Prog Metal: Organizing the categories

King of Loss wrote: Whoa this thread has become REALLY big!

Thank you, King of the Obvious

Hey, anyone give any thought to creating a sister site, PROG-METAL-ARCHIVES?  It would certainly put an end to the non-metal proggers who feel we are taking over their site.  And I just checked and www.progmetalarchives.com is AVAILABLE!

I'd be willing to put some time and money into it if anyone else is.

Vanwarp wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ now I'm confused. I said that Orchestral/Neo-classical has a lot to do with Power Metal. But Symphonic Prog has nothing to do with Orchestral/Neo-classical. In essence: Close to the Edge has nothing to do with Orchestral/Neo-classical. I believe Progressive Neo-classical/Symphonic/Orchestral Metal all have something in common with classical music and related orchestrations being at the core of the music.  Progressive Power Metal actually stands alone as it does not always contain classical music influences.  But I agree some Progressive Power Metal bands do mix some elements of Neo-classical, Symphonic or Orchestral influences of some sort into their music. So, although the music of the bands that put out progressive neo-classical, symphonic or orchestral metal may vary considerably, they will all be heavily influenced by classical music and the orchestrations that usually accompany that particular sub-genre of music.  Adagio is a fine example of a progressive band that mixes neo-classical influences with power metal.  But no progressive power metal band sounds exactly like Adagio which clearly fall under the Neo-classical Progressive Power Metal tag. Just my .02 cents!

Thanks for your comments, nd much of what you're saying makes sense - but you still don't understand why I separate Orchestral and Symphonic.

Please tell me the difference between Therion and Pain of Salvation. Then you'll have a pretty good idea of how I define Orchestral and Symphhonic ...

MikeEnRegalia wrote: Vanwarp wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ now I'm confused. I said that Orchestral/Neo-classical has a lot to do with Power Metal. But Symphonic Prog has nothing to do with Orchestral/Neo-classical. In essence: Close to the Edge has nothing to do with Orchestral/Neo-classical. I believe Progressive Neo-classical/Symphonic/Orchestral Metal all have something in common with classical music and related orchestrations being at the core of the music.  Progressive Power Metal actually stands alone as it does not always contain classical music influences.  But I agree some Progressive Power Metal bands do mix some elements of Neo-classical, Symphonic or Orchestral influences of some sort into their music. So, although the music of the bands that put out progressive neo-classical, symphonic or orchestral metal may vary considerably, they will all be heavily influenced by classical music and the orchestrations that usually accompany that particular sub-genre of music.  Adagio is a fine example of a progressive band that mixes neo-classical influences with power metal.  But no progressive power metal band sounds exactly like Adagio which clearly fall under the Neo-classical Progressive Power Metal tag. Just my .02 cents!  Thanks for your comments, nd much of what you're saying makes sense - but you still don't understand why I separate Orchestral and Symphonic. Please tell me the difference between Therion and Pain of Salvation. Then you'll have a pretty good idea of how I define Orchestral and Symphhonic ...

Orchestral Progressive Metal or Instrumental Progressive Metal without vocals are one and the same thing, IMHO. I haven’t listened to any bands that fall under this category yet. While Symphonic Progressive Metal will always include some lyrics and vocals.

Pain of Salvation

Highly emotional, technical, progressive metal. There’s no denying that Daniel Gildenlow relies heavily on musical exploration and boundary pushing when he records his music. The varied influences used here (folk, industrial, neo-classical, etc...) should put them in the Experimental or Avant-garde Progressive Metal category and NOT Orchestral.  Although some of their songs could be classified as Orchestral in nature, their albums are definitely NOT Orchestral, the lyrics and vocals included on those other tracks and the folk and the multitude of other musical influences makes for a more varied album. In my view, Pain of Salvation is Experimental Progressive Metal...period.

Therion

As you know, Therion started out as a Death Metal band but can no longer be associated with that genre. Nowadays, they combine classical music influences with progressive elements, so they are Symphonic Progressive Metal. BTW, Therion record extensively with the Prague Philharmonic Orchestra and they use choirs as well. These elements are found in Neo-classical and Symphonic sub-genres. (Something Pain of Salvation are NOT doing exclusively.)

I agree with you that Therion and Pain of Salvation are worlds apart, musically speaking. They obviously don’t belong in the same sub-genres.

Progressive Power is one thing and should not be included with other clearly identifyable sub-genres. Neo-classical/Symphonic/Orchestral have something in common and should be close together as a sub-genre...that's what I'm saying.

I hope my explanation helped you sort this all out? 

MikeEnRegalia wrote: Thanks for your comments, nd much of what you're saying makes sense - but you still don't understand why I separate Orchestral and Symphonic. Please tell me the difference between Therion and Pain of Salvation. Then you'll have a pretty good idea of how I define Orchestral and Symphhonic ...

On another note, I don't think you should be changing the definitions of sub-genres to accomodate a certain band, rather, you should be finding the specific "criteria" of each sub-genre and fine tuning the definition for each of them first, then looking at what sub-genre one band falls under or where exactly one band sits vs another.  Seperating Neo-classical/Symphonic/Orchestral from under one general sub-genre makes NO sense to me at all...

I like the chart idea, it's a great tool for sure.  But the definitions (or criteria) noted on your chart are all over the place, very confusing, that's why I provided a more specific definition of many of the sub-genres found on your chart.  I thought it would be more helpful to seperate those sub-genres with similar/common influences.

