How can metal be prog? - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: December 13 2008 at 11:10

^ I don't see a copyright ;-)

What?

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535

Posted: December 13 2008 at 11:29

Mr ProgFreak wrote:

Since you're mentioning my website, let's look at how the album is currently labelled there:

"Neo-Classical Technical Prog Power Metal"

Neo
Classical
Technical
Prog
1. Progressive
2. Rock
Power
Metal

Don't you think that's more than enough to talk of over tagging?

Only if you see it like that ... I don't. Who ever said that this was a genre definition? The genre for the album is Power Metal, as far as I'm concerned ... the other words are simply tags (attributes) which further describe the music.

How else do you want it to be seen?

That''s exactly what you are saying and all as part of a definition.

Mr ProgFreak wrote:

Sorry, but the word "pompous" is well defined. If you decide to use it in your review, people will read it and use this definition to make sense of it.

For heaven's sake....IT'S A REVIEW!!!!

It's suposed to have introduction, arguments, opinions, adjectives, as a fact reviews with less than 200 characters are not posted, we are encouraged to make our reviews wide and argumentsd

A genre name not, it must be as simple as possible for eeverybody to understand or do yo believe that a good description for "Steve Hackett's Tokyo Tapes would be:

Elaborate, Guitar based a la Hackett, with King Crimson Pompous plus Asia simpler Influences and Genesis reminiscences Symphonic/Neo/Avant Retro Prog?

This would be absurd.

Mr ProgFreak wrote:

No. Both reviews and tags are subjective. Even the genre labels at PA are subjective, why else would there be so many discussions about them?

The next four posts after mine, were a discussion between you and Hughes about how appropriate the term metalcore or whatever was for a determined band.

The more tags, the more disagreements and the less understanding.

Iván

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - December 13 2008 at 11:32

Atavachron View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266

Posted: December 13 2008 at 17:51

Mathrock is a large, general category and may include aspects of Mathcore.. to me, 'Mathcore' is an approach (or sound) somewhere between Mathrock and Metal, appearing in both genres; 'Mathcore' is a descriptive, whereas Mathrock is a large, established and inclusive style with hundreds of bands -- some may be heavy and reminiscent of metal, some are quieter, jazzier, or more experimental, but they all are Mathrock. This is why Ruben, Chris and I worked hard to establish Mathrock as an independent category.. it is a movement not unlike Progrock in it's early days.

Edited by Atavachron - December 13 2008 at 18:28

Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195

Posted: December 13 2008 at 18:02

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Mr ProgFreak wrote:

No. Both reviews and tags are subjective. Even the genre labels at PA are subjective, why else would there be so many discussions about them?

The next four posts after mine, were a discussion between you and Hughes about how appropriate the term metalcore or whatever was for a determined band.

The more tags, the more disagreements and the less understanding.

Iván

Please, I made it clear in my posts that I don't think that "metalcore" is a particularly good tag. It should exist because it is being used by many people, but when I tag albums at PF I tend to avoid it. The problem is not the quantity of tags, but the use of confusing labels and descriptions ...

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535

Posted: December 13 2008 at 18:35

Made my point, and gave my opinion, more is unnecessary because the positions won't change.

Iván

Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195

Posted: December 13 2008 at 19:30

^ you'd like that, wouldn't you ... distorting/ridiculing the usage of tags with your exaggerated examples (Tokyo Tapes) and then leaving it at that. Wink

Give me a decent example, where you try to assign a small number of well defined tags to an album ... Big smile

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535

Posted: December 13 2008 at 22:51

Mr ProgFreak wrote:

^ you'd like that, wouldn't you ... distorting/ridiculing the usage of tags with your exaggerated examples (Tokyo Tapes) and then leaving it at that. Wink

Give me a decent example, where you try to assign a small number of well defined tags to an album ... Big smile

I'm not the kind of people who leaves Mike.

I believe the over-tagging is absurd, in Prog Archives we have the reviews which are the proper place to be as wide as you want.

For me a sub-genre is enough, I don't believe we need more, Symphonic or Neo Prog or Prog Folk or Fusion or Prog Metal, that's all.

And honestly I see the Tokyo Tapes example as absurd as saying "Neo-Classical Technical Prog Power Metal", that's my opinion and I believe I'm entitled to it as you are entitled to tag as much as you want.

