| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
micky 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
 Posted: May 24 2007 at 18:32 |
the idea was put out there Tony to have that category....
If Jody and Mike think it's a good idea.. who can argue  It solves this problem nicely.
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
 |
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 18:34 |
Proto-Prog Metal?
You're not pushing Rush there you git...  |
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 18:34 |
 Tony R wrote:
One problem I can see is that there isnt anywhere
satisfactory to place Metallica. It seems to me that whilst Cert's
argument is a winning one the argument suggests that they were
Prog-influencers in as much as they influenced Prog-Metal. What I mean
is that they dont sit comfortably with "Prog-Related" and the more apt
"Proto-Prog" was not designed for bands later than 1970...however it
does appear from the arguments that Metallica were Proto-Prog Metal...
|
the problem with that that.. is ... just when IS the established
date for the creation of prog-metal... 1969 is WELL
established as the start date for the prog movement. Thus proto works
well.. .what about prog-metal...
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 18:35 |
Tony R wrote:
Proto-Prog Metal?
You're not pushing Rush there you git... |
hahahah.. I"m on retirement..... 
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
WaywardSon
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 23 2006
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 2537
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 18:41 |
The problem is Neo Prog and Prog Metal genres began in the 80īs, so that excludes any influenes for these genres going into Proto Prog.
Maybe the solution is to expand the timeline of Proto Prog, so instead of no bands later than 1970, we have it designed for no bands later than 198_?
Well gentlemen?
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 18:47 |
|
my basic problem is short of an established creation date for 'prog-metal' it can't work.
prog had been around for years.. so had metal.. simply... if Metallica
fused them.. they should be judged AS a PM group... they
didn't create the wheel so to speak.. this stuff had been out
there. What about Uriah Heep... Deep Purple.. Rush....groups that have
that tag thrown at them with some regularity. You can't be proto
if the movement wasn't exactly new...
Edited by micky - May 24 2007 at 18:49
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 18:49 |
If there is a catagory called Proto-Prog-Metal then who does end up in it?
How many other bands paved the way for Prog-Metal who aren't actually Prog-Metal (either at the moment or at some point in their careers)?
|
|
What?
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 18:49 |
indeed.
I think the case for Metallica's inclusion has been well made but WHERE do we put them?
|
|
stonebeard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 18:51 |
Tony R wrote:
indeed.
I think the case for Metallica's inclusion has been well made but WHERE do we put them? |
I think that, as was mentioned earlier, if we put proto-prog-metal or something, it will just open up a can of worms or divide prog metal from prog rock even further. I'd say prog metal or prog related, preferably prog related by my perspective.
|
|
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 18:52 |
|
What if we put them in Prog-Metal with a carefully-worded BIO?
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 19:01 |
Tony R wrote:
What if we put them in Prog-Metal with a carefully-worded BIO? |
that is the best solution I think Tony.... IF they are to be included that is
can't resist asking though... what about Iron Maiden...more prog than Metallica.
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 19:01 |
|
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 19:02 |
just wanted to be the first to ask that
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 19:03 |
I'll be interested to read more views about which category we should put Metallica into, no doubt others will join the discussion (and enliven it  ) over the next hours.
|
|
1800iareyay
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2492
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 19:06 |
|
Hard to say whether they should be posted as Related or as full Prog-Metal. I belive that if Metallica is added as Prog-Metal then Iron Maiden should be shifted there as well. Metallica certainly has the credentials: never sticking to one formula (usually the chief criticism levelled at the band), odd-time signatures, complex riffs, and Cliff Burton's incorporation of music theory into a genre that was lacking real structure.
|
|
Barla
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 13 2006
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 4309
|
Posted: May 24 2007 at 19:37 |
Tony R wrote:
I'll be interested to read more views about which category we should put Metallica into, no doubt others will join the discussion (and enliven it) over the next hours. |
Overall, I think Metallica is not a Progressive Metal band, so that category do not fit to them. On the other hand, it's so obvious that Metallica has influenced not only Prog Metal as a whole, but also Metal overall, without a doubt. And, as I stated before, they have evident progressive elements on their music, and even made a technical prog metal album (...And Justice For All) and a total prog metal album (Master Of Puppets). Is it enough? So my opinion is to add them to the Prog Related category.
|
|
|
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: May 25 2007 at 03:58 |
micky wrote:
if you want to argue the case musically... then it is either prog-metal or it doesn't belong here. Like every other group there we evaluate on the site.
|
Indeed - and it is my belief that some of Metallica's albums are Prog Metal - not just related, but the real deal.
micky wrote:
if it is PR... that ..as I've tried to explain is a different case...for the simple fact that so many bands have progressive elements in their music..you have to put stipulations on it. PR status is not about the music itself. .it's about the importance of the group in prog terms... their impact on prog if you will. This of course assumes that these addtions aren't primarily to generate web hits That is much harder to argue, than meerly showing that Metallica varied compositionally from the standard metal of the day. Sounds like you made a case for them being in Prog Metal.. not Prog Related.
