| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
MikeEnRegalia 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
 Posted: June 05 2006 at 17:11 |
|
I must admit that I'm not too familiar with Black Sabbath apart from their obvious hits. I'm trying to listen to them via staytuned.de, which have all their albums, but it will take some time. Last week I listened to Sabotage and I will listen to the newer albums this week ... I know that they were getting more and more "metal" with every release, as did Judas Priest.
|
|
|
 |
AtLossForWords
Prog Reviewer
Joined: October 11 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6699
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 17:08 |
 Certif1ed wrote:
AtLossForWords wrote:
I'd have to agree Mike. Judas Priest is a blueprint for metal, but it's not as much of a direct influence as a band like Iron Maiden was. I think you could call Iron Maiden's A Number of the Beast the first modern metal album. |
I would say that Black Sabbath's "Heaven and Hell" was the first modern metal album - had you considered that?
|
I don't think Black Sabbath did anything that was particularly metal. The overall tonality is similar in a few aspects, but the composition is much different. Heaven and Hell comes close, but still has more in common with hard rock. Black Sabbath's lyrical content was more "metal" than anything else they did.
|
 
"Mastodon sucks giant monkey balls."
|
|
VanderGraafKommandöh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Malaria
Status: Offline
Points: 89372
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 17:05 |
|
Some people seem to talk about Uriah Heep being pioneers of heavy metal, but I've simply not heard enough of their output. I'm sure they're mot pioneers of modern metal though, more just heavy metal, like Black Sabbath.
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 16:55 |
|
And even earlier: Van Halen - 1 (1978). Although I admit that only some songs are metal (Running With the Devil for example) and others are a kind of Heavy Blues Rock.
Edited by MikeEnRegalia - June 05 2006 at 16:57
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 16:54 |
|
What about Scorpions - Animal Magnetism?
|
|
|
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 16:44 |
AtLossForWords wrote:
I'd have to agree Mike. Judas Priest is a blueprint for metal, but it's not as much of a direct influence as a band like Iron Maiden was. I think you could call Iron Maiden's A Number of the Beast the first modern metal album. |
I would say that Black Sabbath's "Heaven and Hell" was the first modern metal album - had you considered that?
|
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|
AtLossForWords
Prog Reviewer
Joined: October 11 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6699
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 13:37 |
|
I'd have to agree Mike. Judas Priest is a blueprint for metal, but it's not as much of a direct influence as a band like Iron Maiden was. I think you could call Iron Maiden's A Number of the Beast the first modern metal album.
|
"Mastodon sucks giant monkey balls."
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 13:17 |
|
^ All I meant was that this particular album is stylistically too far away from modern metal to be a direct influence for albums like Operation: Mindcrime, which was released 12 years after that. There were many groundbreaking albums in between - for example all early Iron Maiden albums, which were undoubtedly a big influence on Queensryche ... or the later Judas Priest albums.
|
|
|
|
Bryan
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 01 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3013
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 13:09 |
|
All I'm going to say is that the amount of influence virtually every heavy or power metal band since has taken from Sad Wings of Destiny (and other early Priest), it's ridiculous to say it has nothing to do with metal. It's true that it's not that heavy by today's standards, but it came out in 1976! Black Sabbath's early stuff isn't metal by today's standards either, but without it metal today probably wouldn't exist, so we have no problem labelling it as such.
I'm staying out of the rest of this...
|
|
CVoss
Forum Groupie
Joined: July 20 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 40
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 13:07 |
(I apologize if this sounds repetitive)
In terms of the forum reasons, right on. We have an interest in analyzing the music and what makes it good/bad/neutral, etc to the masses. Everyone is indeed entitled to an opinion, and we cannot interfere with those without, to put it bluntly, heads being stuck...and I won't bother finishing that statement.
As for the topic in the forum at hand, I do have a great respect from progressive metal. I think most people on this site have a problem with the "metal" half of it, wanting to dismiss the music as just too heavy for symphonic tastes. I actually like bands like Dream Theater (lots) and Symphony X since they are harder and generally more innovative than the neo-prog bands out there (not to put them down too much). The progressive metal genre has gained respect from the metal side because these bands are adding more theatrics into the usual metal genre, and the inclusion of keyboards helps stoke this further.
|
|
"No one told you when to run
You missed the starting gun"
|
|
thetick
Forum Newbie
Joined: December 06 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 35
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 10:42 |
it is a bit over the top.... there are a fair number of people who it
appears don't care for it, but the vast majority have better things to
do... like talk things things we DO like.. than talk about what we
don't.
