What is so wrong with Prog metal

Certif1ed wrote: AtLossForWords wrote: Certif1ed wrote: AtLossForWords wrote: I'd have to agree Mike.  Judas Priest is a blueprint for metal, but it's not as much of a direct influence as a band like Iron Maiden was.  I think you could call Iron Maiden's A Number of the Beast the first modern metal album. I would say that Black Sabbath's "Heaven and Hell" was the first modern metal album - had you considered that?          I don't think Black Sabbath did anything that was particularly metal.  The overall tonality is similar in a few aspects, but the composition is much different.  Heaven and Hell comes close, but still has more in common with hard rock.  Black Sabbath's lyrical content was more "metal" than anything else they did.      What I mean is that Iommi almost completely changed his riffing style to fit around Dio's comedy metal lyrics. "Turn Up The Night" is as metal as you like - I don't know how old you are, but if you'd heard that in 1980, like I did, you would have jumped out of your chair with excitement - there's nothing from 1980 to compare it to. The NWOBHM was all about heavy metal - that was when it was properly defined. Black Sabbath were regarded as Heavy Metal then, and I think deserve the title: The riffs are chugging, the vocals are soaring, the drums are pounding - and the lyrics are about dragons, kings and Rainbows - how much more metal can you get? I am very confused about your phrase "overall tonality is similar in a few aspects, but the composition is much different": The "tonality" of metal always was - and still seems to be very simple. Power chords abound, with a few tasteful changes from major to minor to promote a modal feel, with perhaps a harmonic minor scale thrown in for effect among the pentatonic minors - but almost entirely diatonic. The formal composition of metal has never really changed: Simple rock somg form with perhaps a few additional bridges, an extended solo and a coda - nothing fancy at all.

If you honestly don't believe Sabbath to be a metal band, you should also disqualify the legions of doom and stoner metal bands who shamlessly rip off their style even today from "metal" categorization.  So what if their riffs aren't as fast, since when did metal have to be about speed?


Edited by Bryan - June 05 2006 at 18:49

Been thinking..

Edited by RycheMan - June 05 2006 at 18:58

Forgotten Son wrote: Teaflax wrote: RycheMan wrote: Then why is Mindcrime so highly praised? http://www.digitaldreamdoor.com/ Let me see if I can get what you are asking: if almost exclusive use of Metal/Rock tonality is no hindrance to a band's inclusion on PA, why is Operation: Mindcrime so highly praised on another site? Believe me, I never wanted Operation Mindcrime to be that high on the list, but many disenting posters, as well as my co-list moderator, forced my hand.

hahahha..... while the other moderator didn't give a hoot I bet......

Psssh. All of this is irrelevant as everyone knows the most metal band for all eternity is Manowar

Okay, all jokes aside, despite Mindcrime's...er....not quite up to prog standards...ness..... it did definitely have an influence. However, you say that The Mission sounds like pull me under. Well, to me, it also sounds like Welcome Home (Sanitarium) and One, both by Metallica, or any of those suspended echoey note intros.


Edited by heyitsthatguy - June 05 2006 at 22:41

Jeff Schu wrote: heyitsthatguy wrote: Psssh. All of this is irrelevant as everyone knows the most metal band for all eternity is Manowar Okay, all jokes aside, despite Mindcrime's...er....not quite up to prog standards...ness..... it did definitely have an influence. However, you say that The Mission sounds like pull me under. Well, to me, it also sounds like Welcome Home (Sanitarium) and One, both by Metallica, or any of those suspended echoey note intros.   Well listen to them Back to Back and you'll see what I mean... It's during the instrumental break in The Mission if you have ears you should hear it and how much parts of Pull Me Under sound like it.

Touche. Although for the record its the drumbeat thats most similar. And a guitarline that sounds exactly like the ending...yeah well Images and Words at least had the Ryche influence, but I think it ends there. (BTW I prefer Pull Me Under any day)


Edited by heyitsthatguy - June 05 2006 at 22:57

AtLossForWords wrote: Black Sabbath did not have the speed and aggression to their music than bands like Iron Maiden and Judas Priest did.

