Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all.
Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage") |
|
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 23456 21> |
| Author | |||||||
Mr ProgFreak 
Forum Senior Member 
Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
 Posted: July 07 2009 at 16:33 |
||||||
|
@Certif1ed: I thought about writing a lengthy answer to your in depth analysis of that Megadeth song. The problem is that I don't really have the time, so I'll keep it short and simple:
About your analysis: I have complete transcription books of two Metallica albums (RtL and MoP) and played most of the songs on the guitar, as well as many songs from AJFA and the Black Album. I think that I have a pretty good idea of why you think that their music is so much advanced compared to Megadeth. You are really obsessed with form, and you value it above all else. I have no problem with that. What I have a problem with is your tendency to make it the only prog criterium that really matters. Complexity comes in many forms. You keep comparing "complex" to "complicated" ... I think there are even more "shades": 1. Complex form 2. Complex arrangements 3. Stuff that's "difficult to play" I think there are at least those three. Eric Johnson's classic track "Cliffs of Dover" is a good example of a track that's really difficult to play. I would never call it "prog" though. I'm with you in that matter, merely making a part more difficult to play does not make it prog. As far as the first two types of complexity are concerned: I think that this distinction is really difficult to make for anyone who's not a trained musician. They're also never completely separate ... I think you'll agree that as childish Dream Theater's music may seem to your expert mind, they do manage to write songs that feature more complex form than your average AC/DC song (no insult intended - I love AC/DC). Likewise, I think it's clear that not every King Crimson track is a stellar masterpiece of musical form. To conclude: "Prog" encompasses far more than you think it should. It encompasses Dream Theater, The Flower Kings and Spock's Beard. It contains music that is very experimental, music that's very elaborate, music that's very complex, music that's drawing from many influences, spacey music, improvisational music, classical-influenced music, symphonic-sounding music, mellotron and flute solos. You may think that you have found a simple definition that focuses on complex form, but let me tell you (you're free to ignore it of course): Your definition won't be adequate as long as it excludes bands like Dream Theater. |
|||||||
 |
|||||||
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator 
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 08 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 7559 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 16:29 |
||||||
|
^Heh! Sounds exactly like I expected it to.
Great stuff - thanks! (I liked it).
|
|||||||
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
rushfan4
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: May 22 2007 Location: Michigan, U.S. Status: Offline Points: 66354 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 16:05 |
||||||
|
Only slightly related, when Dream Theater announced that you get a free download of one of their tracks from Roadrunner, I signed up for it, so I could get the free MP3. Today, I got an email that they are giving out a free download of the new Megadeth song Head Crusher, so if any one is interested. http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Transgressor
Forum Newbie 
Joined: July 04 2009 Status: Offline Points: 12 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 12:33 |
||||||
|
No no Debrewguy, a moment...
If I have quit the discussion is not for what you are thinking about ... The reasons are: 1- generally, I don't like forums. I rarely take part on seriuoses discussions (I'm thinking about art and/or philosophy etc...). there are many reasons for it...but I tell you only one: it takes me too long time and spends a very hard work to follow a serious discussion. And, to me, especially in English. Some of the posts here took me 1 hour or so.. (So, why have I entered this forum?...Simply, it was an impulsive decisions after seeing on prog archives the black album review on this site. I was only searching for Crack The skye reviews  )2- I've said what I have to say. This discussion has taken a way where the questions and answers, and explanations, will grow (develop) into a large increase. * If, in the future, I will (would) propose a band to enter prog archives obviously I'll have to fight in everymanner to support my "nominations". ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ In forums, and in general in all the things concerning discussion and, obvious,language (dialectic) it's really difficult to understand each other and the Hegelian synthesis, often, is impossible to reach. I think that some things I have written has been misinterpret or I have explained not so well (and my english sucks). (I have never said, for example that KIMB is a prog release...or...but that's my fault, want that the discussion concerning on - or only on- Megadeth). In some posts (one or two) I was too impulsive in the response (maybe due to the denial of proggy elements in Coroner's Grin and Mental Vortex or RIP )However, I'm not the one who is closed in his personal ideas and consider them a dogma...or the one that doesn't ready to revise his ideas or to expand my point of view (maybe except Metallica seen like a true prog band...and not prog related, is a little too much  )Debrewguy: you are free to believe me or not, but I don't want to spent all my free time and energy I have at home (and not only home, because the ideas of the discussions follows you for all day) ...for two or three days is well...then is too much. (Obviously, also, it depends on how much the discussion his important for you... ) Well...is that my final post?...in this forum I don't know... In this thread I think yes (or hope so)...  *only, for example, for an accurated musical analysis I have to contact someone or some friends that studied music or that play guitar. Edited by Transgressor - July 07 2009 at 12:58 |
