Credibility

Tony R wrote: P.H.P. wrote: Prog rock music has no limits, it is totally experimental, imaginative, inventive, intelligent, it certainly has a meaning, but through decades it HAS BEEN sort of delimited, it's not about how many prog rock characteristics a band could fill (if we let that be the guide of this site, tons of bands would be included day after day, don't you think?), it's something you just know when you got the necessary experience in prog rock, it's out of definitions of this kind or novelty tags, . What you say is simply not true of Prog Rock. You are describing progressive music, which is palpably not the same. The experience that you allude to tells us that Prog Rock was a time and a place and not necessarily a movement. You stated that "Prog rock music has no limits, it is totally experimental, imaginative, inventive, intelligent" but that is just a fanciful generalisation and exaggeration. Genesis and Yes "totally experimental"? I think not. Indeed they were, to devotees at least, "imaginative and inventive" and "intelligent" but these are ultimately not very useful terms for the basis of your argument. Radiohead and Tool are far more experimental and delimited than many of the so-called "Classic Prog Rock Bands". I have no love for either band but your argument is nonsensical and ill-informed, borne of petty snobbery rather than any real feel or "experience" of the genre. This site intends to be as inclusive as possible and we turn down many bands, to the fury and despair of their promoters. As my colleague "Easy Livin'" so eloquently stated in a previous post, if you want to use other sites that have a far narrower, and some might say "blinkered" view of the Prog Rock spectrum, then be our guest.

I think you're talking about something I did not say, I think you're thinking of avantguarde when I say "experimental", Prog rock by definition is experimental, because everything that is new and never done before is definitely experimental I will name only a few and you'll see: King Crimson, VDGG, Gentle Giant, ELP, Genesis, Yes, among many many others...no one did like them before, so consider that important fact before saying anything...

...and yes Radiohead and Tool could have some degree of experimental on their stuff, but since their music isn't really original, it's only a mix of things done before (alternative, pop, grunge, etc), they took no risk at doing that, prog rock did, so I don't honestly think Radiohead and Tool are "far more experimental than prog rock" I truly disagree with you in that one, I think here you are the ill-informed.

P.H.P. wrote: Tony R wrote: P.H.P. wrote: Prog rock music has no limits, it is totally experimental, imaginative, inventive, intelligent, it certainly has a meaning, but through decades it HAS BEEN sort of delimited, it's not about how many prog rock characteristics a band could fill (if we let that be the guide of this site, tons of bands would be included day after day, don't you think?), it's something you just know when you got the necessary experience in prog rock, it's out of definitions of this kind or novelty tags, . What you say is simply not true of Prog Rock. You are describing progressive music, which is palpably not the same. The experience that you allude to tells us that Prog Rock was a time and a place and not necessarily a movement. You stated that "Prog rock music has no limits, it is totally experimental, imaginative, inventive, intelligent" but that is just a fanciful generalisation and exaggeration. Genesis and Yes "totally experimental"? I think not. Indeed they were, to devotees at least, "imaginative and inventive" and "intelligent" but these are ultimately not very useful terms for the basis of your argument. Radiohead and Tool are far more experimental and delimited than many of the so-called "Classic Prog Rock Bands". I have no love for either band but your argument is nonsensical and ill-informed, borne of petty snobbery rather than any real feel or "experience" of the genre. This site intends to be as inclusive as possible and we turn down many bands, to the fury and despair of their promoters. As my colleague "Easy Livin'" so eloquently stated in a previous post, if you want to use other sites that have a far narrower, and some might say "blinkered" view of the Prog Rock spectrum, then be our guest. I think you're talking about something I did not say, I think you're thinking of avantguarde when I say "experimental", Prog rock by definition is experimental, because everything that is new and never done before is definitely experimental I will name only a few and you'll see: King Crimson, VDGG, Gentle Giant, ELP, Genesis, Yes, among many many others...no one did like them before, so consider that important fact before saying anything...

Disingenuous post of the week award? Or just utter fanciful rubbish?
One of them.

P.H.P wrote: And Mike can't tell me nothing really since he's guilty on opening and really destroying the prog rock spectrum too much with bands like Blind Guardian.

