Just wondering if the site can add Trevor Rabin as an artist to the site. I know his early stuff is really pop, but his last album is a must for prog fans and deserves at least to be recognized.

Thanks

 

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=74149&KW=trevor+rabin&PID=3986130#3986130" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=74149&KW=trevor+rabin&PID=3986130#3986130

 

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57246&KW=trevor+rabin&PID=3216885#3216885" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57246&KW=trevor+rabin&PID=3216885#3216885

 

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=53533&KW=trevor+rabin&PID=3047191#3047191" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=53533&KW=trevor+rabin&PID=3047191#3047191

 

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=18049&KW=trevor+rabin&PID=1839225#1839225" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=18049&KW=trevor+rabin&PID=1839225#1839225

 

Agree!

There's a specific forum for the suggestions that's monitored by the teams.

I think you can post there. If you have samples of the last album and it is really prog, you may succeed.

A rejected artist can't be suggested again unless a new release can make people change their mind. You are speaking of a new release so it may be the case.

Find youtube samples to post and let's see what happens.

 

Asia is here, but they play AOR, just like Trevor Rabin.

 

 

Yes, I like album Jacaranda. It is his 2nd prog album by me.  This one a little jazzy but very good.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Jacaranda/dp/B0080QYL9W/ref=mb_oe_o" rel="nofollow - http://www.amazon.com/Jacaranda/dp/B0080QYL9W/ref=mb_oe_o

 

http://www.seaoftranquility.org/reviews.php?op=showcontent&id=12742" rel="nofollow - http://www.seaoftranquility.org/reviews.php?op=showcontent&id=12742

Let's clarify one thing: TRevor Rabin has guided YES for a decade as wellas Phil Collins has guided GENESIS. None of the two is on PA. Collins doesn't have any prog solo output, Rabin didn't until the last albums that I don't know, that's why I think he can be re-evaluated.

Annie Haslam is not on PA, David Gilmour is prog-related only and I don't think Greg Lake is here as well, just to mention some.

Whoa buddy.

Don't go there.

There are plenty of extreme tech prog metal acts. Quite a big difference.

 

It's up to us everybody to listen to what we like. We have forums on PA on which we can discuss of everything even when not strictly prog. Give a look to the forum's page.

We have Howe, Squire, Bruford, Anderson, Hackett, Rutherford, Gabriel and a lot of other "solos". Up to now nobody in the site admins has found the solo works of Collins and Rabin "prog enough", that's all. It doesn't mean that discussing of an album not listed is forbidden. The disucssions are free, only they will not appear as proper reviews. There's a specific forum section for them.

Amazon or rateyourmusic are the reasons why this site is more restrictive with the additions. We don't want to be clones, and respect to Amazon, we don't sell goods (at least I don't).

However, the process that we have adopted for ANY artist's inclusion is:

1) create a thread in the section "Suggest new bands and artists"

2) Attach the link to some samples to support your decision.

3) Collabs monitoring the site will bring the suggestion to the relative team (there's a team for each subgenre)

4) They will evaluate the suggestion and decide whether to include, reject, or move to another team.

A rejected artist can be proposed again if there's a new release which makes it more suitable for the site's standards.

If you click on the links to the subgenres on the home page you'll find the definitions of each subgenre.

I suppose that you think to suggest Rabin as symphonic prog, but I may be wrong. State the subgenre in your suggestion.

I have had a number of rejected suggestions during the years, the last one yesterday (Claudio Milano for JR/F), I have struggled about three years to see the TUATHA DE DANANN added. This is how it works.

Dig a bit more in the site, I' hope you'll enjoy it.  

 

 

No need to get so angry dude.

There are a lot of artists on this site that many don't agree with, and a lot that aren't on this site that many don't agree with. We try to come together and make the best decisions about it. I mean, if a group of people don't share your opinion, that's no reason to get mad.

