Prog Metal: Organizing the categories

Ivan:

There was a discussion about this some time ago - is Prog Metal a sub genre of Prog Rock or not? Well, yes and no.

This diagram is just a rough sketch - the Prog Rock box is meant to contain all Prog Rock genres, I simply didn't have enough space, and the bands are just random picks. The point is the relation between Rock, Prog Rock, Metal and Prog Metal.

At least this is how I think about it. Prog Metal is not a normal subgenre of Prog Rock ... It is a "sub genre" of Metal, which is a sub genre of Rock. Another way of putting this is that many (nearly all) sub genres of Prog Rock are also present within Prog Metal.

So in essence we COULD (I'm not saying that we SHOULD) clone most of the genres we have:

• For Neo Prog Rock we COULD add Neo Prog Metal
• For Symphonic Prog Rock we COULD add Symphonic Prog Metal
• For Jazz-Rock we COULD add Jazz-Metal
• for Folk Prog Rock we could add Folk Prog Metal
• ...

OR

• We could move the Prog Metal bands into the Prog Rock genres. Neo Prog Metal bands would be moved to Neo Prog Rock, Symphonic Prog Metal bands would be moved to Symphonic Prog Rock etc.. Man Overboard suggested this, and I liked the idea.

But IMO both these approaches aren't sensible. The first would introduce far too many genres, and the second would alienate people who don't like metal, and even with all the similarities Metal based bands still often are very different from Rock based bands, so you can't really throw them in the same genre. But Metal IS a sub genre of Rock, so there definitely is a connection.

Edited by MikeEnRegalia

I think splitting Prog Metal up in genres would be a good idea as it would help me to rid out the best from the rest

Citanul wrote: I'm not entirely certain about some of the Avant/Experimental bands.  Anathema and The Gathering both started out as doom/death bands, but have evolved to the point where there's very little actual metal in their music.  Having said that, I'm not quite sure where else they would go.  Veni Domine are more of a doom metal band, and probably are better suited to the Power category.

For bands like The Gathering it is important to see where their focus is. They started as a Death Metal band, but very quickly let go of that. The first 2 albums with Anneke had a slight gothic touch, but aren't really gothic ... they quickly evolved into something which I would call "Post Metal". They've been doing that since 3 albums now, are very succcessful with that, and I think they should be judged rather by that than by their debut album.

This shows how difficult it is to make these genre determinations ... you really need to think.

About Veni Domine: Are they extreme? Bands based on Black/Death/Doom metal should be in the Experimental category - for now. I'm working on this ... 

Edited by MikeEnRegalia

As a former computer programmer, the idea of splitting up genrés into several sub-genrés does not appeal to me at all; this is analogous to the outdated concept of hierarchical databases. We would wind up with funny thngs like having a metal sub-genré "symphonic" and a symphonic sub-genré "metal". Hence the much better solution is to allow a band to belong to more than one sub-genrés (which is analogous to the much more modern concept of a relational database). Take it from a former computer programmer whose job used to be to organise data.

I was not speaking about sub-subgenrés. My suggestion is this: Let a band belong to several genrés, like symphonic and metal and zheul at the same time. That way we would not have to break up metal into irksome sub-genrés at all. Your concept is an outdated one from the beginning of the information age; it is hardly used anymore today, because of the very problems that come along with it (you would for example have a symphonic sub-genré named "metal" and a metal sub-genré named "symphonic").

I like Mike(enregalia)'s drawchart. It's very close (not to say the same) to my own understanding of the rock thing. I also agree with those who argue in the favour of not too many sub categories. It makes me remember an example I was given at school:

A guy sits down in a café and calls the waiter:

Sir?

Give me a Coke!

Yes Sir. A regular or a diet Coke, Sir?

A regular!

A light or a standard regular, Sir?

A standard regular!

A large or a small standard regular, Sir?

The hell of it! Give me a seven-up!

 

Too many sub-categories kill the sorting. Oh! And what about "Art Rock" in the draw chart? Diluted in symphonic?

As a conclusion, I would classify all metal bands integrating obvious prog elements in one single subgenre: prog metal, and classify all modern prog bandsin one single subgenre as well: modern prog. Then we could define some key bands of each classification an refer to them in the reviews to help the discoverer making an opinion on what he may expect to hear. Exactly like when we precise symphonic prog bands to sound more like Yes, or Genesis, or Camel. All are in the same genre but the references in the reviews help defining the style.

