Should Metallica be in the forum? |
Post Reply | Page <1 1314151617 36> |
Author | |||||
b_olariu
Prog Reviewer Joined: March 02 2007 Location: Romania Status: Offline Points: 5532 |
Posted: September 12 2008 at 06:53 | ||||
Disscusion ends for me here, and for sure i won't read the 21 pages, sorry, i have better things to do, maybe i was not convincing here, but i won't change my mind about addition,
.P.S. - And i'm not offended, it's your opinion after all.
|
|||||
Ricochet
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 27 2005 Location: Nauru Status: Offline Points: 46301 |
Posted: September 12 2008 at 06:44 | ||||
Well, despite all these arguments I'm invited to check back, I instead just read that Metallica won't be ever added, and it was enough for me.
A point of observation, if I may again: both the original post of this thread and, in fact, your first post in the thread, Hugues, don't point out why Metallica should be prog. In fact, the first person to start on arguments is T (as expected, of course). Maybe this "why" questioning is bit too directed against the nay-sayers, given that the yes-sayers already elaborated 21 pages of arguments and, who knows, might even consider they've got infailable points going on there... Edited by Ricochet - September 12 2008 at 06:50 |
|||||
|
|||||
Petrovsk Mizinski
Prog Reviewer Joined: December 24 2007 Location: Ukraine Status: Offline Points: 25210 |
Posted: September 12 2008 at 06:40 | ||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21206 |
Posted: September 12 2008 at 06:24 | ||||
I'll continue picking on it everytime I see it ... it's how I am! |
|||||
b_olariu
Prog Reviewer Joined: March 02 2007 Location: Romania Status: Offline Points: 5532 |
Posted: September 12 2008 at 06:24 | ||||
Yes a know Thrash - sorry sorry, my mistake, i was in a hurry
|
|||||
b_olariu
Prog Reviewer Joined: March 02 2007 Location: Romania Status: Offline Points: 5532 |
Posted: September 12 2008 at 06:21 | ||||
Come on HughesJB4, you need to much explenations about something that doesn't need to be here. Doesn't mean if they were much more complex band than the average trash ones is progressive, simply as that. It's true i don't bother to ready 21 pages of something that doesn't belong here - this Metallica disscusions, again simply as that. And to remind you Trash is a genre , Metallica, Slayer, Anthrax, Death Angel, Testament, etc were and still are among top bands of this genre, they made this so called TRASH music. If i was rude with this response, this is how i feel about addig Metallica here. I have nothing against them, i like'em, but i don't want to read something about them here on PA, they must be on metal site. And from Metallica 1991, they were going done to the bottom, lates albums are uninspired, unintristing, comercial, only the name Metallica save them to become a forgetable band.
|
|||||
Ricochet
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 27 2005 Location: Nauru Status: Offline Points: 46301 |
Posted: September 12 2008 at 06:15 | ||||
Perhaps the joke/ attentioning regarding "trash/thrash" can be put aside, not everyone masters English perfectly...
(just to note, I am of the same nationality with b_olariu, but this is also the second or third time you pick on his "trash", that's the reason for my intervention...) Edited by Ricochet - September 12 2008 at 06:16 |
|||||
|
|||||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21206 |
Posted: September 12 2008 at 06:13 | ||||
Thrash. It's called T H R A S H. Trash means waste/garbage, Thrash means this. BTW: If you don't think that Metallica are progressive - that's fine with me, but I'd really like to know why you think that way. Many people here gave specific reasons why they think they are at least prog related, the least you could do - if you expect us to change our minds - would be to point out where those reasons were wrong. |
|||||
Petrovsk Mizinski
Prog Reviewer Joined: December 24 2007 Location: Ukraine Status: Offline Points: 25210 |
Posted: September 12 2008 at 06:04 | ||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
b_olariu
Prog Reviewer Joined: March 02 2007 Location: Romania Status: Offline Points: 5532 |
Posted: September 12 2008 at 05:54 | ||||
No, no, no, no i don't want to see them here. Why, because they are NOT even close to what is called progressive music or related progressive music. From where do you got this idea that Metallica are related in any way with progressive music. They are simply trash in the early days (the '80's) and now they are mixed bag of everything even the musicians don't know what they play. Sorry guys but i'm strongly against the addition here.
|
|||||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21206 |
Posted: September 10 2008 at 03:32 | ||||
If that was true, many more metal bands would be discussed ... but that's not the case. Maybe there's more to music than your over-simplification suggests ("long-winded") ... and if you, as your login name suggests - like avant-garde music, you should know that. Edited by MikeEnRegalia - September 10 2008 at 03:36 |
|||||
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 08 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 7559 |
Posted: September 10 2008 at 03:01 | ||||
That doesn't actually answer the question, but raises a great many in my mind;
Which things have been pointed out that "aren't exactly prog"? Are you talking about Prog Rock or Prog Metal?
