The "problem" with prog metal

Read the whole post Sasquatch, and if you ever write a complete sentence or use a two-syllable word I'll be sure to take that completely out of context just to return the favor.

You may have a point. But don't blmae Dream Theater or Symphony X for having thousand of clones... Blame the clones....

Edited by The T - March 30 2007 at 23:55

I think the point that has been brought up about dream theatre and symphony X type bands is probably the key to this issue.

Power metal is an extremely polarising genre, the majority of people will hate it because it's ireffutably cheesy and for many extremely hard to take seriously both musically and image wise. But as with most things that polarise people the people who love it are very vocal and passionate about that love.

When you combine all that knowledge and compare that with the fact that a lot of popular prog metal bands are power metal influenced (It is my opinion that DT are) or prog/power combos then it's not hard to see why it generates so much derision. Indeed it's not that much different to the derision that heavy metal itself recieves.

Make no mistakes I'm not a prog metal basher, I'm a metal head and a prog nerd so of course I'm going to enjoy a combination of both.

^ I'm at home on both sides ... and beyond these two camps.

Certif1ed wrote: Peter Rideout wrote: Re the whole "progressive" thing  (as the dictionary would have it) you guys are arguing about, lots of neo prog is not truly "progressive" because it is actually regressive -- it follows the established patterns and cliches of classic prog.   Does it really?   How?   Examples?   I don't hear that at all in the Neo Prog I've listened to. Peter Rideout wrote:  sounding like prog," goes, obviously hearkening back to the old sound is good enough for inclusion (see Misplaced Childhood, and countless other neo albums).   I know that album well, and can identify maybe two or three places where Marillion pay an oblique tribute - but none of this "hearkening back to the old sound" - could you be more specific, as I really don't hear it.      Peter Rideout wrote: Now, doesn't PM often incorporate "sounds like" elements from classic prog (fast, flashy synth solos, etc.)? Isn't that really why it is here?   If that's the reason, then there are swathes of other musical styles in the wings that use one or two things that are in common with Prog. Not all Prog had those particular elements (Pink Floyd, for example).   When will ABBA make an appearance? (Check out Benny's "Intermezzo" on their second album).   Peter Rideout wrote:  If not, then when will the modern, "updated" "progressive" forms of other music genres be added? Where's the alt-country? Where's my Wilco? Fairport Convention are here (a mistake, IMO), but where is the rest of the Celtic stuff that's played on electric instruments, and incorporates synths? Are the Pogues a "progression" on old-style Irish traditional? (And no, I don't really think they fit here -- because they sound nothing like prog!)   Here's wisdom. Peter Rideout wrote: If we rigidly demand "progression" as per the dictionary, don't we have to remove most of the stuff that's listed here, including many albums by classic prog acts, where the overall sound changed little, if at all, from one album to the next? (while still sounding like prog -- see A Trick of the Tail to Wind & Wuthering, to And Then There Were Three -- was there truly "progression" there? No - "Progressive" is a bit more than that, in terms of music.   Peter Rideout wrote:   You're working with too rigid and "linguistic/mathematical" a definition of "progressive," folks, IMHO! a dangerous route to take, and one which most of us will never relate to.   No, the trouble is that most people have their own inflexible definitions rather than looking at the bigger picture.   Peter Rideout wrote:   Such an exacting criteria is never going to happen, and not really what it's all about, anyway. Don't get hung up on the word "progressive," and counting notes & chord changes, is my advice -- step back from the microscope, Poindexter, and listen to your heart. More wisdom.   Peter Rideout wrote: Because if that's really how you want it played out, then Sting is a "progression" from the Police, maybe ska is a "progression" from reggae, PIL is a "progression" from the Sex Pistols, John Lee Hooker from Robert Johnson, and Shania Twain might even be a "progression" from Hank Williams.   Stop trying to quantify, categorize and pin down art via your "math" and "weights and measures," guys! It misses the whole point of art as an emotional, subjective, fluid thing. You'll never "apprehend" it that way, or achieve concensus!   On the one side, that is correct.   The multiplicity of vague genres only leads to confusion and misunderstanding, and sub-genrising confused genres leads to more...   But examining established and provable elements of music leads to greater understanding.   Just like learning more about what happened after the big bang leads to our understanding of the universe - even though we'll never know what happened before it, or what happened at point zero in time.    Peter Rideout wrote: Just my three cents worth -- make of it what you will. No big deal.   I think I extracted 2 cents...   There was a bad penny in your analysis of Neo-Prog       /edit - I really don't know why the flippin' forum software insists on decreasing my font size... oh well, size isn't important...