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - September 02 2007 at 14:13

Sound like a Samurai/Ninja manga! 

MikeEnRegalia wrote: P.H.P. wrote: And Mike can't tell me nothing really since he's guilty on opening and really destroying the prog rock spectrum too much with bands like Blind Guardian. I'll gladly plead guilty. Sorry if you see this as destructive - how did the addition of Blind Guardian destroy anything in Prog Rock?

Well, because any young person who enters this site will think he's listening to "prog" only because he likes a few power, alternative or heavy metal bands like Blind Guardian, Nightwish, Meshuggah or Tool, and that's what I'm talking about, and want it or not "prog metal" is a very discussible style, there are far too many bands on this site that only are plain technical or just complex, and that isn't what prog is about. Understand what I mean?

bhikkhu wrote: Thanks Ivan. Couldn't have said it better myself. So, what do you say we just ignore this guy, who's only reason for joining seems to be insulting us. Then we can go back to our destruction by adding more bands like Deluge Grander, Shadow Circus, Indukti, La Machera Di Cera, Nemo, and Frogg Cafe.

It's not about ignoring, it's about facing, and most important I didn't join to insult you guys, I joined because I want to express what I find unfair here and if possible give you some help here, can't I do that?

...and the bands you have named there are good prog inclusions, and certainly acceptable as prog, no one questioned that.

P.H.P. wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: P.H.P. wrote: And Mike can't tell me nothing really since he's guilty on opening and really destroying the prog rock spectrum too much with bands like Blind Guardian. I'll gladly plead guilty. Sorry if you see this as destructive - how did the addition of Blind Guardian destroy anything in Prog Rock? Well, because any young person who enters this site will think he's listening to "prog" only because he likes a few power, alternative or heavy metal bands like Blind Guardian, Nightwish, Meshuggah or Tool, and that's what I'm talking about, and want it or not "prog metal" is a very discussible style, there are far too many bands on this site that only are plain technical or just complex, and that isn't what prog is about. Understand what I mean?

I understand perfectly. There's more to these bands than just power, alternative or heavy metal ... with the exception of Nightwish which I find rather bland - but hey, live and let live!

P.H.P. wrote: bhikkhu wrote: Thanks Ivan. Couldn't have said it better myself. So, what do you say we just ignore this guy, who's only reason for joining seems to be insulting us. Then we can go back to our destruction by adding more bands like Deluge Grander, Shadow Circus, Indukti, La Machera Di Cera, Nemo, and Frogg Cafe. It's not about ignoring, it's about facing, and most important I didn't join to insult you guys, I joined because I want to express what I find unfair here and if possible give you some help here, can't I do that? ...and the bands you have named there are good prog inclusions, and certainly acceptable as prog, no one questioned that.

Yes, but there are a few things that hurt your standing. Your very first post (ever) was a criticism. I also don't believe you see the whole picture. You are going on about a few dubious entries. I will not debate their merits, because they are far outweighed by what is inarguably prog. Some of these have gotten a lot of attention, and I don't particularly like that either. Especially when I am constantly working on artists that rarely get discussed. So, do I insult people because of it? No, I do something about it. I start threads about those lesser known artists, and encourage others to do so. You also can't understand what goes on in the inner-workings here. There is always work to do, and countless submissions to research. A very small percentage of these are like the bands you name. Most of the time the effort is put into gathering more information, and figuring out where best to place them. It's easy to denounce that which you know little about. It's harder to make a positive effort to understand.

I'm not insulting you at all, unless you feel that having your pearls of wisdom challenged, analysed and refuted is insulting. You said your piece. I thought it was over-wrought and over-stated. You said some more and I thought you were wrong. I am still of that opinion. Your crass generalisations do not stand up to even the most casual investigation.

P.H.P. wrote: Hmm Tony R, stop the insults please you sound like a hater more than a Prog listener, I've been of course always aware of the late 60's scene, otherwise I wouldn't have said what I did say, like it or not Prog Rock was the peak of everything constructed there, and I like it, but it seems that you don't appreciate Prog that much, do you?

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - September 02 2007 at 15:33