Should Metallica be in the forum?

zafreth wrote: Here's some "definitions" that i search over internet and i think that serves like a some sort of "internetography" "Metallica's early releases included fast tempos, instrumentals, and aggressive musicianship that placed them as one of the "Big Four" of the thrash metal subgenre alongside Slayer, Megadeth and Anthrax. The band earned a growing fan base in the underground music community, and some critics say the 1986 release Master of Puppets is one of the most influential and "heavy" thrash metal albums." Ok Here's the ALLmusic description: "Metallica was easily the best, most influential heavy metal band of the '80s, responsible for bringing the music back to Earth. Instead of playing the usual rock star games of metal stars of the early '80s, the band looked and talked like they were from the street. Metallica expanded the limits of thrash, using speed and volume not for their own sake, but to enhance their intricately structured compositions."

you're digging a deeper hole.. and you never know who might show up in the GEPR

[

• Concept albums, in which a theme or storyline is explored throughout an entire album in a manner similar to a film or a play.

It's well known that Master of Puppets is about manipulation and ...And Justice for All is about injustice.



[/QUOTE]
Well U2 has some albums and songs like those and the are Not Prog.

Also Andres Calamaro afine rock singer and guitarrist of Argentina in 2000 wrote a five cd disc called "El Salmon" and have over 100 songs related about a theme and he are Not Prog.

So that argument vanishes itself...

Fortunately, I don't require the Internet for my thinking.

Here's some "definitions" that i search over internet and i think that serves like a some sort of "internetography"
Wiki define Metallica like this: "Metallica is an American heavy metal band that formed in 1981 in Los Angeles, California."
"Metallica's early releases included fast tempos, instrumentals, and aggressive musicianship that placed them as one of the "Big Four" of the thrash metal subgenre alongside Slayer, Megadeth and Anthrax. The band earned a growing fan base in the underground music community, and some critics say the 1986 release Master of Puppets is one of the most influential and "heavy" thrash metal albums."

Ok Here's the ALLmusic description:

"Metallica was easily the best, most influential heavy metal band of the '80s, responsible for bringing the music back to Earth. Instead of playing the usual rock star games of metal stars of the early '80s, the band looked and talked like they were from the street. Metallica expanded the limits of thrash, using speed and volume not for their own sake, but to enhance their intricately structured compositions."

Now we go to Metal archive:

Metallica

Genre(s)

Thrash Metal (early) Modern Rock (now)