Sorry Cert -- no offense and all, but I really can't be bothered any more.

I like lots of neo, but to me, the overall sound definitely hearkens back to that of old prog. (That does not mean I don't like it, I just think bands like IQ, Echolyn and yes, Fish's Marillion, generally tread the path "laid long before."

As a non-musician, I don't understand a lot of your technical/intellectual arguments, and I don't relate to art like that anyway.

In any case, I would hazard to guess (based simply on the increasing success/popularity of metal threads), that the current majority of PA members are metal fans, so PM is here to stay. Whether it's truly prog or more "prog, as far as metal goes'" (as Mike implied when he suggested that PM is not a subgenre of prog, but a sub genre of metal) does not seem to matter. The "prog umbrella" has de-facto been expanded to include metal. I may not like the music, but as I say, ever-increasing numbers apparently do like it,. so my pointing out my personal "problems" with this popular music will (as I've found) achieve nothing but  to offend lots of people, and make them dislike me. (And most of them, Ive found, also like the classic prog I enjoy best anyway.)

So I just don't want to talk about it any more, and I should have avoided this thread in the first place. If I'm to remain on this forum, and actually enjoy my time here, without pointless fights and stress, I have to stop trying to resist the prevailing tide. In my house "prog" means one thing -- here, it means that, and a lot more as well.

The old stuff is still there, there's still new stuff that sounds a lot like the old, there's some unique (truly "progressive") new stuff I enjoy (GYBE, Deus Ex Machina, etc), but a very large part of what "prog" is now, is metal. It's not 1974 -- or even 2004 -- any more! Time marches on, the prog "torch" has effectively been passed, and a new generation of its fans have incorporated metal to the ever-expanding "prog" pantheon. Words acquire new, additional meanings over time, and "prog" has not been an exception to that irresistible phenomenon.

So whether I (and a few other doddering ancients, plus scattered young eccentrics) like PM or not (and of course we don't all like everything), or consider it to be truly a valid form of the music which I know  as  "prog" or not, I have to accept 2007's  reality.

So, no offense please, old friend and "comrade," but I'm respectfully bowing out of the discussion.

BTW, thanks for finding "wisdom" in some of my observations -- I am flattered.


Edited by Peter Rideout - April 01 2007 at 23:51

MikeEnRegalia wrote: I really don't think that Prog Metal is any more (or less) popular today than it was ten years ago ... it's not like Prog Metal is "taking over" all the Prog Rock fans.

Edited by Peter Rideout - April 02 2007 at 03:28

Anyway, I said I was bowing out (and perhaps we can see why -- all I get is grief from such discussions ), but I'd still like to hear from some of those older, respected longterm members whom I've listed, on this.

i can't see why people argued over prog metal like it's a matter of life and death. can't you just leave something when you are dead sure you won't like it ? it's not like it's going to kill you either

