Should Metallica be in the forum?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Suggest New Bands and Artists
Forum Description: Suggest, create polls, and classify new bands you would like included on Prog Archives
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=50828
Printed Date: November 29 2024 at 17:41
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Should Metallica be in the forum?
Posted By: J-Man
Subject: Should Metallica be in the forum?
Date Posted: August 09 2008 at 22:46
I think Metallica should Definitely be in the forum, I was just wondering what others thought.  ------------- 
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Replies:
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 09 2008 at 22:48
|
hahahhaha.. oh man... I like you. Yes, I do... but have been rejected in the past.. .though... the beast is never dead here on this site.. never.. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: August 09 2008 at 23:19
|
Hey if Miles Davis (who I've been saying should be on the site for a few years now) is coming, I dont see why not Metallica. Especially if Iron Maiden are here. I'm not saying we should allow more "straight" metal bands if Metallica get in, but the band has a lot of credibility to be here. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm 
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: August 09 2008 at 23:28
Still going! But when Cert is back from vacation, he will certainly put his view in. I'm pretty sure me, MikeEnRegalia and Cert can all agree at the very least the 2 albums Master Of Puppets and ...And Justice For All were the real deal prog. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: August 09 2008 at 23:30
|
Okay, my fellow Metal droogies aren't here to back me up *cues MikeEnregalia, Cert, maybe The T and Jody* Like many prog bands themselves, not many of their albums are prog, but based on their progressive material, they have a strong basis for being proto prog metal. -------------
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 09 2008 at 23:38
they don't fit the idiotic category of Proto Prog... which should be redefined to something like 'influences on prog' which would be a great place for them. The category is useless for modern prog because of the stricly classic slant to it because of the 1969 parameter put on it. They were rejected for PR by the owner so that puts that to an end. Maybe the PMT can take my upcoming Miles Davis addition to heart that you don't have to be a 'prog artist' (whatever the hell that is hahah) to make prog music.. and the categories are for one thing.. and one thing only.. .to help group like sounding groups. If Metallica did prog metal.. and their influence on it is beyond quesation. just like Davis. They could.. and probably should add them. That is their call though. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
HughesJB4 wrote:Posted By: JayDee
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 01:17
Should Metallica be in the forum? Yes. Why not?
------------- 
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 01:48
|
Yes, depending on which forum. This would be a reasonable one, forum_topics.asp?FID=41 - General Music Discussions , though I must admit that I'd prefer Metallica in this one, forum_topics.asp?FID=9 - Just for Fun . ;) I don't know about it a Prog one, though Prog Related might make sense. I don't know Metallica that well, but I've never heard them called a prog band, though they may have proggy albums. Bias: I'd rather not see Lars Ulrich in (has come across as more industry than art to me). How much does Metallica fuse genres and turn music inside and out? ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 01:56
I didn't say they are proto prog, but they are proto prog metal, of which there is obviously no category. Metallica obviously never sounded like "prog" (for those of us on PA that believe the "prog sound ended in the 70s  ) as MikeEnRegalia has pointed out before, but much of their early work was done with prog ideals. Arguably much of Metallica's early is indeed more progressive in nature than Queensryche (who are known as one of the early Prog Metal pioneering bands), and hell, Metallica were more prog in the 80s than many 80s prog bands, no question.Kill 'Em All: Not prog as such, but helped to push the heavy metal envelope and also encouraged other competing bands to step up their compositions Ride The Lightning: I believe Cert argued even this ablum was pretty much prog. I'm not on the same level, not entirely progressive in nature, but again, pushed heavy metal compositional boundaries to greater heights and hence a degree of prog ideals Master Of Puppets: Prog. Not a doubt. Extended and a lot of the time far from straight forward compositons, odd time signatures, very thematic album and just more complex than most anything ever really done in the heavy metal field ..And Justice For All: Prog. Not a doubt. The music had become pretty challenging compositionally and I could think of whole "prog" albums less compex than AJFA. Hell, even some of Rush's proggier moments were still less proggy than AJFA could be. These 4 albums were absolutely seminal in shaping heavy metal to come, and no doubt prog metal, with the latter 2 being obviously prog themselves IMO. EDIT: Did some thinking and some listening. I'm gonna have to say RTL is the real deal too, so change my position to Metallica having released 3 full prog albums. -------------
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 02:02
For someone to really know their place in music, you've gotta really know the history of heavy metal as well. Not sure how well versed you are in that area, but it's something I know a fair bit about. You've just gotta listen to anything prior to the albums I've mentioned to understand why Metallica was a band with prog notions and ideals. I've listened to Metallica's first 4 albums inside out, backwards inside out (you get my point). MoP and AJFA and arguably even RTL are so far removed from the earliest heavy metal (like Sabbath etc) and so much more complex and challenging (in ways a non metal fan perhaps might not understand, but I can imagine Cert and MikeEnRegalia knowing what I mean by this) it's not even funny. -------------
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 02:10
Again the "if X is here, why isn't Y" argument?!   Or is it this time a more evolved form: "if X is here, I don't see why no Y (X and Y have damn well nothing in common). Especially is Z is here"?  ------------- 
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 02:28
|
Metallica has been rejected by the website owner so that pretty much eliminates any PR option.
