Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
WinterLight
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 09 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 424
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:01 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
I refuse to see a Prog site that I joined EXCLUSIVELY FOR PROG, slowly turn into a general music site.
Worse things have happened.
I refuse to see people not caring for REAL 100% Prog bands announced and making 5 or 10 pages of barely related bands.
What is a "real 100% Prog" band?
I refuse to see 10 pages of Metallica and barely one page about the probably last King Crimson tour in a Progressive Rock site.
That's easy enough to solve: don't read those threads (and spare the hyperbole).
I refuse to see an active musician as Alex Carpani, who recruited with great effort a living legend as Aldo Tagliapetra, offering his collaboration to Prog Archives and nobody caring about because Toto, Boistoin and Metallica are more important.
Guess not everyone shares your opinion?
I refuse to see the opinion of the adminuistrators and teams to be questioned by people who don't agree with their favorite band being rejected,. not because of quality, but because IT'S NOT PROG.
Despite clear arguments in support that these bands are progressive. Trust me: it's alright to question of authority, especially authority which fails to legitimize itself (we're not exactly talking about technical, scholarly knowledge--it's just pop music after all).
I refuse to see people accepting the opinion of the majorities, unless the majority agrees with them}
The majority can be misguided, or just plain wrong. In any case, it's by no means incontestable that the "majority" (of who exactly) disapprove of Metallica's inclusion into the archive.
I refuse to see a band like Metallica, who doesn't want to be considered Prog, being pushed into our thrats, despite it's obvious most of the people don't believe they belong here.
By that argument, we should remove King Crimson from the archive in view of Fripp's rejection of the description "progressive."
On the bright side, though, only 88 more theses to post and you can begin the Reformation.
|
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:03 |
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:04 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
- I refuse to see a Prog site that I joined EXCLUSIVELY FOR PROG, slowly turn into a general music site.
How many prog related bands are there ... 100, 150? Of more than 3000 prog bands. Come on ...
- I refuse to see people not caring for REAL 100% Prog bands announced and making 5 or 10 pages of barely related bands.
How do you know that people are not caring? Just because the Metallica discussion has been revived by recent discussions about Miles Davis and Sting? These discussions have come and gone ... none of them has really lasted longer than a week or two.
- I refuse to see 10 pages of Metallica and barely one page about the probably last King Crimson tour in a Progressive Rock site.
Sorry, but I don't see what's that interesting about that tour. Sure, seeing King Crimson on stage is great, but talking about these shows ... what's the novelty?
- I refuse to see an active musician as Alex Carpani, who recruited with great effort a living legend as Aldo Tagliapetra, offering his collaboration to Prog Archives and nobody caring about because Toto, Boistoin and Metallica are more important.
When did that happen? Tell me more about it ... but first: Have you listened to Panzerballet yet? No? Shame on you! Let's be realistic ... none of us has the time to listen to or check out all the lesser known artists that exist on this planet.
- I refuse to see the opinion of the adminuistrators and teams to be questioned by people who don't agree with their favorite band being rejected,. not because of quality, but because IT'S NOT PROG.
This has nothing to do with Metallica being my favorite band. They're not even my favorite band, although I value them highly. Also, I agree that they're not prog. Neither are Queen, Led Zeppelin - or Iron Maiden. Prog Related - which you wrote the description for if I remember correctly - is, among other things, for highly influential bands which came close to playing prog, but didn't quite "cross the line". No matter how this poll turns out, it's obvious that many people think that they're one of a handful of important metal bands which would make sense to be added as prog related.
- I refuse to see people accepting the opinion of the majorities, unless the majority agrees with them}
I can respect these opinions, but I don't have to "adopt" them ... of course I would be glad if this poll turned out in favor of the addition, but if it doesn't it won't change my opinion. In any case, I will accept the admins' decision.
- I refuse to see a band like Metallica, who doesn't want to be considered Prog, being pushed into our thrats, despite it's obvious most of the people don't believe they belong here.
