"Proggyness"

I was reading the main page here and read a review who said this:

"One of the things I dislike about this site is that people often judge albums on their "proggyness." What's more important than how progressive they are is how good their music is?"

The guy wrote very intelligent words, maybe one of the most clever thoughts here, and also made me think: Why MOST of the reviewers here while judging the so called "proggyness" of the music, if it's not very prog or just not prog, they give the album less than 4 stars (often 2 or 1), just because this is a Prog site?? OR the cause is that most proggers are SO close minded that can't listen to anything that's not prog, so they won't like every not-progressive band they listen?? I hate this kind of things and situations, but I had to get the word out. And once again, the big question:

"What's more important than how progressive they are is how good their music is?"

What do you think?

Well I don't think this really applies to most. Take Pure Reason Revolution for example, I'm listening to it currently, 3rd time in a row. It was voted as the ... 4th(correct me if I'm wrong) best prog album of 2006. and I bet most would agree, it's not even close to the proggiest album.

Now on the other hand I think it's worth metioning in such cases as when I reviewed Wigwam's new albums; to give people a picture. See, in these cases the former albums were really prog, while the new ones were pretty much AOR/"american" rock. so it's good for the buyer to know what he's getting when he goes and buys it. The might expect something like being which would be terribly wrong. But you're right, one should never rate an album based on how proggy it is.

tuxon wrote: Only quality of the music counts for me, i don't care how progressive an album or an artist is.

Snow Dog wrote: I think in a Prog site the proggyness of the music is very important if you are recomending albums or not. Even the star system here is technically judged by progressivness so I don't know what else you would expect really?

Does the "proggyness" really care (except that the reader is a close minded)? After all, when you're reviewing the music, you're judging its QUALITY, not its "proggyness" (or at least I think it should be like that), am I right?

'proggy' as in 'fitting the prog rock definition'? I guess that's pretty important since the rating scale specifies that it's being recommended(or not) for a strictly prog collection. So if an album isn't prog rock at all, however brilliant it is on this site's scale it can;t be rated more than 3 stars. Personally, I couldn't care less, as long as its good.

There are two different questions, in my opinion. The first one is: "Do you think this music is good?", whereas the second one is: "Do you think this music is progressive?".

I only look for proggyness in an album. If there's any catchy melodies or lack of grating sxf, I can it. I don't have time for that kinda music!

It's not my fault I don't like rock that's not prog.

I think when rating albums, it should be based on the quality of the album. Sure, it's important to keep correct labels and things like that, but we trust our collaborators and specialists to make sure that stays in order. If you rate an album based on how it fits the genre, you are essentially rating the specialists' job of including the band where they did and not reviewing anything about the album itself....and that's what I think is a shame. A review based on proggyness is insignificant and meaningless to people who are just looking for good music.







Edited by SolariS - February 07 2007 at 20:32

Grand Funk is a 5 star band for me. But I can't give 5 stars to the Red Album in a site like PA. So I would describe their sound and give my opinion about the quality of the music itself, but explaining the reasons why the album cited above can't receive more than 3 stars in a prog site context.