|
If that was the case we wouldn't need the forums. The whole point of
the forums is to debate and question. I try to learn from people that
disagree with me, not just just blatently close my mind to the
possiblities. I wrote "The moral of the story..." to show that I love
prog and I hate to see people be close minded within a genre. If you
don't like it prog metal, fine, so be it but don't be cocky about me
posing the question. I think you saying it is over the top just shows
your missing the whole point of the forum. I have my opinion just as
you have yours. That doesn't mean something can't be discussed or
learned.
|
|
Handing sanity to a faceless mind
I step though the void into this blind
Memory where I see life, death and purity
Clocks dream tolls endlessly
|
|
Guests
Forum Guest Group
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 09:14 |
|
Nothin wrong, only it ain't much to bother about, IMO.
|
|
Paul K.
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 26 2006
Location: Russian Federation
Status: Offline
Points: 197
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 09:02 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
So: It's not really important that a band uses all kinds of stylistic elements on every album. It's important that a band uses the right elements in the right situations, and most Prog Metal bands do that (or are at least trying to). |
Agreed 100%, but by some strange concourse of circumstances I could care less about virtually all Prog Metal bands.
I'm more 60's-70's man.
All in all, tastes differ 
|
|
Weasels ripped my flesh
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 08:53 |
Certif1ed wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
I reviewed (Sad Wings of Destiny) this week on my website - you're welcome to read it. It's just a "first listen" review though. BTW: I fail to see what that album has to do with metal. It's not much more heavy than Rush's 2112.
|
...and I thought you understood metal.
It's clear now that I was sadly mistaken.
You fail to see what that album has to do with metal?
I fail to see how you can possibly arrive at that conclusion - it practically defines most of what metal is!
|
I did not say that it doesn't have anything to do with metal - I just said that it did not influence Operation: Mindcrime more than it influenced any other metal album of the 80s. And I'm really sure that most 80s metal is more influenced by the later Priest & Maiden album which had already progressed into what I call "modern metal". That Priest album is - along with the Rush, Sabbath etc. albums of that time - still clearly "pre-modern metal".
Certif1ed wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
you say that the first 3 albums all sound alike, which couldn't be more wrong. How could anyone describe The Warning and Operation: Mindcrime as even remotely similar? |
Easy - 1. They do, and 2. Read my reviews of them, noting other reviews which also say that just about every Queensryche album sounds like a conglomeration of Iron Maiden and Judas Priest - it's not just me.
|
It's not just you - but very few people see it that negatively. I see how you can get to that conclusion based on the early Queensryche
albums up to The Warning. But I try to see beyond simple observations
like "High Pitched / falsetto vocals -> Priest influence". On
Operation: Mindcrime they had found their own style, which I don't find
particularly interesting in itself ... the twin guitar leads are
characteristic (with the melodies a little more American/AOR than
Maiden) and the atmospheric acoustic guitar songs (2nd half of
Operation: Mindcrime) are not to be found in either Priest or Maiden.
their style is much more apparent on Empire, which is THE key album of
Queensryche IMO (not their best, but the one that shows their own
unique style in perfection).
Certif1ed wrote:
I don't understand why you feel the need to force your opinion on me - what you said has no basis in fact or even reality - it's just your unreasoned opinion. You haven't even bothered trying to justify it, in a kind of "Mike is the supreme winner of the discussion, Cert is an idiot" kind of way.
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
BTW: My fundamental problem with your review is the low rating
|
Why should I not award the rating it deserves among luminaries such as Gentle Giant, Frank Zappa and Radiohead? My ratings are comparative, as the star system here suggests - and only 1 means that the album is bad - all the others mean it's good. Queensryche would not appeal to some people, they are not Prog in the sense that many other bands are, so the rating is fair.
|
Another opinion on which you stand alone: That 2 star ratings mean "good".
Certif1ed wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
- you are bashing the album even as a plain metal album.
|
Indeed - but maybe that's because I think it deserves it?
|
That's quite right - *YOU* think it deserves that. I just take offense on you assuming that most people agree with that. You talk about people who think otherwise as if they're fools.
Certif1ed wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
You're free to do so,
|
Clearly not - you're complaining about it!
|
I'm not complaining about the review - I'm complaining about you using
this review against me. It's just your opinion, not more, not less.
Certif1ed wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
but you're going against EVERY other professional opinion there. I'm talking about press, musicians, websites (prog websites, metal websites) etc. etc. ... they all say that it is a masterpiece.
|
So I'm supposed to submit and follow the masses? I'm talking about my own opinion - that's what goes into a review, along with more objective matter to back it up.