That's just my two cents (of euro)

An example: Let's say we have the (fictitious) bands The Undead Walkers and Slinky Hairspray. The Undead Walkers play prog-metal with some symphonic and fusion elements, so they would belong to the genrés prog-metal, symphonic and fusion, without any sub-genrés. Slinky Haispray play avantgarde with some metal elements, so they would go into this two genrés. No awkward sub-genré splitting necessary, which would just make the whole thing too complex. And, as I pointed out, you will wind up with a metal sub-genré in symphonic and a symphonic sub-genré in metal the way you plan it.

BaldFriede wrote: An example: Let's say we have the (fictitious) bands The Undead Walkers and Slinky Hairspray. The Undead Walkers play prog-metal with some symphonic and fusion elements, so they would belong to the genrés prog-metal, symphonic and fusion, without any sub-genrés. Slinky Haispray play avantgarde with some metal elements, so they would go into this two genrés. No awkward sub-genré splitting necessary, which would just make the whole thing too complex. And, as I pointed out, you will wind up with a metal sub-genré in symphonic and a symphonic sub-genré in metal the way you plan it.

With that concept, wouldn't the symphonic bands end up in half a dozen genres?  A like Pain of Salvation is Prog Metal, Fusion, a bit of Neo, Post, Experimental, Folk and Ethno.

Personally I think it's best to put a band - or album - in one genre only. There will always be a predominant genre for a band, and if a Neo Prog band also toyed with Fusion or Folk at one point ... it's not enough for me to say "They're also a Folk band". You would have to add comments for all these associations - maybe introduce levels, like "80% Neo, 20% Folk". That can be done ... the question is whether we want to go there.

No, move genre classification from the bands to the albums would be more than enough IMO. The bands/artists can then either be associated with the predominant genre of their discography - or you list all of the genres of their albums, which would be more informative,  but also more difficult to implement.

Joren wrote: Mike, first of all: nice diagram! second: - I don't know that much about prog metal, but wouldn't it be logic to pair "symphonic" with "orchestral" - I mean: 'in the beginning' a symphony was an extended orchestral piece. Doesn't that make sense? You could then add "epic" to "power"? And what about "gothic" (proglucky's post was completely ignored)

Symphonic Prog and Orchestral Metal are not quite the same ... Symphonic Prog applies the concepts of classical song writing - polyphony, counterpoint, etc - to Rock (or in this case Metal). Orchestral Metal (Also confusingly referred to as "Symphonic Metal") is merely fusing classical music with Metal.

About Gothic Metal: It is contained in Orchestral Metal, as it is a very similar genre ... there are many bands which are Orchestral, Gothic and Power. That's why I want to combine these genres.

About ProgLucky: I surely don't ignore him ... I've PMed him.

Joren wrote: - The "neo" bit I don't really get; what's "neo" about these bands? DT sounds a bit like neo-prog, but they were one of the first prog-metal bands. So why neo-prog-metal? I think I am missing something here

I'll leave the answer to Neo Prog experts ... I'm not a big fan of Neo Prog. But I know some modern Neo Prog bands like Arena and IQ, and if you add a little more metal you'll get a sound similar to Vanden Plas, Threshold ... and Dream Theater. Obviously I'm not talking about Train of Thought here ... But Images & Words, Awake, ACOS, FiI, ... and Octavarium.

Joren wrote: - To call "symphonic" sort of a combination of "neo" and "avant" goes a bit too far maybe? I mean I've heard Queensryche: not very avant-garde. PoS are maybe a little avant. The rest of the bands I don't know anyways, great job, but please explain these things, or I'm lost

Queensryche is really proving to be difficult. Their first two albums are quite experimental and extreme. Mindcrime sounds more similar to Power Metal. Empire and Hear in the Now Frontier are Neo Progish. Promised Land is very unusual ... a mix of Neo Prog and Avant-Garde, the most interesting one for traditional prog fans IMO.

Because of that diversity I placed them in Symphonic, but the situation will greatly improve when we can apply genres on the album level. 

Edited by MikeEnRegalia

I dont envey you Mike as this splitting Prog Metal into different genres is beginning to look like a lot of hastle.

I dont think that i can make any real sugestions as my knoledge on the bredth of progressive music as a hole is sadly limited (I have a pitifuly small CD collection, for the momet)