Which things "aren't exactly original?" Obviously the music came from somewhere - you could argue that there's nothing new under the sun, but that would surely be to ignore the new aspects that Metallica brought.
Which bits are common traits? Do you mean common to metal since Metallica did them, or traits that have always been part of metal? Again, aren't you ignoring the newer aspects that Metallica brought to the genre?
Thrash is certainly an element of much Prog Metal - but not all of it, and it was a significant element of early Metallica - but they did a lot more than simply thrash, and that's where the Prog Metal qualifications lie. Windhawk's post clarifies much of this, and some of Hughes' comments about Ghoul's shredded (sic) review give technical detail.
This would suggest that Keyboards are the missing element here - every other box seems to be ticked.
|
|||||
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|||||
The T
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: September 09 2008 at 15:57 | ||||
You know... "long songs with keyboards and odd time signatures and lng instrumental sections"... the narrow definition that leaves out anything that doesn't have this elements...
|
|||||
|
|||||
Windhawk
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 28 2006 Location: Norway Status: Offline Points: 11401 |
Posted: September 09 2008 at 15:36 | ||||
Can't agree with you there mate. I followed the scene back then, being an old metalhead and an avid metal fan in the early 80's, and Metallica most certainly did not play what was regarded as standard thrash back then. Compare them to their peers and what they made back then - Slayer, Anthrax, Testament, Holy Moses, Death Angel, Avenger, Nasty Savage, Agent Steel, Possessed, Flotsam & Jetsam, Bathory....to name a few acts I remember from the top of my head. 25 years later much of what Metallica did has become standard indeed, but back then this stuff was highly innovative. Of their contemporaries Celtic Frost is probably the only band in the genre with a similar impact on music; although their avant-garde and boundary-breaking explorations inspired and influenced a completely different crowd in the world of music; some of which can be found in the extreme metal section of this site today. The question isn't whether Metallica were innovative or influential though, and their impact on prog metal is undeniable. Their progressive elements aren't questioned by many either - the discussion now is mainly if the band has enough of those to be included as related or as full fledged prog metal - of which I think the former is more correct IF they should be included. Denying their innovations and their craft doesn't help the debate progress...so to speak. There are many valid arguments against adding Metallica here though - but denying what they did isn't one in my opinion. |
|||||
Websites I work with:
http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
|||||
Avantgardehead
Forum Senior Member Joined: December 29 2006 Location: Dublin, OH, USA Status: Offline Points: 1170 |
Posted: September 09 2008 at 15:05 | ||||
It seems like everyone is being blinded by their love for Metallica and pointing out things that aren't exactly prog in order to get them here. The things I've seen that were said about Metallica aren't exactly original and are common traits of metal in general. They are/were thrash metal, albeit a little more long-winded than ordinary thrash and I guess that qualifies as prog metal these days... |
|||||
http://www.last.fm/user/Avantgardian
|
|||||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21206 |
Posted: September 09 2008 at 09:33 | ||||
^ he's talking about AJFA here, guys ... the review is about that album.
|
|||||
Petrovsk Mizinski
Prog Reviewer Joined: December 24 2007 Location: Ukraine Status: Offline Points: 25210 |
Posted: September 09 2008 at 09:14 | ||||
Let me also make it clear again, for those that aren't aware, I like Megadeth more than Metallica.
THE GHOUL makes up blantantly incorrect information in his review, absolutely garbage review.
|
|||||
|
|||||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21206 |
Posted: September 09 2008 at 08:39 | ||||
^ that was also my main point when I criticised the review ... there are so many factual mistakes that I'm having a hard time accepting his opinion, since I fear that it has no objective basis. Be that as it may, I'd like to point out that the criticism - or the review itself for that matter - had very little to do with Metallica's progressiveness.
|
|||||
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 08 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 7559 |
Posted: September 09 2008 at 08:25 | ||||
^The site owners have rethought all by themselves, no-one has presented a counter-argument, and Dream Theater admit that Metallica were playing that kind of music before they did. What more do you want?