Now, I will say something that may not sound great but it's true. In a way I think Metallica has never been added because it would open a can of worms the likes of which this forum has never seen before. People, who are ready to jump at prog-metal additions and who even deny the very existence of such a genre, and who are paranoid that the genre is taking over this website, would have a field day if Metallica was added. I can see accusations coming. "Oh, finally, the metal archives!" "This site's credibility is dead. I'm out". "Who's next, Korn?" "Metallica was only a thrash band with no progressive elements whatsoever, this site is ruined." And etc, etc, etc.
Two members of the prog-metal team (Mike and I) fully agree in the inclusion of said band in PA. At least three albums are full-blown progressive-metal (Ride, Master, Justice) with Kill'Em All a thrash album that show signs of that (riffs developed as themes, for example). Of course, nobody would add the band for its last 4 albums (one great, one mediocre, one disaster, one undescribable... in chronological order), but they would be added anyway, as is the policy of PA.
And of course, the metal-naysayers who have only heard Enter Sandman and The Unforgiven (two fantastic songs btw, but not prog at all) would cry and tear their clothings like Caiphas with such an addition. Black Sabbath, an english, 70's band which is respected even by non-metallers, incited quite a controversy; Iron Maiden, a band added to prog-related in quite an awkward (IMO) move -should be in PM- and respected widely by non-metallers, caused quite the controversy. Deep Purple and Led Zeppelin, two not-yet-metal bands from England from the 70's caused big controversy........ Imagine: an american band, from the 80's -the dreaded 80's- who started playing music in the same genre of SLAYER, who was accused of inciting violence and even making people kill people, who has appeared on MTV with terrible atrocious performances in recent years, and which, to top it all, is called METALlica.
Anyway, this addition of Miles Davis and the independence I see of one team genre gives me hopes that the prog-metal team will finally one day discuss this matter again and act accordingly. If there is ANY band that influenced progressive-metal (even the flag bearers and favorite band of mine DREAM THEATER) and which released three albums of full progressive-metal, that is Metallica.
Prejudices, after all, are meant to be wiped out... ------------- 
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 02:41
|
^ well said, and I've never believed in the slippery slope idea anyway, it's based on fear and alarmist tendencies.. my position on Metallica has softened and I believe the case for inclusion in a full prog category is warranted, even strong |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 02:56
|
Well, that's the thing, no other thrash band at the time, (from
thrash's earliest days of about 1981 when Dave Mustaine was still in
Metallica), up until the end of the 80s realy did anything that was quite
progressive like what Metallica was doing. Megadeth came close with Rust In Peace, but other than that, Megadeth is just a thrash/heavy metal band just like Slayer, Testament, Kreator (the list goes on and on), and in no way should be considered for PA. I mean, take into account a post Scott (Rushfan4) made last week, or the week before, about how prog bands are added (Like Genesis for eg), yet the band turned to absolute simple pop music yet as of site policy you've gotta add all the albums. Genesis pretty much released 6 or so albums that aren't prog by any stretch of the imagination, yet they are prog band and Metallica aren't?
Both are prog on their own merits and innovations (don't confuse this
for a X and Y argument please but just to make a point even some "true
prog" bands churned out pop).I don't like the Black Album at all, as it really felt so backwards compared to what the band could have been doing (damn you Bob Rock )Anyone that seriously knows their metal history and the bands, will know there is no argument for other thrash bands or really any heavy metal bands of the era that could pass for prog metal (from what I can see, all the prog metal pioneer bands apart from Metallica are already here at PA) Metallica is the one, there will be no Megadeth here, no Exodus no Kreator here et al and well, no Korn (  ) either to be considered for inclusion as they are not prog flag bearers in any sense.Fear of "metalarchivesnumber2.com" are just delusional thoughts. -------------
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 03:01
Genesis released only 4 non albums.
ABACAB, Shapes, We Can't Dance and Invissible Touch
Five if we count the intreoductory FGTTR.
Three Prog Related at least
Duke, ATTW3 and CAS
Seven 100% Prog albums
This makes 10 Prog or Prog related albums against 4 non Prog....This means 71.50% of their production. How many Prog albums did Metallica released?
Genesis is an icon of Prog, has at least 3 of their albums oin the top 10 of every Prog site
How trascendental is Metallica for Prog? Not even the owner (aparently) accepted them for Prog Related.
I don't say they should be added or not, that's problem of the Prog Metal team, but don't compare them in level of progressivenes with Genesis, because in that subject...Metallivca can't hold a comparison with Genesis.
