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):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKGxryyxeN8 - Epica*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reGlno9aUpw - Within Temptation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuqUoMfgMvM - Nightwish*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7lw04Ek9bY - After Forever*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdOYXlcKjGY - Xandria 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wRreonRGwk - Kamelot*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdQcwYQ5Nzk - Imperia

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdQcwYQ5Nzk - 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.

Nuke wrote: But my point is that symphonic metal is coming to be seen as a seperate subgenre of prog.

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.

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.

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.  

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

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. 

I don't think Within Tempnation is progressive. Nor good if you ask me (but that doesn't matter).

I think that even Nightwish should be here, or Metallica. Hey, you know the saying - Sweden is for rock, Finland for metal. These symphonic metal bands are growing like mushrooms after rain last two decades, there's just too much of them. 

But you're right that it's hard to tell prog metal from symphonic. I sometimes uses PA as measure to what is and what is not. Sometimes just my feelings.

AtomicCrimsonRush wrote: The Black Symphony album by WT is more progressive than any of the latest Epica. Prog related I would be settled with if that were possible. I believe wholeheartedly that they are not given enough credit for their influences among the symphonic prog genre. Nightwish are as prog as WT, so I guess if they struggled to get in here it would be near impossible to see WT here. Prog related for both bands - definitely! They are at least using the genre to enhance their method and style. They are featured in the Prog mags, just to back up this point.

You'll have to qualify that statement, because the latest epica album is crazy all out prog, wheras with within temptation I've only heard mild progressiveness. They do some nice integration with the orchestra, definitely a step above the gothic standard creepy sounding keyboard ostinattoes, but what have they done that makes them more progressive than epica?

sleeper wrote: "Prog" is a very subjective term as it is anyway and no one has an adequate definition for it. In general it just seems to be excepted that we all agree on who the original prog bands are and work from their to come to our own conclusions of what constitutes prog, and I'm not going to try to put mine into words, I just know it when I hear it.   There's also the problem that a band can be progressive without being Prog, and the example of Burzum is a good ( I've never actully heard Burzum so I ant comment to much here, the rest of the team rejected him before I found something to listen to and make my decision), and that you can be Prog without being progressive (The Flower Kings for example).   Metal did grow up alongside prog, and a number of those early metal bands did follow some sort of prog leaning, but its overall a seperate genre and should remain so (there's another can of worms right there, lets not open that one).

Ok, I can't open than can of worms, but in my honest opinion I would love to see a prog&metal archives site. I think that is a very unique opinion though .  It seems that in prog metal "prog" is an even more subjective term than it normally is. Perhaps it seems arbritrary to me because I'm not familiar enough with the original prog metal bands to follow their line of influence and determine what prog metal actually is. I grew up listening to just plain metal, and it seems that people who approach metal from a prog perspective see it differently. For me, prog metal was all those bands like dream theater, and bands that were in different genres were not prog metal. However, here, it seems like if a metal band is progressive and also technical but not too what metalheads call "kult," it is added.

For example, Death to me was always a death metal band, at one point just plain death metal and at another point technical death metal with crazy creative riffs, but never really progressive except maybe the album "human." It is really confusing trying to look at metal with a prog perspective after spending my youth looking at it from a metal perspective. I'm glad to see that prog and metal are getting more and more reconciled these days, because they really are related genres.

There's a lot of people that dont consider Metalica remotley prog, and plenty that were quite vocal about it, but you cant beat reasoned argument.   I'll give See Who I Am a try sometime, but the reason that I find Epica's use of orchestra to be progressive is that it is written in to the structure of the songs so that half of them wouldnt work properly without it (at least thats the case on The Divine Conspiracy, but it wasnt on the debut The Phantom Agony so its taken them a few albums to get there), thats not something that can be said for almost every Nightwish song and the same goes for most bands in that style.

I can't argue that Within Temptation are prog, and epica are definitely more prog (I am incredibly excited for the new album after hearing that new trailer, epica are really treading untread waters these days) (but the debut album sucks!) I've heard some of nightwish that really utilises the orchestra, although they still don't integrate it so much that they couldn't function without it. 

rogerthat wrote: I did read that post but, for better or worse, Nightwish are here and who's to say the "If X is here, Y should be" strawman won't be used to propose more bands like Nightwish to be added here?  I agree with you and Nuke that Divine Conspiracy is a step in a different direction but the Epica bio does not even mention it, which led me to conclude that they were here because of the first two albums and in which case, I disagree.  Those two albums are no more prog metal than Nightwish...or Iron Maiden.  I know Iron Maiden are under prog related but it seems to me that that is simply the case because they are a popular metal band because I cannot see why Powerslave-SSOASS and the three new albums with Bruce are less progressive than a lot of bands classified under prog metal here.

Well epica has always worked in the direction. Even their first album incorporated orchestral elements heavily into their sound. Their second album had Consign to Oblivion on it, which couldn't have worked any other way except with the big symphonic sound, and most of their songs were infused with strong soundtrack infuences.  It's just that their most recent album is the most obvious in this element, not that this element didn't exist beforehand. I couldn't call their first album more progressive than nightwish, but I could say that about their second.

sleeper wrote: Prog related tends to be for acts that werent/arent quite prog but are more than average commercial rock or for bands that had a huge impact on large number of progressive groups. I dont know whether its still the case but side projects/solo work that wasnt  prog from members of prog rock bands was also put in there.   Nightwish for the most part are streight up goth/symphonic/power metal band with the occaisonal branch out to more adventourus teratory and even the odd prog song, but no single album that could be considered wholy prog.

Now that I actually know what prog related is for, my original argument seems quite stupid 

I never thought Nightwish's early work was prog, but after listening to Once several times, it seems if you ignore the singles it is quite progressive and not straight up at all. I don't know about their new album though since I haven't heard it. I can't say I have a qualified opinion on them at all because of my limited experience with them, but the album Once seemed really prog to me, at least as wholy prog as other established prog albums on here which also include the odd hit singles. I know it's kind of pointless arguing since they are already on here, it's just interesting to hear the viewpoint that they aren't prog. 

I was hearing Nightwish's Oceanborn and while the music is quite simple it must have been a groundbreaking record for the late 90's. Same as Stratovarius to me , while they aren't considered prog on this site they were  a huge discovery for me because had never heard symphonic-like music and metal combined that way.

Wow, a resurrection! I've been listening to Symphonic Metal this last year, and to me it is even more obvious that it's a subgenre of prog. Whyzdom's debut, Epica's new, Nightwish's "The Poet and the Pendulum",  the trend is pretty obvious, Symphonic metal is becoming more Symphonic. Songs are getting longer, more complicated, more inspired by classical music. The genre is filled with pop music, but I bet that in 5 years it will be undeniable and I will be hailed as a visionary :)

As for restless, I love that song but agree that it is more simplistic.