + 1*5) / (10+1) = 43/11 = 3.91

Let's look at another album which also only has one rating, but 1 star instead of 5:

avg = (10*3.80 + 1*1) / (10+1) = 39/11 = 3.55

Now let's look at an album which has 20 five star ratings:

avg = (10*3.80 + 20*5)/(10+20) = 138/30 = 4.60

Or an album which has 20 one star ratings:

avg = (10*3.80 + 20*1)/(10+20) = 58/30 = 1.93


See? Albums with only one rating start at the total average an slowly work their way up or down the chart as the number of ratings increases. The more ratings an album has, the more it's computed average matches the "real" average ... the less ratings an album has, the closer the weighted average "sticks" to the total average.


So...if she weighs as much as a duck...she's made of wood?


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 23 2007 at 20:19

^ now here lies an interesting paradox...

Without the weighting The Who's Quadrophenia would currently be sitting near top of the Top 100, which would bring about a flurry of hateboy 1-star ratings to drag it down.
 
With the new weighting system this will not happen until it has a sufficient number of 4 and 5 star ratings to get it into the Top 100, which will render the hateboy low ratings ineffectual for quite some time.
 
Which is highly commendable. But not exactly a level playing field for the exisiting albums that have already "suffered" under the old system.
 
(I'm not having a go at The Who - the same thing will happen to the next major inclusion and to the next major release buy one of the big-names)
 


-------------


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman


Posted By: 1800iareyay
Date Posted: July 23 2007 at 20:23
Yeah, but weird things happen here and there with the rating system. Livecrime is in the upper reaches of the prog metal top 100 with only 16 ratings I believe


Posted By: Dim
Date Posted: July 23 2007 at 20:26
WyWh is in the top spot.
 
(sigh) what are we doing to ourselves?


-------------


Posted By: 1800iareyay
Date Posted: July 23 2007 at 20:27
dude, why do you keep bringing that up?


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 23 2007 at 20:37
Originally posted by 1800iareyay 1800iareyay wrote:

Yeah, but weird things happen here and there with the rating system. Livecrime is in the upper reaches of the prog metal top 100 with only 16 ratings I believe
Because it has only 1 1-star rating against it's 13 5-star ratings - ie it desreves to be there - and also DVD's tend to attract reviews and ratings only from fans of the band.


-------------


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman


Posted By: 1800iareyay
Date Posted: July 23 2007 at 20:39
Ok, that makes more sense. Thanks for clearing that up


Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 01:22
Originally posted by darqdean darqdean wrote:

^ now here lies an interesting paradox...

Without the weighting The Who's Quadrophenia would currently be sitting near top of the Top 100, which would bring about a flurry of hateboy 1-star ratings to drag it down.
 
With the new weighting system this will not happen until it has a sufficient number of 4 and 5 star ratings to get it into the Top 100, which will render the hateboy low ratings ineffectual for quite some time.
 
Which is highly commendable. But not exactly a level playing field for the exisiting albums that have already "suffered" under the old system.
 
(I'm not having a go at The Who - the same thing will happen to the next major inclusion and to the next major release buy one of the big-names)
 


I don't think that there's any ranking algorithm that could automatically separate the abusive ratings from the honest ones.Embarrassed


Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 01:52
Originally posted by darqdean darqdean wrote:

Originally posted by 1800iareyay 1800iareyay wrote:

Yeah, but weird things happen here and there with the rating system. Livecrime is in the upper reaches of the prog metal top 100 with only 16 ratings I believe
Because it has only 1 1-star rating against it's 13 5-star ratings - ie it desreves to be there - and also DVD's tend to attract reviews and ratings only from fans of the band.


Which is one of the reasons why live albums and DVDs should not be listed unless the visitor explicitly wants them (clicks a button).


Posted By: Desoc
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 03:34
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

Short explanation:
(snip)
See? Albums with only one rating start at the total average an slowly work their way up or down the chart as the number of ratings increases. The more ratings an album has, the more it's computed average matches the "real" average ... the less ratings an album has, the closer the weighted average "sticks" to the total average.


Okay, thanks, that makes very much sense now.

I do notice, however, that album without any ratings at all are given a higher score with this system than albums with comparably low ratings. Are these albums excluded from the system? That is, are they taken into account when calculating the average rating for all albums in the archives, or not?


Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 05:17
AFAIK the total average and number of ratings are calculated from the ratings database ... so of course the computed average of albums without ratings has no effect on the calculation. It also doesn't make any sense to calculate and display the average for these albums.