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
debrewguy
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 30 2007 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 3596 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 10:00 |
||||||
|
good point Certif1ed. And one that is repeatedly made - if the "evidence" is there, a group will or should hopefully be admitted at PA (which seems to mean being admitted to the loony bin, right now
) . And as any good lawyer can tell you (this is not a reference to you Ivan, rather the comparison to court cases), there is sometimes a basis for a re-trial, so to speak. Not to re-hash old evidence, or to repeat old arguements, but to add to the case being presented an angle, or info - proof if you will - that can make a substantial difference in the strength of the presentation. And yes, it does happen that the big improvement is simply putting it all together in a better way so that it makes more sense. Kudos to Transgressor, it seems that you've quickly learned how to turn a fan's subjective enthusiasm into what can be as close as one can get to an objective attempt at determining whether a band's music is prog or not. Keep up the good work. Kudos also to Certif1ed for praising his debating partner on such skills, and for taking the time to respond in kind to Transgressor's very well thought out points. THIS IS WHAT WE NEED MORE OF. The passion part is as important as the presentation of one's reason for holding a point of view. SO bravo to both  , and all others here who have made the effort to focus on the "proof" they can offer  , rather than just throwing up subjective claims of "X is here, Y should be because they are just as prog", without bothering to point out aspects that support the claim. Edited by debrewguy - July 07 2009 at 10:35 |
|||||||
|
"Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 08 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 7559 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 09:29 |
||||||
Fortunately, most of the Metallica discussions are confined to this thread, where they belong - it has not spiralled out of control, as the addition of Radiohead did, for example. The reason I thought you were referring specifically to my last post is that I was so careful to split opinion from fact - and obviously will stand to be corrected where I have got the facts wrong about that particular song. Ultimately, there is no discussion left to have really - but Transgressor (a newcomer to this forum) started a new discussion, querying why Metallica and not other bands, particularly Megadeth - so really, this should be explored. Possibly it should be explored in a new thread - as there is some compelling evidence in Megadeth's music. The main issue I have with it in general is that despite occasionally exploring quite different styles, and being quite intricate in many places most of Megadeth's music sits in a very tightly defined zone of tritonic riffs with interesting rhythms in self-contained cells - as if the ideas came individually. This does not sit comfortably with my idea of progressive music, while Metallica's evolving riffs concept matches the kind of riff development you can hear plainly in 21st Century Schizoid Man. It's a close call - but I think the difference is evident enough. |
|||||||
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
UMUR
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 19 2007 Location: Denmark Status: Offline Points: 3069 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 09:08 |
||||||
Hell yeah. Lots to love for a prog fan in Katatonia´s music. I´m on the third option with Metallica though. I don´t see their relevance to PA. I do enjoy reviewing their albums. I´m a big fan of a select couple of them.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
akin
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 06 2004 Location: Brazil Status: Offline Points: 976 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 08:41 |
||||||
My post is placed right after yours by coincidence, but it does not refer to you in particular, but to many things that happen in this forum (and other forums as well) in general. It has nothing to do with the band Metallica, but has a lot to do with the billions of discussions about Metallica (I still remember a time when many, many threads were hijacked and degenerated into a discussion about "progness" of Metallica). Never seem many arguments for or against that were not opinions turned into facts by repeating them at exhaustion. Recently, every controversial band proposed follow the same pattern of discussion, regardless if it is added or not. |
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
harmonium.ro
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin Joined: August 18 2008 Location: Anna Calvi Status: Offline Points: 22989 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 08:02 |
||||||
That's theoretically corect, but if we would apply it to the PA database there would be a maximum of 5-10% of the bands left Let's face it: not all prog bands are progressive. However it's true that all the great ones were. That's why they were/are great. |
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 08 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 7559 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 07:09 |
||||||
|
I do not believe I have done that at all.
