How can metal be prog?

Metal is prog in a completely different way than rock is, and I think that's what throws a lot of people off.

PROGMONSTER2008 wrote: Avantgardehead wrote: Metal is prog in a completely different way than rock is, and I think that's what throws a lot of people off.   Well I believe prog was/is supposed to be jazz/classical based rock music full of awesome clever melodies. The type of melody which makesd you think, how did they come up with that. But prog metaI doesn't do that hardly ever. Playing technical only gets you through a couple of listens then it's history.  I don't like the idea of lumping true prog with prog metal. They are completely different forms of music with the word prog in their name. Oh yeah, true prog is way better . I blame the critics for naming it progressive rock in the first place because it's not about inventing new music. It's just quality music written by creative musicians. Most Modern prog bands have actually taken the name 'progressive literally' but that's not what it's about imo

Let's take this logic to its ultimate conclusion, shall we? If it's classical and jazz (among others) that make prog rock 'prog', then why waste time listening to prog at all? My recent listening habits reeinforce this conclusion - hardly any prog, 70s' or modern, and lots of classical and jazz instead.

PROGMONSTER2008 wrote: Visitor13 wrote: PROGMONSTER2008 wrote: Avantgardehead wrote: Metal is prog in a completely different way than rock is, and I think that's what throws a lot of people off.   Well I believe prog was/is supposed to be jazz/classical based rock music full of awesome clever melodies. The type of melody which makesd you think, how did they come up with that. But prog metaI doesn't do that hardly ever. Playing technical only gets you through a couple of listens then it's history.  I don't like the idea of lumping true prog with prog metal. They are completely different forms of music with the word prog in their name. Oh yeah, true prog is way better . I blame the critics for naming it progressive rock in the first place because it's not about inventing new music. It's just quality music written by creative musicians. Most Modern prog bands have actually taken the name 'progressive literally' but that's not what it's about imo Let's take this logic to its ultimate conclusion, shall we? If it's classical and jazz (among others) that make prog rock 'prog', then why waste time listening to prog at all? My recent listening habits reeinforce this conclusion - hardly any prog, 70s' or modern, and lots of classical and jazz instead.   Because prog has something jazz and classical doesn't. It's the combination of rock/jazz and classical which makes it so good

'Because prog has something jazz and classical doesn't. '

You mean mellotrons?

Let's see:

Melody - classical and jazz trumps prog. 'How did they come up with that', you ask? It's simple - often they took it from classical and jazz musicians.

Rhythm - again, you will find better-developed rhythms in jazz and classical (not only Western classical). not that prog drummers or bassist are bad, but it's the jazz guys (playing jazz) that really blow me away

Wealth in instrumentation? Again, classical and jazz reign supreme.

Complexity? Don't get me started on that...

Even these stupid time signatures are better done in classical - Stravinsky, anyone?



'It's the combination of rock/jazz and classical which makes it so good'

Never heard a really good rock/classical combo. Sure, you get folks like Gentle Giant, and they're talented and enjoyable, but when you listen to classical later, you forget about them instantly.

Jazz/classical combo - Ellington or Stan Kenton, anyone?

Rocktopus wrote: ^I'm a lot more on your side than PROGMONSTER2008, but I also think you're being a little diffiicult.  The combining of genres I find in Art Zoyd, Henry Cow and some of those other advanced RIO groups sounds pretty unique to me. Although their origins are 20th century classical and modern jazz in combination with driving bass, electric guitars and percussion associated with rock. And I do listen to the origins of their music as well. But although less advanced and not "better" (I'm not really trained or able to measure these kinds of qualities, I just know it), I've probably played Art Zoyd more often than Bartok. I find the origins of RIO, but nothing that similar to the actual music elsewhere, if you know what I mean.   But if we are only talking about dumb stuff like Trace, Exception, ELP and silly bands like that, you're right.

Fair enough, but if you're going to bring up melodic complexity as the sole criterion for judging the quality of a piece of music (as Progmonster has), you're going to have to face the music, pardon the pun.

Besides, I have a feeling he wasn't really talking about RIO, more like Genesis, Yes, Italian Prog, or Canterbury. And is it just me, or does Art Zoyd sound somewhat like Xenakis? 
 

Edited by Visitor13 - December 09 2008 at 07:35

Metal is a type of rock music... therefore Prog Metal is a subset of Prog Rock... and that answers the question in the original post. All this other talk about Melody, Classical, Jazz, whatever is off topic.  

PROGMONSTER2008 wrote: Avantgardehead wrote: Metal is prog in a completely different way than rock is, and I think that's what throws a lot of people off.   Well I believe prog was/is supposed to be jazz/classical based rock music full of awesome clever melodies. The type of melody which makesd you think, how did they come up with that. But prog metaI doesn't do that hardly ever. Playing technical only gets you through a couple of listens then it's history.  I don't like the idea of lumping true prog with prog metal. They are completely different forms of music with the word prog in their name. Oh yeah, true prog is way better . I blame the critics for naming it progressive rock in the first place because it's not about inventing new music. It's just quality music written by creative musicians. Most Modern prog bands have actually taken the name 'progressive literally' but that's not what it's about imo

You know what the problem with prog metal is: just that they have the egos of a prog musician and a metal one , taking themseves WAY TOOOO SERIOUSLY. I can stand metal when they do it just for fun like Manowar for ex but when they start being too creative they start to piss me off.

Edited by crimson87 - December 09 2008 at 13:49

Avantgardehead wrote: Metal is prog in a completely different way than rock is, and I think that's what throws a lot of people off.

It's weird but your advice made me wanna hear their stuff , it's OK if their are sad in not a cliched way like most metal and modern music.

crimson87 wrote: It's weird but your advice made me wanna hear their stuff , it's OK if their are sad in not a cliched way like most metal and modern music.

What are some examples of modern music being sad in a cliched way?