The REAL problem with prog-metal: is not prog-rock

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ I'm interested in defining prog metal, you simply don't accept my approach - or that of the rest of the world, for that matter.

       Disagree about your replys from the beginning of this forum , till the end  . too much theories & definisions . So far no one said ,  that Prog Metal Is a kind of freak , i've just simply said  that Metal must be separated from Progressive , it doesn't belong to progressive rock that we knew since 1968 . If it is a crime , please  tell me ?????????    I told you , i have no problem with this mania , as i was in the early 70's . bands like Black Sabbath , Deep Purple , Uriah Heep , Dust , Budgie , Led Zep , cannot be compared with Yes , Van Der Graaf , Jethro Tull , King Crimson , Le Orme , PFM  , Mahavishnu & Zappa . And to dig wider Gong , Soft Machine , Caravan , Agitation Free , it's completely different styles , Genres , Mentality , techniques , and  Period .   I like Heavy Metal , but it's only serving for one purpose , no matter what definitions & Theories you're gonna invent , so , do not use your stripes or stars to convince us , it doesn't make any sence to compare Van Der Graaf , Yes or King Crimson , not even Renaissance with Dreamtheater or Symphony X or any one else , so be reasonnable , and enjoy what you've had from previous generations , and what you have now  .    And , about Spastic Ink , it will take me with my team to do what they have done few hours , but perform Thick as a Brick , Siberian , Sailor tail , the Musical box , or the Sleepwalkers , i believe , that we  can't  just get close to , no matter what , so , take it easy , and , let it go , cause i don't like guitar riffs to contol my dreams , Anyway //////////  we respect your opinion , so respect ours .      Toni

mr70s wrote:     Why be so defensive when someone expresses an opinion that does not coincide with your own ? If you don't want to hear it, don't post the links. But ultimately, you mount a shaky defence of a track that is by your own admission, 'not in my top 100'. That is some accolade.   Please don't put words in my mouth. I did not say that Spastic Ink were mediocre, but that the track was.

mr70s wrote: Certif1ed wrote: Rocktopus wrote: Certif1ed wrote:   Spastic Ink mediocre rock?   That shows a lack of understanding of what they're doing. Please come back and debate this topic when you understand it a bit better.     Please also note that again, I am pointing out facts, not delivering a personal insult.   As usual you have no idea have you come across. Your approach only works when the music's made by your squarehead rules. Take that Spastic Ink track out on the street, and try it out. Just to check if your gut feel's still intact.   I am stating the obvious, but a musician working alone, playing to backing tracks has the luxury of being able to record many takes and produce the 'perfect performance.' But how musical is this ? Could this be why so much modern music sounds like a 'digital piano roll' ? If we crush the humanity from music we are left with this cold, unsatisfying product. It's as musical or as unmusical as the performer feels it to be. Not everyone appreciates the details of virtuosic playing, and that's completely fine. If say, Steve Vai (a favorite of mine) missed half the notes he was playing because he was "human", to my ears it would lose half the feeling. Being able to perfectly execute that alternate picked run, hit every note in a sweep picked arpeggio, or whatever, can make or break me being able to feel the fire and passion in the solo. Vai does from time to time slip up live, but his technique is good enough that there are many of his performances that are quite literally, flawless. It was still music to my ears, shock, oh the shock and horror. Some people love Jimmy Page or Hendrix stuff live, good for them, so do I sometimes. But sometimes their playing has been so horribly sloppy, that it has the effect of leaving me cold and unsatisfied. Now that I have some ear training under my belt, out of tune bendin and, bad vibrato is like screeching nails on a chalkboard to my ears, but to some people they simply don't hear that and wont cringe like I will.   Why be so defensive when someone expresses an opinion that does not coincide with your own ? If you don't want to hear it, don't post the links. But ultimately, you mount a shaky defence of a track that is by your own admission, 'not in my top 100'. That is some accolade.   Please don't put words in my mouth. I did not say that Spastic Ink were mediocre, but that the track was. You're original post implied that Spastic Ink were medicore, but thank you for clearing that up

I like the more avant metal bands particularly (not the ones with growling so much), and jazz-metal fusion bands.  I really should explore more "chamber metal."