"Turn Up the Night" is a very fast song for Sabbath, and they always had plenty of aggression - are you sure we're talking about the same band?

AtLossForWords wrote: Has Sabbath done anything with the style of quintessential "modern metal" songs like Run to the Hills or Painkiller?

There's no such thing as "quintessential modern metal" - and if there was, Black Sabbath's style would be right in there. They almost invented the use of the tritone in rock.

And to answer your question: "Heaven and Hell" (the entire album) practically defines the modern style - as I said in my original post that you're trying to dispute.

AtLossForWords wrote: As for your arguement of 1980, Iron Maiden's self titled release and '81 follow Killers demonstrated much more of a modern metal formula.

No they don't - they both have a pronounced punk influence - the "formula" changed dramatically when Bruce joined from Samson. Maiden didn't get the modern style until "Number of the Beast" in 1982 - as you said earlier.

AtLossForWords wrote: Judas Priest Brittish Steel and Point of Entry in their respective years of '80 and '81 also fall much more on the side of Maiden's releases than Sabbath's. Sabbath's Heaven and Hell seems to have much more in common with Alice Cooper's releases which are disputedly described as hard rock.

"British Steel" was Priest's first "modern" sounding album, but that was largely due to a need to keep up with the NWOBHM.

"Heaven and Hell" sounds absolutely nothing like Alice Cooper - at least, to my ears.

AtLossForWords wrote: I think your 1980 argument for Sabbath's Heaven and Hell is losing steam.

You wish - you've been schooled and you're using a statement like that to desparately turn the argument around!

Sneaky tactic - but it doesn't work on me.

AtLossForWords wrote: Aside from Maiden's and Priest's which influence many different styles of metal. Saxon's Strong Arm of the Law and Motorhead's The Ace of Spades were also released in 1980, both of which had a very strong influence on thrash.

Yes, I know - I was a huge Motorhead and Saxon fan - but both are very different to Sabbath.

The strongest influence on thrash was "Exciter" (Priest), which IS thrash, but 6 years ahead of it's time.

The discussion of Thrash is interesting - but I fail to see it's relevance in this context.

AtLossForWords wrote: Lars Ulrich of Metallica for one worshipped Motorhead, but to my knowledge says very little of Black Sabbath. You haven't forgotten about Manilla Road, Venom, and Thin Lizzy's releases that all came out between '80 and '81 have you?

Of course not - but for brevity I didn't mention every possible band.

I could also have mentioned Angel Witch, Diamond Head, Samson, Raven, Def Leppard, Budgie, the Scorpions, the Michael Schenker Group, Bleak House, Dio, Ozzy/Randy Rhoades and a vast swathe of other NWOBHM and related bands that had a huge influence, but what Lars Ulrich thinks of Black Sabbath is irrelevant for this discussion.

AtLossForWords wrote: I know NWoBHM is what metal was about in the beginning, that's why I've mentioned Maiden, Priest, and Saxon. All of which had a much more direct influence to metal bands.

A more direct influence than Sabbath?

Are you really saying that?

Sabbath practically invented Metal - other lesser known contenders may include High Tide, Bakerloo, Blue Cheer - or even Cream or Hendrix - but Sabbath get the kudos from most people who know anything about metal.

AtLossForWords wrote: By overall tonality vs. composition I am not talking about the structure of the parts, but the actual music behind the parts. Tonality is basically the generic tones for each insturment and vocalist, along with atmosphere and such.

No it isn't - you're talking about timbre.

Tonality has to do with harmony structures - it has nothing to do with the quality of the sound itself.

If you're talking about the actual music, you should be talking in terms of all 5 elements of music - not just one.

AtLossForWords wrote: By compostion I'm talking more about riffing. Black Sabbath's riffs are not to the speed of Maiden, Motorhead, Saxon, Priest, or Venom.