Your opinion is your opinion, I suppose, and you're welcome to it. BTW, I fail spectacularly to see how this has anything to do with Metallica, and is nothing but a troll. I would, of course, be interested in your explanation.
Edited by Certif1ed - July 07 2009 at 07:19 |
|||||||
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
akin
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 06 2004 Location: Brazil Status: Offline Points: 976 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 07:06 |
||||||
|
I love the logic in forums, this one (PA) in special:
If you are the last person in a thread writing: "Insert your opinion here is a fact", your opinion is proven as a fact. The important thing is not to stop posting, till the people who disagree with you quit the discussion. BTW, there are so many great things being achieved in forums on the internet that I don't know how people could live without them in the past. |
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 08 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 7559 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 06:45 |
||||||
|
Lars Ulrich is on record as having a strong dislike for the term "thrash" to describe what Metallica did - and with very good reason.
I think of thrash as the music of Testament, Kreator, Dark Angel et al - the music is primarily in the same vein, ie continual open E riffing - thrashing. If you can make a good argument for other bands as Prog Related, then fair enough - chances are they haven't been discussed, or only discussed briefly. The music on Ride The Lightning is a very clear departure from this kind of thrashing, which is strongly represented (but not totally dominant) on Kill 'Em All - Metallica were never a "pure" thrash band - and it's far from "standardised" - can you back up this assertion? Megadeth, however, were always closer to the spirit of thrash, despite the fact that they did vary their style fairly frequently (as many metal bands did - the Scorpions played a kind of reggae on the album "Lovedrive") - take the song you mentioned as an example of "free composition", The Skull Beneath the Skin; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6im6aRuLyg The thing with discussing music is that opinion will almost always enter into the discussion - it's almost unavoidable. Stop trying to see it all in black and white, and just concentrate on the factual aspects. My opinionated suggestions are merely that - suggestions, but the facts speak for themselves; Fact: This song opens with a sequence of diminished arpeggios and almost all the riffs are based on the open E - Bb tritone (diminished fifth - or augmented 4th, if you want to call it A#!) Opinion: This sequence seems to me to be more a display of prowess than an essential part of the song. The fact which backs up this opinion is that this sequence does not appear again. Fact: The use of the tritone, especially open E - Bb is very common in heavy metal Opinion: The use here is very simplistic - not at all "complex". Fact: After the sequence, there are some E power chords over a drum beat. Opinion: This seems like the introduction "proper", because it is in the same root key - E (no surprises there!). It's a very simple introduction, with each power chord falling on the strong beat - it's not as imaginative as the introduction to, say "Hit The Lights". The drum beat bears a lot of similarity to that used by John Bonham in The Immigrant Song. Fact: Riff 1, is a short motif based around a tritone, dominates the song and only varies every other bar - an old technique used extensively by Judas Priest. It is also pedantically single-beat based (ie, you count 4-1-2-3-4, 1-2-3, 4-1-2-3-4, 1-2-3). Opinion: Rhythmically, this riff is quite interesting - but loses interest after a few iterations. It doesn't go anywhere - this is a very simple metal approach. The drums are quite interesting here, but so are Bill Ward's - this isn't an indication of Prog, it's just a bit different. Fact: Then we return to the power chords, for a restatement of the introduction with guitar solo bluff over the top. Opinion: This confirms to me the desire to show technical prowess - it hasn't really moved the music on, it's just showy. Fact: Then Riff 1 reappears, several times, unmodified and topped with more bluff. Unsurprisingly, it's the tritone again. Opinion: The soloing here is remarkably similar to that used by Kirk in Whiplash, but without the direction. Fact: Then Riff 2 is presented. Several times, unmodified. You guessed it, based on the tritone. Opinion: Riff 2 is just a link between the preceeding introduction material and the first verse. You don't really feel the music develop or increase in intensity - an intensity level has been reached and it stays there. It doesn't feel like this was spontaneous, but carefully thought about - and it doesn't feel like much of a composition, as no attention has been paid to musical logic - the rules that are being followed or broken. In other words, in no way does it meet this specific criteria of Prog. Fact: Riff 2 is open E based - almost entirely. It shifts chromatically around the open E, but that's no big deal - so do most Hawkwind riffs. Opinion: Riff 2 doesn't feel like a development or continuation of riff 1, but rather a different idea. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but rather that it's not particularly progressive. Fact: Riff 3 follows, which is a short two-bar riff based on the tritone, repeated verbatim. Opinion: Riff 3 sounds very similar to riff 1, but again, doesn't feel like a development, just another riff idea. Fact: Riff 4 follows this, but is mainly open E chords. Opinion: This seems like a kind of restatement of the power chords in the intro - it's like to-ing and fro-ing between two very simple ideas; Tritonic riffs and single power chords. Like many simple ideas, it's admirable in a way - and more clever than the impression I'm giving. But I feel it doesn't really work very effectively - it's OK, but while the ideas are modified, I never get the feeling that the piece is developing or progressing. If I wasn't paying close attention, I might even think that all the riffs are the same. Fact: At 1:27, we're back to the power chords again, this time with a short open E based tritonic riff layered on top. This is followed by another short tritonic open E based riff over which the verse is sung. Following this is more open E tritone material, with more verse and an inserted E/tritone based bass solo. These two simple ideas continue for quite some time, and a solo completes the piece. Opinion: These riff ideas are very short, to the point of being almost indistinguishable from each other - there is no turning upside down of ideas, no changing key, no tempo change - although there are some reasonably interesting rhythmic changes. Fact: The structure is different to standard song structure. Opinion (it's all opinion fromhere, interspersed with a smattering of facts): OK, it's different. but different is not the same as progressive. It's not a standard heavy metal song, but plenty of heavy metal bands wrote non-standard songs. What I'm really looking for is that big picture - the overall composition showing up a game plan which is greater than the sum of its parts - and I'm not hearing it. I hear more of this type of game plan in Judas Priest or Slayer, and I certainly wouldn't recommend Slayer for the archives - even though they are one of my favourite bands, above Metallica. Essentially, this song is really simple - Intro/Verse/Chorus, but could be broken down differently - it is quite interesting from that point of view. The riffs, however, do not have that progressive flow, and the melodies are almost non-existent, as they are confined into a very narrow area - mostly simple step movement. It's like there's only a vocal melody at all because there are lyrics, and they have to be expressed by being sung. Dave's singing style is OK for the music, but James Hetfield has a much better sense of what makes a "good tune". Kirk, too, has a better sense of what makes a melodic and composed solo, even if he's not as technically adept as Mr Mustaine. James and Kirk (and Cliff, of course!) also have a way of writing riffs that are not only catchy and somehow familiar (yes, I'm aware of how much Metallica plundered!), but have a strong harmonic pull on each other, such that the overall shape of the song pans out in a dramatic way without losing intensity. Mustaine's go for sustained intensity, which gets wearying quite quickly. Harmonically speaking, it's just open E/tritone riffing all the way. Even "Hit The Lights" avoids this trap. Timbrally, it's the same intensity all the way through. Even though they've clearly made an effort to create contrasts through rhythmic differences between the power chords and riff sections, there's none of the light and shade of, say, "Criminally Insane" by Slayer. Yup...it's not as subtle as Slayer... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYplo6ioyIk There's not really enough in "Skull Beneath The Skin" for a progger to get their teeth into, IMO - and it's very short.  Edited by Certif1ed - July 07 2009 at 06:54 |
|||||||
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Easy Money
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin Joined: August 11 2007 Location: Memphis Status: Offline Points: 10669 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 06:36 |
||||||
|
By the way, welcome to PA Transgressor, you know your music. We need more people like that around here.