Iván ------------- 
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 03:04
I stand corrected on 4 instead of 6 (that was me just from memory, so a bit rusty in that department). But let's not continue with Genesis, my point was made for my post and doesn't have to continue. On topic now... How many Prog albums did Metallica released? You've missed the point by a long shot, no offense. Go back and read my posts and Ts. -------------
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 03:15
If you compare a band that "has at least 3 Prog more or less Prog albums" out of lets say 10, with another one that has 10 Prog albums out of 14......I'm not the one missing the point.
I didn't compared an icon of Prog with a more or less proggy band.
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 03:15
If a band only released two albums, but both were prog, they would be prog a band. The "how many prog albums has x released compared to y" argument is dead in the water already. "Metallica can't hold a comparison with Genesis." Oh really? I bet they can, and I know they do hold water compared to Genesis, just for different reasons, but they are just as valid. Read everything you can about heavy metal's history, listen to as much thrash metal as you can from the period and get back to me. -------------
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 03:18
I know enough about the history of metal to know that Metallica was innovative/ progressive, I also know that it has been a very influential band (not just to Prog Metal, but to metal generally), what I don't know is if it's Prog (as one can be progressive without being considered Prog here), or what musical qualities make it Prog (because it is far more complex and challenging than non-progressive rock and metal?). Historical understanding is good, but I also think that the compositions should speak for themselves. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 03:21
Did you read my post?????
I'm talking in the PROG DEPARTMENT!!!!
And there I insist, Metallica is not remotely as Prog as Genesis to vbe compared with them.
Iván wrote:
I know almost nothing about Metal (Or care to be honest), so I don't talk about their importance or even have said if they should be added...Read again my post I'M TALKING ABOUT YOUR COMPARISON WITH GENESIS AS PROG BANDS.
But any person who compares Metallica with Genesis as a Progressive Rock band...Well, I must say is mistaken.
Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: GentleGiant
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 03:30
|
No
------------- BeGiantForADay "This British band is just the cup of tea for aficionados who demand virtuosity,progress and originality in their mix." http://rateyourmusic.com/~GentleG |
Posted By: Rocktopus
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 04:24
|
Using Miles Davis inclusion in jazzrockfusion as an argument for adding Metallica to prog-metal, is as absurd as it gets. I was thinking that with the addition of Miles, that not Metallica but Herbie Hancock whould be a natural next. I suppose if Metallica gets added, I should use them as my main argument to get Herbie in. Makes a lot of sense, eh?
Why are you suggesting that them being american got anything to do with people questioning their relevance for the PA? Are american bands and artists being discriminated? Btw: My impression is that non-metallers know Metallica (I got all their 80's albums, and I've owned them since I was a kid) a whole lot better than most of you metalheads seem know electric Miles. ------------- Over land and under ashes In the sunlight, see - it flashes Find a fly and eat his eye But don't believe in me Don't believe in me Don't believe in me |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 05:05
Now that does annoy me. This has always been the policy of the PMT ... why else would Blind Guardian be here for example? I have always been the first to point out that we should be looking at albums, not artists. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to: 
|
Posted By: Avantgardehead
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 05:16
Several different reasons. The whole "I like it so it's prog" argument, etc. etc. ANYWAY I don't see influence as being reason enough to add something like Metallica to this site. Surely we can all know and love Metallica (except for me) despite not having a section here? My biggest issue is that I don't see how it would benefit the site at all... I also don't believe in retroactively labeling something, especially all these influential bands. For example, let's say a group of strapping young lads all really like Sleepytime Gorilla Museum and are really influenced by their music, yet their band plays indie pop. This band eventually becomes really famous and inspires a whole group of artists in the similar vein. Surely this doesn't make Sleepytime Gorilla Museum indie pop now, right? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Avantgardian |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 05:35
|
^ I won't answer this ... I'm sick of people manipulating my statements.
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 05:47
  This isn't "Anything that at any point ever vaguely resembled something in the general vicinity of the outer reaches of the outer reaches of the most liberal definition of prog rock Archives," it's "Prog Archives" |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 05:53
|
^ so let's just limit the list of artists to Genesis.
