What is so wrong with Prog metal

Teaflax wrote: Nota bene: I have absolutely no problem with the heaviness. I grew up on Metallica, Motörhead, Megadeth, Therapy? and others, coming from a hardcore Punk background (Black Flag and Flipper are still abnds I enjoy a great deal). I like me a good aggressive thrash, but as soon as it turns into Blues, I'm out.

I really don't understand the blues thing. I played blues for several years and trust me it is nothing like DT Shadow Gallery or Dali's Dilemma. I have a fair amount of musical knowledge and I don't understand the melodic make-up of DT songs. They use classical chord structures with wierd church mode scales all the time. Rush's first album is blues and they had a smattering of bluesey tunes scattered on their fist couple albums (I think I'm going bald to name one).

I'm 32 and I have been a classic symphonic prog lover since I was 16. All those years I didn't like Dream Theater and the rest of prog-metal stuff, as it was too heavy for my taste. But nowadays I'm a bit tired of listening always the same groups and I've realized that prog-metal bands are the real innovators of the genre. I love regressive bands like Spock's Beard or The Flower Kings, but I have to admit that Dream Theater, Opeth, etc. have something newer and exciting to offer. I forced myself to listen to them and now, after I have got used to their heavy approach, I love their music.

I don't get the number of notes being played argument. Last time I looked Rick Wakeman was a classically trained pianist. That guys fingers moved quicker than anyone elses back in the day. Same for Patrick Moraz. They did classical style solos. Its funny because Jordan Rudess get cud for moving his fingers too fast whan at the time Rick Wakeman was praised for it.

There is nothing "so wrong" with prog metal. I just don't like it. Particularly the vocals, which seem to me to be without character. But then I haven't listened to all that much of it, so I'm not the best judge.

I admit that some of the Enlish bands of the 70's were ahead of their time and didn't really know what they were doing in terms of creating a new genre of music, what is the point of having a musical influence (mine is Peart and Protnoy) if you can't expound on it. Dream Theater took the composition aspects of Yes and made them heavy. So by your logic any band that sound remotely like aonther is "trying" too hard. There are an infinite number of bands that copied the blues bands from the 30's 40's and 50's (i.e. Led Zeppelin) but they were not being judged the way you are judign DT. People knew they took blues to a heavier place.

The whole point of prog is to take music to a level that usually takes a focused ear to appreciate i just dont like bands that are blatantly TRYING to be "prog"...annoys me

I read a lot of prog forums on the web and I get the same thing over and over, prog metal sucks blah blah blah. The whole point of prog is to take music to a level that usually takes a focused ear to appreciate. The music that Dream Theater makes blows away ANYTHING being produced in the "rock" realm today. Would you rather listen to Nickelback or Disturbed? Most of the bands mentioned in these discussions are not even together anymore (e.g. Genesis, ELP, Floyd). It takes serious talent to play DT, Synphony X, Dali's Dilemma, Shadow Gallery , etc. and many of the musicians that play now could hang with the musicians of the golden days of prog. I would even argue that DT is doing more to further prog than most of the neo-synphonic-classic prog bands are.  They did concepts album, long songs and make mince-meat out of odd time more than most other prog bands out there. If you don't like heavy guitars just say so and be done with it. But to dismiss bands like DT just because they may be more popular than some obscure French band is silly. Yes and Rush are more mainstream than DT is! Now I will tell you I am a huge fan of Rsh (it's how I learned to play drums), Yes (How awesome is Close to the Edge and The Gates of Delerium) and Jethro Tull. However, I can't stand Genesis. I think they are boring. I listened to several of their CD's and nearly fell asleep. To me Marillion isn't much better. I think a lot of the discussion of which type of prog is better stems from the demographic viewpoint of the writer. I am 34 and grew up on heavy metal but still love Rush, Yes Floyd and Tull. I am a card-carrying member of the prog-snob community and I find it silly that people who like prog just dismiss other who happen to like a "different-kind" of prog. The moral of the story is kids, "Can't we all just get along?" Prog to me is my outlet from the crap being played in the real world. Let's just appreciate to musicianship and creative outlet prog gives to all of us. But I know if we did that there would be no reason for forums. So let the flaming begin.