Band additions are a tricky thing around here and often a subject of much debate. Certified pulls a lot of weight on band additions because he's been here a long time and people trust his opinion. Agree with him or not, but guys like him and Teo and Mike did a great job, because I think Metallica was one of our most contested additions ever. I hope you stick around and get to know some people. You'd be suprised, before long people will be looking to you for opinions on bands too. When I first joined the site I noticed some artists missing too. After working on the site for a while people began to trust my opinion and I have been able to get a lot of missing artists added to PA. P.S. If you want to make a case for Megadeth, first drop the Metallica comparisms, Megadeth has to make it on their own music. Get to know some people and start expanding your influence, don't bring up Megadeth constantly, that will undermine your efforts. Just stick around and help out the site and you may be suprised what you may accomplish. Edited by Easy Money - July 07 2009 at 06:40 |
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Transgressor
Forum Newbie
Joined: July 04 2009 Status: Offline Points: 12 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 05:09 |
||||||
I really really quote your line. I'm writing my very last post about this thread (I hope so...) only to stress out some points. Certified: I really think that you are talking from your personal point of view (and that's obvious...everyone has one's) and also about your feelings about Metallica's music. My tastes are for complex and experimental music. I really like Metallica has a thrash metal band but to my point of view they are not so experimental compared to other metal bands. I find WatchTower more interesting than Metallica. And I really like very much strange/personal/prog metal bands like Voivod and Mekong Delta. I'm really into bands like Fates Warning, Sieges Even, Psycothic Waltz, Thought Industry...and technical/experimental stuff like Spastic ink, Spiral Architect, Dillinger escape plan...and others...(I don't want to make a list...these are examples). And other bands... I'm a big fan certainly of the mother of all prog metal...is it "true" prog, is it "dream theater" prog, or technical metal: Rush... About Megadeth: Metallica have their style...and Megadeth have their too. Metallica is magniloquent, epic and powerful; Megadeth is technical (compared to Metallica) mixing melody and harsh. I think Megadeth is also more rockish. Metallica's album (from RTL on) are certainly influenced by Rush ...the progressive influence helped certainly Metallica to expand the thrash metal concept...but it doesn't mean that's not thrash. Master of puppets is the quintessential of Bay Area Thrash Metal. Thrash Metal (especially of the bay area) doesn't mean only simple structure and aggressivnes...and Metallica has showed that. Megadeth, to me, is a more strange band than Metallica...their Thrash Metal is particular and dismisses from the thrash that Metallica has standardized. They show another possibility to make thrash, that's not Metallica's or Slayer's...Megadeth blends together things that seems to be opposite...a controversial album like So far so good what, for example, that it has complex and technical songs with a mood that in some is punky and in other is "melodical" and "dark" . And Poland touch gives a feeling bluesy to the Peace sells... album and the title track seems to be a rock songs (like a complex ac/dc) turned to thrash metal. Yes, they are not the only one...but It seems to me that in Megadeth, especially during the '80 this things ("opposition?" I don'to find a special meaning) is more marked than other thrash bands (excluding experimental bands). Rust in peace is more standardized and solid...(but it's always a Megadeth record). Metallica certainly has evolved themselves ( but what I was trying to say is that the "base" the "root", the conception beyond RTL, MOP and AJFA is the same; with riffs that become more intericated album per album and so the time signature) But I think that also Megadeth did it (I mean, about evolving thir style) PSBWB is a jump in quality compared to KIMBABIG and RIP is one step ahed PSBWB (and SFSGSW but this album is more particular and isolated). However, Metallica and Megadeth are two fundamental metal bands, similar for some things (without questioning who's proggish....all two bands finished their thrash metal era with albums that have prog elements: justice and RIP) but really different from many other. And, about this thread... I have nothing against Metallica (I also like them)... I have taken this thread as a pretext to show that I'm not so ok with the all the prog related thing into a prog site because it could cause confusion to a listener. It seems ridicoulous to say after my words: but I don't like stricted classification. A lot of great bands reassumed different style into its personal one (but it's also important to see what is the style that's more "dominant") * So the other point: there are other bands that could enjoy "prog related"...So, why take only some of them and leave out all the others? *So , also If I don't care of strictly classification, calling Metallica, like Certified, a true prog band sounds to me "wrong"...because in metal history Master of puppets is one of the examples of the Thrash Metal (the most famous 4 albums that defines the genre Master, Pease Sells, Reign in blood, and Amog the living). I hope that I've explained better my personal point of view. P.S. aehm..sorry for my english. I have written very quickly. P.P.S Certainly it's my fault, but I didn't want to create another Metallica vs. Megadeth or focus only on Mustaine's band... Edited by Transgressor - July 07 2009 at 05:38 |
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 08 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 7559 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 03:41 |
||||||
I didn't say there was unanimous support 
If there was a prog style, then it wouldn't really be prog, would it? One of the main points of this great music is that it's all different - and that is one reason Metallica should not be ruled out as just a heavy metal band, because, as the existence of Prog Metal confirms, Metal has a place in the pantheons of Prog.