In Gibraltar's Progressive rock encyclopaedia in the alphabettical lis in the M letter here's the index:
M MacArthur | Machiavel | Mackenzie Theory | Macromassa | Mad Curry | Mad Puppet | Made in Sweden | Madison Dyke | Madrugada | Maelstrom | Maestro Trytony | Magdalena (Japan) | Magdalena (Spain) | Magdeburg | Magellan | Magenta | Magic Elf, The | Magic Muscle | Magic Mushroom Band | Magical Power Mako | Magma (Argentina) | Magma (France) | Magma (Korea) | Magna Carta | Magnésis | Magnus, Nick | Magpu | Magus | Magyar | Magyar Posse | Mahavishnu Orchestra | Mahavishnu Project, The | Mahjun | Mahoujin | Maillet, Frédéric | Maina, Pepe | Mainhorse | Malibran | Malicorne | Malombra | Malone, Sean | Mammut | Man | Man on Fire | Mandalaband | Mandel, Harvey | Mandillo | Mandrágora (Argentina) | Mandragora (UK) | Mandragore | Maneige | Mangala Vallis | Manitou | Mann, Geoff | Mann's Earth Band, Manfred | Manning (Guy) | Manring, Michael | Manticore | Mantler, Michael | Mantra Sunrise | Manzanera, Phil | Máquina | Máquina de Hacer Pájaros, La | Mar de Robles | Marathon | Marcel | Marco | Marcoeur, Albert | Marge Litch | Maria | Marianus | Marillion | Mark 1 | Markusfeld, Alain | Mars Everywhere | Mars Volta, The | Marsupilami | Martin Circus | Martini Henry | Martz, Jasun | Mary Newsletter | Maryson | Maschera Di Cera | Másfél | Masal | Masque (Japan) | Masque (Sweden) | Massacre (Chile) | Massacre (USA) | Mastedon | Mastermind | Matching Mole | Materia Gris | Material | Matraz | Matrix | Mats and Morgan | Matter | maudlin of the Well | Mawwal | Max | Maxophone | May Blitz | Mays, Lyle | McChurch Soundroom | McCully Workshop | McDonald and Giles | MCH Band | McKendree Spring | McKennitt, Loreena | Medina Azahara | MegaXBrand | Meisenfloo | Mellow Candle | Memoriance | Men of Lake | Menayeri | Mentaur | Mephistopheles | Mergenthaler, Andrè | Merlin | Mersmak | Merzbow | Meshuggah | Message | Metagaia | Metamorfosi | Metaphor | Metcalf, Thomas | Metheny, Pat | Metro | Meza, Arturo | Mezcla | Mezquita | MIA (Musicos Independientes Asociados) | Midas | Midian | Midnight Sun | Might of Coincidence | Mighty Baby | Miklagård | Milkweed | Miller, Phil | Millo, Mario | Mind Gallery | Mind Over Matter | Mindgames | Mindworm | Minefield, The | Miner, John | Mini | Minimum Vital | Mink Deville | Mink, Ben | Minotaurus | Mirage | Miranda Sex Garden | Miriodor | Mirkwood | Mirror | Mirthrandir | Misin, Andrei | Missing Link | Missing Persons | Missus Beastly | Mist Season | Mistral | Mr. Albert Show | Mr. Bungle | Mr. Doctor | Mr. Sirius | Mr. So and So | Mo. Do. | Modry Efekt (M Efekt) | Modulo 1000 | Mogul Thrash | Mohodisco | Mona Lisa | Mongol | Monk, Maria | Monkman, Francis | Monolith | Montefeltro | Montesano, Gustavo | Montrose, Ronnie | Moody Blues, The | Moon Fog Prophet | Moondog | Moongarden | Moor, The | Moraz, Patrick | Moreira, Airto | Morgan | Moria Falls | Mormos | Morning Sky | Morpheus | Morrigan, The | Morse, Steve | Morte Macabre | Moscow | Mostly Autumn | Moto Perpetuo | Motor Totemists Guild | Moulle, Alain | Moullet, Patrice (and Alpes) | Mountain Ash | Mouse | Move, The | Moving | Moving Gelatine Plates | Mucchio, Il | Muffins, The | Mugen | Mujician | Multi-Story | Munju | Murphy Blend | Murple | Museo Rosenbach | Mushroom | Music Magic | Musica Elettronica Viva | MusicAEnchiradiS | Musique Noise | Mutantes (Os Mutantes) | Muvovum | Mychael | Myers, Allen | Mysia | Mystery | Mythologic | Mythos

I see no Metallica...

We continue in The Metallica forum and the definition of Metallica is:
"Trash Metal band with masterpieces like RTL and MOP"

So, i can continue on and on, but a general opinion in a simple internet swarm discover: Metallica are not a Progressive Rock Group. And that's a fact.

Winterlight give me 5 solid reasons why do you think Metallica are Prog?? and please do not use the obvious statements i.e Rapid tempo shifts, etc, etc.

Besides the general perception of Metallica (for not prog lovers and even pop lovers) are that they make good thrash rock or even heavy metal .

So, i think that all this discussion is because you like it a lot and want to inclusion in PA. that means totally subjetive matter.

It's more o less like the Coltrane discussion, i want his inclusion in PA because i think he have the sufficient proto prog elements (remember he died before the birth of prog) to be in PA, and if he had live enough he would brace the prog element without doubt.

So i can justified the same thing about Coltrane like you do with Metallica.

To make the things clear if we were "prog purist" neither of the two should be in PA never, if were "prog purist".

I remember when Ride The Lighting came out in 1983, my older cousin lend me the original LP i was 10 ten years and i have almost a year hearing rock, like Iron Maiden, Ozzy, etc. when i saw the name of the group my first thinking was "oh a group of women trying to do rock" jajaja well when i see the inner sleeve, (The original lp has one) i see that are a group formed by men, so, i went to my house and when i hear it i was full blown away (in those times a barely know what's progresive rock, my first contact with Prog was in 1984), so my inmediate comparison was Iron Maiden et al, but... i think, no, these guys going to much faster than Maiden, to much heavyness, so when i want to reach some more info about this "Newly" style i discover via magazines and other opinions (internet wasn't avaible to make things easer), that they, along with "other" bands, (the other big 3)  are the founding fathers of a subgenre called Trash, and that my friend was in 1983.

So, i think that we are to trying some revisionist, thing here, in 1983 in the year of releasing RTL everybody called Trash and lately in 1986 when MOP was released, everybody still call Metallica a Trash rock band.

The question is ¿Why are trying to fit prog to Metallica's trash legacy???

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

Maybe in hey style the are vanguards, innovators, but prog???