Porcupine Tree / Steven Wilson doesn't like being called "prog" either ... obviously that doesn't stop us. Besides, let's emphasize again that I'm not calling Metallica "prog".
If this was a General Rock site, I would accept Metallica, The Bee Gees...Even N'Sync, but no, this is a Progressive Rock site, that some of us have formed since it started, placed a lot of effort on it, expend time that could had been spent with our family or working to gain ore money, but we doid it for PROG, not for Metal, Jazz, AOR, Alternative, Sibnger Songwritter, etc. Let me repeat again that this website has accepted a very small number of prog related / proto prog bands. Nobody's "opening the flood gates". If I hadn't brought up Metallica, won't you instead complain about Avantasia, whose addition I had nothing to do with? Please, I'm not your enemy. I don't think that we need many more prog related bands in the archives, I just think that Metallica are one of the few that are vital.
BTW: I believe it's more trivial and out of lace to create a 10 opages thread about Boston, NMetallica or Toto, than place our emphasis in REAL PROG BANDS.
This place is called PROG ARCHIVES....Not Allmusic.
That's why we're not adding thousands of non prog bands.
Iván |
|
|
|
Alberto Muñoz
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 26 2006
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 3577
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:17 |
The T wrote:
[
I clearly understand your logic and it seems it was the best course of actin. When the site had but 10 prog-related bands, a big name as Metallica which causes a lot of controversy in regards to its relation to prog would've been more problematic. Now the situation can be looked upon with much more reasoning and less prejudice.
Yeah in that logic, Korn and RATM has also Proggy elements no?????
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:25 |
^ I can't see any logic in your deduction. Of course we should be careful not to "water down" the definition of prog related. The more bands there are, the easier it is to make an argument for an inclusion - the dreaded "X -> Y" rule. I remember how prog related started ... Queen were one of the first bands to be added, and back then I remember that Led Zeppelin were also suggested, but rejected. More and more prog related bands were added, and at one point Led Zeppelin were put back on the map and finally added.
I don't want to see this happen with metal bands ... rather the reverse. Still, Metallica are one of the few bands which IMHO are perfect for prog related.
|
|
|
burritounit
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 18 2007
Location: Puerto Rico
Status: Offline
Points: 2551
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:34 |
Sorry if this has been asked before. I haven't read the other pages that much. For what reason are we going to add Metallica(if "approved")? because of their influence on the progressive metal genre? or because they are prog metal, prog related or however you call it? Personally I can't hear any "progressive" elements in their music and I don't think that having odd times and long songs makes you prog. Also, I don't know much about Metallica(I only have Master Of Puppets and S&M) but I clearly I cannot se any relation between Metallica and prog unless your reffering to the influencethey had on some progressive metal bands. If thats the reason "maybe" they should be considered Just my opinion...
Edited by burritounit - August 19 2008 at 16:40
|
"I've walked on water, run through fire, can't seem to feel it anymore. It was me, waiting for me..."
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:46 |
^ I think it's a combination of both. Certif1ed posted some specific examples of the progressiveness in those Metallica albums ... the most obvious examples are Master of Puppets and And Justice For All. Do you own any other important thrash albums from that time? I think the difference between for example Slayer - Reign in Blood and Metallica - Master of Puppets is quite apparent.
|
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:47 |
WinterLight wrote:
[QUOTE=Ivan_Melgar_M] I refuse to see a Prog site that I joined EXCLUSIVELY FOR PROG, slowly turn into a general music site.
Worse things have happened.
Yes of course, an asteroid could fall on our heads, but that's out of our reach, we can solve what we are working for, what WE created in 5 years of work
I refuse to see people not caring for REAL 100% Prog bands announced and making 5 or 10 pages of barely related bands.
What is a "real 100% Prog" band?
Yes, Genesis (Early), King Crimnson, Kansas, PFM, Anglagard, Par Lindh Project, Focuds, Banco del Mutuo Soccorso, After Crying, Disclipline, Pain of Salvation, Porcupine Tree, Rick Wakeman, Steve Hackett, Frank Zappa, Factor Burzaco, Anton Roolaart, Mahavishnu Orchestra, Jean Luc Ponty, ;Mike Oldfield, etc...Do they say anything to you?