When I first started on this site, I felt like the "prog" definition was like a badge or something. Pretty much every band I like I end up thinking they are at least "prog-related." But they aren't always. And ya just gotta deal with it. No biggie. Enjoy the music anyway. :-D

I do admit that Trevor Rabin is not the most proggy artist. I was just wanting to expose people to his new album, which I consider very proggy and it's also a delight to hear.

Thanks for hearing me out and hope Trevor comes out with some more albums that could maybe make him a member of this wonderful site.

Thanks!!!

 

I have mentioned David Gilmour. I hope you'll not be concerned if I comment your sentences.

I was around in the early 70s and the word "progressive" I think has been used for the first time around 1972 and it took several years to become a label. Nobody was thinking of anything called prog in these years. I think I've heard it for the first time at the end of the 80s.

I don't see the ambiguity in the site. I don't get your point so I can't comment.

About prog metal, give a try to Ayreon's "The Human Equation" with a bit of open mind and let me know what you think.

If you really want to open your mind I can suggest you "Universal Totem Orchestra", the first 4 albums of Art Zoyd or even the last live of Nichelodeon (the first things that I have in mind). No metal of any kind there.

Even Sir Gilmour has attempted something really new for him with his colaboration with "The Orb". Try it.

 

1.) As I have stated already in several other threads, I support Trevor Rabin for Prog Related.  There is no way that he is Symphonic Prog though, and our team would surely reject him.
 
2.) The procedure as described above is how is ought to work, not how it really works most of the time (especially not for Prog Related suggestions). Most such suggestions never lead to formal evaluation. Trevor Rabin is a good example of this; he has been suggested many times, but nothing has happened. What’s the point of creating yet another thread when nothing happens?

 

3.) Instead of any more fruitless discussion: Take a good look at the guidelines for Prog Related, gather a number relevant facts about Rabin with the guidelines in mind, and get a special collaborator to send a private message to the admins. (And then be prepared to wait loooong time before any result).

  

True if you think to "related". For full prog categories that's the process, I think.

 

Personally, I would love PA to be a little bit more like Rateyourmusic. Many of my favourite bands are borderline Prog, and many of these are presently included in PA's Prog Related category, but not all of them.

 

Many here seem to think that we are scaring people off by including "questionable" or "unpure" artists. I think the opposite is true. If Queen, Black Sabbath, Rainbow, etc. would not have been here, I would most probably never have found my way here. These are, after all, great "gateway" bands. I think we should be more liberal with inclusions.

 

Here I agree with you (also with the mentioned bands), but remaining "specialized" is not snobism. I think it gives the site a punctual identity. The criteria for inclusion may be discussed or changed, of course.

Yes, indeed it is. But as far as Trevor Rabin is concerned, I think Prog Related is the only option. Though I haven't heard his latest album. 

Yes, I agree that we should indeed remain specialized. But with open minds. 

 

A whole raft of artists for whom the original general consensus was 'Prog Related' have been reintroduced to the Crossover charts for a second bite. I guess this is due to the fact that the chances of any of them actually being seriously considered by admins for PR are somewhere just below zero...so the votes that were cast for that category are to all intents and purposes meaningless. Interesting times...!

Great, I hope that he votes 'yes' then, because it is a real shame that Trevor Rabin is not here already. He clearly belongs in Prog Related! Bring him on 

Not sure I would have phrased it quite like that, unfair to Admin and perhaps a certain CZ a more appropriate place

 

It wasn't intended as a slur on our admins, who do a fantastic job. It was merely a reflection of the very strict set of criteria which the site requires to be satisfied before an artist can even be considered by them for Prog Related. This subject has been brought up in several other threads on here, and it has been well explained that we don't want the Prog Related category to expand so that it has even more artists in it than the 'real' prog subs do.

 

A fair number of suggestions that the Crossover team are presented with are kind of 'borderline cases', and team members often vote 'Prog Related' if they feel that is the most appropriate place for them to be filed. However, due to the strict entry criteria which rightly exist for PR, the need for an SC to step forward and put together a convincing case in support of the artist and present it to admins in the first place, etc etc, artists with a majority of votes cast for Prog Related tend to get shuffled off into the 'discuss' section on progfreak, where they just sit stagnating for months on end because there is little or no chance of them ever actually being considered for this category.