They are good in his own style that hardly can match of progressive.
 

jimidom wrote: HughesJB4 wrote: [Heck, Led Zeppelin are in the archives, yet Jimmy Page is extremely sloppy, and some guitarists would leave mid concert because they just couldn't listen to his sloppy playing. People keep asking for Hendrix's inclusion. I love Hendrix, but some of his stuff I refuse to listen to because his playing is a complete slopfest. Frank Zappa had some sloppy times, and his sideman Steve Vai has some pretty sloppy sweep picking chops (although in other areas of technique, Vai is pretty much spot on). So let's take Zappa out of the archives shall we? Prog still isn't and wasn't always about sheer technical ability. It's a feature of prog, to some extent, but nowhere does it say you cannot be a prog musician if your chops aren't up to scratch. You are right about Page. His wizardry does not come from his chops but from his dynamics and his ability to effortlessly go from beautiful Bert Jansch- inspired acoustic playing to heavy buzz saw riffing. As for Hendrix, his live playing left a lot to be desired generally, especially how often his guitar would go out of tune. However,  his performance of "Machine Gun" from the New Year's Eve concert at the Fillmore East is nothing short of brilliant as was his performance of "Hear My Train a Comin'" from the Isle of Wight show.  I'm still on the fence with regard to his inclusion in the archives. You are also right about Zappa and Vai. Even the most technical players get sloppy at times. I'm sure that Paganini hit a bum note at one time or another. Prog to me is only partly about technical ability, but it is certainly not about technical perfection.

Indeed, I love the 12 minute version of Hear My Train A Comin'. Actually one of Hendrix's cleaner examples of playing, and just full blown blues emotion there. And yep, even some of the most technically proficient guys have had slight sloppiness from time to time, but usually at that level of playing you have to be a guitarist yourself to notice and the sloppiness is so slight that it's barely noticeable and has no real negative impact on the performance.

Certif1ed wrote: JethroZappa wrote: Certif1ed wrote: Why and why?   Because their music is not prog. You can tell they are Metal, Hard Rock, whatever you want but they are not prog, absolutely. Instrumentals like "Metal Militia", may be pleasant, but not prog. As musician skills, well, the solos are all the same, and have you ever heard mr. Hammett doing the "One" solo in concert correctly?   I'm sorry, but saying their music is not prog does not make it that way - that's only your opinion. To many others, myself included, it IS Prog. BTW, Metal Militia is not an instrumental - and it's not supposed to be pleasant as far as I can tell, but it's a very progressive piece - name another that sounds like it from 1983?   The live environment is not how we're judging them, just the recorded output - and the 3 specific albums have already been named - although I hold a candle for "Kill 'Em All" as the first of its kind (after Diamond Head's "Lighting For the Nations", which is also pure Progressive Metal, and "Canterbury", which is 50% stunning and 50% dross).   The live environment is certainly the one for judging musician skills - and when I saw them in 1986, they were stunning. Cliff Burton's bass soloing particularly was astonishing - some of his early work can be found on YouTube, and that gives a good idea.   You need an argument, my friend - not a polar opinion      Logan wrote:  (...)  How much does Metallica fuse genres and turn music inside and out?   There's an interesting (and long) discussion...   Quite a lot is the short answer

Indeed Cert, I may be a lot younger than you, but from everything I've heard from guys your age that saw the band at what I feel was their peak, they were incredible tight and precise live (Kirk Hammett's vibrato non inclusive though) and yep, Cliff was just a genius, incredible musician.

And Metallica really threw out the rule book with their compositions on the 3 prog metal albums they did, but it's not something you can understand unless you're an avid metal (of the era anyway) fan like Cert obviously is and me to some extent too.
KEA isn't prog, but Dave Mustaine, Lars and Hetfield managed to write music that was just totally off the wall at the time. Still don't believe me (not aimed at Cert obviously)? Watch some thrash metal documentaries, read some books, go on the heavy metal forums, and you'll soon find out how revolutionary it was at a time when metal had become pretty underground and was dominated by speed metal and NWOBHM bands (which sort of go hand in hand in a way, but that's a story for another time).

zafreth wrote: What you mean with "Sloppy", sorry but do not understand what's your point about "Slopiness"

As Mike said, bad intonation, bad timing, as well as just missed notes/bad articulation, bad muting technique (causing unwanted string noise).

zafreth wrote:   maybe and maybe not, there are others fine trash drummers and even Better than Lars.