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 06:10
Ugh. Micky's statement in blue is always bit stretched out, though I know it's his usual way of provocative vision. If you take a look at classic grounds on which prog rock still stands, if you take a look at the 1 billion topics debating what's the best of prog rock, you will actually notice there are plenty of "prog artists" that define prog rock. So for me, it's less important that (what follows is a purely fictional example) Sting would have made a prog rock album in 1977, influenced by the movement, but rather that bands like Van der Graff Generator were there from the start and through their most important, valuable work, made themselves prog artists without a shred of a doubt. Prog artists exists, prog music is of course general, but when talking about Metallica, you can't of course talk about prog music (as in general work), but about prog albums. Now the procedure to focus on music/albums/compositions/riffs/silences/whatever instead of judging an artist is already old, since the issue of "completeness" in creating these archives were several times stuck when reaching an artist that's not progressive by default, but made several albums that tent to have progressive leanings. Metallica has 4 prog-metal albums? Suure, it's more than one prog album anyway, but still...how convenient! Let's just the range of prog artists has ended, and we can go into picking every prog albums non-prog artists have ever done! To me a complete Archives, guys, ya! Thing is major opinions about how to gestion the prog archiving were always duplicitary: When talking about additions
Maybe we're on the verge of becoming original in describing and defining the whole movement of prog rock - separating from most of the other sites and chronicles and such - but the sudden urge to take each artist from this Universe and find what prog bit he made in his life is not the good direction, IMO. I'm sorry for this rant, you can blame it on me being confused and a bit unsatisfyed with some reasons pointed out here. -------------
|
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 06:12
If you're going to make a straw man argument, please make better ones than that. |
Posted By: laplace
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 06:37
------------- FREEDOM OF SPEECH GO TO HELL |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 07:34
| Just a reminder that mailto:M@x - M@x has said no to Metallica being added at all. |
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 07:37
*sigh of relief* Perhaps you could make a sticky thread of all the big name bands whose names are floated every so often (like Metallica) but who have been rejected by Max? |
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 07:40
Well then case closed. -------------
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 08:04
I had heard no to PR only when it was brought to his attention......that's news to me... and the PMT's I guess as well......... oh well. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 09:43
A quick look at the PMT chart could also do you good. *sigh of frustration* perhaps I simply shouldn't be looking for serious discussions here ... the problem is: Is there any place at all on this globe where people can discuss music without being ridiculed? ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 09:57
|
since when has M@X ever unilaterally said a group can not be added here... something smells.. and smells badly
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: febus
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 11:47
I am sure someday a KISS fanboy will come up with hard facts how Kiss is prog related and ask PA to have them included here as well 
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 11:52
 you're a better poster than that man.... if people think they belong here.. it might be for a reason other than being a fan of the group. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 12:00
|
Anyone who can't see the progressiveness in Metallica has a lot to learn about music in general ... I know this is a bold statement, but I stand by it. Comparing them with Kiss is ridiculous and only confirms my deepest fears ... most posters here simply don't seem to know what they're talking about. Fortunately they make it obvious for everyone to see ...
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 12:19
I can see how they were groundbreaking, and I can see the mild prog elements in their music (granted I've only heard MoP), but there's a difference between having prog elements and being prog. |
Posted By: febus
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 12:29
Yes this is Sunday, i had a tough week , i am tired so the usual high quality of my posts is taking a dive today
Also someone next door is blasting Megadeth and it's interfering with my Toccatta playing in my place, doesn't match!! |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 12:34
|
ahhhhh someone blasting Megadeath ... yes.. that explains the post now ...
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 13:00
Are you sure? |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 13:08
yeah.. .sort of funny to read that .. .from a fan of Rio/avant music of all things hahahhah. Find me a place where that stuff is generally associated with prog rock ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 13:16
MoP is their most progressive album ... but there aren't too many "prog elements" on it, if you're referring to easily recognisable elements as time signature changes, tracks close to 20 minutes of length (the simplistic definition of "epics"), mellotron, theatralic singing / stage acting, ... All kidding aside: I would never call MoP a prog metal album. Metallica were refused by the prog metal team. They were then proposed for addition as prog related, which was refused by the admin team and finally by Max. I accept this decision, but I don't agree with it and will always use threads like this one to keep the discussion alive on the subject ... in a nutshell I think that MoP is an amazing display of a band trying (and succeeding) to out-grow the confinements of their genre, combined with stunning musicianship, sophistication and experimentation. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 13:21
and keeping the discussion going... isn't it fair to say.. that there is more to prog than that Mike? Again.. since it has been raised indirectly.. are those elements what defines say....RIO/Avant area? ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 13:26
|
^ I think that I must have explained this in more than a dozen posts ... I'm not going to do that now. But since you ask: Of course there's much more to prog than time signature changes and mellotron. The problem is that still most people are looking for these simple stylistic elements and not for the more intricate things. Certif1ed for examples values complex/sophisticated form, which most people would never be able to identify. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 13:26
|
This isn't really the time to judge the progressiveness of genres such as RIO, Progressive Electronic, Krautrock, Indo/Raga or such, all "failible" in some way to what we recognize as classic prog rock, if you want my two cents.
-------------
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 13:30
of course you have.. the question was what we call in Micky speak.. .a hanging breaking ball over the heart of the plate.... it can't be said enough...... ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 13:32
NOT COMPARING THEM WITH METALLICA (you can't be careful enough to avoid missinterpretations), but it has already been done
: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4397&KW=Kiss - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4397&KW=Kiss
Thanks God the thread was closed.
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 14:36
|
I can only hope that regardless of all the sarcasm and tongue in cheek "babbling" that goes on around here, those who care to keep track of all the decisions of the genre teams and their members will at some point recognize a pattern. Additions are not simply chosen on a random basis or based on the personal preferences of single members ... personal perferences may be motivations for selecting candidates for addition, but when it comes to actually adding them there are usually several people involved, and they often have contradictory views on the additions. In the end, looking back at all the additions of the last couple of years, I *do* recognize a pattern.
