Can each type of Metal be progressive?

I think some metal genres are just too simplistic and aimed at mainstream appeal in general so that if a band in it were to develope progressive tendencies it could no longer be viewed as a member of that genre. Speaking of the genres Hair Metal and Nu-Metal really where I don't agree with either of your examples.

Trickster F. wrote: So, the main question is, is there an opposite to Prog within whatever genre of Metal? Let's try to look over to see whether that is true or not, by trying to find one example for each sub-genre of Metal.   Traditional Metal - half of the popular bands under the tag 'Progressive Metal' fit this definitin.

Interesting thread, but I'm lost looking at the above quote. Are you trying to find an opposite of prog in each genre or is the list a seperate thing?

I personally hold the belief that the quintessential or most perfect representation of Progressive Metal are bands called Dream Theater, Pain of Salvation, Zero Hour, Vanden Plas, Tool, and etc.

Opeth really opened up the door for more and more bands to be classified as Progressive Metal.  I think if Opeth isn't classified as Progressive Metal, very few extreme bands if any would be considered Progressive Metal now.

In other words

Progressive Metal is a genre of bands like Dream Theater and Pain of Salvation, but other bands do Progressive things with their music.

uh
that was quite confusing aahahhauhauhaua
but i get it now

let me see

Death Metal: Death
Black Metal: Borknagar
Power Metal: Angra
Folk Metal: Agalloch
Thrash Metal: Nevermore ( i'm still wondering why they aren't in the archives)
Nu-Metal: System of a Down ( i really see some prog in their music)
Doom Metal: Anathema
Gothic Metal: Epica

i will not put grindcore, metalcore and industrial cause i don't like, don't listen and don't know a thing about this kind of music

Very interesting...
I also used to think that Progressive Metal was a kind of...virtuoso heavy metal with its roots in Iron Maiden and Metallica, as Dream Theater and maybe Synphony x...
But then I discovered Pain of Salvation, Opeth, Tool...etc and I realized that its almoust always Heavy metal, whatever this may be with more elaborated, sophisticated structures and adventurous passages... then I also began to think that bands like Symphony x may not be that progressive, but more of virtuoso metal, full of shreading...but progressive?...well, maybe but Im not so sure

Well, if you ask me the best example of Progressive metal, or to begin understanding progressive metal would be Ayreons albums, this ones are truly 50% metal and 50% prog... or better yet, 50% metal and 50% symphonic

Also of note (and often overlooked) is Progressive Sludge Metal, with bands like Isis, Pelican, and Callisto.

Trickster, for progressive power metal Symphony X would be a suitable choice?

It may be difficult to think of Symphony X this way, I guess; we are quite used to think of them as a 'prog metal' band. But if there is not such a subgenre, then this example would not fit?

Oh man... genreizing makes my head hurt... But I will try to contribute something.

In my observation, I have found music to be very cyclical.  You can never not be influenced by someone else, yet on the other hand, you must distinguish yourself as an individual artist.  So being an artist is almost an exercise in contradiction.  This contradiction is magnified within the boundaries of progressive rock, thanks to how we popularly characterize what is "prog" as fans.  Today's "prog" is supposed to be influenced by older "prog"; but "prog" is supposed to push the boundaries, be unique and unprecedented—in other words, it's supposed to be "progressive."  So anything we label as prog is cursed with this intense contradiction.

Therefore, I don't think the question is whether one of these definitions of "prog" is better than the other; I think the goal of the artist is to balance these two seeming contradictions.  Nothing any artist makes will ever be completely new.  Nevertheless, the artist takes what s/he knows and makes it different, makes it better, makes it their own.

So if genreizing is your thing, then I have this to say:  it would be possible to make/classify any type of metal as progressive.  But due to the arbitrary rules and definitions we create, we may ourselves keep this from happening.  Example:  I really wouldn't consider System of a Down as prog.  But why is this?  I believe it would be their influence:  I have a hard time hearing any prog influence at all in their sound (though that doesn't mean it's not there).  On the other hand, with a blend of modern (and bordering on the extreme) metal and world music, there's no doubt SoaD are fairly unique and original, and thus fairly "progressive". 

It seems to me that the definition we stick with for prog-metal is a metal band with notable prog influences or a prog band with notable metal influences—characteristics most of us would give for Dream Theater, Pain of Salvation, etc.  So the cycle lives on...  We love the bands who respect the past, and we love the bands who embrace the future.  Hopefully these two mindsets can coexist and thrive.

(Hope that makes sense.)


Edited by xtopher - September 10 2006 at 02:45

1.classic metal - Iron Maiden
2.power metal - Helloween
3.progressive metal - Queensryche
4.glam/hair metal - Twisted Sister
5.thrash Metal - Destruction
6.death metal - Death (what else?)
7.black metal - Emperor
8.atmosheric/goth - bands like As Divine Grace or 3rd And The Mortal
9.nu metal - Machine Head
10.folk metal - Skyclad
11.grind metal - Napalm Death
12.NWOSHM - In Flames
13.US/hardcore metal - Lamb Of God

(14.White Metal - Strypes )

oliverstoned wrote: All that is pure invention. You can invent all sub genres and categories you want, there's not the smallest progressive element in all that. This is just garbage teenage music, IMO!

Olivier, of course you have every right to express your opinion... Only remember that here there are people who like that genre, and not all of them are teenagers (I also like some metal, as you might remember, and I'm definitely NOT a teenager!) - and opinions can and should be expressed in a more subdued way to avoid offending others.

As to invention or the presence of progressive elements, I think this is an ongoing debate, and that on this website or others there is no agreement on what constitutes progressive... This is what you think, but no one can say it's the gospel truth. We're not talking hard sciences here, but an art form.