Speed has nothing to do with it - and Sabbath did actually do a few pacy numbers.

No-one played as fast as Motorhead, except Priest on a couple of occasions. They were renowned as the fastest band on the planet, and had a totally different riffing style to anyone else, since their music was more firmly grounded in 1970's hard rock. If United Artists hadn't got cold feet and shelved their debut, then Metal would have revolutionised the world's music scene - not punk, and Motorhead would be remembered as the leaders of the metal revolution.

Riffing isn't composition - it's riffing.

A riff will be worked over a number of bars for one segment of a composition, then a new riff may be introduced.

Riffing evolved from bands such as the Kinks and the Who - it's a technique used as part of composition, but it's not a compositional technique - that's the difference.

AtLossForWords wrote: The structure for the bands are similar, but the technique is not.

Not sure what point you're making here - most NWOBHM bands developed different techniques - largely on a "subtle" level, but all the bands I've mentioned so far are strikingly different and innovative in their own ways (except Bleak House, who are only famous for inspiring a Metallica song).

AtLossForWords wrote: While speaking of scales, Iommi primarily sticks to pentatonic scales, while you have already stated metal sticks much more to diatonic scales.

No - I said that metal uses both pentatonic and Diatonic scales.

Early metal primarily used pentatonic, since it arose from the blues via hard rock. Motorhead (your example) are a classic consumer of the pentatonic scale.
    
    

Edited by Certif1ed - June 06 2006 at 03:45

certif1ed wrote: No they don't - they both have a pronounced punk influence - the "formula" changed dramatically when Bruce joined from Samson. Maiden didn't get the modern style until "Number of the Beast" in 1982 - as you said earlier.

  The style didn't exactly change dramatically songs like The Ides of March, Murders in the Rue Morgue, Progidal Son, Sancturary, Transylvania, and Remember Tomorrow showcased many different styles of "modern metal" including the softer acoustic passages (something which punk did not have).  Iron Maiden's first release can easily compete with Sabbath's Heaven and Hell and Priest's Brittish Steel as the most influential metal album of 1980.

[

AtLossForWords wrote: The style didn't exactly change dramatically songs like The Ides of March, Murders in the Rue Morgue, Progidal Son, Sancturary, Transylvania, and Remember Tomorrow showcased many different styles of "modern metal" including the softer acoustic passages (something which punk did not have). Iron Maiden's first release can easily compete with Sabbath's Heaven and Hell and Priest's Brittish Steel as the most influential metal album of 1980.

I'm very familiar with the early Maiden albums - I used to go and see them a lot, especially when they played at Bracknell Sports club and the other small venues in our area.

I said they had a punk influence, not that they were a punk band.

Maiden's first release simply does not have the polished sound of Heaven and Hell or British Steel - we're not talking about influence, we're talking about the "modern sound".

Don't lose the thead!

AtLossForWords wrote: certif1ed wrote: "British Steel" was Priest's first "modern" sounding album, but that was largely due to a need to keep up with the NWOBHM. There you've said it yourself. Should we now begiving Priest the credit for modern metal now.

Said what?

That Priest should get the credit for modern metal?

You're making up your own little thread now, aren't you?

I said... but you can read what I said this time

AtLossForWords wrote: certif1ed wrote: Sneaky tactic - but it doesn't work on me. Well you're a savy guy, it seems this won't be as easy.

Depends what you're trying to do really.

AtLossForWords wrote: certif1ed wrote: Yes, I know - I was a huge Motorhead and Saxon fan - but both are very different to Sabbath. That's what I'm trying to say. Sabbath is too different from modern metal to have the most direct influence.

I didn't say that... Saxon were different to Motorhead were different to Priest were different to Sabbath...

