Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
TheProgtologist
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: May 23 2005
Location: Baltimore,Md US
Status: Offline
Points: 27802
|
Topic: Metallica... Prog Metal or Prog related Posted: June 01 2007 at 12:34 |
The site owners emphatically said no to Metallica's inclusion,so this thread can be closed.
|
|
|
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 1751
|
Posted: May 31 2007 at 06:10 |
I think Metallica would fit in a prog metal site, like some techno bands would fit in a progressive electronic site. But a general Progressive music site - NO!
|
|
|
Rocktopus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 02 2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 4202
|
Posted: May 31 2007 at 05:57 |
WaywardSon wrote:
The only way out of this maze is to put Maiden and Metallica in Prog Metal.
(Maidenīs last 2 or 3 albums could be considered Prog Metal) It looks a bit strange how Maiden is the only metal band in Prog Related. Metallica have enough songs which could be classified as Prog metal. |
I think its looks a bit strange how Maiden, a metal band is put in prog related. Don't see how adding another one will make it less strange.
|
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 31 2007 at 03:35 |
micky wrote:
If not.. then leave the music itself out of it....it becomes a PR issue.... where... for the seeemingly 100th time.. the music is not the defining aspect of what is and is not a PR group. |
I am truly baffled by this.
(also for what seems the 100th time!!!!)
The music is the defining aspect of a Prog Rock group - how else do you define it?
micky wrote:
It's not about the music itself.. if it was... any one with a set of ears would and could add PR groups. It's about 'knowing' prog.. and that has been reserved to the admins.. as it should be in my opinion.
|
Unless I've completely misunderstood your jist, this looks like complete bollocks, with all due respect.
Who "knows" Prog?
Answer - no-one.
As far as I know, "knowing Prog" is not reserved for the Admins - with respect to them and the great job they do, they're just Admins. This site is not "Admin Archives"
I might politely point out that the Admins did not identify the first Prog Rock groups either - my understanding is that it was a journalist in the mid 1970s.
If a musician cannot suggest ways of identifying particular types of music, then there's no hope.
Edited by Certif1ed - May 31 2007 at 03:41
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: May 31 2007 at 02:13 |
micky wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
micky wrote:
let me be frank Mike.... that is why the admins decide these matters..
the basic disconnect between the two is IM were directly influenced by
the prog movement itself.. and it shows in the musc.
Metallica weren't. I don't see why you keep on dragging IM into
this. Different cases... and face it.. IM had a far stronger case
for being included here at PA's. As Zeppelin showed as well..
it's not only influence ON prog.. but infuence BY prog.
|
With all due respect ... this post does not sound like you listened to Master of Puppets.
And
let me be equally frank: I think the admins made a horrible decision
there. I accept that they have the right to make the decisions - I'd
even accept if they overruled the PM team on Prog Metal additions ...
but a) I don't have to agree with the decisions, and b) they're not
automatically right just because the admins make them.
|
and with all damn due respect hahahha...
I've heard it.. .years ago... but you again... miss the damn
point. If you want to argue sound and the music they made.... put
this band before the PMT and it's an up or down vote.. as every band is
here.
If not.. then leave the music itself out of it....it becomes a PR
issue.... where... for the seeemingly 100th time.. the
music is not the defining aspect of what is and is not a PR
group. Explain Zepplin and their. what... 4 or 5 prog songs over
the course of a decade. It's not about the music itself..
if it was... any one with a set of ears would and could add PR
groups. It's about 'knowing' prog.. and that has been reserved to
the admins.. as it should be in my opinion.
|
ok ... I didn't know that the definition of the category changed completely in the last 24 hours. Let me check ... wait a minute ... it didn't! Tell you something: Maybe you should perform a reality check every once in a while before you insult long standing members with this sort of patronizing ... FYI: I was the one who performed the poll for Max back in 2005 which was about which "semi-prog" categories should be created and what they should be called. And one of the first bands that was added was Queen ... now explain that to me!
|
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 20:21 |
WaywardSon wrote:
The only way out of this maze is to put Maiden and Metallica in Prog Metal.
(Maidenīs last 2 or 3 albums could be considered Prog Metal) It
looks a bit strange how Maiden is the only metal band in Prog Related.
Metallica have enough songs which could be classified as Prog
metal.
So all I can suggest is they both be silently moved to Prog Metal in the wee hours of the morning, to avoid ...er ...problems. |
that might be the the solution...short of simply saying ..great
band.. 'progressive' (think of Steely Dan.. my next visit
after this post) but simply not worthy of being included at this
site, a PROG rock site.
I have to say though.. we have a system though.. it works....
either they are prog metal... to be determined.(if not already) by the PMT. Thus either accepted or rejected.
OR (again.. admin policy has been that PR is NOT a consolation prize for rejected artists)
they go before the admin council for PR.. and I think Tony hinted and what I am driving at..
they simply don't fit or just plain don't belong there.