Hmm - not sure what you're getting at, as I have always made it clear that I agree with this.
Not at all - I am trying very hard to include Prog Metal and ignore "style", because I do not think that is a particularly valid way to analyse. It's a way to categorise, for sure, but it's not very useful otherwise. I do not see how I have "bent" the rules (although there is no reason the rules can't be bent that I can see - surely that's one of the points of Prog) in this case - I have concentrated on a method of composition which I have found in bands which are considered to be Prog. There are very, very few exceptions - which rather proves the rule in the first place.
Elements are not the same as the overall approach. Time signatures, polyrhythms and multi-section songs and extended instrumentals are all things that can be found in Prog, but don't necessarily indicate it - it's how these things are used, not whether they are used or not, and it doesn't matter if the techniques involved are simple or advanced - it's the end result that matters to most listeners, not the technicality. The "difficulty" has nothing to do with it at all and is relative. Angus Young, Michael Schenker and Randy Rhoades (among many others) all played some "difficult" parts, yet none are identified with Prog (although Ozzy/Rhoades has come up for discussion before, and not without reason). As for the sections in DT's music being "seamless", apart from this not being a particular indication of prog either, I would dispute this - much of it sounds tangential to me... but that's a different discussion. The devil is in the detail, and Prog is about the bigger picture than the minutae. DT may have written some complex music, but the compositions are rarely truly complex - there's a difference. In most of the stuff I've heard by them, the standard song structure stands out plainly, and the multi-section instrumentals that give a clear Metallica/Maiden link are not developments of earlier ideas, but simple insertions of new material that is fine if you like that sort of thing, and fine if it adds dramatic purpose - but I don't feel it does. Some things can only be felt - it's not important as a detail, just another way of expressing it - don't get bogged down with this kind of point. The main point in this dialogue appears to be complexity, and I'm simply pointing out the difference between complexity and complicated. Let's take a much earlier example; Judas Priest's "Killing Machine" album. For some reason, few would consider this a Prog Metal album - and yet it exhibits every element you describe above. If you were a beginner, with basic chord and pentatonic scale knowledge, you'd find it difficult to play anything on "Killing Machine" - I must admit that I find some of the solos difficult to reproduce, and I do not consider myself a beginner. More recently, System of a Down wrote complicated riffs (pre Mesmerise). It's fashionable among heavy metal bands now to write riffs in odd time signatures and stuff - it's simply become part of what metal is, because it's an evolving genre. Even in its early days, it was more complex than people liked to give it credit for - so it can be hard to draw a line between heavy metal and progressive rock, because the two emerged at the same time from the same Progressive Music scene, so in some ways are fundamentally related. But the essential difference at the time was that Progressive Rock pieces were compositions, rather than straightforward songs, yet sounded improvised - as if they were somehow "free" compositions. Metal preferred to stick to rigid structures, on the whole. Sabbath were actually verging on the Prog with their compositional approach, as were Purple, but Priest preferred standard song structure on the whole, as did UFO - both progressive metal bands in terms of technique; Schenker's widely copied soloing chops and Priest's even more widely copied riff and vocal techniques. Going back in time to contemporaries of Sabbath, the Pink Fairies and Steppenwolf are among of the best examples of non-tritonic metal in the early 1970s, and it's not hard to hear huge variation in style within their music - it's just not a particularly progressive thing. It's just what metal bands do. Until you've "got" why Moon Child is every bit as amazing as I say it is - Note: I am not saying that you have to like it or there is something about it that is fundamentally "good" - but in terms of progressive composition, it is absolutely stunning, in that they present a song (with a relatively interesting structure), then break it into pure essence. This is not my opinion - there are clear signals in the music that this is really the composer's intention. It's the method that should be admired here, even if the end result is not pleasing - and this is a good illustration of what Prog is about, without dipping into technicalities. There are other examples, of course - this is just one of the finest, IMO. In terms of style - it's unquestionably Prog, isn't it? And complex without being particularly complicated. ...and it's not one of my favourite pieces of music. Edited by Certif1ed - July 07 2009 at 03:44 |
|||||||
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 01:35 |
||||||
This is exactly my point: Within Prog there is a bandwidth of complexity ... some bands are more complex, some less.