"Heaven and Hell" is the earliest album I can think of with a "modern" metal sound - I think it's more modern sounding than British Steel, "Ace of Spades" has a stunning sound, but it's unique to Motorhead, "Strong Arm" sounds a bit old these days - very similar sound to Saxon's debut, and the only other radically modern sounding metal album of 1980 was probably AC/DC's "Back In Black", which kicks serious ass to this day.

AtLossForWords wrote: certif1ed wrote: Sabbath get the kudos from most people who know anything about metal. I could understand giving kudos to Sabbath for the timbre of metal, but as you've already said bands like Motorhead and Saxon are very different from Sabbath.

Yes they're different... (is there an echo in here?)

Sabbath didn't just influence metal through timbre - don't forget my point about the tritone. It's the harmonic structures that Sabbath put together that are still prevalent in metal everywhere more than the timbre.

It wasn't just the music either - the whole doominess and "devilish" aspects of Sabbath's lyrics and appearance was a huge influence on metal.

AtLossForWords wrote: certif1ed wrote: Speed has nothing to do with it - and Sabbath did actually do a few pacy numbers. I hope I'm not misinterpreting you when I believe by it you're referring to "modern metal". To my knowledge speed has quite a bit to do with most "modern metal".

Not really - some modern "modern metal" is very fast, thanks to the revolution of thrash, which was spearheaded by Metallica.

AtLossForWords wrote: Is a band categorized by just a "few" of it's numbers. If that's the case maybe Metallica is progresive metal for their works "The Call of Ktulu", "...And Justice For All", and "To Live is to Die". Metallica had a few proggy numbers. [IMG]height=17 alt=Wink src="smileys/smiley2.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle>

It's not just Metallica's slow numbers that are proggy - but that's a whole new discussion and largely dependent on how you define what is and what is not proggy.

AtLossForWords wrote: certif1ed wrote: with perhaps a harmonic minor scale thrown in for effect among the pentatonic minors - but almost entirely diatonic. certif1ed wrote: No - I said that metal uses both pentatonic and Diatonic scales. Early metal primarily used pentatonic, since it arose from the blues via hard rock. Motorhead (your example) are a classic consumer of the pentatonic scale. Which is it, is metal primarily diatonic or primarily pentatonic. You're being confusing when you say metal is almost entirely diatonic and then go back and say early metal is primarily pentatonic.

It seems clear to me that I'm saying metal uses both and not committing in either case to one or the other - so I'm not contradicting myself at all.

Some metal bands use pentatonic exclusively.
Some concentrate on using the more "exotic" diatonic modes to create a more jazzy or far-eastern sound.

I see where the confusion lies - I use the term diatonic quite freely, as it means conventional major/minor harmony - and it can also be used to differentiate between pentatonic and diatonic scales.

However, most early metal bands use diatonic harmony - ie they never deviate from the key signature, and use major and minor chords - but also use pentatonic scales in their soloing and vocal melodies. Sabbath did more than this - but that's another discussion.

As Mike says, "Number of the Beast" contains harmonic minor scales in the soloing - which is a break away from the all-too-prevalent pentatonic scales of earlier soloing - but Maiden weren't the first. Thin Lizzy didn't stick to pentatonic scales either, as one example.

AtLossForWords wrote: Motorhead is one of my examples, and you said that many bands developed different tecniques. So therefore Motorhead's use of the pentatonic scale may not necessarily be a big influence on modern metal, but their speed was.

Sorry, that does not follow.

Speed is but one element - and some metal bands play slowly. Not all metal bands use thrash, and very few use Motorhead's signature styles - "Kill 'Em All" does to some extent, especially "Motorbreath" (co-incidence?) and "Powertrippin'" by the Almighty bears some resemblance to "Overkill" - but almost no-one plays using the same speed techniques as Motorhead - not even Saxon.

I think a good experiment would be through a straw poll using a few examples - pick a few very modern metal tracks that are plainly different stylistically, and then see if we can spot which 1980s band had most influence on the songs.

Certif1ed wrote: Don't lose the thead!