I refuse to see 10 pages of Metallica and barely one page about the probably last King Crimson tour in a Progressive Rock site.
That's easy enough to solve: don't read those threads (and spare the hyperbole).
That's easy to say for a newcomer with 198 posts, but many of us have placed our efforts (and still do it) creating something unique and special.
I may isagree with collabirators like Mike, Micky, Raffaella, or others, but I seen them every day for years working hard, even at 2 or 3 am and raff waking at 5 am to work every day with the Symphonic Team.
With them we cleaned 519 bandsone by one, it took us almost a year, we don't want to let this work disappear.
I refuse to close my eyes, that won't change reality and won't save us from the risk of loosing credibility, and honestly, I care for this site.
I refuse to see an active musician as Alex Carpani, who recruited with great effort a living legend as Aldo Tagliapetra, offering his collaboration to Prog Archives and nobody caring about because Toto, Boistoin and Metallica are more important.
Guess not everyone shares your opinion?
This proves that many people haven't joined PROG ARCHIVES....THE ULTIMATE PROG ROCK RESOURCE because of Prog.
I refuse to see the opinion of the adminuistrators and teams to be questioned by people who don't agree with their favorite band being rejected,. not because of quality, but because IT'S NOT PROG.
Despite clear arguments in support that these bands are progressive. Trust me: it's alright to question of authority, especially authority which fails to legitimize itself (we're not exactly talking about technical, scholarly knowledge--it's just pop music after all).
That authority has been chosen by the OWNERS, the peope who placed their money in this site you are enjoying for free, How can we question them?
Authority that faills to legitimize itself?????
Please..legitimacy is earned with resources, effort, money and work, the owners put the money and a lot of work, the Adms put the hard work, the Collaborators put their sacrifice and their time for free...Don't you believe we earned our legitimity?
POP?, well I don't agree with that (maybe in the case of Metallica, but still I doubt it). Pop has it's own parameters and characteristics different to Progressive Rock, and if you don't find them, I understand why you are having problems with this issues.
I refuse to see people accepting the opinion of the majorities, unless the majority agrees with them}
The majority can be misguided, or just plain wrong. In any case, it's by no means incontestable that the "majority" (of who exactly) disapprove of Metallica's inclusion into the archive.
So..We must ignore the owners, the Administrators, the Collaborators the members and believe you?
We are all misguided and you are right?
I refuse to see a band like Metallica, who doesn't want to be considered Prog, being pushed into our thrats, despite it's obvious most of the people don't believe they belong here.
By that argument, we should remove King Crimson from the archive in view of Fripp's rejection of the description "progressive."
He has a dislike for categorization, but has never rejected the term Proggressive neither the characteristics of their music, but Metallica is explicit, they claim to be a METAL BAND and nothing more.
On the bright side, though, only 88 more theses to post and you can begin the Reformation.
The reformation has started long before you joined, a reformation created with work and love for the site and Prog.
Iván
|
Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - August 19 2008 at 16:49
|
|
|
Alberto Muñoz
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 26 2006
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 3577
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:48 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
^ I think it's a combination of both. Certif1ed posted some specific examples of the progressiveness in those Metallica albums ... the most obvious examples are Master of Puppets and And Justice For All. Do you own any other important thrash albums from that time? I think the difference between for example Slayer - Reign in Blood and Metallica - Master of Puppets is quite apparent. |
You repeat that argument in previous Threads??? why???
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:52 |
^ I'm sorry, I don't understand the question.
|
|
|
moreitsythanyou
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: April 23 2006
Location: NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 11682
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:53 |
I could not agree more with Ivan.
|
<font color=white>butts, lol[/COLOR]
|
|
burritounit
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 18 2007
Location: Puerto Rico
Status: Offline
Points: 2551
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:58 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
^ I think it's a combination of both. Certif1ed posted some specific examples of the progressiveness in those Metallica albums ... the most obvious examples are Master of Puppets and And Justice For All. Do you own any other important thrash albums from that time? I think the difference between for example Slayer - Reign in Blood and Metallica - Master of Puppets is quite apparent.
|
I don't think I own other albums form this particular time and I know the difference between those bands just like you said, it's pretty clear. Yet I still stand by my opinion and I clearly understand their influence on progressive metal and I just can't see their relation to prog other than being this one and if it's that one I'll accept it. I'm only stating my opinion...and not relating it to the Miles Davis and the Avantasia additions (honestly I've never heard of them up until now).