Posted By: Desoc
Date Posted: July 24 2007 at 05:36
I completely agree, but it would be an easy "mistake" to use the total number of albums in the database, and not only the number of albums with ratings, as a basis for calculating the average rating of all albums. Hence the question.


Posted By: eduur
Date Posted: August 01 2007 at 02:57

Mike thanks for your explanation on the 23th of kuly.
But I still don't get it!

I see how you compute "the average" but for whom ??

With your example with two albums:

================

N=10
R=3.80

now we have an album which has only one rating of 5.0:

n=1
r=5.00

The weighted average is:

avg = (N*R + n*r) / (N+n)

In this case:

avg = (10*3.80 + 1*5) / (10+1) = 43/11 = 3.91

====================

That's nice, but what average? It's the overall average for all albums.
But who would be ranked higher in this case? album (N,R) or (n,r) ?
And why ? (Formula, please :} )

I hate to tell you I have a PhD in Mathematics but it still doesn't make sense to me.



Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 01 2007 at 07:00
^ You got it all wrong .. N/R does not stand for a single album:

N = Average number of ratings for all albums in the database. So if there are 100 albums and a total of 1000 ratings in the database, N would be 10.
R = Average rating of all the albums in the database. This is a traditional arithmetical mean, like the avg(...) aggregate function in SQL does.

So N and R are constant values in this algorithm - they're the same for all albums (during the calculation of the weighted average ... of course when new ratings are submitted or existing ratings edited, these constants change).

Now for any given album we first calculate these constants and then apply

avg = (N*R + n*r) / (N + n)

for

n = the number of ratings for the given albm
r = the average rating of the album (arithmetical mean*)

* this has nothing to do with the calculation of this weighted average ... but for the sake of completeness it should be mentioned that the mean value used here is also a slightly "tweaked" arithmetical mean calculation ... for each rating a weight is applied depending on the rating (no review text / review text / collab).


Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 01 2007 at 07:13
Incidentally: Another good way to understand what this algorithm does is this:

Suppose that in the archives each album has 10 ratings on average, and the average rating of all albums is 3.5. The average for any given album is then calculated as if the album had 10 additional ratings of 3.5 stars. So new albums with only one rating of 5 stars get "dragged down" towards 3.5 stars ... new albums with one low rating get dragged up towards 3.5 stars. Albums with 10 ratings end up halfway between their own average rating and the total average rating ... and albums with much more than 10 ratings are not really affected, their own average rating remains unaffected.


Posted By: eduur
Date Posted: August 01 2007 at 11:21

Mike, I now understand thanks!

So, in the above case where there are two albums with one album

n1=10
r1=3.8

and the other

n2=1
r2=5

N = 11/2 =5.5
R = 43/11=3.91

album1 = (N*R+n1*r1) / (N+n1) = (5.5*3.91+10*3.8) / (5.5+10)= 3.83
album2 = (N*R+n2*r2) / (N+n2) = (5.5*3.91+1*5)    / (5.5+1) = 4.08

Is this correct?

And do you know R and N for Progarchives...



Posted By: digdug
Date Posted: August 07 2007 at 08:42

Possible Ratings algorithm error ???

I looked at the top 100 for Experimaental/Post Rock
and did not see
Le Notti Difficili by  Lazona..... This album has a rating of 3.36 based on 11 ratings....
 
The top 100 includes many albums with a rating less than 3.36 and less ratings.
 
Please explain.....
Thanks


-------------
Prog On!


Posted By: Desoc
Date Posted: October 07 2007 at 12:19
Originally posted by digdug digdug wrote:

Possible Ratings algorithm error ???

I looked at the top 100 for Experimaental/Post Rock
and did not see
Le Notti Difficili by  Lazona..... This album has a rating of 3.36 based on 11 ratings....
 
The top 100 includes many albums with a rating less than 3.36 and less ratings.
 
Please explain.....
Thanks
 
Seems like a valid point... More people than digdug would like an answer to this Smile ..out of curiosity and search for knowledge, of course. Perhaps Mike could provide an answer given his record in this thread? Wink


Posted By: progressive
Date Posted: February 24 2008 at 14:02
Now it's much much more difficult to search new band when there's

"Only albums with at least 25 ratings and an average ratings over 3.5/5 are displayed in theses lists"

, so eg Zeuhl has only 11 albums in the list and prog folk 30. Why can't people decide themselves how to set the list?? You got the material, large amount of reviews, why can't it be utilized progressively?
DeadCryAngryConfusedShocked

Thumbs%20Upbut.. good luck

-------------

► rateyourmusic.com/~Fastro 2672 ratings ▲ last.fm/user/Fastro 5556 artists ▲ www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=4933 266◄


Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: February 24 2008 at 15:10
I think we should create multiple topics about the new system, whether we wanna write a positive or negative opinion on it.

