| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Rocktopus 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 02 2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 4202
|
 Posted: May 16 2007 at 03:49 |
|
I think neither Deep Purple, Led Zeppelin, Iron Maiden or Metallica's got much to do in a Progarchive. Although I like all of them, as most of the forum-member does. I suspect that's the main reason they are all here.
I own all 80's Metallica albums, and have loved them since the late 80's. Metallica surely progressed as a thrash-metal band and sophisticated that genre. To me, you all admitting that progmetal is mainly built on Metallica + NWBHM proves to me that the progressiveness of most other progmetal = nil.
Btw: Although I'm against I'd rather have Metallica here, a band that truly progressed than most later DT-school so-called progmetal.
Edited by Rocktopus - May 16 2007 at 15:00
|
|
Over land and under ashes
In the sunlight, see - it flashes
Find a fly and eat his eye
But don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
|
 |
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 03:44 |
 Atavachron wrote:
Certif1ed wrote:
Led Zep weren't the first heavy metal band - Blue Cheer were, just as Metallica weren't the first thrash band - Judas Priest were.
Metallica brought it all together - and developed Prog Metal (just listen to "Sanitarium" on "Master of Puppets", "One" on "...And Justice for All"... the list goes on). |
Except
1, Maiden were more progressive from the very first note
|
No - not true.
I cannot think of a single example that would prove this - can you?
Atavachron wrote:
2, Harris formed the band in 1975, 1st album 1980. Metallica formed 1981, first album 1983.
|
Time is irrelevant - we're talking about different musical styles.
Atavachron wrote:
When I was road crewing for the Bay Area metal scene (this was back when Kirk was with Exodus) the term 'progressive metal' was just beginning to be batted about, unfortunately few thought of Metallica as PM, wheras Maiden was the definitive ProgMetal band. That perception may have changed since then, of course.
|
No-one thought of Genesis, King Crimson, Gentle Giant or Yes as Prog Rock in 1970 - the perception may have changed somewhat... 
Edited by Certif1ed - May 16 2007 at 03:44
|
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 03:39 |
Certif1ed wrote:
Metallica brought it all together - and developed Prog Metal (just listen to "Sanitarium" on "Master of Puppets", "One" on "...And Justice for All"... the list goes on). |
Except
1, Maiden were more progressive from the very first note
2, Harris formed the band in 1975, 1st album 1980. Metallica formed 1981, first album 1983.
When I was road crewing for the Bay Area metal scene (this was back when Kirk was with Exodus) the term 'progressive metal' was just beginning to be batted about, unfortunately few thought of Metallica as
PM, wheras Maiden was the definitive ProgMetal band. That perception may have changed since then, of course.
Edited by Atavachron - May 16 2007 at 03:42
|
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 03:28 |
Atavachron wrote:
but the starter of a new genre often gets left behind in said new genre, like when Led Zep is cited as the first heavy metal band. They may have recorded some of the first 'heavy metal' ('Good Times, Bad Times', 'Communication Breakdown'), but Sabbath brought it all together and presented an, if you will, real or pure kind of heavy rock. Metallica may be in that perpetual protozoic stage, and may not be seen as having the sophistication that Maiden had. Just a thought.
|
Metallica had far more sophistication than Maiden - and the specific genre of Metallica's music is different to Maiden's because of the integration of the alternate picking thrash style - don't overlook just how significant this technique is in the formation of Prog Metal.
Led Zep weren't the first heavy metal band - Blue Cheer were, just as Metallica weren't the first thrash band - Judas Priest were.
Metallica brought it all together - and developed Prog Metal (just listen to "Sanitarium" on "Master of Puppets", "One" on "...And Justice for All"... the list goes on).
|
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 03:14 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Metallica run circles around Iron Maiden in terms of musicianship, but again you need to know Master of Puppets (and And Justice For All in this case) to understand my point of view. |
I do, and that's debatable.. I'm just postulating as to the resistance toward Metallica at a prog website.