 

These artists have been brought back into the charts for another look in the hope that a definite 'yes' or 'no' decision can be reached rather than the current indefinite one for Prog Related, which would most likely never be resolved.

 

That is how I see it, anyway.

 I sympathise with this. When I was a collab on the neo team and new suggestions, it was very much the case that Crossover was seen as a sort of "let's get them in here, because nobody else will have or take them" sub-genre, which I am fairly certain was not the intent when the sub genre was created.

My own preference, for which I have been slated, remains to go back to having a general Art Rock category, and not expanding the prog related at all except in a very few, very rare, instances. I am of the opinion that it is easier to say, Rabin is an Art Rock artist that Rabin might be a Crossover artist. In the latter, 99% of people here would not have a clue what that was defined as anyway. I know I would struggle, and that is the problem with all fabricated things.

I have, btw, listened to Rabin's latest. I was not impressed enough to buy it, although I did enjoy his contributions to Yes. My impression was that this would qualify as a piece of art rock. It was most certainly not a pop album.

His inclusion here should be solely on the basis of whether he has released a prog rock album, or not, simple as. My vote, if I had one, would be yes re Jacuranda. 

 

Trevor Rabin is now therefore cleared for inclusion in Crossover.

Good

Time now, then, to revisit Phil Collins on the basis of Face Value

(Please, everyone, do not bother to respond. It is a joke).

True, but as we were fond of saying back in the day: not all Art Rock is prog,

Not unfair points, David.

For people under 30, I would tend to agree with you, although whether "Crossover" is any clearer is something I would take issue with.

As with David, I absolutely agree with this. I have never suggested that all art rock is prog. All prog, though, could be classified as art rock. The trick is, as ever, to identify what is prog, and what is not. Simples, eh?

Mmmmm. In Britain, Genesis, Floyd, and solo Lennon would certainly have come under the art rock banner, and, indeed, did. The Bowie, Eno, RM set you refer to would have been classified as either or both of glam rock or art rock. In other words, glam, like prog, was part of an art rock set clearly identifiable as such in this country. 

Therefore, to clarify earlier posts made, I would never classify Bowie or Roxy Music as progressive rock bands. Ditto Lennon. I would, though, class all as art rock. And, btw, that does not make them prog related, either.

Without wishing to be overly pedantic, and in keeping with the spirit of this discussion, you could classify Genesis, Floyd, Yes, Le Orme, Tull, Uncle Tom Cobbly et al as Progressive Art Rock, to distinguish it from General Art rock, and, given that this is a Progressive Rock site, I would assume people would not be too misled when they discovered that Lennon was not included here as Art Rock artist. They would, I am sure, be able to appreciate that Lennon was many things, but prog he most certainly was not.

It really isn't about what is prog or what is related to prog or what influenced prog.  Groups that have the most tenuous links to prog (Jefferson Airplane, Black Sabbath, Miles Davis, etc. etc.) are proudly listed here, while acts whose links to prog are multitudinous and well documented.are routinely rejected.  Boston is a good example here.

And it's always the same stupid excuse.  They play AOR.

As if AOR didn't partially evolve out of the prog scene.

You will notice that the same people never say "They play metal" or "They play jazz" or anything else.  It is pure snobbishness trying to pass itself off as sophistication.  Once you realize this, you realize that PA should not be used to define what is or what not is progresive rock.  At it's best. PA lists music that might appeal to some people who like some progressive rock and has definite biases for and against music that are not very logical.

Of course Trevor Rabin should be included as a prog related act. 

Face Value, Brand X, Genesis....and yet some unfathomable perception by a few that this place will be worse off if he was included smacks of snobbishness or narrow mindedness.