Iron Maiden at least had STRONG prog influences... thus like Zeppelin
(disagree as I may)... a logical fit for what PR has been
used by this site for.
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
WaywardSon
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 23 2006
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 2537
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 19:40 |
The only way out of this maze is to put Maiden and Metallica in Prog Metal.
(Maidenīs last 2 or 3 albums could be considered Prog Metal) It looks a bit strange how Maiden is the only metal band in Prog Related. Metallica have enough songs which could be classified as Prog metal.
So all I can suggest is they both be silently moved to Prog Metal in the wee hours of the morning, to avoid ...er ...problems.
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 19:12 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
micky wrote:
let me be frank Mike.... that is why the admins decide these matters..
the basic disconnect between the two is IM were directly influenced by
the prog movement itself.. and it shows in the musc.
Metallica weren't. I don't see why you keep on dragging IM into
this. Different cases... and face it.. IM had a far stronger case
for being included here at PA's. As Zeppelin showed as well..
it's not only influence ON prog.. but infuence BY prog.
|
With all due respect ... this post does not sound like you listened to Master of Puppets.
And
let me be equally frank: I think the admins made a horrible decision
there. I accept that they have the right to make the decisions - I'd
even accept if they overruled the PM team on Prog Metal additions ...
but a) I don't have to agree with the decisions, and b) they're not
automatically right just because the admins make them.
|
and with all damn due respect hahahha...
I've heard it.. .years ago... but you again... miss the damn
point. If you want to argue sound and the music they made.... put
this band before the PMT and it's an up or down vote.. as every band is
here.
If not.. then leave the music itself out of it....it becomes a PR
issue.... where... for the seeemingly 100th time.. the
music is not the defining aspect of what is and is not a PR
group. Explain Zepplin and their. what... 4 or 5 prog songs over
the course of a decade. It's not about the music itself..
if it was... any one with a set of ears would and could add PR
groups. It's about 'knowing' prog.. and that has been reserved to
the admins.. as it should be in my opinion.
Edited by micky - May 30 2007 at 19:13
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 14:03 |
Certif1ed wrote:
If I remember correctly, the original purpose of this thread was not to debate the inclusion, but where to put the band. |
Somebody actually READ my first post! .....
If you scroll down a little bit in the previous page, you'll find a thread called "Metallica", where we should have continued the discussion....
I was going to make this poll a vote-only one, but I didn't... Guess it's my mistake after all.....
Well, the opinion is on anyway: put Metallica in the Archives, in the folk-chinese grunge genre, as many have suggested here...
|
|
|
Visitor13
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: February 02 2005
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 4702
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 12:15 |
Cert, I think Micky meant that it was the '70s prog bands that didn't influence the metallic side of prog metal bands.
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 12:10 |
^ IMO to add Led Zeppelin was a logical step after Deep Purple and Queen had been added - but to add Iron Maiden as the *only* metal "prog related" band ... I accept the decision (like I said above), but I think it's wrong. Edit: I should add that I agree with most of the decisions of the admin team ... this is only one out of many.
Edited by MikeEnRegalia - May 30 2007 at 13:18
|
|
|
Easy Livin
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 12:00 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
And let me be equally frank: I think the admins made a horrible decision there. |
Which decision are you referring to there Mike, LZ or IM (or both)?
Edited by Easy Livin - May 30 2007 at 12:00
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 11:53 |
^ Saying that prog metal is less prog than the original bands of the 70s is perfectly fine ... I even agree, although it is a very broad statement. If you took it one step further and said something like "Prog Metal doesn't belong here - none of these bands are prog enough" then I would begin to feel offended. BTW: I wasn't referring specifically to you when I was talking about people who bash the genre ... and it also depends on the thread whether bashing the genre is offensive at all.
|
|
|
Rocktopus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 02 2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 4202
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 11:43 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
I never said that liking prog metal was a requirement ... I'd simply appreciate if those who don't like the genre refrained from bashing it.
|
Is that what I'm doing? Am I not correct about PM's main sources for inspiration? Where am I bashing the genre? Is it when I state my honest opinion about it continously dissapointing me? Saying that most progmetal is less progressive than the original 70's prog-movement, feels about as controversial as saying that protoprog is less complex than R.I.O.
Edited by Rocktopus - May 30 2007 at 11:44
|
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
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 08:05 |
micky wrote:
let me be frank Mike.... that is why the admins decide these matters..
the basic disconnect between the two is IM were directly influenced by
the prog movement itself.. and it shows in the musc.
Metallica weren't. I don't see why you keep on dragging IM into
this. Different cases... and face it.. IM had a far stronger case
for being included here at PA's. As Zeppelin showed as well..
it's not only influence ON prog.. but infuence BY prog.
|
With all due respect ... this post does not sound like you listened to Master of Puppets. And let me be equally frank: I think the admins made a horrible decision there. I accept that they have the right to make the decisions - I'd even accept if they overruled the PM team on Prog Metal additions ... but a) I don't have to agree with the decisions, and b) they're not automatically right just because the admins make them.
