Does the recent PA policy harm the genuin

...In a way, all bands that played music around or before the 60s led to prog...prog is largely derived from Classical music structures and playing styles, yet we don't see them on "proto-prog: bands that paved the road to prog". There is a point when we're pushing things, and adding a few too many proto-and prog related bands. Obviously Deep Purple (to name one) had a massive influence on prog, and so did the Beatles, but Beatles also influenced everything, y'know? Well I kind of lost the focus of my post...Now I'm just talking without direction.

Edited by Shakespeare - July 27 2007 at 21:20

I think what Erik is driving at, is in the same vein as my recent tirades. I just want to stop focusing so much energy on the same ol', same ol'. There's prog in them thar hills, just waiting to be discovered.

I've also been thinking about this whole CD availability thing. I have ordered a ton from online stores. Sure it takes longer that going to a regular store, but there isn't a whole lot of prog at the mall, is there? There really isn't much you can't find from CD Baby, SynPhonic, Wayside, ZNR, etc.

Edited by bhikkhu - July 27 2007 at 22:44

I have to say that while I don't agree with some inclusions, in some cases is just taste which makes me disagree... For, I can recognize that The Who may be just as "prog" as Iron Maiden, but as I don't like the former as much as the latter, I could disagree with their inclusion. I have written 12 IronaMaiden reviews so I can't say I haven't "benefited" (in a way) from non-pure-prog inclusions..... I have said a couple of times that for me PA must be like a big prog encyclopedia, and it has to contain everything for it to be, well, complete.

1800iareyay wrote: The thing about PR is that it can draw people to prog, but it also makes a more complete image of prog, as The T said. To discount the Who, Zeppelin, and especially the Doors and Beatles is to not grasp the full scope of both the influence on and the impact of progressive music. It's almost ironic that you point oyut how many threads are made for PR artists, since equally as many are devoted to subjects like this where someone laments the decline of PA's integrity. Quite obviously, the focus of the site should be progressive rock, but PP and PR are necessary, yes necessary, in order to truly pay homage to the music we love.

I completely agree with you. I love being able to trace the history, and it is incredibly important. I believe that proto and related have a place here. However, that is not the whole picture either. There are a lot of people out there who would like to discover something different. Discussing the same, well known artists all the time is not going to help.

We should make a game where you name bands and try to out underground each other, and provide samples of the band.

Edited by erik neuteboom - July 28 2007 at 06:42

Two cents from the cloudy south of The Netherlands:

As mentioned by a few people already, there's a lot of fuss being made about approximately 10 controversial additions, while the whole of PP and PR related bands are roughly 10% of what is in the archives.
What I learn from this is that something I thought was a problem of the Dutch culture is not so specific after all: we complain about things we cannot influence, because it is so much easier than devoting our energy to actually achieving something positive. Now this is not directed at Erik or any of you, it's referring to the multitude of negative threads and posts about these bands that are presumed to 'not belong here'.

Now if I look at the number of visitors and guests on the site and the forums, compared to the actual number of members, I think the problem being brought up here is not as big as it seems. Just look at the discussions, it's only a small 'hard core' of people that stand up to fight over these additions, while most guests and less prominent members stick to discovering bands and reading and writing reviews - the sole purpose of the site. I tend to agree with Dean and Guigo here, people are smart enough to know what is true prog, and what is to be considered PP or PR.

Yes, we should be careful what to add, but don't let the amount of attention the 'should be here/should not be here' discussions get on the forum fool you. PA is doing fine, the problem just looks bigger because of this other human habit of being distracted by and giving more attention to the negative things. I see a strong parallel with what happened earlier this week at work. I was talking with an Israeli company CEO about sending people over for a short project. When I told him my people were not too keen on visiting the war zone that according to our daily news he's living in, he answered "The negative aspects get too much attention - don't believe what you see on the news. If people are afraid to come, let them give me a call and I'll tell them how live is for people commuting to work here everyday."

Concerning Iván's post. Comparing discussion thread sizes as you do is in line with what I addressed above - on the forums we act as humans, focussing on the much easier to spot negatives. However, the artists you mention are likely more interested in getting their band included and a couple of good reviews to reference, than a lengthy forum discussion that disappears to forum page 999 in four weeks.

Finally - if PP and PR are concerned, I agree with Micky that some bands may need to move out of their to real prog genres. For the others, I'll repeat what I wrote in Raff's thread: if we make a bit more work of describing in the bio pages why a band is included in the archives, even the less knowledgeable guests and members should be safe from misunderstanding prog. And of course, new and unknown prog gems deserve more attention, but I question whether lengthy forum discussions are what they need - a way to make them show up more often on the main page is probably more effective, so start reviewing rather than debating


Edited by Angelo - July 28 2007 at 06:47

There are many people that share BaldFriede's concerns about bands that are not added. Let me assure you that we receive a constant stream of artist submissions. There is a constant back and forth in the collaborator section, and in PM's concerning these. But again, in the main forums, I don't see as many suggestions for full prog bands as I do for proto/related. Jump in and start talking about these prog bands you feel should be here.

Angelo is right that we need to start reviewing the lesser knowns. I am going through my collection, and tackling the ones with none, or only one review. However, the min focus on these artists comes from discussion. I didn't start looking into Zeuhl until I saw people talking about it. It's the conversation that will spark interest.

BaldJean wrote: Friede would not have complained had we not made those suggestions over a year ago. I understand you are a bit busy, but why don't you just simply trust us for once? Bunka is a well known guitar player in the prog scene; surely his solo work can be added. as for Echo City: they were one of the most avantgarde bands there ever were; go to their homepage. we are not fangirls who want to push a favorite artist of ours through, we simply want to improve the database. does this really have to be so difficult?

Sometimes we just need a little reminder. It's easy for a candidate to get lost in shuffle. That's why it's good to keep bringing these artists up. That way they can be kept fresh in the memory. I would suggest contacting my good friend Geck0 about Echo City (you did suggest them for Avant, right?). He's always in the lookout for good avant-garde stuff. Where do you think Bunka might fit?