That they had prog elements in their music.. we know...we've heard it... however since this appears to be a PR question.. That is a tricky one for Metal groups.. did they just impact metal as a whole.. or just the Prog-Metal side. One should be here.. the other shouldn't.
|
I'm also opposed to arguing for the sake of PR, as I made clear earlier.
To me, it's all about the music - but you know that
micky wrote:
you mention...
'The difference is that very few metal bands in the early 1980s constructed songs using this technique - it's all intro, V,C,V,C,SOLO,V,C,C,C...'
that is true... I notice that Dream Theater goes to great lenghs to cite YES as an influence for example. Instead of attributing the complex constructions of prog metal over standard Metal to Metallica.. isn't it fair to assume that Yes or Rush, or other classic prog bands that might have influenced PM, could have been that influence instead. You can extrapolate that Metallica is the main influence on the complex nature of prog metal quite easily just by saying they did..... however many of those bands grew up ..not listening to Metallica Mark... but Yes, Rush, and god... even Genesis.
|
But who did Yes grow up listening to?
Genesis?, Rush?
DT may cite Yes as an influence - but I don't think that in itself is a criteria for a band to be considered prog - in fact, I might argue the case that to be influenced by a Prog band is not Prog.
I'll stick with gut feelings here, instead of elaborate musical arguments:
I don't hear Yes in DT's "Images and Words", or even "Metropolis" - I hear Metallica.
There's other stuff too - but early Yes is a ringer for a cross between the Beatles and Buffalo Springfield (who aren't here yet...).
Early Rush is famously Zep-like - and Zep have only recently made it in.
Don't confuse the "heavy" with the "metal" in Metallica - sure, they were a metal band when they started out, and the game plan was to become the ultimate metal band - which they arguably succeeded in doing beyond anyone's wildest dreams.
If you were a fan of metal in the early 1980s, you were in a minority that was frowned upon for listening to music that was perceived as brutish and simple.
Metallica responded by making music that was more brutal than anything before them (with the possible exception of Motorhead and Blue Cheer), darker than anything before them (with the possible exception of Black Sabbath and Necronomicon), and faster than anything before them - with no exceptions.
They responded to the jeers of "it's only thrash" that came out of the press by producing music that was more sophisticated than music that was being touted as Progressive Metal, and they followed that up with an album that had the metal world on it's knees in almost worshipful disbelief - Master of Puppets had a 2-page review in Kerrang!, with the reviewer almost gasping the lines out.
There is nothing on "Images and Words" (gut feeling alone - I won't try to prove it, but it'd be interesting to see if there's general agreement) that isn't on Master of Puppets.
"IAW" is more polished, in terms of execution and production - and I am emphatically not saying that it's just a clone, as the music is generally very different.
However, strains of "Welcome Home (Sanitarium)" do float out of the music in a familiar fashion, and the construction of, say, Orion, is evident in places - and the riffing technique, lights and shades are pure Metallica.
To my ears, MOP and AJFA are pure Prog Metal albums - and I have strong feelings about RTL as well, particularly the title track, "Call of Cthulu", "Fade to Black" and the epic "Creeping Death".
Make the comparisons yourself - I'm not, for a change, saying this is how it is and here is the proof - I'm saying that this is my instinctive, gut feeling - my opinion 
Edited by Certif1ed - May 25 2007 at 03:59
|
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Online
Points: 21196
|
Posted: May 25 2007 at 05:33 |
|
^ "To my ears, MOP and AJFA are pure Prog Metal albums -
and I have strong feelings about RTL as well, particularly the title
track, "Call of Cthulu", "Fade to Black" and the epic "Creeping Death"."
I understand what you're saying and I sympathize, but the term Prog Metal is already "occupied" by bands which sound like Dream Theater ... that's Prog Metal in a literal sense. Of course you can use it as a moniker for all bands which are both related to Prog and Metal, but since the style of Dream Theater is so closely associated with the term "Prog Metal", there will always be misunderstandings. Of course the same problem exists for newer bands like Opeth and Tool, but for a band which had its progressive phase before the "real" prog metal bands released their landmark albums, the association simply is more difficult to realize.
|
|
|
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: May 25 2007 at 05:42 |
OK - I had no idea that DT weren't considered "real" prog metal - I thought they epitomised it, since they brought it to popularity.
The comparisons can easily be drawn with Opeth too
Opeth use thrash techniques combined with lights and shades and elaborate instrumental sections contained in songs as the basis of their music... just like Metallica...
|
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Online
Points: 21196
|
Posted: May 25 2007 at 05:52 |
|
^ Prog Metal = Dream Theater ... I thought I had said that and not the opposite. If you could only name one single band as an example for Prog Metal then it would have to be Dream Theater, it's as simple as that.
|
|
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Metallica?