Edited by burritounit - August 19 2008 at 17:02
|
"I've walked on water, run through fire, can't seem to feel it anymore. It was me, waiting for me..."
|
|
Alberto Muñoz
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 26 2006
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 3577
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:59 |
Agree 100% with you Ivan, i rembember the first time i visit PA, it was a site in construction, when i became a forum member in 2006, the site was enormously... and by now it's really a huge influential site.
Cheers to all that have sacrified time, effort and diversions to run this wonderful site that yes we all enjoy for free, nothing more nothing less.
I personally being friend of Cesar Inca and Memowakeman, and they are also a very connoseiur of prog rock themes.
Alberto
|
|
|
rushfan4
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 22 2007
Location: Michigan, U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 66266
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:04 |
Since Ivan mentioned the AllMusic Guide, here is their definition of Thrash music.
Thrash was essentially the sound of underground heavy metal during the '80s, dominated by a driving, percussive approach to rhythm guitar (thanks to a pick-hand technique called palm muting) and furious levels of aggression. Thrash was often technically accomplished, taken at fast tempos, and emphasized heavy, sometimes atonal guitar riffs over melody; however, these generalizations are far from absolute rules. In its early days, thrash was essentially the same thing as speed metal, the product of American bands who in the early '80s fused the lean, vicious attack of the New Wave of British Heavy Metal with the tempos of hardcore punk and Motorhead. However, the dexterity and constant intensity required to play speed metal proved limiting to some, and a variety of different approaches quickly took shape: some thrash bands concentrated more on midtempo grooves, occasionally accelerating into speed-metal realms; some, like Metallica and Megadeth, used their instrumental technique to craft more intricate and progressive music; others emphasized the music's aggression to project theatrically menacing images. Thrash provided a harder, heavier, more authentically metallic alternative to the accessible pop-metal bands who dominated the charts in the late '80s, and despite a dearth of airplay, it became quite popular, so much so that when Metallica and Megadeth streamlined their sound to make it more accessible in the early '90s, they became instant superstars. Diehard underground metalheads took refuge in the thrash-inspired death and black metal styles, which took thrash's dark subject matter and visceral force to intentionally disturbing extremes.
In blue, their reference to Metallica and Megadeth crafting "progressive music". Their definition, not Mike's or Certs. As weird as it may seem to some there really is some rationale behind it.
As I posted in one of the other threads I really never considered Metallica to be a thrash band other than with their Kill 'em All and some of Garage Days.
|
|
|
Alberto Muñoz
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 26 2006
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 3577
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:08 |
Progressive music in Thrash Style, well Allmusic has to explain more about this sentence...
|
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:12 |
tuxon wrote:
IMO,
Basically Metallica is more progressive than Iron Maiden, Yet Iron Maiden is more prog-related than Metallica.
Metallica doesn't belong in PR because their influence on and from prog is really minor, their music in a way can be considered progressive in it's own right, but that's often the case with leading bands of a new sub-culture/genre, while with Iron Maiden it's in a way the other way around, though limitedly progressive themselves their influence on and from prog rock is more extensive, songs like Rhyme of teh ancient mariner is not progressive, but is very much influenced by progresive rock music and structures. their later phase albums are leanin g towards prog-metal aswell.