Yes, Mike Portnoy's techique is above and beyond what Lars could do, but I don't ever recall Portnoy being around in the early 80s pioneering a new style of music like Dave Mustaine, Lars and Hetfield were.

zafreth wrote: Jaco Pastorius Bass soloing are far more atonishing, and he is not in PA

Just your opinion. Just so happens I liked Cliff's style more. I also think Stuart Hamm, Dave La Rue, Victor Wooten are better than Jaco, but again, IMO.

darkshade wrote: HughesJB4 wrote: Frank Zappa had some sloppy times, and his sideman Steve Vai has some pretty sloppy sweep picking chops (although in other areas of technique, Vai is pretty much spot on). So let's take Zappa out of the archives shall we? Zappa was never sloppy. I dont know any recordings (and i have basically all of them) where he plays sloppy. Zappa liked the tension of playing notes not necessarily in the "same" key. Jazz musicians do this all the time. But he resolved the notes. Other than Zappa and his first album, I havent heard enough Steve Vai, but i know he's not sloppy. I want to see you do what he does. I see a lot of people critiquing other players, but i dont see them on music sites being discussed, or releasing albums and going on tour (myself included )

So because I'm not in a band touring I can't critique other's playing? So I guess if a music teacher that isn't known very much known on the internet, isn't in a touring band etc, I guess he can't critique his/her students playing then Anyway.....

So I guess when Zappa learnt to play guitar, he was NEVER SLOPPY? I suspect in the heaps of improvisational recordings he did that weren't released, there was slop.
I still love his playing, but his timing wasn't always spot on, and there many moments on the Shut Up and Play Yer guitar set of recordings where he wasn't always hitting the spot. Again, let me state that I still think he was a fine player despite not being a technical virtuoso.

Compare Vai's sweep picking technique to that of Frank Gambale, Rusty Cooley, Michael Angelo Batio, Jason Becker, Marty Friedman, you get my point, there are probably  a million guys that have cleaner sweep picking chops than Vai. Honestly, I'm not that bothered, because with what other technique Vai has, he is incredibly expressive with it IMO, so it wont break my heart that his sweep picking isn't 100 per cent perfect.

WinterLight wrote: Notwithstanding this mild criticism, I believe, for reasons already articulated by others in this thread, that Metallica deserve placement in the forum, in particular under Progressive Metal.  Additionally, I think that an argument (albeit not an exceptionally strong one) can be made in support of inducting into the archives the three other "big four" thrash bands.

Cert already made a great point against the inclusion of the other major thrash bands, which I was more than willing to back him up on.
There were hints of prog on Megadeth's Rust In Peace IMO (as well as being one of the more technical metal albums to be released at the time), but everything I've heard from Anthrax, Exodus, Artillery, Sepultura, Testament, Mortal Sin, Slayer (and the list goes on) none of it really went beyond the boundaries of what was and is thrash metal. That my friends, is one of the key features that seperates Metallica from the rest of the field.

Let me also make it clear, I'm not particularly biased towards Metallica, and prefer to listen to Testament and Megadeth on any given day, but I'll have enough rational insight to not let me vouch for their (Megadeth/Testament's) inclusion as well.

Here in México in the local mayor retailer, they have a section of progressive rock... fortunately

WinterLight wrote: zafreth wrote: Trying to say that many of people that think Metallica are progressive, maybe thinks that other bands of other styles are progressive, the argument that pretend to support  that Metallica must be in PA, have no contundent reasons, as many other bands would add in PA, think of Spooky Thoot, is a band that deserves to be in PA, and the arguments  that many of our friends applies the same to ST. Do you mean to suggest that if Metallica were included in the Archives, then by this precedent other bands necessarily would gain inclusion?  In that case, I disagree.  Each band should be evaluated on its own merits.  If we agree that Metallica is progressive, then we are not bound to agree that other bands are progressive.  This is nearly a truism, but it merits repeating. quite right About the other thing i do not understand about your opinion. How record stores categorize their inventory is irrelevant.  In any case, I don't think that record store management is concerned with the subtleties distinguishing, say, "symphonic prog" from "eclectic prog"; indeed, it simply tosses Genesis in with Britney Spears under Pop/Rock and undoubtedly loses no sleep over the musical faux pas.    undoubtedly

WinterLight wrote: zafreth wrote: If they maybe were progressive then, that criteria would apply to many many bands... Not sure what you're trying to say.   Also as a note when you enter a music record store you don´t find Metallica in the progressive section by the way. For transparent reasons, that particular argument carries no weight.

Trying to say that many of people that think Metallica are progressive, maybe thinks that other bands of other styles are progressive, the argument that pretend to support  that Metallica must be in PA, have no contundent reasons, as many other bands would add in PA, think of Spooky Thoot, is a band that deserves to be in PA, and the arguments  that many of our friends applies the same to ST.

About the other thing i do not understand about your opinion.