I gave my opinion as you have given your's plenty of times, so yes, I leave this thread because it's futile to continue discussing when we are in such different positions.

Iván.

The T

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493

Posted: December 13 2008 at 23:34

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

The more tags, the more disagreements and the less understanding.

Sorry my beloved metallers but in this case I clearly side with this position. While it could be very valuable for us to be using those ridiculous names in our own metal website, in a progressive rock website in which, as I have said, we are just a side genre (it's my opinion.... we're not a prog sub genre but a prog side genre), we don't need to be confusing people, including ourselves, with tags like "progressive technical mathematical scientifical galileian hardcore post-christian satanic white metal" or anything of the sorts.

We have the perfect number of sub genres, all of them sharing the "metal" part of the name. I know there is something called progressive-black metal for example (a genre i really like a lot), but for the outsider (for metal) prog fan, calling it EXTREME progmetal should be enough. Yes, we can find 4349837403 subdivisions if we want, but let's do that in ProgMetalTheTYourLord.com, which will be launched in 2066.

Really, I'm supposed to know my metal and that byzantine discussion about "mathcore" and "metalcore" really lost me. I've always been opposed to extra tag-zation (I've alwats mantained Mike), and even in a metal website I would only use words that would help distinguish between SUBGENRES, not between subjective opinions from members which, as it's obvious, could generate 3928302932 tags for one single album.

Edited by The T - December 13 2008 at 23:35

Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195

Posted: December 14 2008 at 01:58

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Mr ProgFreak wrote:

^ you'd like that, wouldn't you ... distorting/ridiculing the usage of tags with your exaggerated examples (Tokyo Tapes) and then leaving it at that. Wink

Give me a decent example, where you try to assign a small number of well defined tags to an album ... Big smile

I'm not the kind of people who leaves Mike.

Well, neither am I. Tongue

Iván wrote:

I believe the over-tagging is absurd, in Prog Archives we have the reviews which are the proper place to be as wide as you want.

For me a sub-genre is enough, I don't believe we need more, Symphonic or Neo Prog or Prog Folk or Fusion or Prog Metal, that's all.

I gave my opinion as you have given your's plenty of times, so yes, I leave this thread because it's futile to continue discussing when we are in such different positions.

Iván.

The difference between our positions is that you criticise and ridicule mine, while I simply describe my position. Have I ever said anything negative about yours? Honestly, I can't understand where all this negativity is coming from - and the same applies to The T's recent post. You hate Progfreak.com, we're all a bunch of idiots there for using tagging - got the message. But can't we collaborate and help one another even if we use different approaches?

WinterLight View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: June 09 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 424

Posted: December 14 2008 at 02:25

Pretty important stuff taking place here. Too bad I'm not smart enough to participate.

Petrovsk Mizinski View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: December 24 2007
Location: Ukraine
Status: Offline
Points: 25210

Posted: December 14 2008 at 02:37

Atavachron wrote:

Mathrock is a large, general category and may include aspects of Mathcore.. to me, 'Mathcore' is an approach (or sound) somewhere between Mathrock and Metal, appearing in both genres; 'Mathcore' is a descriptive, whereas Mathrock is a large, established and inclusive style with hundreds of bands -- some may be heavy and reminiscent of metal, some are quieter, jazzier, or more experimental, but they all are Mathrock. This is why Ruben, Chris and I worked hard to establish Mathrock as an independent category.. it is a movement not unlike Progrock in it's early days.

I understand what you mean and definitely Mathrock can a somewhat unforgiving term to get your head around.
My only beef with the names Mathrock and Mathcore is this really: that the name Mathrock (if not taken as a "large, established and inclusive style with hundreds of bands") implies it has it's roots in rock, while mathcore implies it has it's root in hardcore punk, when really, mathrock is much more closely aligned with hardcore punk (if not always musically in the case of some band, at least aesthetically anyway) and mathcore takes from metalcore, hence why I find "Technical Metalcore" is a more correct tag than mathcore.
I agree 100 per cent with it being called Mathrock, if we see it as a movement, which indeed, again I agree, it is.
But I just think, if the definition of Mathrock...well part of the definition of anyway of Mathrock ever gets revised, I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to take into consideration possibly explaining the whole " math rock implies it has it's roots in rock, while mathcore implies it has it's root in hardcore punk, when really, mathrock is much more closely aligned with hardcore punk (if not always musically in the case of some band, at least aesthetically anyway) and mathcore takes from metalcore, hence why I find "Technical Metalcore" is a more correct tag than mathcore" thing (if not in those exacts words, but something to that effect obviously) to make things a bit clearer.
Heh, I ain't really pushing for it.........I just think it's not a bad idea, that's all and I guess we can leave the mathrock/mathcore thing here, since it's getting too much off the topic at hand.

Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195

Posted: December 14 2008 at 02:50

WinterLight wrote:

Pretty important stuff taking place here. Too bad I'm not smart enough to participate.

Just the typical stuff that happens on the 14th page of a thread with a subject like "how can metal be prog". LOL

PinkPangolin View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: May 26 2006
Location: Somerset (UK)
Status: Offline
Points: 213

Posted: December 14 2008 at 05:05

oh boy - me wonders why there isn't a genre called "wood" or "plastic" (oh yes - sorry that's 80's pop) - maybe if you fuse plastic, wood and metal you get Prog?

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: December 14 2008 at 05:20

What?

Slartibartfast View Drop Down

Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630

Posted: December 14 2008 at 06:39

Everyone knows metal is the only true prog, everything else is boring. Tongue

Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

DavetheSlave View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: May 23 2007
Location: South Africa
Status: Offline
Points: 492

Posted: December 14 2008 at 07:12

Jeez, and I thought my Posts got people hot under the collar???

crimson87

Prog Reviewer

Joined: January 03 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 1818

Posted: December 14 2008 at 08:33

Talking about genres , what's art Metal by the way? Ziggy Stardust with growling vocals???

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535

Posted: December 14 2008 at 12:11

Mr ProgFreak wrote:

Mike, I tried to leave in two previous posts and you keep asking me to come back, I'm, trying to avoid saying more things that may affect your sensibility, but you insist.

Well, neither am I. Tongue

If you say so.

The difference between our positions is that you criticise and ridicule mine

If you remember I quoted a thread started in Progressive Ears on another thread about this issue, making fun of this and questioning what the hell happened with Prog Archives.

And the funny thing is that the person that came into your defence was Sean Trane who I haven't seen tagging like this ever,

while I simply describe my position.

No Mike, you don't describe your position, you protest, shout insist, you tried to force us to do that kind of tagging and if things don't go your way, you threaten, saying you will leave, it has hapened a lot of times.

Have I ever said anything negative about yours?

All you say implies that our asystem is not adecquate, yes I used a bit of humour, but still I don't see my definition of Tokyo Tapes, too different from "Magnificent Neo-Classical Technical Prog Power Metal!"

Honestly, I can't understand where all this negativity is coming from - and the same applies to The T's recent post. You hate Progfreak.com, we're all a bunch of idiots there for using tagging - got the message.

The T is one of the persons who has placed his body in the line of fire multiple times for you, but because he doesn't agree with you once, he's accused.

You have a different style Mike. you don't make fun, but you use the victim role and accuse everybody who dares to disagree with you of being negative or vindictive. You accuse us of hating Progfreak, no Mike it would be moronic to hate a site, I may like it or not, buty hate it...no way.

But can't we collaborate and help one another even if we use different approaches?

Mike, I can't talk for others, but I can't collaborate, because I don't understand what you are doing.

While in Progfreak you define Yes as "Great Technical Retro Prog Rock!" we call it Symphonic, as simple as that, I believe the term Retro Prog is absurd and more in this case, because Yes was not retro Prog on 1974 when released Relayer or later in their career, so it's not only long, absurd but inadequate.

You also tag a song from Relayer as "Great Experimental Technical Prog Jazz!", we don't tag the albums (Much less songs), we allow people to make their reviews, How can you ask us to collaborate with that?

OK tell me...Should that song go to Fusion while the rest of the album stays in Symphonic? Please Mike!

What in hell is Technical Prog Jazz? That doesn't exist except in the mind of the person(s) who wrote this.

I believe Relayer goes further than just Symphonic, but that's where the reviews make sense, to talk whatever you want, not in incredibly long tags that scare the people or worst, make them laugh.

People like to listen music, talk about it, enjoy it, not cut it in pieces as a coroner does with corpse Mike.

And remember, I wouldn't wrote this post if you hadn't insisted to get my reply, I had left the thread two times.