Christ I even have emails from M@X the site owner saying he should be included and he would be up on PA in 2010/11....go figure

Fantastic news that Trevor Rabin has finally made it on here.

Great to see such a well put argument regarding AOR and even how AOR morphed from prog leanings. Asia a classic case and I for one stand corrected regarding Boston. I  argued against their inclusion in the past and actually in retrospect see that was wrong now.

Maybe they will be revisited at some point.

 

The 2012 album "Jacaranda", submitted for the original vote, in my opinion, meets that criteria. 

 

Boston, on the other hand, had one song I would call prog, and only vague hints of progressive rock elsewhere.  Phil Collins even less. 

 

I would bet that every member on this site could find a few entries on this site that would make them say "They don't belong here".  I could name quite a few that I feel that way about.  And on the other side, there are artists that I think should be listed that have been rejected.

 

My advice?  Get over it.

 

I agree with you on this, Chris.  While I don't like Collins' solo albums at all, I have an appreciation for what he has given to prog rock and fusion, and think he deserves a place here. 

 

I wouldn't say every member of a prog band who goes solo as a pop artist deserves to be listed as prog-related, but Collins is a special case.

HOWEVER, his place in Prog Related is at the discretion of the Admins - if the current Admin team think he should be there that is their call - not yours, not mine, not ex-Admins such as myself or Tony or Bob or any of the other ex-Admins who opposed his addition in the past or anyone else with an opinion - it is not a matter that should be decided by consensus or public vote - it is up to the current Admins and them alone. Give them the respect they are bloody due. 

I make no secret that I'm not nearly the expert in the greater art rock scene as some of the guys here, David and Dean namely, seeing as I just don't have the experience and the time I've spent becoming well versed in music has been in the direct prog scene. 

As for Trevor Rabin, I was surprised that he wasn't on here when I first heard his 2012 album Jacaranda. It's about as textbook prog as it comes, with an AOR edge. Had he been in ELP in the 70s instead of Emerson, I suspect their music would have sounded very much like this song:

If we look at the definition of crossover we have here, "Crossover Prog contains progressive rock music that, though 100% progressive, may have a musical connection to popular music-- whether it be the lack of emphasis on extended compositions, or an influence from mainstream music in addition to classical, jazz and folk. Compositions, however, still exhibit a high degree of sophistication, sometimes outright complexity, and the musicianship and virtuosity is often on a par with established Prog acts," at the very least Jacaranda fits this description.

Absolutely right and we have 1000's of those

Anyway if it all gets too much and repetitive for some you can always go here:

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=69197&PN=78

Sure, there is a switch in the Admin control panel that when flipped turns on an automated ignore feature, this works by constantly scanning the forum for negative opinions on artist additions and the review database for people who rate entire discographies of an artist with low ratings, it then takes two courses of action:

This means the people who complain think the artist has been deleted and the rest of us don't have to put up with their moaning, and Andy, Keishiro and David can carry on doing the sterling job they do without having to put up with this BS. 

That was under the site guidelines 'till the management changed the definition. As per new definition, Trevor Robin belongs here as same as Phil Collins.

Prog Related definition

No musical genre exists in a vacuum. Not all of the bands that have been a part of the history and development of progressive rock are necessarily progressive rock bands themselves. This is why progarchives has included a genre called prog-related, so we could include all the bands that complete the history of progressive rock, whether or not they were considered full-fledged progressive rock bands themselves.

There are many criteria that the prog-related evaluation team considers when deciding which bands are considered prog-related. Very few bands will meet all of this criteria, but this list will give an idea as to some of the things that help evaluate whether an artists is prog-related or not.

1) Influence on progressive rock - The groundbreaking work of artists like Led Zepplin and David Bowie affected many genres of rock, including at times progressive rock. Although both of these artists created rock music in a dizzying array of genres, both contributed to the ongoing history of progressive rock several times within the span of their careers.

