Thanks for Iron Maiden - Megadeth

Funny how you guys all chose to stay quiet when hordes of people were expressing their outrage at Maiden not being listed yet and waited until we'd already gone ahead with including them to say anything.

Bryan wrote: Funny how you guys all chose to stay quiet when hordes of people were expressing their outrage at Maiden not being listed yet and waited until we'd already gone ahead with including them to say anything.

stonebeard wrote: Liquid Len wrote: Do you think that the rating system should be changed for Neo-Prog?   Neo Prog = within the confines of prog music   Prog Related = related to prog         And, yes, Neo-Prog should have another Rating system:   5 Stars: Masterpiece of progressive music 5 Stars: Masterpiece of progressive music 5 Stars: Masterpiece of progressive music 5 Stars: Masterpiece of progressive music 5 Stars: Masterpiece of progressive music   [IMG]height=17 alt=Wink src="smileys/smiley2.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle>

LOL very good

Hate Neo myself.

Who told that guy in Pendragon or Fish that they could sing?


     
    

Edited by Liquid Len - October 02 2006 at 17:55

"SOMEWHERE IN TIME" AND "/th SON OF A 7th SON" ARE ALONE A SYMPHONIC POWER METAL ALBUMS!!!

 

AND MEGADETH IS ALONE A BAY AREA TRASH METAL BAND!!!

stonebeard wrote: Logan wrote: Hey, I've thought that Sabbath should be here in a Proto-Metal category.  Anyway, it seems that several Prog reviewers disagree with Maiden only being in the Prog-Related category (that is if I understand the ratings system properly) as several of their albums have been rated 5 stars (Essential: a masterpiece of progressive music).   This is a glaring problem and I'm glad you reminded me of it. How is any reviewer supposed to logically give 5 stars to a semi-prog album when the criteria for a 5 star album on this site is that the album must be a masterpiece in the prog genre?   The only way to fix this is to change the rating system for all prog-related albums.

Yes indeed.  Or change the rating system altogether for all genres and lose the progressive music criteria.  Later Genesis, for example, albums of course which as part of their discography aren't under Prog-Related, yet no matter how good one might find them, they can't be given more than a 3 star rating according to the guidelines (unless one thinks the albums are full-blown Prog of course).

I imagine they were using that rating system before they brought in Prog-Related.  I seem to remember that from my early days using PA as a reference site. It is problematic, and can be confusing, and I do think a different ratings system is in order.  If someone thinks an Iron Maiden album is a masterpiece, while recognising that it's not recognised as full-blown Prog, it seems odd to have to give it less than 4 stars.  It ceases to be an easy-to-follow and useful guide for the viewers and reviewers when you're rating albums you think great with less than stellar marks.

I'll be interested to read from the reviewers how they determined their ratings -- whether they consider certain Iron Maiden albums to be more than Prog-Related, or if they were disregarding those criteria for ratings evaluation.

sularetal wrote: By the miracle: http://img238.imageshack.us/img238/6647/untitledjd3.jpg [IMG]height=17 alt=LOL src="http://www.progarchives.com/forum/smileys/smiley36.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle> brilliant!!!   I don't really care about IM's addition. I just thought it was too risky adding them....

All those photoshopped pics do is fan the flames of controversy.Like we need any more of that.

Thanks Ansen.
    

Iron Maiden was added but Coroner wasn't? ZOMG they used keyboards on a few songs!

Oh, no ! It was a big surprise to see Iron Maiden on PA.

I told you...thiswould be  a snow ball....of heavy metal applicants

TheProgtologist wrote: Their addition here under Prog Related does not mean they are prog,and no one is saying they are prog. --------------------------- Prog Related Prog Related definition Rock and Pop Bands and Artists after 1970 who were not truly “prog” (as that term is generally and broadly defined, even by the site), but who were clearly not “mainstream” or simply “rock” bands. A wide subgenre that encompasses two kinds of bands/artist, that either consist of progressive artist that strayed away from their progressive roots into mainstream rock or were influenced by progressive rock. Even though the music by these artists is sometimes unrelated it had things in common with prog music in that it was very structured and even adventurous, sometimes hard or heavy, sometimes mellow, strong melodies, good hooks are an integral part of most of the material. Sometimes these artists pioneered other rock genres. Though most of these artist can't really be considered progressive themselves, their relation to progressive music is not to be underestimated. --------------------------- Honestly.....how hard is that to understand?

I don't think it's a matter of understanding - most people understand, but it's simply hard for them to *accept* it.