MikeEnRegalia wrote: Logan wrote: Incidentally, this highlights my concern with Metallica being considered a  proto-prog metal band since I had thought that the Prog aspect in bands such as DT comes more from Prog rock than heavy metal bands such as Metallica. I understand what you mean. I would look at it from a different angle: In the early 80s metal bands like Iron Maiden and Metallica were playing around with progressive elements in their music ... but after reaching a peak from 86-88 those progressive elements got rarer again. During this peak the first prog metal bands arose (Fates Warning, Dream Theater, Queensryche) who - in a way - picked up those progressive elements and refined them, creating a new style of metal which not only contained progressive elements but made them the central part. Does that make sense?

I understand what you mean...

Digressions: I had a friend into heavy metal in the '80s, and I thought Metallica more "progressive" (and better speaking from personal taste) than Iron Maiden.

 I still value progressiveness more highly than retro-Prog qualities.

mr70s wrote:   I am stating the obvious, but a musician working alone, playing to backing tracks has the luxury of being able to record many takes and produce the 'perfect performance.' But how musical is this ? Could this be why so much modern music sounds like a 'digital piano roll' ? If we crush the humanity from music we are left with this cold, unsatisfying product.

I don't agree. Of course it's amazing if someone can deliver a magnificent performance in the first take, but that doesn't mean that it's spontaneous ... the musician might have practiced that *many* times at home. Classical musicians spend hours working on short passages of their performance until they get it right.

mr70s wrote:   Why be so defensive when someone expresses an opinion that does not coincide with your own ? If you don't want to hear it, don't post the links. But ultimately, you mount a shaky defence of a track that is by your own admission, 'not in my top 100'. That is some accolade.   Please don't put words in my mouth. I did not say that Spastic Ink were mediocre, but that the track was.

This wasn't directed at me ... nevertheless I'd like to say that while I like the track I can see why some people might not like it. I would use attributes like "cold" and "technical" to describe it ... whether you like that or not is a matter of taste.

mr70s wrote:   Ah...'widdly' means bluff. So when people describe Vai, Satriani, Gilbert and Petruccui as widdly, they mean they are bluffing ? 'Widdly' is a feeble term born of lazy journalism, but if I had to use it, I would say that i like widdly guitar, widdly bass, widdly keys and widdly drums. Never cared much for widdly essays though.

http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=J9Y9Davme-s

That's "widdly". It's not particularly good IMO, but I wouldn't join the one who posted the video in calling it "idiot with a guitar playing widdly stuff". It shows how some people perceive technical, fast parts ... they "shut" their ears and immediately judge them as being flashy, unnecessary and immature. Now, in my opinion they often are, but it totally depends on the situation. Some will say that there simply should not be too much of it in a song, but IMO anything can make sense. There can be beautiful tracks which consist of 100% shred (Steve Vai - Juice, anyone?) and there can be tracks which hardly feature any "short notes" at all. That's the beauty of music.

Certif1ed wrote: Rocktopus wrote: Certif1ed wrote:   Spastic Ink mediocre rock?   That shows a lack of understanding of what they're doing. Please come back and debate this topic when you understand it a bit better.     Please also note that again, I am pointing out facts, not delivering a personal insult.   As usual you have no idea have you come across. Your approach only works when the music's made by your squarehead rules. Take that Spastic Ink track out on the street, and try it out. Just to check if your gut feel's still intact.   I am stating the obvious, but a musician working alone, playing to backing tracks has the luxury of being able to record many takes and produce the 'perfect performance.' But how musical is this ? Could this be why so much modern music sounds like a 'digital piano roll' ? If we crush the humanity from music we are left with this cold, unsatisfying product.   Why be so defensive when someone expresses an opinion that does not coincide with your own ? If you don't want to hear it, don't post the links. But ultimately, you mount a shaky defence of a track that is by your own admission, 'not in my top 100'. That is some accolade.   Please don't put words in my mouth. I did not say that Spastic Ink were mediocre, but that the track was.   Ah...'widdly' means bluff. So when people describe Vai, Satriani, Gilbert and Petruccui as widdly, they mean they are bluffing ? 'Widdly' is a feeble term born of lazy journalism, but if I had to use it, I would say that i like widdly guitar, widdly bass, widdly keys and widdly drums. Never cared much for widdly essays though.

   Just imagine dear friends , playing the Sleepwalkers , or the Musical Box  , or Close to the Edge , or Lark's tongues ,  or Knife Edge , or a plague , from top of Himalaya - Everest , how wonderful & Bombastic will be for 13 billions ears living around this Planet . So carry on the good comments regarding this thread , it's gonna end for nothing , as it seems we're divided to , Stone Age , and new metal !!!!.

Argh, the pseudo-intellectualism going on here is making my head hurt...

Just enjoy the music, people!