I don't think this would change all that much on your chart, just the criteria really, but this would definitely help sort all the bands out in the end.

I'm just trying to help out here, this was a great initiative and I'm sorry I arrived a little late for the party! 

^ I don't want to introduce too many categories. Obviously some bands have several genres (Symphonic + Avant, Experimental + Extreme, Power + Neo etc.), so there really is no perfect solution, no matter how many categories you introduce. My approach is to make these categories really "fuzzy", and to put the bands into the category that suits them best.

And I'll say it again: Symphonic IS NOT THE SAME AS Orchestral. What is orchestral about Spock's Beard? Think about it - those bands that I categorized as "Orchestral/Gothic" have much more in common with Power Metal than with Symphonic Prog Rock. My Symphonic Prog Metal genre is for bands which come closest to Neo Prog Rock and Symphonic Prog Rock bands. 

Vanwarp wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: You either can't or don't want to understand me, so I think it's best to agree to disagree. Our main problem is that you think that Orchestral=Symphonic. But in the context of "Symphonic Prog Rock" it has a different meaning. It may involve classical influences, but often in an entirely different way than the Neoclassical/Orchestral bands do. A band may also be both Orchestral and Symphonic (Adagio, Symphony X are good examples), which makes this discussion even more confusing ... No, this makes perfect sense to me.  Both Adagio and Symphony X definitely fall under the Neo-classical, Symphonic and sometimes Orchestral Progressive Metal influences.  I totally agree with this, makes perfect sense to me.  But, in both these cases, one could also argue that their music is largely influenced by Power Metal.  This is why I've been arguing that Adagio (and Symphony X for that matter) are principally Neo-classical/Symphonic Progressive Power Metal bands, and NOT strictly Progressive Power.  I don't want to disagree with you, I'm just looking to sort the different sub-genres out so it is a little more clear than what it is now.  To many similar influences in seperate sub-genres...I'm talking about the chart.  It's never too late to fine tune it?

Bands cannot be in several genres. Even if it was technically possible to put them in several genres, I would not want to do it - unless there would be a "main genre" and some "secondary genres".

Maybe this will help: I think that certain attributes are stronger than others. This is how I would list them (in descending order):

1. Extreme
2. Power/Raw
3. Doom/Dark
4. Neo-classical
5. Experimental/Technical
6. Shred/Fusion
7. Experimental/Avant
8. Neo
9. Symphonic

So if you consider a band like Symphony X which is both Power/Raw, Neo-classical, Neo and Symphonic, the Power/Raw attribute would be dominant.

Hmmm ... if I am to abide by my own rules, I'll have to move Opeth to Extreme ... I'll do that later.

^ your categories overlap, and that's the problem. Many Shred artists are experimental, many extreme bands also use orchestral elements, the symphonic bands also frequently use innovative (avant) and experimental elements ...

Just name three key bands for your genres, maybe I'll understand you better. Remember that we cannot put bands in multiple genres.

The chart I’m proposing would include 8 major categories all can be divided in sub-categories if necessary. I’ve numbered the major categories from 1 to 8 with sub-categories falling within some of the major categories:

1. Progressive Metal

(Progressive metal is a heavy brand of progressive rock which is characterized by the use of complex compositional structures, odd time signatures and some intricate virtuoso influenced instrumental playing. The high level of musical proficiency is often combined with lyrical/textual ideas, resulting in lengthy songs and concept albums.)

• Dream Theater
• Royal Hunt
• Shadow Gallery
• Threshold (UK)
• Vanden Plas

2. Progressive Power

(Essential criteria: fast rhythms with double bass drums, high-pitched vocals, guitar soloing and guitar harmonics)

• Angra
• Kamelot
• Pyramaze
• Symphony X
• Tad Morose

3. Gothic/Doom/Dark/Orchestral

(heavy metal influenced down-tuned guitars, slow sludgy pace to evoke a sense of impending doom, ethereal synths and spooky orchestral textures)

Gothic

• Acron (Italy)
• Lake of Tears
• Lost in Twilight

Doom

• Agalloch
• Anathema
• Avrigus

Dark

• April Ethereal
• Ashes to Ashes (Norway)
• Green Carnation

Orchestral

• Aina

4. Neo-classical/Symphonic

(very strong relationship with classical music and orchestrations)

• Adagio (France)
• Dionysus (Sweden)
• Luca Turilli
• Magnitude 9
• Majestic
• Rhapsody
• Therion

5. Fusion/Shred

(a mixture of jazz improvisations with guitar/keyboard virtuosos)

• Yngwie Malmsteen
• Steve Vai
• Jordan Ruddess

6. Avant-Garde

(new, innovative and radically different techniques of expression)

• Alchemist
• Isis
• Winds (Norway)

7. Experimental

(hybrid use of musical styles, unorthodox, distinctly unique ingredients)

• In The Woods
• Orphaned Land

8. Extreme

(Thrash/Death/Black)

Thrash

• Bezerker
• Dillinger Escape Plan
• Meshuggah
• Voivoid

Death

• Dark Suns (Germany)
• Insomnium
• Into Eternity
• Opeth

Black

• Arcturus
• Borknagar
• Grand Alchemist
• Susperia
• Vintersorg

Perhaps with a little more effort I'm sure I could have categorized a lot more bands but I think I got enough in here for you to get the big picture...

Bands should be categorized by the most predominant feature of their music!