That is, we can use this one.


-------------


Posted By: dalt99
Date Posted: February 24 2008 at 23:19
What was wrong with the way it was? I don't understand the change. Why not add an option of what we want to see? If we want to see "Only albums with at least 25 ratings and an average ratings over 3.5/5 are displayed in theses lists", than fine, but we should also be able to CHOOSE to see ALL albums in a genre/studio album/year, etc. of all rating number. Even albums with no votes could be seen. This list was one of the best ways to find out about new album (and more unknown) albums that had only a few ratings but were very good.


-------------
Best of 2006 that I've heard:
PFM-Stati Di Immaginazione
Zenit-Surrender (Best "unknown" album)
Oaksenham - Conquest of Pacific
2007:
Phideaux - Doomsday Afternoon
La Torre Del Alchimista - Neo


Posted By: Harkonnen
Date Posted: January 06 2009 at 20:10
Dear all,
 
I was looking at the imdb movie database and came accross the "True Bayesian Estimate" to rank the best 250 movies. I think that such method could work well in our PA database.
 
BTW, I just love the flexibility to choose exactly what you want on the Top 100/250 section.
 
I normally choose the studio and live albums with a score higher than 3.8 and more than 50 reviews. I copy the results to Excel and make a table. I normally add a column where I multiply the score times the number of reviews... Not very elegant.
 
I just did the TBE calculation and I like the results... Please give it a try:
 
WR = (vR + mC) / (v + m)
 
Where:
 
WR: Weighted Rank (Score, 0-5)
v = number of reviews
R = average score for that particular album
m = minimum number of reviews to be considered (In my case, 50)
C = average rating of the whole database


Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: January 07 2009 at 02:50
I think our algorithm is similar.


Posted By: 615694
Date Posted: January 19 2009 at 20:26
Wondering why "Close to the Edge" isn't listed in the Top 100 or did I miss it?
 
It's one of my "5 albums marooned on an island" picks.


-------------
"Helm, full dive on the planes."


Posted By: Moogtron III
Date Posted: January 20 2009 at 02:23
Originally posted by 615694 615694 wrote:

Wondering why "Close to the Edge" isn't listed in the Top 100 or did I miss it?
 
It's one of my "5 albums marooned on an island" picks.
 
It's at nr. 3 Wink .


Posted By: maru19206
Date Posted: January 20 2009 at 07:53
Again, how we know N and R, number of all in the database?



Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: January 20 2009 at 08:04
^ they are dynamic numbers it is not possible to know them because they keep changing as more ratings are posted. They are calculated internally when the chart positions are calculated and are not displayed. I doubt that even M@X knows what the precise values are at any one time.

-------------


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman


Posted By: maru19206
Date Posted: January 21 2009 at 06:54
Ah, yes I got it. Thanks a lot.

Keep on Proggin'.


Posted By: M@X
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 02:10
Many changes during the past days to the TOP PROG ALBUM tool and the sub-genre list of key albums.

Basically , the algorithm is mostly the same, it's the default value use in the calculation that have changed.

Here the updated info describing the calculations variables and filters in the TOP PROG ALBUM tool:

Here is some details about how we calculate the average rating of an album and the rank of an album.

  • Average rating: The classic calculation of the average but more weight is affected to the rating of progarchives.com collaborators and to rating with reviews.
    - Rating only: Weight = 1
    - Review by members : Weight = 5
    - Review by PA Collaborators : Weight = 10
  • Rank of an album: We use a calculation that compare an album average rating and number of ratings over all others albums in the query using this theory ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weighted_average - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weighted_average )

  • By default, only albums with at the number of ratings above the average number of ratings in the query and only albums with at the average ratings above the average ratings in the query are displayed in theses lists



The results have changed in both the PA TOP 100 PROG  albums and in the sub-genre too because of the changes in the default variables.

Please post your sugg. and comments here.


-------------
Prog On !


Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 10:58
I believe that for a bunch of people who follow an unpopular genre which rarely is presented in charts, we care damn too much for the top list.
 
When i invite somebody to PA I don't tell him/her "Check the ratings", I tell them "Read the reviews".
 
Iván
 


-------------


Posted By: M@X
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 11:14
I understand your point IVAN but in the end, we must "anyway" offer some kind of charts as a prog rock web site. And now, with the update algorithm and default value, I believe it's more accurate.

