Symphonic metal and prog

Recently, I've been listening to this subgenre of metal called "symphonic metal" and lots of the bands seem to be classified as prog, and a lot of them don't, but they are all related to some degree. The strong connection between all of the bands makes their half-presence on prog archives a bit non-useful. Before I say more, let me mention the bands I'm talking about. An asterick* means they are on here, and I linked to youtube videos so you can hear them yourselves (the videos are totally random and don't really represent the best works, but are just to give a snapshot of the sound):

Epica*

Within Temptation

Nightwish*

After Forever*

Xandria 

Kamelot*

Imperia

Nemasea

Obviously, the ones that were chosen are in fact more "progressive" than the ones not chosen. However, it seems with these bands forming their own unique genre, it is a bit nonsensical to split them apart. It is hard to research related bands when they aren't in one place. A symphonic fan can usually explore and research related bands that aren't necessarily prog by going into "prog related," however most of the related bands are all classified as one genre and included in totality here. Also this is the case with older progressive metal, where related music such as metallica will be found in prog related.  I think there is either a case for the other symphonic metal bands to be considered prog related, seeing as they are related to prog bands, or else to see symphonic metal as a subgenre of prog, which it seems closer and closer to every year as more symphonic metal bands try out epics and concept albums. What does everyone else think?

sleeper wrote: There's a reason we pick and choose amongst the Symphonic Metal bands and thats because only some of them have progressive elements. For example useing an orchestra or creating an epic isnt prog in itself, its how the band makes use of them. Within Temptation will never be here because there song structures are clearly set at being sreight up metal/pop where as Epica's songs are anything but with thematic development and dynamic shift between sections. Ignor the inclusion of  Nightwish as they shouldnt be here but were added a long time ago when anyone could add bands.

But my point is that symphonic metal is coming to be seen as a seperate subgenre of prog. Lots of subgenres have come on here that didn't necessarily have many elements from prog, like Tech/extreme prog metal for example. I never heard 70's influence on early cynic, and never read any interviews where they claimed they were inspired by Yes and King Crimson. Likewise with many other bands in the genre. Enough bands existed within the subgenre that were directly influenced by prog that it could be added as a subgenre, and I think that might be the case with symphonic metal.  At least the bands who are related to the prog bands should be put into prog related. I don't know how strong a case I could make for within temptation since they became a pop band. It's not straight up like you said though, they have a lot of orchestral florishes. It's really quite amusing hearing straight up pop with a pretentiously huge bombastic orchestra behind it 

I've said this before, but the way that my logic works is that prog rock is either the melding of rock with symphonic music or rock with jazz music.  Symphonic metal is the melding of symphonic music with a subgenre of rock known as metal, and thus logically should be seen as a subset of progressive rock music.  However, those much wiser than me say that this is not the case and thus I say OK and move on, only to drop in on the subject every so often when it re-rears its ugly head so that I can state my same opinion.

sleeper wrote: By who? Granted the style does lend itslef to prog charecteristics but I never base my decisions on what has been written down in the press or on what other people have said, I base them entirely on what I hear.

That's actually a good point. I always hear symphonic metal being described as prog metal, but I just did a google search and didn't find anyone notable saying symphonic metal was subgenre of prog. I guess the other posters in this thread answer this question though. At least the opinion that symphonic metal is prog is popular on this site, even though it's just a bunch of random internet dudes so far that I've found. 

Its long since been established that modern prog doesnt have to sound or even be influenced by the classics of the 70's to be considered prog, MrProgFreak nicely puts it as "prog by style" or "prog by method" (or descriptions to that effect at least). I cant answer for any other genres and their teams but many of the bands that are added under Tech/Extreme are there because they have moved away from there standard genre with a progressive aproach, whether thats by adding clear influences from the 70's prog bands or because they have tacken on a new aproach to their style of music  that shuns conventional song structures. Also remember that we have a number of Progressive Balck Metal bands here, like Wolves in the Throne Room and Enslaved, but this doesnt mean we are about to add Burzum, Mayheam or Darkthrone. Infact Burzum has already been rejected. In this case consider it the difference between Progressive Symphonic Metal and Symphonic Metal.

Hmm, I can't agree with prog by style or prog by method at all. That really opens the floodgates to anything and make "prog" a much more subjective term. If that's what the consensus is though, who am I to fight it? I guess the black metal is a great example. Burzum would satisfy "progressive by method" since varg worked so hard to take a new approach to his music and wrote in a very unconventional style, with lots of really long epic songs that shun standard song structures. I guess what I'm getting at is that I have no idea what is prog and what isn't, because what is and isn't included seems arbritrary and subjective to me. Am I the only one really confused on what makes a modern band prog?

(this is especially confusing with metal because metal grew up right besides prog rock, and really ought to have been a genre of prog from the get go just like krautrock was, because it was part of the same creative uprising, and has maintained the same artistic and anti-mainstream spirit as krautrock and symph prog. When I see metal as an inherantly "progressive" genre, it is hard for me to properly see some metal as more progressive than other metal. Transylvanian Hunger seems a heck of a lot more progressive to me than any dream theater albums.)

As I mentioned in my previous post, bands that are to be considered for inclusion to PR have to have a strong argument made for them to the admins. You're welcome to have a go but bare in mind that the argument to get Metallica here lasted 36 pages. Oh, and do you have any idea how much pop actually does use an orchestra, or at least a sampled one, orchestral flourishes alone are nothing more than window dressing.

A 36 argument just to get one obviously prog related band into the archives? Man, I don't even want to think what it would take to include a new subgenre. Oof, I think I'll be a lazy wuss and just satisfy myself with throwing the idea out there and hope it festers until someone much more determined tries to get it or the bands included. 

As for Within Temptation, they actually used a real live orchestra. The way they wrote the music in is much more than most pop music "orchestra" samples. Their orchestra is huge sounding, almost to the level of epica. Go listen to "See who I am" to see what I am talking about. It's not just window dressing. I can't call Within Temptation prog, but you have to respect their orchestration, which is actually quite well done.