Should Metallica be in the forum?

micky wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: Then why don't you listen to people who know prog metal and Metallica? Certif1ed and me disagree on many things, but not this one ... and there are various other members here who support our opinion. I got into very hot water privately with the admins regarding Metallica... and defending you if the the truth be told.  I do.. and always have listened and respected your opinion.

Wow ... sorry, I guess I'm losing track of all the opinions here.


Edited by MikeEnRegalia - August 17 2008 at 10:16

The T wrote: ...(snip...) 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.

Teo, nice overview - I tend to agree, and I'm still hoping for a remastered version of Justice.... but after Newsted's departure that will probably never happen.

Have to say that I have no clue why M@X rejected them - at the time it might have been more of an issue in terms of site credibility rather than something music related.

micky wrote: .. just what the hell are we doing here.

Errrm.... generating internet traffic?

zafreth wrote: I have no read a solid argument about Metallica's inclusion, come on men they' re a trash band nothing more nothing less.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: And please ... it's "thrash", not "trash".

MikeEnRegalia wrote: And please ... it's "thrash", not "trash".

Meh, it goes either way in my view.

Avantgardehead wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: And please ... it's "thrash", not "trash". Meh, it goes either way in my view.

just knew someone wouldn't be able to leave that alone

you know it is absolute roadkill when I don't touch it looking for a cheap laugh hahahha

Angelo wrote: micky wrote: .. just what the hell are we doing here. Errrm.... generating internet traffic?

Support  that jajajajaja

I'm heartily sick of people saying about band x (not Brand X, micky) "It's not prog" without saying what they mean by prog. Make an argument, for goodness' sake. Tell us what you think prog is, and then, given how adamant you are, it ought to be clear to all of us why band x isn't prog.

Problem is, most of those who say something isn't prog can't explain what prog is to them. It's self-evident, they think, like love. Well, it's not. Some of us mean almost diametrically opposite things by prog. Tell us what you mean or stop wasting bandwidth. How can we agree with you if we don't know what you think?

So what do I think? My view is that prog can be either innovation in music, where new elements are added to rock (or subtracted from it, in the case of ambient music), or something that is derivative of the 'classic prog' sound of the 1970s. In my opinion Metallica satisfies both criteria to some degree, which means it's a band in that grey area where it's difficult to put up a convincing argument that it's 'heartland' prog as most people would understand it, nor is it easy to dismiss.

At my most provocative I'd suggest there ought to be a new category here, a third category to cover a third class of bands that are 'proggy' at some point in their career without being 'prog'. We have prog-related and proto-prog - I think a category called 'Prog-influenced' would cover many bands, like Metallica, that had been exposed to the classic prog era and incorporated elements into their own sound - while still being mainly something else other than prog.

So: Metallica for prog-influenced!

MikeEnRegalia wrote: And please ... it's "thrash", not "trash".