Opinions ?



-------------
Prog On !


Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 11:35
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

I believe that for a bunch of people who follow an unpopular genre which rarely is presented in charts, we care damn too much for the top list.
 
When i invite somebody to PA I don't tell him/her "Check the ratings", I tell them "Read the reviews".
 
Iván
 


You're always on a crusade against the ratings ... I think that's going a bit too far. Reviews should be more important than ratings at PA, but I don't think ignoring the ratings completely is the way to go.


-------------
http://mikeenregalia.com" rel="nofollow - My Blog about Nutrition, Dieting and Excercise ... oh, and Music, too! ;-)



Posted By: StyLaZyn
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 11:39
Originally posted by M@X M@X wrote:

I understand your point IVAN but in the end, we must "anyway" offer some kind of charts as a prog rock web site. And now, with the update algorithm and default value, I believe it's more accurate.

Opinions ?


You guys do what you have to do. In trying to understand what Ivan is getting at, in reference to non-Prog listeners trying to get into Prog, it is understandable that the most accessible has the best chance of keeping them listening. Frankly, some of the top 100 ranked albums here are way out there and will quite likely put off a new listener due to the utter bizarreness. 

For instance, I would think it would much easier to enjoy PF's Animals than Bacamarte's Depois Do Fim. That point is not to detract from the effectiveness and rating of Bacamarte's album, but merely an illustration.


-------------


Posted By: M@X
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 11:47
UPDATE:

I have found an issue in the old and recent changes and fixed it, so expect some changes in the TOP LIST.
Details: there was 341 ghosts ratings from deleted albums that affected the weights.



NP: MARILLION "Fugazi" , what an underrated ones....


-------------
Prog On !


Posted By: M@X
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 11:55
And now ELP seems to have find a spot ...  at the 49th position !

-------------
Prog On !


Posted By: M@X
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 11:57
still checking to improve things... stay tuned

-------------
Prog On !


Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 11:57
Originally posted by M@X M@X wrote:

I understand your point IVAN but in the end, we must "anyway" offer some kind of charts as a prog rock web site. And now, with the update algorithm and default value, I believe it's more accurate.

Opinions ?

 
Not in your case mailto:M@X - M@X , I  know you try to give the most accurate chart fopr us, and that's valuable, if we are going to have a chart, lets have the best one.
 
My question is why towards other persons who constantly live pending on the charts.. Peiople who ask, The Ratings? Why this band is 20 and this is 15? How can my favorite band not be in the top 500?
 
For God's sake, mailto:M@X - M@X does a hard job improvinmg the system, i seen iit change at least 10 times, that's a lot of work, let the man live.
 
Iván
 
 
 
 


-------------


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 11:57
Tales from Topographic Oceans is in the top 20 symph now?  Shocked

Too bad Kansas fell off.  Cry



-------------
http://epignosis.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow - Listen to the new Epignosis album for free- it's good for your health


Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 12:06
Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

I believe that for a bunch of people who follow an unpopular genre which rarely is presented in charts, we care damn too much for the top list.
 
When i invite somebody to PA I don't tell him/her "Check the ratings", I tell them "Read the reviews".
 
Iván
 


You're always on a crucade against the ratings ... I think that's going a bit too far. Reviews should be more important than ratings at PA, but I don't think ignoring the ratings completely is the way to go.
 
Mike, I have notyhing against the ratings, I rate all my albums, I believe a good rating is a visual aid for a review but nothing more, I'm not obsessed if an album is Nº 1 or Nº 12454,, that's the difference, I guess mailto:M@X - M@X has a llot of important things to do to be constantly behind the ratings and the numbers, this is not a rating site, this is a review site, reviews are collateral.
 
As a prove that I care in some degree about ratings and want to have the best system, i supported clearly the addition of .5 stars to be more precise (again, if we are having ratings, lets have the most accurate system), but if it never happens, it won't affect me, if Foxtrot gioes down to Nª 500, will still be my favorite album ever.
 
It intrigues me why people is pending on which band is at the top, or like the guys last week who came to manipulate the ratings and take Pink Floyd up...that's absurd IMO.
 
Iván
 
 


-------------


Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 12:08
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Tales from Topographic Oceans is in the top 20 symph now?  Shocked

Too bad Kansas fell off.  Cry

 
Good point, I find Tales boring and lame in comparison with other Yes albums, but i won't like it more because it's a top 20, i choose any Kansas album, despite the place it is over tales any day.
 
Iván


-------------


Posted By: M@X
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 12:14
Kansas back , Tales gone from the TOP 20 Symph.

