It is true to say that many "prog" bands and critics treat an album of this kind as tho' there are fixed rules, set back in the early 70s. The fact is that what we now call prog rock, was made extraordinary because it did NOT follow rules.
The commercial world set rules for reasons of profit. That makes sense. Our kind of music doesn't easily fit those rules.
That said, the prog experts who think that all progressive albums must be judged by VERY strict rules. That is insane!
Here are some basic rules against which we are all judged:
Long albums are bad (why?). Short tracks are bad (Why?). Simple melodies are too... simple (WTF?). An album should flow (90% of the time, that translates to "Boring"). A prog album should sound like the 70s but also NOT sound like the 70s!
HOW MANY WOULD AGREE WITH THIS?
A probable review for The Beatles white album, if it were released today would not go well!
A prog experts opinion might be
The white album's tracks are all over the genre spectrum. No direction, "Revolution number 9" is pointless. Silly McCartney love songs. Ends with Ringo doing a old people's home goodnight with an orchestra on it. It could have been a good album. Fans may like it.
A commercial/pop reviewer might say
Some of the best rock music ever. A lot of weird stuff on the album but regardless of that, it is one to buy!
Colin's view of it
Brilliant! It never gets boring. There is no other album like this one. Buy it!!!!!!!!
Most bands find their sound after an album or three. Is that a good thing? No it is not! I hope to hell that Corvus Stone never become predictable and create albums that "flow".
Who wants to be "One direction"
CORVUS STONE II