2) Location - Progressive rock did not develop at the same time all over the world. It may surprise some people that as late as the mid-70s the US had very few original progressive rock bands that did not sound like exact copies of British bands. Journey was one of the first US bands to present a uniquely American brand of prog-rock before they eventually became a mainstream rock band. We have collaborators from all over the world who tell us which bands helped the progressive rock scene develop in their corner of the globe, even if those bands were like Journey and were known more for being mainstream rock bands.

3) Members of important progressive rock bands - Although most of the recorded solo output of artists like Greg Lake and David Gilmour falls more in a mainstream rock style, their contributions to progressive rock in their respective bands insures them a place in our prog-related genre.

4) Timeliness - Like many genres, prog-rock has had its ups and downs. In the late 70s and early 80s prog-rock was barely a blip on the radar. During this time artists such as David Bowie and Metallica released albums that captured key elements of the spirit of prog rock and did so while contributing their own original modern elements to the mix.

5) Integral part of the prog-rock scene - Sometimes you just had to be a part of the scene during a certain time period to understand how some bands fit with the prog rock scene of their time. Although Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath and Wishbone Ash may seem like mere hard rock bands, in their time they stood apart from other hard rockers with their more serious lyrical content and more developed compositions. Put simply, in the early 70s every prog-rock record collector usually had full collections of all three of these artists. These three bands were very much part of the prog-rock scene without being total prog-rock bands them selves.

6) Influenced by progressive rock - From the late 60s till about 1976 the progressive tendency was in full effect in almost all genres of music. Once again, as we enter the second decade of the 21st century a melting pot of prog-metal, math-rock, progressive electronics and post-rock influences have once again made a progressive tendency in rock music almost more a norm than a difference. Yet in other periods of musical history receiving influence from progressive rock could really set a band apart and make them worthy of our prog-related category.
Being influenced by progressive rock is hardly the only factor we look at, and in some periods of musical history it is almost meaningless, but still, it is almost a given that most of the artists listed in prog-related were influenced by the development of progressive rock.

7) Common sense - Nitpicking over the above listed criteria is not necessarily the correct way to evaluate a band for prog-related. Sometimes you just have to use some common sense and look at the big picture.
A very good way to describe prog-related would be to imagine an exhaustive book that covered the history of progressive rock. Would such a book include references to led Zeppelin's 'Stairway to Heaven', David Bowie's 'The Man Who Sold the World' or Queen's 'Bohemian Rhapsody'? Probably so.
- Easy M

Hey, ho. Sevtonio is wrong again.

Not that the "one album" rule was ever a written policy, it was a stated intention from the site owner and it applies to the Prog subgenres not the Prog Related category.

The original Prog Related definition was:

It was later re-written thus to remove the "subgenre" association:

That was finally changed to the version we have today to limit the number of suggestions a manageable number. Without this we would become yet another RYM clone.

At no time did it ever say that an artist having one Prog album made them eligible for Prog Related.

Peace out

So your argument is that he was a core member of a progressive band and a jazz fusion band and THEREFORE there is clearly nor reason or justification for adding him as a prog related artist??????

Your logic has left me speechless.

Trevor Rabin as solo artist is not the same thing of the bands he played in. Even though I still don't understand what "prog related" means, in order to be added to this site he should have a prog output in his solo discography, regardless what he has done with his bands. 

Good. There are moments when I enjoy silence.

I wasn't talking about Rabin.

Read the Prog Related definition, if you still don't understand what that means then Prog Related is probably not something you should spend any time on.

Ad hominem leads to a slippery slope.

Seriously, either have a civil argument or bitch at each other via PM.

Andy Webb wrote: *sigh* Ad hominem leads to a slippery slope.

Sorry. 

Okey, so am I correct in understanding that it is now final that Trevor Rabin will be added to Crossover?

If that is the case, then this is fantastic news indeed, (even if I think that Prog related would have been a better home for him).

I'm looking forward to reviewing Can't Look Away, (Jacaranda I don't care that much for to be honest)

He's been cleared for Crossover, yes.