Why should I take the side of fanboys if I think the music sucks?
|
No need to do that - but maybe becoming a hateboy is not a good solution either.
Certif1ed wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
So while I won't ASK you to change your rating or your review, I WILL criticise it
|
Jolly good - keep it up; I'd hate to think no-one read my reviews!
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
and certainly object to your claim that it represents the only logical, objective conclusion that exists about that album, and that anybody who disagrees is an idiot. Which you haven't spelled out like that - I know, but frankly - aren't you saying just that? |
As you say, I haven't said that, and just to make sure it's fully understood, I'm not saying that at all. I don't think that everyone who disagrees with me is an idiot, I just think that hold a different opinion to me - which seems a reasonable supposition.
What I am saying is "Here is my review, this is what I think and (crucially) this is why I think it. Would you care to discuss it in the forums over a nice cup of tea and a biscuit, or would you prefer to throw things at me?"
And if you throw things at me, don't be surprised if stuff gets thrown back.
 |
I'm trying to avoid "throwing things". I also try to avoid saying "he started it" or "I'm innocent - others started the fight" ... it always takes two for such arguments to unfold. I guess I'll have to review Operation: Mindcrime ... then there'll be our reviews for all to read, without the possibility for mud slinging that a forum allows.
Edited by MikeEnRegalia - June 05 2006 at 08:58
|
|
|
|
Trickster F.
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2006
Location: Belize
Status: Offline
Points: 5308
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 08:43 |
Haven't we all agreed on Judas Priest being Milk-Metal? In any case, I don't see this discussion going to any logical conclusion.
Now listening: Celtic Frost - Dethroned Emperor
-- Ivan
|
|
sig
|
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 08:30 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
 because I'm not as arrogant as you - in my previous point I suggested to leave the decision to the reader. Here you suggest to leave it at "Cert is the supreme winner of the discussion, Mike is an idiot." And sorry - that is not the case here. You just can't leave things without having the final word AND saying therein that you're right, can you? |
I'll leave that decision for the reader.
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
I reviewed (Sad Wings of Destiny) this week on my website - you're welcome to read it. It's just a "first listen" review though. BTW: I fail to see what that album has to do with metal. It's not much more heavy than Rush's 2112.
|
...and I thought you understood metal.
It's clear now that I was sadly mistaken.
You fail to see what that album has to do with metal?
I fail to see how you can possibly arrive at that conclusion - it practically defines most of what metal is!
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
I guess you didn't listen to (the Queensryche albums) then ... |
I always listen to an album as I review it - it's part of my strategy.
And I always "live with" an album for a good few months before reviewing it, as I know that some albums can take time to "get".
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
you say that the first 3 albums all sound alike, which couldn't be more wrong. How could anyone describe The Warning and Operation: Mindcrime as even remotely similar? |
Easy - 1. They do, and 2. Read my reviews of them, noting other reviews which also say that just about every Queensryche album sounds like a conglomeration of Iron Maiden and Judas Priest - it's not just me.
I don't understand why you feel the need to force your opinion on me - what you said has no basis in fact or even reality - it's just your unreasoned opinion. You haven't even bothered trying to justify it, in a kind of "Mike is the supreme winner of the discussion, Cert is an idiot" kind of way.
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
BTW: My fundamental problem with your review is the low rating
|
Why should I not award the rating it deserves among luminaries such as Gentle Giant, Frank Zappa and Radiohead? My ratings are comparative, as the star system here suggests - and only 1 means that the album is bad - all the others mean it's good. Queensryche would not appeal to some people, they are not Prog in the sense that many other bands are, so the rating is fair.
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
- you are bashing the album even as a plain metal album.
|
Indeed - but maybe that's because I think it deserves it?
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
You're free to do so,
|
Clearly not - you're complaining about it!
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
but you're going against EVERY other professional opinion there. I'm talking about press, musicians, websites (prog websites, metal websites) etc. etc. ... they all say that it is a masterpiece.
|
So I'm supposed to submit and follow the masses? I'm talking about my own opinion - that's what goes into a review, along with more objective matter to back it up.
Why should I take the side of fanboys if I think the music sucks?
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
So while I won't ASK you to change your rating or your review, I WILL criticise it
|
Jolly good - keep it up; I'd hate to think no-one read my reviews!