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 16:16
I think the fact that it takes laborious contracted negotiations to get certain artist inclusions speaks well of the sites credibility. Imagine if we just rolled over all the time for inclusion cases, BUT and I stress the word BUT, inclusion criteria needs to consistent for new/newer artists as well. I am not saying it is not but it needs to be consistent. I am not a Metallica fan BUT think they warrant inclusion simply because of Iron Maiden/similar artists being here and again consistency needs to apply.
I do also believe that one prog album deserves an artist inclusion even if the other four or six are not!
Also I have learn't that the sarcasm and babbling is all part of 'passionate' processes and not to take it too much to heart  . Mike all I can say is don't give up on Metallica, PA is an evolving site and a work in progress.------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 16:30
Why so sure that I think all the rio/avant listed on PA belongs here? To actually address your question: the entire RIO movement and Zeuhl are almost universally identified with prog rock. That said, there are indeed many bands listed under RIO/avant that seem to get in because they are avant-rock rather than avant-rock that actually crosses over into prog (I'd point to Beefheart and Zappa as the most notorious examples... if Zappa belongs on this site it's in jazz-fusion IMHO). I'm not on the team and haven't had any say in what's added, and many of what has been added I would've vetoed/voted against had I the power. RIO is, IMO, no exception to PA's tendency to be too liberal in including albums. That shouldn't discredit the significant portion of it that clearly overlaps with prog rock. Just about everything Magma did with Kohntarkosz especially bleeds of prog rock. Epic in multiple sections, pomposity, etc, etc, etc. Henry Cow started as a Canterbury band out in left field and gradually morphed into a more classical vein (Western Culture) that is somewhat more of a tangent to prog but still merits inclusion taken next to their back catalogue. And Univers Zero... well it seems pretty hard to escape the prog rock tendencies they have in their period up through Heatwave. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 17:02
|
Very generally speaking here... As but two of the biggest names in chamber rock (not mentioned by Pnoom) it's hard to argue that Art Zoyd and Present doesn't have the musical merits of progressive rock. Or latter day bands such as U Totem. For me, I find metalish bands such as Hoyry-Kone, Estradasphere, or Secret Chiefs 3 more Prog than prog metal giants ;) such as Nightwish, Blind Guardian, Epica, and Rhapsody (of Fire). I used to think of RiO/ Avant progressive movements as quite seperate to the Prog movement, but I don't anymore. I'd go so far to say that RiO (while a particular movement) took Prog to the next level (evolved it), and I think that when typical Prog was waning, certain avant rock artists were the ones who were truly progressing rock -- with integrity to the art, I'd say, and real musical values. I'd like to say saved Prog, but it wasn't popular enough. From the late 70's on, Avant rock saved progressive rock for me. I'd say, though I fully support such additions, that some of the avant bands are too far removed from rock, or have too little rock to be considered truly progressive rock. Some are far more informed by academic music, than rock, for instance. A fusion of non-rock genres with rock is one of the most important prog traits, and it's not surprising that as less rock artists get in, even less get in, and, in a way, that much progressive rock would progress farther away from rock. Whatever others think of Metallica etc. as prog, and despite historical concerns, it's the musical qualities that are paramount. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Avantgardehead
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 17:27
A now for my final thought: An 8-minute thrash metal song is still a thrash metal song. Oh look, classical-ish acoustic guitar parts and leads! Um, that's progressive! Yeah... even though the majority of their output is thrash metal, the little intelligent bits found on their first few albums make them prog!
Sounds good to me! ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Avantgardian |
Posted By: Abstrakt
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 17:27
| No |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 17:34
Sounds good to me! [/QUOTE] But only provided we limit Genesis to the post Duke era. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Avantgardehead
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 19:51
|
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Avantgardian |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 21:21
|
It's funny to read how everybody react like children when the name of band is mentioned... ...
Caml down... your boogeyman doesn't exist. If the site owner has said not AT ALL, then even the prog-metal team is powerless. My opinion on the matter, though, stands as always. And, unlike Mike, I DO think the band would go DIRECTLY in progressive-metal, not in prog-related. But it's not my site nor would I go over regulations and a need for a harmonious environment here in PA to add any band.
I will not address specific points as they are the usual ones by the usual ones. You have your opinion, other people have another. I can live with that. In the end, it would seem that for many, the addition of said band would actually take a toll in their personal lifes. So I beg to all of you: let's call it quits. Metallica won't be added. Case closed.
In the meantime, enjoy the fantastic work of the prog-metal team which adds about 2 bands a day to this site.
