Heavy Metal Fans

 

 -- Ivan

 

I think this is because they both have so much in common, both pride themselfs on profecent playing (most of them; I can reasonably say that some metal artists could outplay the prog greats and the other way around.) and both are heavly influnced by classical music. The only difference is metal is less interested in the Jazz of prog and therefore tend to be more structured and are more about the band than indivdual. Metal is also more about "sight and sound" as well as emotional effect which is evedent from their brand of classical influnce. Alot of metal is a direct result of prog (Iron Maiden for example) and is a natarul evolution from seventy's prog. If you look at the list of influences from a metal band, amoung the Led Zepplen/Deep Purple/Black Sabbath listings 1 out of two times you will see Genesis listed and mabye even Yes as well as a slew of other prog bands. Just like the "original" (as in originality) prog groups did not emulate their influnces only were inspired by them to make something new, metal did that in the eightys. I always thought that Neo-prog were just copyists that did not dare to fully branch out and explore what was going on. A real simple way of expressing what I am saying is if alot of metal bands from the eightys to today started thier carrers in 1970 they would have probobly been prog bands. (note... this post is obviously not about "all" metal bands, because metal is a style and not a genre it encompasses all genres and therefore some are not relevent to this discussion).