Prog Metal: Organizing the categories

yargh wrote: "You share that point of view with Friede, obviously. But there IS a third alternative. Read the above post ... and then explain to me why - according to your logic - Jazz-Fusion is in the archives." Considering the poor job done with it (there's not many artists in general and precious little from the jazz side of things) it arguably shouldn't be.  But since 1) fusion is progressive in the broad sense of the word, 2) arose at the same time as progressive rock, and 3) shared musicians and audiences with progressive rock, it makes sense to include it on a site dedicated to progressive rock.

1. applies to Prog Metal as well (IMO)
2. also true ... the roots of metal are in the 70s, and Prog Metal became popular during the "reign" of Neo Prog ... and various other Prog Rock genres were in full bloom before, during and after the beginnings of Prog Metal.
3. Yes, by all means this also applies to Prog Metal. Just go to a concert and look at the t-shirts.

GoldenSpiral wrote: This thread has been really interesting to read. However, the whole bloody thing is nothing more than an exercise in nerdery.  If you want to know what a prog metal band sounds like, there should be an accurate description in their biography page.  perhaps some references would help (i.e. "This band is for fans of....").  There's really no need to keep subdividing subdivisions. Prog rock by itself is a fairly obscure genre these days, let alone all of its subdivisions.  There's no need to go any further with it.  You can accurately describe a band's sound without labelling them.  in fact, labels don't really tell you much.

The genres as I laid them out are not at all specific. Three or four major areas, and the bands are quite evenly distributed ... and most prog metal fans among the collabs agree that the genres make sense, although there won't be a perfect consensus, naturally.

Think of it this way:

• Looking for driving, powerful or orchestral music? (no real counterpart in prog rock)
• Looking for melodic and symphonic music? (Neo Prog, Symphonic Prog)
• Looking for experimental music? (RIO, Avant-Prog, Post Rock, Jazz-Fusion)
• Looking for extreme music? (no real counterpart in prog rock)

Mike, one question... Did The allow You 2 create sub genres for prog metal? Me thinks Tony did say that? Is is settled that prog metal will be divided?

To me, there´s only old and classic prog. Where we find great bands and great albums as well as bad bands and albums like Caravan, CAN, CAP, Epidarius, etc. who make generic prog.

 There´s also recent prog like these Spock guys, Flower´s harmless-easy listening prog, porcupine, fantastic Anglagard´s prog,  etc. And there´s Metal with synth sounds that make of metal, "metal prog".

 A usefull category would be one that separates good prog from bad prog. So one don´t need to listen to every subgenre to check if it is good or bad. That way I wouldn´t have lost long hours trying to download MAGMA and Beggars opera.

 I suggest:

 * Great prog (must have and keep forever)

 * Good prog (must have)

 * Regular prog (Listen with open minded attitude. Good choice if you can´t dig other genres. Or better look for something else, like Fusion Jazz))

 * Bad prog (Only for hardcore stubborn prog heads)

 * Lousy prog (Better listen to mainstream pop)

 * CRAP-PROG (better listen to your own corporal music)

Ok, there are two different points of view here: Some say that Prog Metal is only a sub genre of Prog Rock, like Canterbury or Zeuhl. This would imply that all the bands in that genre are in some way similar. Others say that Prog Metal is not really a genre, but a phrase similar to Prog Rock. But the bands described by that phrase are very diverse, similarly to the diversity of the Prog Rock bands. Well, it's obvious that I choose the second theory. So if Prog Rock is divided into genres, why not divide Prog Metal as well?

Lets use a bit of logic Mike:

• Prog Metal is a subgenre of Progressive Rock: Then must follow the rules of each and every Progressive Rock sub-genre, as Canterbury or Zehul.
• Prog Metal: Ia a simlilar entity to Progressive Rock, in other words a genre with diverse sub-genres, in this case doesn't belongs in Prog Archives, because this is a site for Progressive Rock and all of it's sub-genres, as simple as that.

I really can't understand when Prog Metal fans ask: "Progressive Rock has it's own sub genres, then why Progressive Metal doesn't?

The answer is simple: Because Progressive Metal is already part of Progressive Rock

The confusion begins because Progressive Metal a sub-genre of Progressive Rock and a sub-genre of Metal (Pages of both genres define it as a sub-genre of them and claim the paternity) and there's where the problem starts, Metal sub-genres are being adapted to a Progressive site to create a hybrid not a genre (because it's part of Progressive Rock) and not a sub-genre because it has it's own sub-sub-genres.

I know it doesn't mater what I think and probably what a silent majority of Progheads believe, the decision is taken and Prog Metal will have it's own sub-sub genres, but I don't know what this will cause.

Think for example that Neo Prog fans decide to believe they deserve to have their own sub-sub-genres also, so they divide in at least 3 sub-sub genres:

• Genesis influenced Neo Progressive
• Yes influenced Neo Progressive
• Other bands influenced Neo Progressive

But of course Genesis fans decide that this is not enough, because Genesis has two different eras very different and all unique, so they decide to create two new sub-sub-sub-genres:

• Peter Gabriel Genesis influenced Neo Progressive
• Phil Collins Genesis influenced Neo Progressive

But then again Phil Collins Genesis fans decide that Phil Collins era is divided two different sub-sub-sub-sub genres, because there was a Progressive era and a  non Progressive era, so they create two new sub-sub-sub-sub-genres:

• Phil Collins four men era Genesis influenced Neo Progressive
• Phil Collins three men era Genesis influenced Neo Progressive

Of course Yes fans will want to do the same with Anderson, Trevor Horn, Trevor Rabin and probably Kaye, Wakeman and Moraz, and of course if hey don't decide that Bruford and White also were a major influence.

Of course this is absurd and only using an example to make a point, but. Aren't we opening The Pandora Box?

Things are simple, there are Genres like Progressive Rock and sub-genres as Canterbury, Symphonic and Prog Metal, lets not make things more complex, Progressive Rock is already too complex for 95% of the people.

Lets decide if Prog metal is a sub-genre of ¨Progressive Rock in which case they deserve a place along with the other sub. genres or if it's a genre with it's own divisions and particular sub-genres, in which case it doesn't belong here, there are no other options IMO.

Iván

BaldFriede wrote: Mike, unfortunately choosing the second theory also means they do not belong here. You can't have and eat your cake. If prog metal is not a genré of prog rock, then the bands belonging to it do not belong here but on a prog metal site, since this is a prog rock site.

Did you have a look at the chart that I posted? I explained it a hundred times ... here it is again: Prog Metal is a "child" of both Prog Rock and Metal. Most relevant prog metal albums were created after 1985, and the various bands - although rooted in metal - were influenced by the various prog rock genres. The resulting music is as diverse as prog rock ... even morse so, because the different metal genres are combined with the prog rock genres. Look at a band like Opeth ... rooted in extreme metal (Death Metal is the closest approximation), but heavily influenced by 70s prog rock bands like Camel. Or look at bands like Vanden Plas or Threshold ... sometimes sounding just like a modern Neo Prog band. Or The Gathering, a band based on a Gothic/Doom metal sound, but fusing it with Progressive Electronic and Space Rock.

In a nutshell: Your logic is flawed, because it's based on the assumption that either Prog Metal is a genre of Prog Rock, or it doesn't have anything to do with it. But the world is not just black and white ... there are many (pleasant) shades of gray.