-------------
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 10 2008 at 22:47
well said Teo... hopefully you can convince your team mates to approve them since it appears that is the only way a group which should be in the archives will get into the archives. I know my position has changed 180 deg.. from being opposed originally to now support full addition. That comes from listening to those who know the music best. I agree.. this discussion here has run it's course. Any future action is up to the PMT That discussion though... is not for the general forum.. but is between the teammates and friends on the PMT. Discussion is great. .and everyone got their say here. Where it goes from there... is up to you all.. you are are the experts on that sh*t .  ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 00:03
this is not what im saying. what im saying is that if an artist with many progressive attributes that pushed music further like Miles Davis is finally being added to this site, then a band like Metallica with progressive attributes (in the 80s) that pushed music further should also be added. as to where, i dont know. I am for them being added to PM. Iron Maiden should also be in this category, it's a disgrace they are under PR, as they were more influential than Metallica (they were influenced by Maiden for god darn's sake!) anyway here's what i think of Metallica's discography, which only goes up to the Black Album, because after that they became "Alternica" Kill 'Em All - 1983 - Not really prog, though a few songs lean towards it, especially The Four Horsemen (Mechanixxx for you Megadeth fans, only more prog). Mostly great thrash metal with great play on themes Ride the Lightning - 1984 - Mostly prog, they're still coming off their full thrash assault days, but the compositions are now much more elaborate and technical. Also their heaviest album IMO Master of Puppets - 1986 - Full prog metal. Every song, even the 2 bookended thrash songs, are big prog. This was probably their peak. Then you have a song like Orion, which is barely even metal, but a beautiful full out prog rock song. ...And Justice For All - 1988 - Full prog metal. This time the songs are longer and waaaayy more complex. Odd time signatures everywhere, epic compositions and containing their heaviest song in Blackened. The production sound is cool, i just wish there was some bass. real quick, i had a friend who had GIANT sub-woofers in his truck play this album with the bass ALLLLL the way up (and when the bass was this high, everything shook). However, even with the bass that high, you could not hear any of Newstead's bass parts. You just heard the natural low tone of the guitars and bass drum... very unfortunate. However, it does give the album its identity... The Black Album (Metallica) - 1991 - The album everyone knows. A big step back from the previous album, but has some prog moments, the structures are still more complex than anything they did afterwards. Maybe a quarter prog. Still a great rock/metal album. So with these albums (3 of which being highly influential in the genre of prog metal) i think they have enough credibility to be added to the site. Under which sub genre, i dont know, and will probably be a bigger discussion that this one. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 00:30
That's exactly what if X then why not Y. Metallica should be added at Prog Meetal's team criteria at the end they are the experts, as each and every tream.
If Miles Davis is added otr not doesn't mean a thing in this case, Miles Davis is not even a Prog Metal artist.
I agree with you about Iron Maiden, but I don't dare to tell a team what they should do, they have the last word AS EACH AND EVERY TEAM.
Prog Metal has decided not to accept Iron Maiden and I respect their decision, as we hope the decisions of all the teams are respected.
There I don't give an opinion, I'm not a Prog Metal specialist, that's the decision of the team.
I don't know enough about Metal to tell Mike and his team what to do and what not to do, it doesn't matter that the votes for Metallica are against the band the PMT havs the last and only call AS EACH AND EVERY TEAM.
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 00:46
to reiterate, i am not for adding more metal bands if Metallica get it. That's what that other site is for. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 01:44
Hope you don't mind my intrusion into your dialogue (will use red).
Missed which site you're referring to. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 01:51
|
About M@X's decision: I think it's either a reminiscence of when M@X and Rony created the site and thus builded its database from scratch, before the creation of Specialist Teams, either it's a final or decisive vote when (you gotta admit) controversial suggestions such as Metallica are concerned. M@X has actually been a main actor back when Led Zep were discussed. Now, not to stay this decision Bob mentioned didn't go against the "autonomy" of the PMT (then again, the PMT rejected Metallica themselves), but at this point I find a bit more often the times bands arrive on Teams desk with a recommendation letter from the webmasters themselves. At that time, the autonomy still takes place, as Teams have the last word. I even well remember rejecting Robert Beriau together with the "classic" AR quartet, back in the AR days. Yeah, not seen as a pleasing decision up the high chairs.  -------------
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 02:10
Exactly Rico, as a fact the first post I read mentioning mailto:M@X - M@X , was referred to PROG RELATED, not to Prog Metal, then Bob said mailto:M@X - M@X had no intervention, and I believe him.
Until today mailto:M@X - M@X has never told the Symphonic Team add or reject a band, as a fact mailto:M@X - M@X has sent us several bands to verify and even contacted us with the musicians, and he has shown nthing but respect for our decision, sometimes we said we don't believe it's Prog or we don't believe it's Symphonic but Eclectic (for example), he has always respected the team's opinion.
And believe me, it's much harder to tell a band member we don't believe you should be here than telling the administrators, but mailto:M@X - M@X has always supported us.
Of course in some conflictive issues (I guess sometimes the Administrators are divided in a decision -as the team's members in some cases- or mailto:M@X - M@X feels is better for the site to ADD the band) and mailto:M@X - M@X gives his opinion......It's his site and he has all the right to give the final call.
Again agree with you Rico.
