Megadeth - Prog Related

Fieldofsorrow wrote: And yes, bands on the 'fringes' are always going to be a source of disagreement, inevitably. But the question is, should these sort of artists be on the website, or is their progressive direction too vague to be included?

I think that those artists that keep being suggested again and again by knowledgeable members/collabs should indeed be added - but as prog related.

micky wrote: RATT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  they were prog for sure

I also was not keen on Metallica's addition, but partially because an argument being used was that it influenced Prog Metal bands such as DT, whereas I felt that that the Prog in Prog Metal (using DT as an example) owed more to bands such as Yes than Metallica (Metallica being more an influence on metal generally than on the Prog part of the equation).  That said, I do think that Metallica showed some Progtitude itself in music, rather than just being progressive.  If it was just about being progressive, then we'd include various 50's rock and roll artists for their influence on rock.

That said, the parameters for what can be considered Prog is expanding, and with that comes what can be considered Prog-Related and Proto-Prog (though a core criteria of both now is that it must be demonstrated that they influenced Prog -- I had thought that Prog_Related was intended more for those that were influenced by Prog rather than influencing it, but I think that changed).  Some wanted Metallica to be in a Proto-Prog Metal category, but to me that didn't make much sense.

I'm very inclusive, and don't really mind the addition at all.  As long as Prog-Related additions are well-balanced (the various categories related artists are as well and equally represented as makes sense, then I'm happy).


Edited by Logan - August 19 2009 at 13:04

I see that metallica are on this site, but can't understand why megadeth are not.  After all dave mustaine was once a member of that band.  I think that megadeth have more prog leanings than metallica and are as good a band.

Last time I checked Metallica were a part of the prog-related part of the archives, and not the experimental metal part of it.

Their experimental attitudes, which was just that at the start of their career when compared to their contemporaries, as well as their profound influence on prog artists, was what made their inclusion as a related act. Among the bands openly admitting Metallica as an important influence on their musical escapades are Dream Theater.

Dismissing that aspect of their inclusion out of hand as well as drawing comparisons between what they did in the 80's with what other bands did in the 90's is a good example of comparing apples and oranges, unlogical arguments as far as I'm concerned. Kind of like dismissing The Beatles experimental and musical influences by comparing them with Electric Light Orchestra.

As far as Megadeth goes, they strike me as a much more technical than progressive outfit as such, and by the time they became well known enough to be highly influential their output had ceased most relations with prog in my opinion. Perhaps reconsidered opinion - I know I have spoken on this topic previously but don't remember what conclusion I drew then *chuckles*

The Pessimist wrote: If I'm gonna be br00tally honest (see what I did there), I never thought Metallica deserved to be on the Archives. Yes, OK, they are experimental. But experimental metal does not mean prog metal in any way. Anyone want to refer to one of our subgenres? No. The bands in the Experimental/Post-Metal genre are waaaaaaaaaay waaaaaaaaaaaaaay waaaaaaaaay more experimental than Metallica ever were. I mean look at bands like Devin Townsend, Deadsoul Tribe and Tool... I mean seriously, anyone who says Metallica are experimental to the leagues of Tool is an idiot, and Tool are a through and through progressive band. Good music experiments. It pushes boundaries. But does that make them prog? Faith No More and Dog Fashion Disco push boundaries, but they are not listed on the Archives for good reason: THEY ARE NOT PROG. Being "progressive" is different to being "experimental", they are worlds apart. With bands like Megadeth, I'm going to have to back Harry up on this one: they only have a few songs that I see progressive. Same goes with Metallica for me actually. And if this is the only criteria required for a band to get listed on this site, then I may as well just give up calling prog "prog" and call it "partly progressive rock" instead. It's definitely a resounding NO for me. If Megadeth get in, then we may as well list half of the metal bands in existence as "progressive". Before you know it we'll have Sepultura, Suffocation and Morbid Angel on here and although they are fantastic bands, I find they will struggle to fit in under the same unbrella term as bands like Atheist, Edge Of Sanity and Neurosis. Even firther into it, can you seriously imagine Megadeth fitting into the same genre dedicated site as Genesis, VDGG and FRANK ZAPPA???

Edited by jampa17 - January 21 2010 at 13:38

Olav: About the whole related thing, Edge of Sanity are highly influenced (this needs no citation really as you can hear it) by Morbid Angel. Hell yeah man, Morbid Angel should be prog-related I'd have thought you, a collab, of all people should know it doesn't quite work like that. Cephalic Carnage (progressive grindcore band listed on the Archives) are influenced by Napalm Death and Carcass. Should we add those two to the archives as well? The reason I bring experimentation into the equation also is that Metallica aren't really progressive, or what I see as progressive anyway. They are EXPERIMENTAL, because they took Thrash to new heights. Doesn't make them progressive though really. Aphex Twin took Dance music to new heights, yet they have been turned down by progressive electronic (and for good reason too: THEY ARE NOT PROG. (or related for that matter).

Agreement on Megadeth though

jampa17:

Tool would have existed without Metallica. Metallica are not the only metal band before Tool.

Why can't I compare them? They are both metal. They are on the same site. Once again, like I said with Olav, Metallica are Prog-Related. They are there because they had an influence on Tool. However no more influence than say Sepultura and Slayer. Or even as far back as Indian classical music. By these rights should we include composers recordings such as Ustad Vilayat Kha? No. In fact, any respectful artist in music takes influence from a MYRIAD of others, from Bach to Miles Davis to Venetian Snares. If we go by the notion of "Metallica are in Prog-Related because they influenced Dream Theater", then I'm afraid to be fair, you'll have to completely clog up the entirety of Prog-Related with EVERY SINGLE MUSICIAN TO EVER LIVE.

Technical DOESN'T = Prog or Prog-Related.

Yes I can. Because Radiohead are prog. Dream Theater are prog. Metallica are not.

Raff: I do know what prog-related is, I have been here for a few years now I just think we should be stricter about it, because of my reasons given above. I hate to go against the whole site, but this is really getting out of hand now. Next it'll be Judas Priest, then Megadeth, then Status Quo, then The Rolling Stones, then Ray Charles, then Stevie Wonder, then The Red Hot Chili Peppers (because they have done an 8 minute song and use 5/4 a few times and like prog bands do that too so they must be prog-related), then BUSTED (because they have Sci-fi lyrics in that song Year 3000 and loads of Prog bands use sci-fi lyrics)... can you see where I'm going here? Maybe the philosophers are right and we are all one entity, thus making all genres prog or one of its relatives. I could be wrong. But as numerous people have said before: this isn't "Music That is Slightly Progressive Archives".

And to be honest, I don't think the fact that other sites are loose justifies opening the gates to almost every band that gets suggested. Let them do what they please. Doesn't mean to say we have to follow suite.

Rant over.

The question is though, where do we draw the line I mean, if we drew the line at Metallica, fair enough. But if we drew the line at Megadeth... that would have to allow a whole load of bands which are barely related to prog at all, not without going into the subject matter deep.

Over my dead  undead body.... 

The Pessimist wrote: Next it'll be Judas Priest.

Yes...in time. Anyone who has heard their first four albums (Rocka Roll, Sad Wings of Destiny, Sin after Sin, Stained Glass) as well as their two latest albums (Angel of Retribution, Nostradamus) will note very strong prog rock influences. Beyond enough to make them fit perfectly in PR, IMHO.