Prog Metal: Organizing the categories

Tony R wrote: ivan_2068 wrote: I'm not criticizing your work either, I know it's very hard job,  but this is turning into a mainly Prog' Metal site. The only category with 3 or 4 sub-genres will be Prog Metal. Have you ever read the polls about which is your favorite genre? In all the cases Symphonic has won by far and If I'm not wrong Prog Metal wasn't even near, why should this barely Prog whose limits with plain metal are almost invisible should have three sub-genres. Has any Prog sute done this ever? I know many Metalheads will try tu crucify me plus other guys who are probably passing through a teenage metal stage, but I believe this site should be kept Prog with a sub-genre for each category. Iván Prog-Metal is just the start,Symphonic will get a makeover too.We had to start somewhere and it just so happened that Mike was prepared to donate his spare time to this venture.

Still I can't understand, many times some members (Including myself) talk about sub-genres, and we recieve a lot of answers from people that doesn't care for genres or don't want to be labeled.

I believe Symphonic is OK, the same for Folk and Prog Metal.

He has the full support of the Admin Team and all the people involved in this should be applauded.

One thing why I come  here is because I always felt free to give my opinions and often disagreed with Adm's opinion, but always been encouraged by them to write with freedom (Never disrespected anybody), does this means I can't give my opinion any more?

Iván

Nazgul wrote: Stupid Idea! IMHO. I have only two subgeneries: It's good,or I dislike it. That's all BTW I wonder wich subgeneries in Yours opinion is new album of Riverside

Well, personally I think that Riverside could well be classified as Neo Prog Rock, especially their new album. But they also fit in Neo Prog Metal. Borderline symphonic. 

Tony R wrote:   Ok. I think that someone says DT, or Opeth......ect.... Everyone witch hear their music knows what it  is about ^ I think he is saying that just because someone is familiar with a band doesnt necessarily make them an expert at categorizing them...........ok,so I put my own spin on it. I think that a few of the people contributing to this discussion need to get a sense of perspective..this kind of over-reaction "upsets me dearly".

Same here Tony.It gets a little upsetting having hours and hours and hours of hard work just ripped to shreds by people.

When I listen to  Prog-Metal bands I hear differences as wide as the whole spectrum of Prog itself.Prog-Metal is just a catch-all genre and needs clarifying and expanding.

Any one easily offended or confused by "sub-genres" should just ignore them.For instance,I've managed to ignore Zeuhl for a near-lifetime without any kind of weird side affects like shouting or the urge to stamp my feet...

goose wrote: Tony R wrote: I've managed to ignore Zeuhl for a near-lifetime without any kind of weird side affects like shouting or the urge to stamp my feet... That's what happens when you don't ignore it!

No that usually results in bouts of wailing and gnashing of teeth.

yargh wrote: "Any one easily offended or confused by "sub-genres" should just ignore them" Doesn't that defeat the purpose of *having* them?  Somebody well-versed in prog-metal doesn't need to invent sub-genres, and somebody who doesn't know the genre well will just be confused by the artificiality of the whole thing. Of course there are lots of different "sounds" in prog metal.  Why not just leave it at that and let the reviews speak for themselves?  Why engage in the counterproductive exercise of forcing this stuff into subcategories? Like I already stated, the general division of progressive itself has already made for a good amount of inaccurate categorizations.  Why take a flawed model and make it more flawed?

OK,Yargh-let me deal with a few of your questions

Why take a flawed model and make it more flawed?  

Because we are anally-retentive? Or maybe we want to make it less flawed...

somebody who doesn't know the genre well will just be confused by the artificiality of the whole thing.

How do you know something is artificial if you are not familiar with it in the first place?

Of course there are lots of different "sounds" in prog metal.

There are lots of "different sounds" in all types of music,so why dont we just call it "music" and have done with it?

I believe there will always be people out there who will always say "black" if someone else is saying "white". It's the easy way out....

Some of the first members here know that I always refer to sub-genres which IMO help to understand the differences whithin Prog Rock bands, for example almost everybody considers King Crimson Symphonic, but I can't find a single connection between any Post ITCOTCK album wiyh for example Yes and Genesis.

But honestly, in the case of Prog Metal, all the bands have the same basic influence which is metal, we're adapting Metal Sub-Genres to Progressive Rock, it means we're creating sub-genres of a sub-genre.

Of course it's a hard work, I admire the work Mike, Bryan  and everybody involved in this project has done, it's a hell of a job, (I haven't even heard about at least 75% of the bands mentioned), but each and every band have something in common, all form part from the metal genre.

Each time I mention Classic Prog' to refer to bands like ELP, The Nice or Le Orme due to the enormous influence of a determined classical era (Late Romantic/Early Modern) some people even laughed,

When I mentioned Dutch Euro Prog (I believe Prog Archices doesn't even recognize Euro Prog or Kosmische -Hope it's well written, if notor the term is misused Dallas Bryan will correct me ), I recieved a very nice and well elaborated PM (Won't mention the name of the member who sent it because he may have his reasons to keep it private) where he disagreed with my opinion (Still waitting for your reply my friend, you know who you are, and I enjoyed your PM).

So I believe we're going too far, my opinion is that there should be one sub-genre for each genre that has influenced Prog.

• 1 for Symphonic
• 1 for those bands influenced by symphonic (Neo Prog)
• 1 for Folk
• 1 for Psychedelia (Maybe in this case 2 because USA Psychedelia is different to British Psychedelia)
• And of course 1 for metal.

If not we should add 1 sub-genre for each classical era (At least Medieval/Gothic, Baroque, Classic, Romantic, Modern/Copntemporary) or add a folk sub-genre for each region or country, because Celtic/British Folk is absolutely different to Greek, USA Folk/Country, Latin American, Nordic, etc).

And all we would have achieved is too make things even more complex.

But this is only my opinion.

Tony wrote:

Absolutely not Ivan. All I am trying to say that Mike hasnt just gone ahead with this-he has Max's approval and that of the Admins.We know there are differing opinions about the relevance of sub-genres.We also know that other genres need "tidying up," we are just waiting for collaborators to volunteer. As for discussing this and even disagreeing-no problem Ivan-your comments are always welcome.

Thanks Tony, I always knew the open criteria of the Adm's and PA staff, was only making a point.

BTW: Count with me when you need help with other sub-genres whith which I'm more familiar, because wouldn't feel comfortable giving an opinion if I'm not willing to help.

Iván