It's much easier to say yes to every band, people don't look at you as the bad guy, but we can't lie, if the four members believe a band is not Symphonic, we have to say it loud and clear, and normally asd the head of Symphonic, I take the responsability of making this decision public, so I face the reaction.
I received albums from couple of bands and had to tell them "the team doesn't believe the band fits". (God, I hope the teams don't have to face this situation very often, because it's terrible) and we consulted the Administrators for PR in all the cases.
But I would lie if I said the Administrators, mailto:M@X - M@X or Ronnie ever placed preasure on us to accept a determined band.
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 02:19
|
Interesting Rico, thanks. Incidentally, since this band has been rejected by both the Prog Metal team and Prog Related, perhaps this thread should be moved to the "Discuss Rejected Bands and Artists" forum. ;) Even if the teams can make an autonomous decision on the inclusion of Metallica, I think it unlikely that another team, such as Raga Rock, will want it. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 02:36
Those aren't "prog metal giants" ... they are on the "outer rim" of Prog Metal. I know you were joking, but I think it's important to point out that I (or the other members of the PMT, to my knowledge) am aware that these bands aren't prime examples of the *style* of Prog Metal. Neither are Secret Chiefs 3. Dream Theater and Fates Warning will always be the two prime examples of Prog Metal ... but of course - and fortunately - that doesn't mean that we can only add DT clones.
You could also think of the movement as an aftermath of prog - a last attempt at saving the prog "spirit" if you will. In any case, prog was dead at the beginning of the 80s, and what came afterwards was a different kind of music, regardless of which genre you're looking at. Even bands like Anglagard or Wobbler can't re-create the vibe of the original "wave" of prog artists/albums.
I don't think of Metallica as prog. It's the old distinction between progressive and prog ... some find it laughable to make such a distinction, but it's really necessary IMO to understand the development of the genres. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Easy Money
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 02:37
|
Hey Guys, Looks like I'm coming into this thread late, but I did try to read enough of the earlier posts to get in on the basic drift of things.
Although there other artists missing from PA that I would place above Metallica, I have often pointed out on here that their album Master of Puppets was one of the first 80s albums to capture that introverted {existential/spiritual real me vs the plastic rest of you'll} early 70s emotional musical and lyrical feel that typified so much of classic prog rock bands, especially Pink Floyd, Black Sabbath and Gabriel led Genesis. Besides, their first two albums rock like nothing else since DP In Rock. |
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 02:42
|
In the forum, rather than on the database? Sure... bring in James Hetfield if he'll post... I'd love to chat to him in the Suede Room. Although they may get trapped here and never release that album... -------------   
|
Posted By: KoS
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 03:20
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 03:27
-------------
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 03:33
Indeed Mike, you've said exactly what many of us have been thinking I made the point earlier in the thread (well I think I did anyway ) that indeed Metallica weren't merely an "influence" on prog metal, but just like Fates Warning and Queensryche (Dream Theater hadn't entered the game at this stage) I and many others consider to be in the real deal prog metal game.-------------
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 03:38
I touched on the progressive vs Prog thing before in a response early in this thread. "I know enough about the history of metal to know that Metallica was innovative/ progressive, I also know that it has been a very influential band (not just to Prog Metal, but to metal generally), what I don't know is if it's Prog (as one can be progressive without being considered Prog here), or what musical qualities make it Prog ... Historical understanding is good, but I also think that the compositions should speak for themselves." ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 03:47
metal-archives.com *edit* BTW this band SHOULD be added to the archives, even though they just broke up and released only one album... http://www.myspace.com/bogdanovichband - http://www.myspace.com/bogdanovichband ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm
|
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 03:52
| For the consipracy theorist who thought they could "Smell a rat", here's an old thread which will be of interest : http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4778 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4778 |
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 03:55
haha and System of a Down?? i remember when that was a big topic. i would almost say 'yay' for their inclusion too......... ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 03:59
An oldie but a goodie; it's "dated" well.------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: gbmolina
Date Posted: August 11 2008 at 20:08
| i don't think metallica shoul be added in the forum, after all, it's about progressive rock and metallica do not bear even a slight hint of progressive. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 02:24
|
^ http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=KSndn8E5FRY - http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=KSndn8E5FRY Notice the rhythmical gimmick starting at about 2 minutes, when the drums get "out of sync" with the rest of the band by one 4th note. Dream Theater would use this technique many times later on, becoming one of the (many) trademarks of prog metal. Edit: It's a 4th note, not a 8th ... I shouldn't be posting these things before my morning coffee.  ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 21:02
|
Well, now I can give my honest opinion, Ive been intensively listening "Master of Pupetts" their allegedly proggiest album, and can't fond the connection, probably they used some techniques that would be used by Prog Metal bands, but don't believe it's enough, not even Orion
Adding to this fact that I have "And Justice for All" I can vote in the poll. Maybe I'm wrong because I don't consider myself remotely a Prog Metal expert but had to be honest and vote with better knowledge.
Despite this opinion, having them in the Archives wouldn't make me feel so uncomfortable as other bands.
Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: August 12 2008 at 21:17
 is it a crack in the armor ?! good, fair assessment Ivan, if you don't buy them as progressive after those two albums it's probably not gonna happen ..to me they're a heavy metal band that progressed at a time when it wasn't as fashionable.. but it is ultimately out of our hands |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 17:19
|
I think: NO, despite somewhat "Progressive" elements in his music, Metallica is pure Heavy Metal creation, it's like said that Slayer or Anthrax goes to PA.
i think there are more bands and artist that deserves to be in PA than Metallica.
my two cents
-------------  |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 17:30
|
The differences between Master of Puppets and Reign of Blood should be obvious to anyone ... ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: JethroZappa
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 17:34
|
Should Metallica be in the forum? No I think they are not even close to the word "prog", and I don't see particoular musicianship in their albums either and I think Lars Ulrich's drumming is very weak (remember Metallica fans, that's just my opinion) ------------- "I hope they all get an indigestion, I hope, hope, hope, hope, hope!" |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 17:35
|
Of course Mike, but Those albums are cited by guitar player, in the Heaviest 50 albums of all time. Slayer Reing in Blood in number 6.
Metallica Master of... in number 17.
I think that both albums are totally heavy metal and all his variants.
------------- |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 17:38
|
Well Lars have a "punch" of Heavy Metal standards but not for prog standards, besides he will look like a 8 year old drumming , between Bill Bruford or Mike Portnoy.
------------- |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 17:39
|
Well Lars have a good "punch" for Heavy Metal Standards, but for prog standards... he might look like 8 year old drumming between prog giants of the stature of Brufford or Portnoy.
------------- |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 17:54
but how does an album being considered 'heaviest' by a magazine mean it wasn't a prog album.. A Passion Play was #1in the U.S. for a time in 1973, does that mean it was a pop record only disguised as pretentious, widely-panned prog nonsense? |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 18:49
|
I think that Metallica themselves never consider Prog acts. Here´s extracts of an 1999 interview:"Virginmega.com: If you did an album the other way around, like Metallica plays classical favorites, could you guys pull it off?
Hetfield: What, like us playing my favorite Bach piece? Not really. But as a joke I did a whole set list of Metallica songs with orchestra innuendoes. There was Mozart Breath instead of 'Motor Breath,' Wolfgang Man instead of 'Of Wolf and Man.' I think there's been enough rock musicians doing stuff like that - Yngwie Malmsteen, Dream Theater. It doesn't really interest me. It's a little too rigid." ------------- |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 18:57
|
^ but you don't have to be accomplished at classical to do progressive metal, that's like saying Floyd weren't progressive cause Gilmour couldn't shred and Rick Wright was dull compared to Wakeman, or that Rush aren't progressive cause they come from a hard rock background ..and many artist don't consider themselves 'prog', never stopped us before |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 19:05
|
Agree with you in part but... if you read between lines in the extract of the interview, Hetflied pointed out one archetypical metal progressive band: Dream Threater.
So Hetflied might want to say to his interview that are other bands that do elaborate, and intricate long solos with multiple tempo changes, etc, and he and Metallica, don't interest at all.
And you will agree with me that Classical music is an influence of progressive rock.
------------- |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 19:07
|
Besides i think that the poll is talking itself
------------- |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 19:09
hahah.. yeah... it seems like a sport to see who can distance themselves from ....errr..and grrrr.. being LABELED (have I mentioned today how much I hate that word ) prog.------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 19:10
|
[/QUOTE] hahah.. yeah... it seems like a sport to see who can distance themselves from ....errr..and grrrr.. being LABELED (have I mentioned today how much I hate that word ) prog.[/QUOTE] hahahaha nice to see here friend------------- |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 19:22
|
thanks.... I was just passing through on a spamming run... Do think it funnier than hell all the prog artists that tell anyone that will listen that they aren't. We just judge (err.. SHOULD )on the music.. screw the tags and labels don't let me interrupt... I read more than I post believe it or not.... ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 19:22
undoubtedly, and Metallica won't be added to the site anytime soon |
Posted By: Real Paradox
Date Posted: August 13 2008 at 19:48
|
I believe they may be accepted in this forum, but definitely as a progressive band... but just as prog related. If Iron Maiden, and other more metal bands were inducted in here, I guess Metallica as the credibility and props from at least the prog metal heads that are here in the forum, to become one of the bands. I'm voting "yes" on the poll.
------------- What is This? It is what keeps us going... |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: August 14 2008 at 01:38
by the way, the poll title says "to the forum"... so in a way, Metallica HAVE been added to the forum..... they'rebeing discussed here after all... now, added to the website or database, that's another matter.... -------------
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: August 14 2008 at 02:03
|
Metallica aren't in the forum.......... I don't see James Hetfield, Kirk Hammett, Lars Ulrich or Rob Trujillo around here yet Hell it would be good to see them around, I would finally get to ask Kirk one on one why he uses the wah wah pedal too much and can't vibrato properly -------------
|