Peter Rideout wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: I really don't think that Prog Metal is any more (or less) popular today than it was ten years ago ... it's not like Prog Metal is "taking over" all the Prog Rock fans. Well, having been here since the start, I think metal (and threads about it) is more popular overall HERE than it was in 2004. I think as the new generation of prog fans grows in numbers and influence, PM will only grow in popularity. I've been here for quite some time now ... not since 2004, but almost. I didn't notice any particular increase in the popularity of prog metal here ... as a matter of fact, I see an increase in the popularity of post rock/metal (and many put post metal closer to post rock than to prog metal) and what magazines call "new art rock" - The Mars Volta, Porcupine Tree (newer albums), Pure Reason Revolution etc..   This is getting rather tiresome for me. Can any other longterm members from my generation back me on that perception? Dick? Bob? Dan? Jim? Tony? Vibe? Has metal grown in popularity here or not , and is the younger generation of prog fans more likely to embrace it than the generation weaned on the old stuff, or not? (Am I really imagining all of this? If there really is no broad connection between modern metal and listener age, then I'd love to hear someone other than Mike, or an offended young metal fan, say as much.) I'm sure they will (or already did), I'm just adding my 2 7/8 cents.   No offense to Mike -- I just want someone else to explain to me how everything I ever write about metal is wrong, and disrespectful of its many fans. Oops! Should I not say it has "many" fans? I think that only 60% of all you've written about metal is wrong.   Then you can perhaps go on to prove to me that Justin Timberlake's fans are every bit as likely to be middle-aged (straight) men, as they are teen aged girls like my daughter. Why should I try to prove that - it's wrong and I never said that. For the record: Prog Metal has been around for more than twenty years ... Dream Theater celebrated their 20th anniversary last year. The band as well as their fans are typically in their 30s or 40s ... which doesn't mean that there aren't any younger fans or that indeed prog metal may be more popular among younger people, but for current teenagers prog metal is about as trendy as prog rock (meaning: not at all).   Through my work, I encounter plenty of teen-twenties metal fans, but I honestly don't know of EVEN ONE death or black metal fan from my peer group, or from among my friends/acquaintances who are my approximate age. Meet Certif1ed. Even though he may prefer Kreator to Death ... those genres are also more than 20 years old in origin ... "true" Black Metal came a bit later, but was already "initialized" through 80s bands like Celtic Frost.   (And when I was young, my parents and their friends weren't into Zeppelin, Sabbath or Deep Purple, either! Overall, the different generations listened to different music (which was written and marketed specifically to appeal to them). Has that really all changed, now?  Are teen-twenty-something music purchasing patterns really just the same as those of old farts my age?) Is it so bad that prog metal, just like prog rock, is more than a short trend? It peaked in the mid 90s and since then it lives on in a small group of devoted fans, and this group is aging slowly but steadily.   (Mike, I know you really resent it whenever I dare mention metal, age and listening patterns in the same breath, but as the average member age here fell, metal simply became more prevalent in the topics and reviews. (I'm honestly okay with that. The metal fans tend to like the old stuff, too, and I still have a place here. No one is forcing me to buy and review  DT albums, and Jon Anderson is yet to start growling. (I wonder what that would sound like!) Well, you're always around when the topic is metal ... and why not?   Is it totally unreasonable -- or somehow hostile -- of me to think that modern metal fans are more likely to be younger than the original generation of prog fans? (You will never convince me that, for example, black or death metal fans are just as likely to be in their mid forties, like me, as they are to be in their teens and twenties. I know there are always exceptions, Mike, but do you really think that age has nothing measurable to do with overall listening patterns, and genre preferences? Are advertisers/music industry/magazines totally off base when they inquire about respondent ages in their polls and studies? Does the "average" middle aged man really listen to the same music, and exhibit the same tastes & spending patterns, as the teen skateboarder? I know what you're getting at. I'd say that as a general rule of thumb young people are more likely to be attracted to aggressive or "rebel" music ... which - among other non-metal styles as punk, goth/wave, "gangster"-rap etc. - includes most styles of metal. But I am sure that this is not a thing of youth which automatically "wears off" as people grow older. The main point is: Prog Metal is not childish. People like Certif1ed look down upon the genre, saying that true Prog, Jazz and Classical music are much more advanced in many aspects. But still most Prog Metal is many, many levels above simple popular music. I love Prog Metal for what it is ... and I'm sure that the essence of what it represents is not compatible with adolescence. In fact, I think that Prog Metal is the "grown-up" version of simple metal ... which doesn't mean that it's not for young people ... growing up is not necessarily related to age.   Will I always be in the wrong, and run afoul of you, whenever I make any observations, no mater how carefully and respectfully worded about metal? Am I simply not allowed to ever mention metal, as I will always be assumed to be attacking its place here, and/or its fans, if I do mention it? Please, by all means do criticise metal ... I love a good argument. I'll try to keep my comments civil, which I didn't always manage to do in the past ... but the mere fact that I'm responding to your posts does *not* mean that I want you to shut up ... rather the reverse.   And no, I don't think its "taking over" the prog fans, either (did I say that?) -- I just think that as time marches on, more and more prog fans are also metal fans. Overall, young prog fans seem to like metal too -- is that such a controversial, completely unfounded observation? No, but I also observed that there are many young members here who hate metal with a passion. There are always two sides of a story (make that three if lawyers are present).   Time is on the newer form's side. New is always more interesting than old ... but all that is new eventually grows old. In 100 years from now Prog Rock will be 135 years old, Prog Metal 120 years ...   Anyway, it's here, it's here to stay, and its very popular here -- can we agree on that much, at least? Of course! Or should I -- in particular -- simply never mention metal, just to be on the safe side? No. What I would recommend to you though is not to try to get into prog metal at all cost ... I think that it contains some elements which you simply don't like.

^ then simply don't take it to heart. I don't take any of these discussions to heart anymore ... music is not an exact science and taking it too seriously *will* inevitably ruin it for you as a thing to simply enjoy and appreciate.