well something like that. |
I agree strongly with 99% of your post Gerald.. right up to the point where you say their influence is minor... I hear Metallica all over DT... that is like saying Stavinsky wasn't an influence on Symphonic prog. However... the rest.. spot on.. Metallica did do prog metal albums.. and this ... all these threads and everything would have NEVER happened if people got rid of the silly idea that this site is GROUP orientated.. not music orientated. Metallica should have been included in Prog Metal... to some though.. that is the same as saying the Metallica IS a prog group.. .whoa.... anyone care to define.. just WHAT a 'prog group' is. oh yeah.. . groups that only did prog would be the logical answer. Then 86 3/4 of the database and banish it to Prog Related... or would the answer be that they are not KNOWN as a prog group. Try telling me that.... and I'll tell you this site with a VERY few exceptions.. then would 86 damn near every group AFTER 1979. Groups today trip over themselves not to be 'known' as prog. What we judge here is music... Metallica were not prog related... but were over the course of 2 or 3 albums.. Prog Metal... and that team could have.. and maybe should have added them and 'this' never would this come about. Iron Maiden is .. if we are to be correct.. far more Prog Related than Metallica. That is why they were added.. and have long been the only PM related addition. That explains my vote. However since the PMT did not take the group.. it comes down to Prog Related.. or nothing.. and this IS an important group in Prog Metal.. and aren't we here to be the 'Ultimate Prog Resource' Metallica did do prog albums.. so while Prog Related is not the best choice... hence the stupidity of comparing them to Iron Maiden which was a sound addition..... they should still be added. my two cents.. and final two cents.. you all are yapping at each other.. and don't think many of you are really listening to each other at this point.
Edited by micky - August 19 2008 at 17:17
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
WinterLight
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 09 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 424
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:19 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
Yes of course, an asteroid could fall on our heads, but that's out of our reach, we can solve what we are working for, what WE created in 5 years of work
Metallica or asteroid? Your hyperbole would be laughable if it weren't so predominant.
Yes, Genesis (Early), King Crimnson, Kansas, PFM, Anglagard, Par Lindh Project, Focuds, Banco del Mutuo Soccorso, After Crying, Disclipline, Pain of Salvation, Porcupine Tree, Rick Wakeman, Steve Hackett, Frank Zappa, Factor Burzaco, Anton Roolaart, Mahavishnu Orchestra, Jean Luc Ponty, ;Mike Oldfield, etc...Do they say anything to you?
Not sure what the question means: they don't "say anything" to me.
That's easy to say for a newcomer with 198 posts, but many of us have placed our efforts (and still do it) creating something unique and special. Sorry for crashing your exclusive club.
This proves that many people haven't joined PROG ARCHIVES....THE ULTIMATE PROG ROCK RESOURCE because of Prog.
Is that supposed to be sarcasm? Try again, please.
That authority has been chosen by the OWNERS, the peope who placed their money in this site you are enjoying for free, How can we question them?
Sure, we can question their decisions, and they can choose to ignore our questions. I agree that, ultimately, the decision lies with them. This doesn't mean that their decision isn't poorly made.
Authority that faills to legitimize itself?????
Please..legitimacy is earned with resources, effort, money and work, the owners put the money and a lot of work, the Adms put the hard work, the Collaborators put their sacrifice and their time for free...Don't you believe we earned our legitimity?
Legitimacy is earned through reason not wealth.
POP?, well I don't agree with that (maybe in the case of Metallica, but still I doubt it). Pop has it's own parameters and characteristics different to Progressive Rock, and if you don't find them, I understand why you are having problems with this issues.
There's popular music and serious music (i.e., classical music). It may not appeal to your elitism, but it's true enough. Prog is just clever pop music.
So..We must ignore the owners, the Administrators, the Collaborators the members and believe you?
We are all misguided and you are right?
You don't have to believe me at all--I make no claims to infallibility.
He has a dislike for categorization, but has never rejected the term Proggressive neither the characteristics of their music, but Metallica is explicit, they claim to be a METAL BAND and nothing more.
That an artist chooses not to define his work in some particular vocabulary does not preclude a reasonable characterization in that context. Again, this is elementary--elementary to the point that I feel somewhat silly in actually articulating it.