That review is pretty bad - it starts with the premise that Metallica did nothing new, when all the evidence is to the contrary on 5 separate albums.
He says it's all been done before without examples. He doesn't state what was done before.
Who were these bands that went before that were better at it, I'd like to know.
The Mustaine riffs only make up part of Kill 'Em All, and in fact the Mustaine compositions are the weakest, from a progressive standpoint. Preference of riffs doesn't enter into the equation, but FWIW, I prefer the Hetfield/Hammet compositions to the Mustaine ones, which tend to be over repetitive ("Four Horsemen" for example).
Ride the Lightning contains virtually NO Mustaine riffs - indeed, the writer omits the fact that it contains many Burton riffs ("For Whom The Bell Tolls") which are very strong indeed.
Master of Puppets is Metallica's best, IMO, so if Mustaine is absent from that album, so much the better - it just underlines the point that this line of inquiry is futile and proves the opposite of what it is trying to claim!
Also, quick point: Newstead didn't play on Master of Puppets - he first played on ...And Justice For All.... maybe that's just the way it reads - it looks like he's still referring to MoP, but maybe he isn't after all...
Interestingly, it was quite probably Metallica's first appearance on MTV (playing "One" at an awards ceremony, IIRC) that started the swing towards modern metal, and The Black Album and all its attendant singles that really kicked off Modern AND Nu Metal, leading to the rise of Progressive Metal later in the decade.
The riffs, solos and drum patterns on "AJFA" sound different to earlier ones to me - I'm not sure what planet the reviewer is on, and it's a pity he didn't explain what he meant using examples. You might just as well say that all metal sounds like Black Sabbath or Judas Priest and leave it there.
(Here's an Objective counter-argument for you, akin - can't argue with the facts!)
Talking of the riffs, they're not really Pentatonic, are they? Tritonic would be more accurate.
Since when has there been a flattened fifth or a sharpened fourth in a major or minor Pentatonic scale?
Some music theory knowledge is helpful to people who use the phrases - if you don't know what they mean, then any musician will be able to see through the lack of knowledge and see the bile underneath.
...so it's not a fair review - it makes stuff up and draws on straw-manning to make all the relevant points - and a simple examination reveals all the "factual" stuff to be no better than lies, and the straw-manning to be inaccurate to the point that one would suspect he'd made it all up in order to make the band match his low opinion of them.
It's fair enough not to like a band and their music - but to make stuff up to make them look worse?
That is not fair in my book.
Edited by Certif1ed - September 09 2008 at 08:34 |
|||||
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|||||
akin
Forum Senior Member Joined: February 06 2004 Location: Brazil Status: Offline Points: 976 |
Posted: September 09 2008 at 07:53 | ||||
For me it was a fair review, with arguments that can only be contradicted in subjective terms. When people state that this is the worst review they have read for weeks, it is clear that it is biased because people are trying so hard to contradict any argument against Metallica being prog. There is a strong obsession of some members to track every post saying that Metallica is not prog and trying to refute the arguments given using personal opinions and personal attacks, and calling it a rational position. The general consensus and silence of every other serious source in the world about Metallica being prog other than in PA or PA areas of influence is a clear prove that people here are lacking good judgement. I'm about to throw up every time I see a Prog Metal thread, not because Prog Metal, but because every discussion ends with the same people trying to convince the others how Prog Metal is Metallica. Considering that the focus of the site is to evaluate and add as many prog bands as it is possible, all Metallica discussions are fruitless and against site policies, since every time a person is frustrated with the disapproval of a certain band, the person is recommended to stop pushing the addition of that band and concentrate in other bands, but since I returned to the forums after a break, I have seem many Special Collabs focused only in adding Metallica to PA. People here know that, despite being rejected by the site owner, some collabs will sneak Metallica sooner or later by the Prog Metal team. They just want other people to resign these fruitless discussions and then have in their pocket that Metallica was discussed but there has been a long time that no against argument surfaced (or use this argument to "convince" the site owners). It is already happening and no one will be surprised anymore to see another band in the database that is considered prog only in PA. |
|||||
Post Reply | Page <1 1314151617 36> |
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 |