Sorry, but I really think that you're bending your rules as you please, so that they support your favorite styles and exclude that which most of us call Prog Metal. "At different levels" ... so who are you to define that DT's "level" isn't Prog while Metallica's is? I fail to see any objective reasoning behind this. So you see through the "episodic" structure of many DT epics ... big deal. Not every Prog Rock epic is structured like a symphony. I think that Prog has many facets. The kind of complexity shown by DT is one of them. And yes, I call it complexity. To you shifting time signatures, polyrhythms, songs with many different parts that are connected seamlessly, extended instrumental parts/solos effortlessly played while being insanely difficult may mean nothing, but these are all part of "Prog". |
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 27 2004 Location: Peru Status: Offline Points: 19557 |
Posted: July 07 2009 at 00:54 |
||||||
|
Claude, I apologize if my comment was missunderstood as an attack to anybody, never had he intentoion of offending any member, adm or owner.
I also apologize for talking about a closed issue against why I always do.
But I'm an honest person who says what I think, and would be dishonest with the members to lie saying I don't believe what I said
Ivan
Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 07 2009 at 01:10 |
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
debrewguy
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 30 2007 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 3596 |
Posted: July 06 2009 at 20:14 |
||||||
|
Just in case Ivan is actually reading - I do believe that many legal appeals are launched when new evidence or a STRONGER ARGUEMENT comes forward.
Slavery, Racial Segregation, Women's rights in America (as in many countries) was not won on the first court case, nor the first election. But once the proper legal arguement was found , these issues were resolved as they should have been long before. T has every right to ask why you have not retracted your "pressure" comment. And you really don't seem to be able to recognise that M@x may have changed his mind not because of this "pressure", but that a sufficiently strong case was made for their inclusion. If M@x, the site owner, who has so far very successfully guided PA ... if he can be open-minded enough to change his position in a situation like that, why is it impossible for you to come forward & apologise for the "offense" that was taken ? You keep insisting none was meant, but refuse to see that it did hurt some people here. People that you have worked with and , from the looks of it, that you respect. They're not looking to use this apology as an admission of fault so as to bring you to court . They're telling you quite clearly that they were insulted by the comment. In Quebec, they have a phrase - "Allume !" |
|||||||
|
"Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: July 06 2009 at 15:59 |
||||||
|
^ I'm neither saying you're wrong, nor that you don't have supporters. Although I'd like to say that when someone posts a complex (sic) theory in a forum, a lack of critical posts doesn't necessarily mean that there is no criticism.
BTW: Do you agree with my approach (sic, yet again) of splitting prog into two components (approach vs. style)? Your interest lies primarily in the approach part, but surely the style part can't be ignored ... |
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 08 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 7559 |
Posted: July 06 2009 at 15:49 |
||||||
|
No I'm not raising the bar too high, I'm selecting a group familiar to anyone into Prog (and if not, why not?
) in whose music complexity is obvious.Maybe you're setting the bar too low? I could equally have said Frank Zappa, Gong, or any other band that plays in the more complex realms of Prog - it's just an example for illustration purposes.
I've frequently referred to Can, Hawkwind and Pink Floyd - in this thread, I believe - whose music is entirely different, and yet complex at times. All 3 use/d this composed/improvised organically developing form of composition but at different (and not necessarily "lower") levels, because all 3 wrote Prog.
I've addressed the definition of Prog fairly thoroughly a few times and mainly had support for my viewpoint, evolving, though it is, so I'm happy that I have a reasonable handle on what it really is. It is true to say that King Crimson, despite being one of the defining bands of Prog, never set out to write it, and Fripp even now denies he ever wrote it or was involved with it, IIRC. Prog is as Prog does and it's all in the music. Edited by Certif1ed - July 06 2009 at 15:55 |
|||||||
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 23456 21> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Metallica ?
Topic Options
akin wrote:
) in whose music complexity is obvious.