Is this chart accurate?
>>64709303
>Progressive Rock
Nice meme :^)
>>64709303
well wipe my bottom with a soft cotton tissue, that is one glorious chart, OP!
>>64709303
>prog
>>64709337
It's from the 4chan wiki
I don't get where's Tarkus, what is Miles Davis doing there, and what are those bands with non-English names
if this chart were accurate, Yes wouldn't be in it
>>64709303
Yes, progressive music is objectively superior to all other forms of music for its complexity. Weak minded individuals will often find themselves lost with in the structurally intellectual songwriting found in good prog outfits like King Crimson, Camal, Dream Theater, Tool, Magma, the list goes on...
>>64709303
It's like someone just went through the top 100 symphonic prog albums on RYM
>>64709452
>>64709333
>>64709360
Fuck. See the file name. It's a prog chart from /mu/ wiki. I'm trying to see if it's accurate or not. That's it. You have to be a dad to have a chart like this.
For those that don't know, that chart's based on Prog Archive's Top 100. It works similarly to RYM's rating system though no review system.
I agree with most of it, though there's a lot of modern stuff and prog metal that really shouldn't be there. It's that stuff that not only misses the point on prog, but has also caused half of prog archives to be a shithole, and have dumbasses statements like >>64709452 appear from.
Outside those, there's some things misplaced the like surprisingly low placement of The Lamb Dies Down On Broadway when even the page on Genesis on Prog Archive says that it might be their best album.
Last beef is the fact that there's jazz fusion here that's not even prog.
OP, if you're trying to figure out if this is a good gauge for getting into prog, check out everything from it that isn't Opeth, Dream Theater, Steven Wilson, generally prog metal that isn't Operation Mindcrime. And if you do like an artist, check out their page on Prog Archives or whatever to see some albums that are fantastic but not on this chart (Discipline by King Crimson for a popular example.)
>>64709762
Thank you anon for your reply. Didn't know about the source of the chart. This explains what stuff like Opeth is doing there.
One question though: does Thick as a Brick deserve to be so high up? It has great concept, GOAT lyrics, but its middle part is so filler that I felt anger (!) listening to it.
>>64710048
Well, back in the day I used to find a lot of Jethro Tull filler as fuck period. But it's really not too bad on Thick As A Brick, at least when compared to like, Aqualung or something.
Also next time, start with the topic title being something like "prog general" or "prog thread" as that encourages more discussion since just posting topster charts elicit a different reaction here.
>>64710585
Okay then. I was asking because the Wikipedia page states only the beginning was written before the recording sessions; the rest was composed on the spot and it sounds like wasting precious time of the listener. It's not so bad on the second try, but the gap in quality is striking and apparent.
But now that I know it's all basically ProgArchives top copied, it doesn't matter anyway. It's same as taking RYM top as an objective measure.