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
and certainly object to your claim that it represents the only logical, objective conclusion that exists about that album, and that anybody who disagrees is an idiot. Which you haven't spelled out like that - I know, but frankly - aren't you saying just that? |
As you say, I haven't said that, and just to make sure it's fully understood, I'm not saying that at all. I don't think that everyone who disagrees with me is an idiot, I just think that hold a different opinion to me - which seems a reasonable supposition.
What I am saying is "Here is my review, this is what I think and (crucially) this is why I think it. Would you care to discuss it in the forums over a nice cup of tea and a biscuit, or would you prefer to throw things at me?"
And if you throw things at me, don't be surprised if stuff gets thrown back.
|
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 08:23 |
|
^ What you don't seem to understand is that most music enthusiasts don't have a theoretical background on music - they're not scientists. So if 80% of all Queensryche fans back in 1988 chose to call Operation Mindcrime a masterpiece of Prog Metal - then that's that. It happened, it can't be changed.
now what we progarchives "experts" need to do is to find a balance between all these criteria that might - in combination - lead to something being called "prog". Accepting Operation: Mindcrime as prog doesn't mean that anything will be accepted ... it's a decision that's made album by album.
BTW: I always lobbied for Steve Vai to be accepted as prog. Result: he's in prog related. I don't make a big deal about the issue - I accept that my point of view is not that of the majority. I could rant all day long about most people judging Vai without knowing the important parts of his discography, or his background ... but I'm not doing that. why? because I know that this matter will not be solved to everyone's satisfaction ... so I
Let It Go.
|
|
|
|
Teaflax
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 26 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 1225
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 04:25 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Well, you certainly win the prize for the best "talking in riddles" in a heated argument ...
In English please.
|
It's
the same thing I've been saying all along, so never mind me repeating
it at length. We'll have to agree to disagree. I basically think much
of the not-very-Prog-at-all ProgMetal gets a free ride (and similarly
that many yes-it's-Prog-but-not-fully bands get lauded as The Second
Coming). You don't agree. C'est la vie.
And "craniorectal autoinsertion" I assume you got.
Edited by Teaflax - June 05 2006 at 04:25
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 04:10 |
Teaflax wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
I would love to debate that question, only not with so much backstabbing and negativity. |
If you feel you are being backstabbed, I certainly apologize. The
negativity is only there because I feel strongly about the subject at
hand; that very superficial aspects seem to signal Prog to a great many
people.
|
It's not just between me and you. I just notice a general trend of negativity against those who are supporting the guidelines of the archives. If you disagree with those you should take it up with Max, who (with ProgLucky) owns this place.
Teaflax wrote:
| Some Electronic music is also accepted (Tangerine Dream etx.) if
those bands also worked in a Rock context in the widest possible
sense. |
Very wide, then.
| With that definition, is it so hard to accept that Squarepusher will most likely not be added? |
Eh.
What it means to me is this; Prog Rock came about to break the
strictures and rules that surrounded Rock music. It did this in all
aspects; sonically, structurally, compositionally, melodically, etc.
Yet this legacy and spirit is to be ignored because it has its
grounding in Rock (which I see as utterly incidental - that was the
only real way for most young kids to make music at that time),
something it moved away from rather quickly. I find that sad, limiting
and and prejudiced.
|
Leave me alone with this discussion - I'm not interested in it, it was not my decision. I don't really care.
Teaflax wrote:
| It has nothing to do with levels - there's just a historic
component. If a band was called "progressive metal" in magazines,
interviews etc. ... then we add them. |
So this is not a Progressive Rock site, is what you're saying. It's a
Progressive Rock/Progressive Metal site, and the confusion and problems
probably arise from the different criteria these two sides use.
|
Yes and no. Yes, this is a rock/metal website (funny that you didn't notice from the start), and no, no different criteria are used. It's just that Rock is very different from Metal ...
Teaflax wrote:
Otherwise you really would have to approach each possible inclusion
from a Prog Rock perspective, not - as you say you do - from a Prog
Metal Historical perspective. And that's how the bar drops so low that
you get to even discussing Evanescence in the first place.
|
The "historical" perspective applies to all genres, not just metal. It's therefore not a metal issue.
Edited by MikeEnRegalia - June 05 2006 at 04:10
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: June 05 2006 at 03:58 |
Teaflax wrote:
What? A leads to B and I'm accused of having performed craniorectal autoinsertion for pointing it out?
How, pray tell, did B even come about if not that way? Surely it was
not a spontaneous event, but part of a sequence of decisions.
|
Well, you certainly win the prize for the best "talking in riddles" in a heated argument ... In English please.
|
|
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
What is so wrong with Prog metal