Ivan

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - December 14 2008 at 12:13

Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195

Posted: December 14 2008 at 12:38

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Mr ProgFreak wrote:

Mike, I tried to leave in two previous posts and you keep asking me to come back, I'm, trying to avoid saying more things that may affect your sensibility, but you insist.

Well, neither am I. Tongue

If you say so.

The difference between our positions is that you criticise and ridicule mine

In my opinion that kind of tagging is essentially ridiculous, I heard Prog Metal fans complain why people dislike the gene, well making it sound so specialized with 5 or 6 words like "Magnificent Neo-Classical Technical Prog Power Metal!" makes the casual listener run away because most surely doesn't understand passed the Prog Metal Tag.

What's there not to understand about those words? "Magnificent" merely represents the rating. "Neo-Classical" also isn't exactly hard to guess. "Technical" should be a no brainer, too. "Prog" ... well, kind of obvious. "Power Metal" ... ok, you'll have to look that one up if you don't know what it means, but there are definitions all over the net.

If you remember I quoted a thread started in Progressive Ears on another thread about this issue, making fun of this and questioning what the hell happened with Prog Archives.

That's exactly my point ... you're making fun of other people's honest efforts.

And the funny thing is that the person that came into your defence was Sean Trane who I haven't seen tagging like this ever, and believe it or not, even when I don't agree i also said that this criticism was wrong..

while I simply describe my position.

I have left - at least as a collaborator. I never threatened anybody with anything ... except for that thread in the collab section regarding the genre charts. I've already explained countless times that I never intended that one as a threat either.

I am no longer asking people to join me at PF ... instead I'm constantly trying to improve the website, and I hope that slowly but steadily more people will go there and submit some information.

However, that doesn't mean that when you or others bring the subject of tagging back to this forum, I'll advertise my approach.

Have I ever said anything negative about yours?

I do think that the system which PA uses is limited in many ways. However, I think that it's adequate in the context of this website. The focus is clearly on reviews and completeness of artist/album information, which are things that I'm not really interested in for my website. PA and PF can peacefully coexist, at least that is my opinion.

The T is one of the persons who has placed his body in the line of fire multiple times for you, but because he doesn't agree with you once, he's accused.

I'm not accusing, I'm merely wondering where the negativity is coming from. I've just spent several hours improving PF ... I'm doing it to promote prog music, nothing else. I appreciate criticism, but not if it's factually wrong.

You have a different style Mike. you don't make fun, but you use the victim role and accuse everybody who dares to disagree with you of being negative or vindictive. You accuse us of hating Progfreak, no Mike it would be moronic to hate a site, I may like it or not, buty hate it...no way.

Sometimes I might feel like a victim, but usually that quickly passes. It used to be different, but I now reached a position where I simply don't give a damn about what you think about PF ... I've given up any hope of getting you to participate.

But can't we collaborate and help one another even if we use different approaches?

Mike, I can't talk for others, but I can't collaborate, because I don't understand what you are doing.

Wow - you don't seem to understand that these things are not defined by admins at PF. If currently Yes are described as Technical rather than Symphonic, it simply means that more people assigned that tag. You're welcome to assign Symphonic to them ... I'm actually with you there, I think that while they're technical, that aspect is not that important for the band.

Tony R also complained about things like that ... but I'm determined to keep the rating/tagging process 100% democratic, which means that I don't simply interfere and change the database when I think that one of the tags isn't right.

BTW: Have a look at the current genre label for Close to the Edge: "Magnificent₄₆ Symphonic Prog Rock!". That's another advantage of my website ... you get more precise info on the album level.

OK tell me...Should that song go to Fusion while the rest of the album stays in Symphonic? Please Mike!

*You* can decide that for yourself. You are free to decide whether you rate/tag on the album or song level. You're free to decide whether some songs should have different genre than others.

What in hell is Technical Prog Jazz? That doesn't exist except in the mind of the person(s) who wrote this.

Please, it's simply a combination of tags. If the combination of "Prog" and "Jazz" doesn't make sense to you, then you don't have to use it. I'm very sure that it makes sense to many users.

I believe Relayer goes further than just Symphonic, but that's where the reviews make sense, to talk whatever you want, not in incredibly long tags that scare the people or worst, make them laugh.

I'd be glad to know that my website makes people laugh. Wink Kidding aside, there are hardly any long tags at PF. For very popular and/or really eclectic albums/artists the list of tags can indeed get a bit long. But I'm working on that ... soon you'll be able to limit the number of displayed tags, if they annoy you.