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 03:08 |
|
^ Despite the fact that Led Zeppelin don't have anything to do with metal (neither sound-wise nor composition-wise) ... Metallica run circles around Iron Maiden in terms of musicianship, but again you need to know Master of Puppets (and And Justice For All in this case) to understand my point of view.
|
|
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 03:04 |
|
but the starter of a new genre often gets left behind in said new genre, like when Led Zep is cited as the first heavy metal band. They may have recorded some of the first 'heavy metal' ('Good Times, Bad Times', 'Communication Breakdown'), but Sabbath brought it all together and presented an, if you will, real or pure kind of heavy rock. Metallica may be in that perpetual protozoic stage, and may not be seen as having the sophistication that Maiden had. Just a thought.
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 03:03 |
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
so many negative general comments, but nobody explains to me why Master of Puppets isn't prog. I assume that most posters here simply don't know the album and judge the band based on Enter Sandman and Until it Sleeps (if not, *please* elaborate).
|
Please don't take offence but I find Metellica to be 'thug rock' like Sex Pistols, AC/DC, Def Leppard etc. Which is pretty much the antithesis of prog. After all you listen to prog to get away from such (how shall I put this) 'stuff'.
|
ok, I guess you really don't know the album.
|
Yeah you've got me there .
But the rest of their discography isn't prog?
|
The following album (...And Justice For All) was very technical and could be seen as prog-related because it's very technical and complex regarding to song structure (much more dedicated to form than any other Thrash Metal album I know), and there are some single tracks on the previous albums that are quite "proggy", most of all Call of Khtulu. But you're right, I think that only Master of Puppets can be seen as prog (prog-related on this website, prog if you take the word literally). I think this is why most people don't see the connection ... with Iron Maiden the case is simpler, because they have never been very progressive, but consistently so on a greater number of albums.
Edited by MikeEnRegalia - May 16 2007 at 03:05
|
|
|
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 02:53 |
*sigh*
It's the same as it always was - 1,000's of people ready to say "NO" without a single thought.
There are strong arguments for why - ie, they practically invented Prog Metal, and were far more progressive as a band than, for example, Iron Maiden (there are plenty more, but until there is ONE SINGLE ARGUMENT that is convincing on the "No" side of the fence, these will do).
Just because you don't SEE progressiveness in their music, it doesn't mean it isn't there - it is, in fact, in spades - more so than some accepted Progressive Rock bands (who I won't name or shame).
Even "Kill 'Em All" is progressive, from a strict point of view - it's not simply thrash, and there are so many influences that the album represents the start of a new genre. Lyrically, much of it is in the fantasy realm - like Prog Rock, the riffs are not just metal riffs - they enter a new dimension - the structures are complex and the playing is superior to Iron Maiden (as a single example) at the time.
I do agree with Celtic Frost - with bands like Death and VoiVod already in the archives, their ommission is puzzling, and to some extent, Megadeth.
Black Sabbath are a less concrete case - unless they're filed under "Proto" or "Prog-Metal Related", which is fair enough - especially since Led Zeppelin and Deep Purple are here - it doesn't make much sense to leave out the final part of the triangle.
To compare Metallica to the Sex Pistols, AC/DC or Def Leppard is to not have listened to the music. Sure, the attitude is born of a similar aggression, but there are plenty of Prog bands with that kind of aggression as the root of their music, and including elements from other genres is a significant part of Prog. Metallica's music (until their self-titled album) was NEVER simple or straightforward like those three luminaries.
So YES.
Metallica belong here - I've been saying this since I joined, and it's good to see that people who have actually thought about this rationally agree.
/edit: And when talking about bands at the root of Prog Metal, don't forget Judas Priest or the Scorpions - I'm not arguing for the inclusion of either, but both are at least as - if not more - significant than Iron Maiden.
/edit 2: I tracked down some Mercyful Fate albums, and I get where supporters are coming from, but unfortunately, Metallica trumped them severely. While the 'Fate's riffs are glorious, they are still strongly rooted in Judas Priest, and unlike Priest (at least, on the albums I've heard), made no use of the alternate pick thrashing technique that Metallica evolved so successfully. Priest are the stronger link in the chain for historical reasons - 'Fate just happened to have a similar but more polished sound, and from what I can hear, didn't really evolve it (read:Progress).