Sorry , still tweaking the algo.


-------------
Prog On !


Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 12:18
Originally posted by M@X M@X wrote:

Kansas back , Tales gone from the TOP 20 Symph.

Sorry , still tweaking the algo.
 
That's my point my friend, you are breaking your back on this, and honestly, what's the problem with Kansas being 20 or 30?
 
I know you have a lot of issues to worry about, yes, let's have the best possible system, if you agree lets add the 0.5 stars, but if not.....Also great, we have the chance to write our reviews and give our honest rating as nowhere else, in most places only a small elite is able to revioew, here we all can....What else can we ask?.
 
Thank you mailto:M@X - M@X  for everything
 
Iván 


-------------


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 12:23
I don't lose sleep over what albums are where personally, but I know that when I was new to this site years ago, those top twenty lists were extremely important to me, because they were an "at a glance" guide for "what to buy next" with limited funds.

The reviews are of course far more informative and useful, but even to this day I still use the top 20 lists for each genre as a broad way to keep in mind albums I should look toward purchasing next.


-------------
http://epignosis.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow - Listen to the new Epignosis album for free- it's good for your health


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 12:26
^ I agree - I often look at them and think "Oh, I haven't got that, I wonder what it's like and why it's so popular?" - the reviews often answer those questions, but it's the ratings and chart position that draws my attention to them.

-------------


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman


Posted By: M@X
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 12:52
I think I did the final tweaks now, please use and comments the TOP PROG ALBUM tool and check the sub-genre TOP 20 studios album for anomalies and report please.

...now back to FISHed Marillion's era music


-------------
Prog On !


Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 14:10
Like itClap

-------------


In Lazland, life is transient. Prog is permanent.


Posted By: Mellotron Storm
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 14:57
I just had a look at the top 100 and i think it's much more accurate now then it was before.  I think it's more realistic.  Nice job Max!Clap

-------------
"The wind is slowly tearing her apart"
"Sad Rain" ANEKDOTEN


Posted By: M@X
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 22:05
I also think it's better now .... i'd like to hear more comments, maybe about the genre experts too ?!

-------------
Prog On !


Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 16 2009 at 01:19
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

 
It intrigues me why people is pending on which band is at the top, or like the guys last week who came to manipulate the ratings and take Pink Floyd up...that's absurd IMO.
 


I saw your posts about the .5 rating steps ... I know that you don't want the ratings removed. But I see so many posts where you tell people that they should focus on reviews only. IMO such a strategy only works for people who don't really want to expand their collection ... people who are content with the list of artists they know and just want to see what other people have to say about Yes and Genesis and *very rarely* ever check out new albums. For such people ratings indeed aren't very important.


-------------
http://mikeenregalia.com" rel="nofollow - My Blog about Nutrition, Dieting and Excercise ... oh, and Music, too! ;-)



Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 16 2009 at 01:30
Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:



I saw your posts about the .5 rating steps ... I know that you don't want the ratings removed. But I see so many posts where you tell people that they should focus on reviews only. IMO such a strategy only works for people who don't really want to expand their collection ... people who are content with the list of artists they know and just want to see what other people have to say about Yes and Genesis and *very rarely* ever check out new albums. For such people ratings indeed aren't very important.
 
Do you imply I don't want to expand my collection Mike? LOLLOLLOL
 
I got more than 100 new albums last year and 200 DVD's, most of them from new bands....Or do you believe I only read reviews about albums that I know?
 
Don't get your logic......Do you really believe that  If you don't focus on reviews only, then you don't want to expand your collection? Confused Or is it that you believe the formula to expand your collection is to read ratings and memorize them?
 
Why can't  I focus on reviews about new albums? Question
 
What's the logic of that?
 
If I read a rating, probably I will have forgotten it in one minute, if I read a good review about an album, wuill remember it for a long time.
 
I don't say forget ratings, I say FOCUS PRIMARILLY ON REVIEWS, reviews matter more for me and ratings alone are worth very little for me, but how in hell does that means i want to have the same albunms?
 
Please explain me, I'm intrigued, I fiind absolutely no connection.
 
Iván


-------------


Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 16 2009 at 03:49
I think that when you want to expand your collection and you only rely on reviews, you really need a lot of time on your hands ... Wink

BTW: I would be curious which albums you get ... I guess you won't, but you can always use the PF playlist. You don't even need to submit any ratings or tags to put albums on the playlist ... Smile


-------------
http://mikeenregalia.com" rel="nofollow - My Blog about Nutrition, Dieting and Excercise ... oh, and Music, too! ;-)




Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk