| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Alberto Muñoz 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 26 2006
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 3577
|
 Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:32 |
My interpretation??? sorry dude i have no made and interpretation at all , is a question hahaha.
|
|
|
 |
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:33 |
 burritounit wrote:
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.
|
no problem at all. I'll give you a few examples, track by track : Battery: Notice the multi layered, majestic intro. In the song itself, notice how the structure is based on seemingly erratic numbers of bars. Normally songs - even in thrash metal - are structured on even numbers of bars, typically 4 or 8 of them form a part which is then repeated. In Battery you have groups of 3 bars mixed with groups of 2 (chorus) , sometimes one odd bar is thrown in. Master of Puppets: It's an epic. Ok, it's only 8:35 long, but it consists of several parts which are very cleverly connected. First you have the intro. In the verse you have the famous 4/4+5/8 riff. The chorus is oddly disrupted by the "Master, Master" vocals, the guitars play really complex riffs, reminding of AJFA. Then the interlude follows, with very gentle melodies and a Hetfield solo which injects some Hard Rock/Blues into the music, which rarely ever happens in Metallica (or Thrash in general). It's how they turn these very different elements into a homogeneous whole. The interlude seamlessly turns into a heavier bridge with a modified version of the chorus vocals. Then follows a short solo, then follows a really cool riff, followed by the intro riff. Only now, after all those transitions, the second verse starts, followed by the chorus again. After a few repetitions we get a short outro. The Thing That Should Not Be: The atonality of the main riff (and of the short solo) simply amazes me. Granted, this is an attribute of Thrash, not Prog. But you won't find any similar track on other Thrash releases of the time, especially considering how the bass is involved in those riffs. Plus, if you are looking for novelties: They used drop D tuning, which few bands used back then. A minor thing, but still. Welcome Home (Sanitarium): Intro and verse are alternating between 4/4 and 6/4. Also, how they manage to seamlessly switch between different tempos/moods is unmatched compared to their peer. Megadeth come close in their best moments, but don't quite reach the level of perfection/sophistication. BTW: Starting at 4:50 we get some very cool guitar harmonies again, reminding of the Battery intro. Disposable Heroes, Leper Messiah: Not much to say apart from some odd/unusual time signatures and tempo changes. Pretty cool songs though. Plus Disposable Heroes is continuing the concept. Orion: No comment necessary. Cliff 'em All!  Damage, Inc.: Pretty cool intro - again nice guitar harmonies, this time with the use of the volume knob. Summary: If you're looking for the progressive moments, focus on the Battery intro & structure, the title track, The Thing that Should Not Be, Welcome Home (Sanitarium) and of course, the fantastic Orion. 
Edited by MikeEnRegalia - August 19 2008 at 17:36
|
|
|
|
Petrovsk Mizinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: December 24 2007
Location: Ukraine
Status: Offline
Points: 25210
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:33 |
micky wrote:
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.
|
Indeed Micky, I and hopefully many others understand your point. Cert and I obviously both agree that Metallica are not just a band with strong prog elements, but indeed were the real deal prog metal with Ride The Lightning, Master of Puppets and ...And Justice For All. The problem has been this really: add the band to prog metal, and that will possibly 'lower the bar' and people will begin suggesting bands like Megadeth and Testament for prog related. Cert and I fully realize those two aforementioned bands have no merit in being included into PA, because we are obviously somewhat educated in this field of heavy metal as such. The other side of the problem is: add them to prog related, which wont have the problem of apparently "opening the doors too wide", but it seems the band is deemed too progresive (well on the merits of their proggresive metal material anyway) to be able to fit into prog related. I know MikeEnRegalia obviously doesn't, but I stand with Cert on Metallica's prog metal position....... and if you were to ask all three of us about whether the flood gates open up for the other thrash bands inclusion, we will promptly answer with a no. Voivod, Watchtower and Mekong Delta (three of the bigger name prog thrash metal bands) are here under Tech Extreme prog metal because they have a very clear and astute progressive thrash nature. Metallica has a clear prog metal nature (although obviously pre dated those bands and lack the Tech nature apparent in the aforementioned three. And again, as I've said before to calm the seemingly irrational fears, Megadeth, Anthrax, Exodus and the rest, have absolutely no real merit for inclusion. I speak purely for Metallica here and as another avid and well educated on-the-matter man, Cert does too.
|
|
|
|
WinterLight
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 09 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 424
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:35 |
zafreth wrote:
My interpretation??? sorry dude i have no made and interpretation at all , is a question hahaha. |
Yes, you have made an interpretation: in order to even formulate a question about any statement it is necessary first to interpret the meaning of that statement.
|
|
Alberto Muñoz
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 26 2006
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 3577
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:38 |
WinterLight wrote:
zafreth wrote:
My interpretation??? sorry dude i have no made and interpretation at all , is a question hahaha. |
Yes, you have made an interpretation: in order to even formulate a question about any statement it is necessary first to interpret the meaning of that statement.
|
No comments in this one  you are the next Heiddegger or Gadamer of Hermeneutic Prog rock and all of his variants!!!!
|
|
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:42 |
WinterLight wrote:
Metallica or asteroid? Your hyperbole would be laughable if it weren't so predominant.
Maybe laughable, but I can collaborate to keep Prog Archives and Progressive Rock alive, so I put mny efforts there.
Worst things can happen, but are out of my control.
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.
This answer my question, if you ask about Prog bands and I give you a list of real icons and they say nothing to you.
Sorry for crashing your exclusive club.
It's not a club, it's a place to enjoy and to help with work.
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.
Again, if you don't get it...the problem is not mine. 
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.
Poorly according to you and the minority?
Legitimacy is earned through reason not wealth.
I talked about work reason, effort and also wealth, if you choose to limit to wealth, look to another side, I have invested no money in this site and all I do is for free.
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.
Says you????? Popular is not Pop, maybe you should check:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_structure_(popular_music)
Or to make it easier:
Introduction
The definition of pop music is purposefully flexible as the music that is identified as pop is constantly changing. At any particular point in time it may be easiest to identify pop music as that which is successful on the pop music charts. For the past 50 years the most successful musical styles on the pop charts have continually changed and evolved. However, there are some consistent patterns in what is identified as pop music.
Pop Vs. Popular Music
It is tempting to confuse pop music with popular music. The New Grove Dictionary Of Music and Musicians, the musicologist's ultimate reference resource, identifies popular music as the music since industrialization in the 1800's that is most in line with the tastes and interests of the urban middle class. This would include an extremely wide range of music from vaudeville and minstrel shows to heavy metal. Pop music, on the other hand, has primarily come into usage to describe music that evolved out of the rock 'n roll revolution of the mid-1950's and continues in a definable path to today.
Music Accessible To the Widest Audience
Since the mid-1950's pop music has usually been identified as the music and the musical styles that are accessible to the widest audience. This means the music that sells the most copies, draws the largest concert audiences, and is played most often on the radio. After Bill Haley's "Rock Around the Clock" hit #1 on music charts in 1955 the most popular music became the records influenced by rock 'n roll instead of the songs and light standards that had dominated TV's Your Hit Parade weekly countdown show. Since 1955 the music that appeals to the widest audience, or pop music, has been dominated by sounds that are still rooted in basic elements of rock 'n roll.
Pop Music and Song Structure
One of the most consistent elements of pop music since the 1950's is the pop song. Pop music is not usually written, performed and recorded as a symphony, suite, or concerto. The basic form for pop music is the song and usually a song consisting of verse and repeated chorus. Most often the songs are between 2 1/2 minutes and 5 1/2 minutes in length. There have been notable exceptions. The Beatles' "Hey Jude" was an epic 7 minutes in length. However, in many cases, if the song is abnormally long, an edited version is released for radio airplay such as in the case of Don McLean's "American Pie." It was edited down from its original 8 1/2 minutes length to just over 4 minutes for radio airplay. On the other end of the spectrum, in the late 1950's and early 1960's some hit songs clocked in under 2 minutes in length.
The Pop Music Melting Pot
Like other art forms that aim to attract a mass audience (movies, television, Broadway shows), pop music has been and continues to be a melting pot that borrows and assimilates elements and ideas from a wide range of musical styles. Rock, r&b, country, disco, punk, and hip hop are all specific genres of music that have influenced and been incorporated into pop music in various ways over the past 5 decades. Most recently, Latin music seems to be impacting pop music more significantly than at any point in the past.
Pure Pop and Power Pop
Although pop music continues to be a melting pot of styles, there is a genre of pop music that claims to be pop music in its purest form. This music, usually called pure pop or power pop, typically consists of relatively brief (not over 3 1/2 minutes) songs played on the standard electric guitar, bass and drums with vocals that have a very strong catchy chorus, or hook. Art is not a concern. Audience pleasure in listening to the song is the primary goal.
Among the top pure pop or power pop performers of the past are the Raspberries, Cheap Trick and the Knack. Most recently, the Click Five have identified their style as "new school power pop."
|
If you still think Prog is POP, then I can't say more.
You don't have to believe me at all--I make no claims to infallibility.
I already decided not to believe you.
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.
I think you're lost again, Robert Fripp decides not to categorize his work...Metallica has decided to categorize they're work....AS METAL.
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.
Not pontificatioin, I'm talking with the support of the majority, you are only voicing your opinion and recommending us to close our eyes and let thisngs happen, because worst things can occur.
Iván
|
Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - August 19 2008 at 17:48
|
|
|
|
rushfan4
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 22 2007
Location: Michigan, U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 66266
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:52 |
Ivan, Obviously I can't answer for Mike, but since it appears that he has logged off, his position with Avantasia wasn't so much that he disagreed with their inclusion in prog related as much as he disagreed with their inclusion in prog related when a band such as Metallica had not been included in prog related. Until Avantasia was approved Iron Maiden had been the only metal band included in Prog Related. Pursuant to the definition that you wrote (so no need for me to repeat it) prog related is meant to include larger well-known bands that although not prog were either influenced by or influenced prog bands. Avantasia is neither a large well-known band nor influential on other prog bands. They were however influenced by prog bands (probably including Metallica). Metallica is a large well-known band that arguably is not prog (I somewhat agree and somewhat disagree) that arguably influenced the entirety of prog metal. There is not denying that Dream Theater was influenced by Metallica. Whether Dream Theater was influenced by "progressive elements" of Metallica is open to debate and I think each individual's answer to this question depends on whether or not each individual believes that Metallica had progressive elements or not.
Does Metallica need the love and free advertising that is being provided by these arguments and debates? No. Should we be concentrating our attentions on more 100% prog bands? Yes. But this also gets done in many other threads. Unfortunately, for the lesser known bands this only gets done by the small minority that continue to go out of their way to try and bring recognition to these lesser known bands. There is definitely room for improvement here on the site. M@x tried that a bit with the artist of the month, but unfortunately Torman Maxt was a disaster, Contrarian had a bit of better results, and then the well seems to have ran dry of bands willing to pay the advertising fee for the month. I, for one, would certainly like to see more bands included in this, whether it is band of the month or album of the week, etc...
I know that our positions on Metallica is different, because I feel that it is a shame that they are not included in prog related (at this point it would be silly to have a separate prog metal related or proto-prog metal category). I think that this position will mostly be along the same lines of people who believe that prog metal is prog or not. If you don't feel that prog metal is prog than obviously you won't think that Metallica is suitable for prog related.
On the other hand, I fully feel your frustration for the seeming lack of support for what you term 100% prog bands.
Cheers,
Scott
|
|
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65268
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 17:55 |
|
as to the band recreating their music live, they did it as well or better than any metal band I've seen, 'cept maybe Priest.. Metallica were one of the hardest working bands in the world at one point, roadmasters, inexhaustible ..no, mostly they kicked ass in concert
|
|
WinterLight
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 09 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 424
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 18:02 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
This answer my questiion, if you ask about Prog bands and I give you a list ofvreal icons and they say nothing to you.
No, they really don't say anything to me. I'm not sure how giving meaning to your statement.
Poorly accordingto you and the minority?
First, what evidence do you have to support that mine is a minority opinion? The poll is irrelevant not only to the site but to the population in general. But, suppose that it is a minority opinion. Does that make the opinion illegitimate? I should think not.
I talked about work reason, effort and also wealth, if you choose to limit to wealth, look to another side, I have invested no money in this sitre and all I do is for free.
What I mean is that ownership of the means of communication is not in itself a legitimizing factor. Now, of course, the owners can do what they like with their property. But this does not imply that their choices are well-made.
I already decided not to believe you.
Evidently, enthusiasm for progressive music doesn't correlate with progressive tendencies in general.
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.
I think you're lost again, Robert Fripp decides not to categorize his work...Metallica has decided to categorize they're work....AS METAL.
Your point was clear to even the meanest intelligence. I countered your point with a general principle, which as it happens, invalidates your argument. No road map necessary for me.
Not pontificatioin, I'm talking with the support of the majority, you are only voicing your opinion and recommending us to close our eyes and let thisngs happen, because worst things can occur.
Well, you (and the alleged majority) have done nothing but opine, too. In fact, my focus hasn't been on matters of opinion (not too much, anyway) but primarily on bringing to light certain fallacies. To be honest, I wish that you'd open rather than "close" your eyes. Some simple intellectual honesty would be nice.
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 18:07 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
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.
It rubbed me the wrong way. Don't tell me you didn't have any knee-jerk reactions ... or frustrating situations. I find it odd though that you go to such lengths to explain how horrible it would be for you if Metallica get added, that this place is becoming allmusic.com ... yet if the admins decided to add them you would quietly 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.
In my humble opinion this is simply because most of the pure prog bands which get added these days are very obscure. The music is often very hard to find ... I listen to new prog releases all the time, but I've never heard of the artists you mentioned above - and you won't be able to make me feel bad about it. I do what I can - but unfortunately my time is limited.
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. Doesn't have to mean that much to me. I really like King Crimson, but seeing them live is not a priority for me. If they came to my home town or somewhere I could travel to in a sensible manner, I would probably go see them.
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
That's because many people know Boston. Personally, I don't give a flying s..t about them ... never cared, never will. But with this attitude of yours you won't be able to attract people to your additions either. Unfortunately you can't force these things. I think my website is a good thing and would be useful for many people - but I can't make them go there and create accounts. The more you try to convince people, the less will actually take your advice.
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.
Cool ... I tip my hat to you. But surely there is a prog band which was recently added/discussed and which you weren't able to check out.
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?
No - in fact I stalled the addition of metal bands to prog related. It was the admin team, micky and Raffaella (as I recall it) who added Iron Maiden. For over a year this has been the only metal band in prog related, only this week the admin team decided to add Avantasia, without my knowledge. So now that the admin team has decided to expand prog related to metal bands, the addition of Metallica becomes more important to me.
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.
I don't care about labels that much. This might sound odd, considering my website and the genre teams and all. I know that Metallica deserve to be added as prog related - and FYI: Iron Maiden tickets aren't sold as Prog Metal either.
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?
I respect you too, that goes without saying.
Why did you made an issue about Iron Maiden? It's only one band also...But 1 + 1 + 1 is three and keeps growing,
I have a problem with this:
Iron Maiden: yes
Avantasia: yes
Metallica: no
As someone who knows all three bands very well, I simply think that it makes no sense. It's sending the wrong signal.
now we have albums released in 1959 as the most popular PROGRESSIVE ROCK ALBUM OF THE WEEK  Well, you know my opinion about certain things here ... genre per album would prevent this, also I would have added Miles Davis as prog related and not allow prog related albums in that spot. But - it's just my opinion.
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?
Remember how I got ridiculed in the Miles Davis thread when I said that his addition would lead to people demanding Coltrane or Coleman? But 40s ... I think that request for Glenn Miller was not entirely serious.
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..
No. I have my own will ... I can live with decisions, but I don't have to pretend in the forum that it was my idea, or that it was a good decision. I would never undermine the admin team or their decisions, but IMO them arriving at a decision doesn't always imply that all discussions about the subject have to stop.
Iván |
[/QUOTE]
|
|
|
|
burritounit
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 18 2007
Location: Puerto Rico
Status: Offline
Points: 2551
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 18:07 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
burritounit wrote:
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.
|
no problem at all. I'll give you a few examples, track by track :
Battery: Notice the multi layered, majestic intro. In the song itself, notice how the structure is based on seemingly erratic numbers of bars. Normally songs - even in thrash metal - are structured on even numbers of bars, typically 4 or 8 of them form a part which is then repeated. In Battery you have groups of 3 bars mixed with groups of 2 (chorus) , sometimes one odd bar is thrown in.
Master of Puppets: It's an epic. Ok, it's only 8:35 long, but it consists of several parts which are very cleverly connected. First you have the intro. In the verse you have the famous 4/4+5/8 riff. The chorus is oddly disrupted by the "Master, Master" vocals, the guitars play really complex riffs, reminding of AJFA. Then the interlude follows, with very gentle melodies and a Hetfield solo which injects some Hard Rock/Blues into the music, which rarely ever happens in Metallica (or Thrash in general). It's how they turn these very different elements into a homogeneous whole. The interlude seamlessly turns into a heavier bridge with a modified version of the chorus vocals. Then follows a short solo, then follows a really cool riff, followed by the intro riff. Only now, after all those transitions, the second verse starts, followed by the chorus again. After a few repetitions we get a short outro.
The Thing That Should Not Be: The atonality of the main riff (and of the short solo) simply amazes me. Granted, this is an attribute of Thrash, not Prog. But you won't find any similar track on other Thrash releases of the time, especially considering how the bass is involved in those riffs. Plus, if you are looking for novelties: They used drop D tuning, which few bands used back then. A minor thing, but still.
Welcome Home (Sanitarium): Intro and verse are alternating between 4/4 and 6/4. Also, how they manage to seamlessly switch between different tempos/moods is unmatched compared to their peer. Megadeth come close in their best moments, but don't quite reach the level of perfection/sophistication. BTW: Starting at 4:50 we get some very cool guitar harmonies again, reminding of the Battery intro.
Disposable Heroes, Leper Messiah: Not much to say apart from some odd/unusual time signatures and tempo changes. Pretty cool songs though. Plus Disposable Heroes is continuing the concept.
Orion: No comment necessary. Cliff 'em All!
Damage, Inc.: Pretty cool intro - again nice guitar harmonies, this time with the use of the volume knob.
Summary: If you're looking for the progressive moments, focus on the Battery intro & structure, the title track, The Thing that Should Not Be, Welcome Home (Sanitarium) and of course, the fantastic Orion.
|
Umm...I understand your point. But again it's not showing anything. Just by using these methods you mentioned in their music doesn't make you prog, any genre can use odd time signatures and it still won't make it prog. It's like today's tech metal bands, they have technicality, incredible players and whatnot, but again, I don't think that makes it prog. And I bet that most of these bands don't even know what prog is. They even sound nothinglike the original progressive rock bands and I don't think that bands should keep doing the same thing over and over again. Metallica was innovetive indeed but just within the boundaries of its own genre, and as I've said before their only relation to prog is their inlfuence on many prog metal bands to come ahead of them. By the way I do like Master Of Puppets and have nothing against them(and Orion is fantastic  ). And neither will I have it if they get added. Maybe we should add them, but because of their influence on the prog metal bands.
|
|
"I've walked on water, run through fire, can't seem to feel it anymore. It was me, waiting for me..."
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 18:10 |
rushfan4 wrote:
Ivan, Obviously I can't answer for Mike, but since it appears that he has logged off, his position with Avantasia wasn't so much that he disagreed with their inclusion in prog related as much as he disagreed with their inclusion in prog related when a band such as Metallica had not been included in prog related. Until Avantasia was approved Iron Maiden had been the only metal band included in Prog Related. Pursuant to the definition that you wrote (so no need for me to repeat it) prog related is meant to include larger well-known bands that although not prog were either influenced by or influenced prog bands. Avantasia is neither a large well-known band nor influential on other prog bands. They were however influenced by prog bands (probably including Metallica). Metallica is a large well-known band that arguably is not prog (I somewhat agree and somewhat disagree) that arguably influenced the entirety of prog metal. There is not denying that Dream Theater was influenced by Metallica. Whether Dream Theater was influenced by "progressive elements" of Metallica is open to debate and I think each individual's answer to this question depends on whether or not each individual believes that Metallica had progressive elements or not.
Youpointed the problem I see (At least one of them), Metallica has influenced many modern metal bands, as Louis Armstrong has influenced modern Fusion bands, but IMO it's not a Prog influence, so it's out of our competence.
Plus opening the doors is dangerous.
Does Metallica need the love and free advertising that is being provided by these arguments and debates? No. Should we be concentrating our attentions on more 100% prog bands? Yes. But this also gets done in many other threads. Unfortunately, for the lesser known bands this only gets done by the small minority that continue to go out of their way to try and bring recognition to these lesser known bands. There is definitely room for improvement here on the site. M@x tried that a bit with the artist of the month, but unfortunately Torman Maxt was a disaster, Contrarian had a bit of better results, and then the well seems to have ran dry of bands willing to pay the advertising fee for the month. I, for one, would certainly like to see more bands included in this, whether it is band of the month or album of the week, etc...
That's absurd, we fruightened te bands, I agree Thorman Maxt was a disaster, but people qualified Contrarian a pure Prog band as Cheesy Regressive Prog, we frightened people who were investing in Prog Archives, because some felt this Prog bands were bnot so good...But as a paradox they support bands that have little or no relation with Prog.
Now we have 1940's and 1950's albums as the most popular in Prog Archives...In the 40's noit even Rock existed, none of tose albums is remotely fusioin, weżre loosing our identity.
I know that our positions on Metallica is different, because I feel that it is a shame that they are not included in prog related (at this point it would be silly to have a separate prog metal related or proto-prog metal category). I think that this position will mostly be along the same lines of people who believe that prog metal is prog or not. If you don't feel that prog metal is prog than obviously you won't think that Metallica is suitable for prog related.
Never said that Prog Metal is not Prog, I like some bands, won't lie saying that is my cup of tea, I never ghidden I dislike Dream Theater, but never denied their Prog qualities.
On the other hand, I fully feel your frustration for the seeming lack of support for what you term 100% prog bands.
My frustration is for the site, we are capable of being the first Prog site in the net and weare risking it for bands that don't belong anddon't want go be here, but we afford the luxury of scaring bands as Contrarian who are willing to invest in us.
Iván |
|
|
|
|
burritounit
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 18 2007
Location: Puerto Rico
Status: Offline
Points: 2551
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 18:12 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
rushfan4 wrote:
but IMO it's not a Prog influence, so it's out of our competence.
|
|
I agree with that.
|
|
"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 18:14 |
|
^ you know ... it's odd. Sometimes the very same person can use the same point in favor of one band, but against another. I've often seen that, particularly with time signatures. Some people will point out the use of time signatures in classic prog music, but dismiss it as a superficial element in modern music. Even the holy cow of time signatures - The Rite of Spring - has its critics, who claim that Stravinsky only added the erratic signature changes to adapt the music to the ballet dancing.
Personally, I think that time signature changes, odd time signatures, polyrhythms etc. are a criterium for prog. Of course their use can be bland or uncalled for / unnecessary, but IMO that's more a matter of quality (good/bad) than style (prog/non-prog). Non-prog music uses standard time signatures, it's as simple as that ... some rare exceptions confirm the rule (Take Five comes to my mind ... but that's Jazz).
|
|
|
|
rushfan4
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 22 2007
Location: Michigan, U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 66266
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 18:19 |
My exposure to Miles Davis is nil, so any opinions I have there would strictly be prejudicial on preconceived notions (just to clarify by prejudicial I do not mean racially prejudicial), but I agree that it doesn't seem right that the album of the week is an album from the 40's or 50's that appears to be a blues album by its title. In a way though, is this any different then when a Genesis album from the early 70's pops up as the album of the week. Yes, at least it is definitely a prog album, but still it would seem that the album of the week would be for more modern prog albums (which it usually is depending on your opinion of Porcupine Tree or Meshuggah, etc).
Edited by rushfan4 - August 19 2008 at 18:20
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 18:21 |
Kind of Blue is actually a Jazz album ... for many it is even *the* ultimate Jazz recording of all time. I love it ... I might even buy the vinyl edition later this week.
|
|
|
|
burritounit
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 18 2007
Location: Puerto Rico
Status: Offline
Points: 2551
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 18:24 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
^ you know ... it's odd. Sometimes the very same person can use the same point in favor of one band, but against another. I've often seen that, particularly with time signatures. Some people will point out the use of time signatures in classic prog music, but dismiss it as a superficial element in modern music. Even the holy cow of time signatures - The Rite of Spring - has its critics, who claim that Stravinsky only added the erratic signature changes to adapt the music to the ballet dancing.
Personally, I think that time signature changes, odd time signatures, polyrhythms etc. are a criterium for prog. Of course their use can be bland or uncalled for / unnecessary, but IMO that's more a matter of quality (good/bad) than style (prog/non-prog). Non-prog music uses standard time signatures, it's as simple as that ... some rare exceptions confirm the rule (Take Five comes to my mind ... but that's Jazz).
|
I've seen it too. And honestly I wouldn't use the same argument for one particular band. I would apply the same reasoning to every band. And I do agree that they are the criteria of prog, but it's not the only one, if not many bands would be here just because they have that only characteristic of prog.
|
|
"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 18:30 |
|
^ of course - one criterium is not enough. Remember that I would never add Metallica as prog metal ... their music isn't fully fledged prog, except maybe for Orion, AJFA (the track) and a small number of others.
|
|
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 18:30 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
[
It rubbed me the wrong way. Don't tell me you didn't have any knee-jerk reactions ... or frustrating situations. I find it odd though that you go to such lengths to explain how horrible it would be for you if Metallica get added, that this place is becoming allmusic.com ... yet if the admins decided to add them you would quietly accept it?
I will focus my replies in constructive posts as your's.
I can live with that, it was a knee jerk reaction, I also had some like in the Discipline case in which I PM'd you to say you were right.
And believe me, if Metallica is added, I would say nothing more, as I shut up with Radiohead and even The Who.
In my humble opinion this is simply because most of the pure prog bands which get added these days are very obscure. The music is often very hard to find ... I listen to new prog releases all the time, but I've never heard of the artists you mentioned above - and you won't be able to make me feel bad about it. I do what I can - but unfortunately my time is limited.
Mike, the problem is wider, eacgh time a newbie comes here, we have to deal with the same sack of bands that have been rejected ten times, there should be a strike three rule.
People don't come here to learn or to talk about Prog, they come here to talk about their favorite bands, no matter they are not Prog.....But this is a prog site, we can be open minded, but this site is PROG ARCHIVES.
Doesn't have to mean that much to me. I really like King Crimson, but seeing them live is not a priority for me. If they came to my home town or somewhere I could travel to in a sensible manner, I would probably go see them.
Look at this paradox...I never hidden I don't like most King Crimson, but I know what they represent, and I believe it's an end of an era
IThat's because many people know Boston. Personally, I don't give a flying s..t about them ... never cared, never will. But with this attitude of yours you won't be able to attract people to your additions either. Unfortunately you can't force these things. I think my website is a good thing and would be useful for many people - but I can't make them go there and create accounts. The more you try to convince people, the less will actually take your advice.
That's why a strike three rule should exoist, rejected, one, two, even three times, but 10 or 15 times? This is something we muust avoid.
Cool ... I tip my hat to you. But surely there is a prog band which was recently added/discussed and which you weren't able to check out.
Of course, there are hundreds of new bands I haven't heard, but each time Erik, HT, Guigo, E-Dub or even myself have created threads to promote lesser known bands...nobody cares.
People complained.."
Why in hell you moved Gentle Giant and King Crimson from Symphonic...We have the right to be informed...We want to know, you dicator, tyrant"
You mustremember that Mike, I created a thread explaining every change in the main page....2 replies, Erik Neuteboom and HT (Two of the few persons I knew would be informed about thoise changes and agreed with them)....The rest, ignored it.
No - in fact I stalled the addition of metal bands to prog related. It was the admin team, micky and Raffaella (as I recall it) who added Iron Maiden. For over a year this has been the only metal band in prog related, only this week the admin team decided to add Avantasia, without my knowledge. So now that the admin team has decided to expand prog related to metal bands, the addition of Metallica becomes more important to me.
Lets wait and see what happens, until they are added I will talk, then if added I will keep my word and shut up.
I don't care about labels that much. This might sound odd, considering my website and the genre teams and all. I know that Metallica deserve to be added as prog related - and FYI: Iron Maiden tickets aren't sold as Prog Metal either.
That's a matter of opinions, I believe Iron Maiden deserves, to be in PR and you believe Metallica...We can agree to disagree.
I respect you too, that goes without saying.
Thanks
I have a problem with this:
Iron Maiden: yes
Avantasia: yes
Metallica: no
As someone who knows all three bands very well, I simply think that it makes no sense. It's sending the wrong signal.
Maybe the message is that enough is enough
Well, you know my opinion about certain things here ... genre per album would prevent this, also I would have added Miles Davis as prog related and not allow prog related albums in that spot. But - it's just my opinion.
You know I partially agree, I want to add genres to all Symphonic albums and eras and schools, but it's a monumental task and the urgent always blocks what is necessary.
I would had added Miles only from Bitches Brew and mention that his previous career is Jazz and not Fusion.
Remember how I got ridiculed in the Miles Davis thread when I said that his addition would lead to people demanding Coltrane or Coleman? But 40s ... I think that request for Glenn Miller was not entirely serious.
We were two if you remember.
No. I have my own will ... I can live with decisions, but I don't have to pretend in the forum that it was my idea, or that it was a good decision. I would never undermine the admin team or their decisions, but IMO them arriving at a decision doesn't always imply that all discussions about the subject have to stop.
Don't worry Mike I understand you, even when I disagree sometimes.
Iván |
|
|
|
|
rushfan4
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 22 2007
Location: Michigan, U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 66266
|
Posted: August 19 2008 at 18:31 |
^   I kind of figured that Kind of Blue probably was a jazz album since it was from Miles Davis, but with the word "blue" in there I wasn't sure if it was some sort of blues/jazz mix or something. Thank you for the clarification. I could very well be the target audience for his inclusion since I really know very little about him other than that Bitches Brew is an album that I should definitely hear.
|
|
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
The "Metallica for Prog Related" Poll