People like to listen music, talk about it, enjoy it, not cut it in pieces as a coroner does with corpse Mike.

And remember, I wouldn't wrote this post if you hadn't insisted to get my reply, I had left the thread two times.

Ivan

I don't mind this post at all. I don't expect you to change your mind, but from your comments I can see that you really have a wrong impression of what my website is about. I wish I could do something about that, but I'm at a loss to see how. Embarrassed

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535

Posted: December 14 2008 at 13:32

Mr ProgFreak wrote:

What's there not to understand about those words? "Magnificent" merely represents the rating. "Neo-Classical" also isn't exactly hard to guess. "Technical" should be a no brainer, too. "Prog" ... well, kind of obvious. "Power Metal" ... ok, you'll have to look that one up if you don't know what it means, but there are definitions all over the net.

You will never get it Mike, for most peoploe that's extremely overtagging,

In that case "Elaborate, Guitar based a la Hackett, with King Crimson Pompous plus Asia simpler Influences and Genesis reminiscences Symphonic/Neo/Avant Retro Prog" is a perfect definitionm of Tokyo tapes, you can find all those adjectives in the album and all thjose influences, look at the reviews and you will find all those terms describing the album.

But you and me agree it's absurd.

That's exactly my point ... you're making fun of other people's honest efforts.

For God's sake Mike, the thread was in Progressive Ears and Sean and I defended you!!!!!!!!!!!

Some of them are the ones making fun, I don't agree with that, but I understand why they do it, maybe in a metal site is OK, but not in a Prog site

Mike, don't make me do history, this is not the first time you leave after an angry post.

I am no longer asking people to join me at PF ... instead I'm constantly trying to improve the website, and I hope that slowly but steadily more people will go there and submit some information.

Good for them, I wish you and Progfreak the best HONESTLY, but I can't collabotrate with somethiong that is like sanscrit for me.

However, that doesn't mean that when you or others bring the subject of tagging back to this forum, I'll advertise my approach.

The Progfreak reference came after you started to talk about how we need more tags

MikeenRegalia wrote:

Of course we need more. I'm not sure where your sentiment against tagging comes from

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=53913&PN=13

I simply answred "probably in PF you need more tagging, but not on PA".

You brought the issue here, then accept the opinions

As long as one doesn't interfere with the other, there's no problem.

I'm not accusing, I'm merely wondering where the negativity is coming from. I've just spent several hours improving PF ... I'm doing it to promote prog music, nothing else. I appreciate criticism, but not if it's factually wrong.

Mike, the negativity comes when that overtagging starts to come here.

Sometimes I might feel like a victim, but usually that quickly passes. It used to be different, but I now reached a position where I simply don't give a damn about what you think about PF ... I've given up any hope of getting you to participate.

You know many of us tried to use it despite our disagreements, but actually it was impossible for some of us. I gave you alternatives, opinions, but you disagreed OK, it's your site, but then don't blame us.

But also understand why for some of us this sounds absurd

Your site is created to tag and rate go on for it, it's what you want to do.

BTW: Have a look at the current genre label for Close to the Edge: "Magnificent₄₆ Symphonic Prog Rock!". That's another advantage of my website ... you get more precise info on the album level.

Ok, great for you, I wopuldf take the Magnifiscent out of itm, because it's really subjective, but again, it's yor place.

*You* can decide that for yourself. You are free to decide whether you rate/tag on the album or song level. You're free to decide whether some songs should have different genre than others.

That's what we do Mike, buit when 50 names are given in a thread, and we seen how a genre has turned into three before, and specially after you say:

MikeenRegalia wrote:

Of course we need more. I'm not sure where your sentiment against tagging comes from

I believe it's time to worry.

Please, it's simply a combination of tags. If the combination of "Prog" and "Jazz" doesn't make sense to you, then you don't have to use it. I'm very sure that it makes sense to many users.

It's absurd, you could stay hours giving all the attributes of the album, but that's not a definition, that's an excercize of mind jerking IMO.

Again, good for you.

Milke let me be honest, I wish you and your site the best, don't doubt it. but I don't understand what you are doing, listening a track to see who adds more characteristics is absurd from my perspective.

And please Mike, let me leave the thread, this is the third post in which I ask this.

Iván