Edited by MikeEnRegalia - May 30 2007 at 08:06
|
|
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 06:49 |
micky wrote:
enteredwinter wrote:
I also voted for the joke option as my way of voicing "Metallica shouldn't be here", which I believe for reasons I already explained in the recent "Metallica?" thread in this part of the forum.
IMO, the poll should have included an option that said: "Metallica shouldn't be added to the Archives", instead of the joke option, because not doing so seems to assume that people generally agree that they should be added, which is clearly not the case.
In other words, before we decide what section to put them in, shouldn't we decide by vote if they belong here in the first place? I know that three or four people have stated their case in the other thread in favor of adding them, but a vote that measures what the overall sentiment is on this issue would have been more appropriate at this point. IMHO. Not that the archives should listen to the majority ... but still I think it would be valuable input to see where the majority lies.
|
voted for the joke option myself... reading the cases for them in the other thread... not convinced of influence... and seems more of a case was made that they were in fact PM. Not convinced by that either.... as Tony said in the other thread. Where is the best place for them...simple... neither...
they aren't PM.... by most accounts... and they aren't Prog related enough to merit inclusion here by several who I think undestand what it is and what the category stands for. TOO many bands have prog elements in their music.. it is about influence and impact on PROG in many cases and I am not convinced that their impact was on the 'prog' side of prog-metal. I think that came from the classic groups that many PM artists list as direct influences... they sure as hell didn't influence the metallic side of things
|
These are very bald statements of opinion - I'd like to understand your reasoning.
Especially that last statement - how on earth can anyone deny Metallica's influence on the metallic side of things???
Dream Theater covered MOP - that's enough, but if you want more evidence, listen out for the Metallica riffs on "Images and Words", and the extensions of Metallica-like constructions.
micky wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
micky wrote:
they aren't PM.... by most accounts... and they aren't Prog related enough to merit inclusion here by several who I think undestand what it is and what the category stands for. TOO many bands have prog elements in their music.. it is about influence and impact on PROG in many cases and I am not convinced that their impact was on the 'prog' side of prog-metal. I think that came from the classic groups that many PM artists list as direct influences... they sure as hell didn't influence the metallic side of things
|
Do you think that Iron Maiden had that much of a "prog influence" on prog metal bands either?
|
let me be frank Mike.... that is why the admins decide these matters..
the basic disconnect between the two is IM were directly influenced by the prog movement itself.. and it shows in the musc. Metallica weren't. I don't see why you keep on dragging IM into this. Different cases... and face it.. IM had a far stronger case for being included here at PA's. As Zeppelin showed as well.. it's not only influence ON prog.. but infuence BY prog.
|
Again, interesting opinions - ones that I would say completely justify Metallica's inclusion, since they were clearly inspired by Prog to create such elaborate instrumental sections, lights and shades and use of unusual time signatures - but absolutely no reasoning again.
If I remember correctly, the original purpose of this thread was not to debate the inclusion, but where to put the band.
Edited by Certif1ed - May 30 2007 at 06:51
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 06:03 |
I never said that liking prog metal was a requirement ... I'd simply appreciate if those who don't like the genre refrained from bashing it.
|
|
|
Rocktopus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 02 2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 4202
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 05:47 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Maybe you simply don't like prog metal?
|
So what? That certainly doesn't mean I'm wrong, and everyone who likes it are right.
Edited by Rocktopus - May 30 2007 at 05:54
|
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
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 05:44 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
micky wrote:
they aren't PM.... by most accounts... and they aren't Prog
related enough to merit inclusion here by several who I think undestand
what it is and what the category stands for. TOO many bands have
prog elements in their music.. it is about influence and impact on PROG
in many cases and I am not convinced that their impact was
on the 'prog' side of prog-metal. I think that came from the
classic groups that many PM artists list as direct influences... they
sure as hell didn't influence the metallic side of things
|
Do you think that Iron Maiden had that much of a "prog influence" on prog metal bands either?
|
let me be frank Mike.... that is why the admins decide these matters..
the basic disconnect between the two is IM were directly influenced by
the prog movement itself.. and it shows in the musc.
Metallica weren't. I don't see why you keep on dragging IM into
this. Different cases... and face it.. IM had a far stronger case
for being included here at PA's. As Zeppelin showed as well..
it's not only influence ON prog.. but infuence BY prog.
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: May 30 2007 at 05:39 |
^ I'll use this "trap" as long as Iron Maiden are the only prog-related metal band in the archives. "Ok, so Prog Metal is mainly inspired by Iron Maiden and Metallica, a
couple of other metal bands and two-three the biggest prog act of the
70's. That's excactly the reason its not considered nearly as
progressive as the original prog-movement by most who knows it well... And why each time when I've streamed a track or two by almost any of the post 70's/PM bands on your playlist, I've been dissapointed." Maybe you simply don't like prog metal?
|
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.