The reformation has started long before you joined, a reformation created with work and love for the site and Prog. Evidently, you don't understand my allusion to your pontification.
|
|
|
Alberto Muñoz
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 26 2006
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 3577
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:21 |
Here's the Allmusic Review of And Justice For All:
Review |
by Steve Huey |
The most immediately noticeable aspect of ...And Justice for All isn't Metallica's still-growing compositional sophistication or the apocalyptic lyrical portrait of a society in decay. It's the weird, bone-dry production. The guitars buzz thinly, the drums click more than pound, and Jason Newsted's bass is nearly inaudible. It's a shame that the cold, flat sound obscures some of the sonic details, because ...And Justice for All is Metallica's most complex, ambitious work; every song is an expanded suite, with only two of the nine tracks clocking in at under six minutes. It takes a while to sink in, but given time, ...And Justice for All reveals some of Metallica's best material. It also reveals the band's determination to pull out all the compositional stops, throwing in extra sections, odd-numbered time signatures, and dense webs of guitar arpeggios and harmonized leads. At times, it seems like they're doing it simply because they can; parts of the album lack direction and probably should have been trimmed for momentum's sake. Pacing-wise, the album again loosely follows the blueprint of Ride the Lightning, though not as closely as Master of Puppets. This time around, the fourth song — once again a ballad with a thrashy chorus and outro — gave the band one of the unlikeliest Top 40 singles in history; "One" was an instant metal classic, based on Dalton Trumbo's antiwar novel Johnny Got His Gun and climaxing with a pulverizing machine-gun imitation. As a whole, opinions on ...And Justice for All remain somewhat divided: some think it's a slightly flawed masterpiece and the pinnacle of Metallica's progressive years; others see it as bloated and overambitious. Either interpretation can be readily supported, but the band had clearly taken this direction as far as it could. The difficulty of reproducing these songs in concert eventually convinced Metallica that it was time for an overhaul.
Well.. acording with this review Metallica can't reproduce live these songs???? interest discover....
T, Cert and Winter, correct me i this guy is wrong... |
|
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:24 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
I refuse to see a Prog site that I joined EXCLUSIVELY FOR PROG, slowly turn into a general music site. How many prog related bands are there ... 100, 150? Of more than 3000 prog bands. Come on ...
Then Mike, answer me one question...Why did you asked your tag to be removed when Avantasia was added asa Prog Related band?
The "Come on" argument only works for you?
I haven't threatened anybody, if Metallica is added I will close my mouth and accept it.
I refuse to see people not caring for REAL 100% Prog bands announced and making 5 or 10 pages of barely related bands. How do you know that people are not caring? Just because the Metallica discussion has been revived by recent discussions about Miles Davis and Sting? These discussions have come and gone ... none of them has really lasted longer than a week or two.
Because as an individual and as a team I have addec pure Prog bands in the last months and nobody gives a damn, sometimes two replies from the usual suspects (Logan, Atavachron, Ricochet, Micky, and a couple more).
But a thread about Boston is opemned and we have 100 posts.
Sorry, but I don't see what's that interesting about that tour. Sure, seeing King Crimson on stage is great, but talking about these shows ... what's the novelty?
Is the goodbye tour of the most rep´resentative band of all Prog and the one that created the bases for Symphonic, which is by far the most popular sub-genre....This means a lot.
I refuse to see an active musician as Alex Carpani, who recruited with great effort a living legend as Aldo Tagliapetra, offering his collaboration to Prog Archives and nobody caring about because Toto, Boistoin and Metallica are more important.
When did that happen? Tell me more about it ...
But that's not alone:
Shadow Circus: a and willing to collaborate with Prog Archives, with a member asking for attention, and still:
[quoite]
|
But on the other hand:
On thread has 170, others 56 and 64, AND THEY ARE NOT EVEN HERE
but first: Have you listened to Panzerballet yet? No? Shame on you! Let's be realistic ... none of us has the time to listen to or check out all the lesser known artists that exist on this planet.
For your uinformation, I pay a lot of attention to Fusion bands and panzerballet was precisely one of thse releases that inmediately listened, didn't liked it, but I recognize they are good.