Edited by Certif1ed - May 16 2007 at 03:00
|
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 1751
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 02:38 |
|
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 02:34 |
|
|
|
|
|
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 1751
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 02:27 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
so many negative general comments, but nobody explains to me why Master of Puppets isn't prog. I assume that most posters here simply don't know the album and judge the band based on Enter Sandman and Until it Sleeps (if not, *please* elaborate).
|
Please don't take offence but I find Metellica to be 'thug rock' like Sex Pistols, AC/DC, Def Leppard etc. Which is pretty much the antithesis of prog. After all you listen to prog to get away from such (how shall I put this) 'stuff'.
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 02:22 |
so many negative general comments, but nobody explains to me why Master of Puppets isn't prog. I assume that most posters here simply don't know the album and judge the band based on Enter Sandman and Until it Sleeps (if not, *please* elaborate).
|
|
|
|
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 1751
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 01:49 |
|
Hell no, Metellica is a joke just like the Sex Pistols or Liberace
|
|
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 00:10 |
Atavachron wrote:
I'd say no.. and I grew up in S.F., they were our boys.
and T, you say you don't want to be stoned, but I think you already are
( kidding)
|
|
|
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266
|
Posted: May 16 2007 at 00:02 |
I'd say no.. and I grew up in S.F., they were our boys.
and T, you say you don't want to be stoned, but I think you already are
( kidding)
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: May 15 2007 at 23:55 |
enteredwinter wrote:
You raise a valid point, but a very similar argument could be made for Black Sabbath, Megadeth, and many other bands that are considered heavy metal but not prog.
Before we knew it, it would look like we should be including almost any heavy metal band that may have influenced prog-metal, and it would just get out of hand.
Sure, certain additions, such as Iron Maiden, probably opened up a floodgate for this kind of addition. However, I say close the floodgate, instead of opening it further, or the site is going to start losing a lot of credibility.
Either we'd become "ProgArchives with MetalArchives included!", which makes no sense, or the people who run the site would have an increasingly difficult time trying to justify not including certain metal bands. IMO, better to put a halt to this kind of thing before it devolves into one of those two scenarios.
|
I understand that approach and I'm ready to shut up in the matter for the reasons you mentioned. But only as a talking point, I'd say Sabbath and Metallica only. Megadeth and other metal bands, while good, didn't have the musical elements nor the importance and influence of these two in progressive-metal. I'd say as much of maybe more than Iron Maiden. What I say is: if progressive-metal is an integral part of our site (and a large one at that), we could find room for arguably the grandfathers. We have one (Iron Maiden), we have some other that are related (LZ, Deep Purple).
But as you say, maybe it's better not to think about this.
|
|
|
|
enteredwinter
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 05 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 501
|
Posted: May 15 2007 at 22:33 |
|
You raise a valid point, but a very similar argument could be made for Black Sabbath, Megadeth, and many other bands that are considered heavy metal but not prog.
Before we knew it, it would look like we should be including almost any heavy metal band that may have influenced prog-metal, and it would just get out of hand.
Sure, certain additions, such as Iron Maiden, probably opened up a floodgate for this kind of addition. However, I say close the floodgate, instead of opening it further, or the site is going to start losing a lot of credibility.
Either we'd become "ProgArchives with MetalArchives included!", which makes no sense, or the people who run the site would have an increasingly difficult time trying to justify not including certain metal bands. IMO, better to put a halt to this kind of thing before it devolves into one of those two scenarios.
|
|
|
|
akin
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 06 2004
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 976
|
Posted: May 15 2007 at 17:59 |
|
This was already discussed and this issue falls in the realm of the great prog-related problem.
I don't like very much Metallica, I don't see any progressiveness in
their music and if I had a prog site it would be forbidden to mention
Metallica on it, but I don't care what the team members or admins may
decide.
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: May 15 2007 at 17:43 |
paolo.beenees wrote:
If you add Metallica, I expect a spot also for Celtic Frost and Mercyful Fate. 
erm... I almost forgot King Diamond... forgive me Kim! |
No, the point isn't to turn this site into an all-metal site, no. But Metallica was a cornerstone, probably THE influence for progressive-metal, they influenced SO many of today's prog-metallers... And, anyway, looking at their work and the time in music history, their music is prog-metal by its own merits, even if they hadn't influenced anybody!
If you're going to stone me, please, try to aim for the middle area.... 
|
|
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Metallica?