I refuse to see the opinion of the administrators and teams to be questioned by people who don't agree with their favorite band being rejected,. not because of quality, but because IT'S NOT PROG. This has nothing to do with Metallica being my favorite band. They're not even my favorite band, although I value them highly. Also, I agree that they're not prog. Neither are Queen, Led Zeppelin - or Iron Maiden. Prog Related - which you wrote the description for if I remember correctly - is, among other things, for highly influential bands which came close to playing prog, but didn't quite "cross the line". No matter how this poll turns out, it's obvious that many people think that they're one of a handful of important metal bands which would make sense to be added as prog related.
If they are important for Metal, keep them in metal, you already have Prog Metal, Extreme Tech Metal and another third sub-genre, now you want to add metal bands also to Prog Related?
I refuse to see people accepting the opinion of the majorities, unless the majority agrees with them} I can respect these opinions, but I don't have to "adopt" them ... of course I would be glad if this poll turned out in favor of the addition, but if it doesn't it won't change my opinion. In any case, I will accept the admins' decision.
There we agree
I refuse to see a band like Metallica, who doesn't want to be considered Prog, being pushed into our thrats, despite it's obvious most of the people don't believe they belong here. Porcupine Tree / Steven Wilson doesn't like being called "prog" either ... obviously that doesn't stop us. Besides, let's emphasize again that I'm not calling Metallica "prog".
Steve Wilson can talk whatever he wants, but he and his band present themselves in exclusively PROGRESSIVE ROCK FESTIVALS. their tickets are sold as PROGRESSIVE ROCK CONCERTS, Metallica is sold as Metal.
If this was a General Rock site, I would accept Metallica, The Bee Gees...Even N'Sync, but no, this is a Progressive Rock site, that some of us have formed since it started, placed a lot of effort on it, expend time that could had been spent with our family or working to gain ore money, but we doid it for PROG, not for Metal, Jazz, AOR, Alternative, Sibnger Songwritter, etc.
Let me repeat again that this website has accepted a very small number of prog related / proto prog bands. Nobody's "opening the flood gates". If I hadn't brought up Metallica, won't you instead complain about Avantasia, whose addition I had nothing to do with? Please, I'm not your enemy. I don't think that we need many more prog related bands in the archives, I just think that Metallica are one of the few that are vital.
By the contrary Mike, I consuider you a friend for whom Ihjave respect, but why the problem about Avastacia (Band with whom I disagreed if you chhexck the thread, but once added I shut my mouth in respect for those who decided) if it's only one band?
Why did you made an issue about Iron Maiden? It's only one band also...But 1 + 1 + 1 is three and keeps growing, now we have albums released in 1959 as the most popular PROGRESSIVE ROCK ALBUM OF THE WEEK
And to make it worst:
- Not Prog
- Not Rock
- Not Fusion
People is claiming for 100% JAZZ artists of the 40's
When is this stopping?
BTW: I believe it's more trivial and out of lace to create a 10 opages thread about Boston, NMetallica or Toto, than place our emphasis in REAL PROG BANDS.
This place is called PROG ARCHIVES....Not Allmusic.
That's why we're not adding thousands of non prog bands.
Then accept Avastacia, The Doors, Iron Maiden, etc with the same effort you place on Metallica..
Iván [/QUOTE]
|
|
|
WinterLight
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 09 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 424
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:28 |
zafreth wrote:
|
| The difficulty of reproducing these songs in concert eventually convinced Metallica that it was time for an overhaul.
Well.. acording with this review Metallica can't reproduce live these songs???? interest discover....
T, Cert and Winter, correct me i this guy is wrong... |
|
No, the author isn't incorrect, but I think that your interpretation is. He observes that it was difficult to reproduce those songs live, not that they couldn't reproduce it. Kirk Hammett makes a similar remark on Behind the Music. He noted that the tour (which was about 18 months, I believe) became an nightly exercise in perfectionism. It was an emotional nadir for them, especially since it was their first tour without Burton. In the end, that wanted to simplify their music, and that they did with the subsequent album.
|
|