Stratovarius

stonebeard wrote: Stratovarius is on a prog metal compilation I have, but I wouldn't say they are much more than not-exactly-the-same power metal.

bluesynight wrote: stonebeard wrote:  Lindsay Lohan's definition of prog metal (read above: power metal + keyboards = prog metal) is pretty much what the mainstream music media uses to label something as prog-metal or not... Lindsay Lohan? the actress?

The T wrote: akin wrote: Add all the bands mentioned in this topic. Evertything is prog-metal or prog-metal-related or proto-prog-metal.   Seeing the "big" body of metal that you have reviewed, it's quite obvious it's not your favorite genre, and it's quite obvious from this wise post you made you actually see it with contempt. Save that great peace of wisdom for yourself please. We can't take so much knowledge in a single sentence.

No you're wrong. That is because I think if this site is coherent, it should do exactly what I said. Metallica, Stratovarius, Sonata Arctica, etc, are at the same level of many prog metal/prog related (included because they are either prog metal related or proto-prog metal) bands in the site.

Of course a main argument for not including Stratovarius, Metallica and Sonata Arctica when many other similar metal bands are included is that "every band is judged by their own merits".  But since many prog-metal fans and lovers feel that there is a strong connection among the bands aforementioned and those included in the site, this argument seems to be an excuse to hindering something tricky or unjust, that is to give the power of a few to decide what should be on the site or not on the behalf of thousands, when they are deciding only on their behalf.

And the way you criticize my opinion just because I'm not a huge prog-metal fan just shows that you are one of those who believe that the is some kind of "prog metal fans elite" that should take the decisions according to their interests, not the interests of the huge number of users in this forum/site.

What you have been doing is trying to disregard any poster that is not from the "prog metal fans elite" (like me). You should be ashamed of that.

akin wrote: The T wrote: akin wrote: Add all the bands mentioned in this topic. Evertything is prog-metal or prog-metal-related or proto-prog-metal.   Seeing the "big" body of metal that you have reviewed, it's quite obvious it's not your favorite genre, and it's quite obvious from this wise post you made you actually see it with contempt. Save that great peace of wisdom for yourself please. We can't take so much knowledge in a single sentence. No you're wrong. That is because I think if this site is coherent, it should do exactly what I said. Metallica, Stratovarius, Sonata Arctica, etc, are at the same level of many prog metal/prog related (included because they are either prog metal related or proto-prog metal) bands in the site. Of course a main argument for not including Stratovarius, Metallica and Sonata Arctica when many other similar metal bands are included is that "every band is judged by their own merits".  But since many prog-metal fans and lovers feel that there is a strong connection among the bands aforementioned and those included in the site, this argument seems to be an excuse to hindering something tricky or unjust, that is to give the power of a few to decide what should be on the site or not on the behalf of thousands, when they are deciding only on their behalf. And the way you criticize my opinion just because I'm not a huge prog-metal fan just shows that you are one of those who believe that the is some kind of "prog metal fans elite" that should take the decisions according to their interests, not the interests of the huge number of users in this forum/site. What you have been doing is trying to disregard any poster that is not from the "prog metal fans elite" (like me). You should be ashamed of that.

rushfan4 wrote: Just FYI, the PA biography for Jens Johannson refers to him as "toured extensively with progressive metal band Stratovarius".  One might say that this is inconsistent with the current site position on Stratovarius.   http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=1956

akin wrote: The T wrote: akin wrote: The T wrote: akin wrote: Add all the bands mentioned in this topic. Evertything is prog-metal or prog-metal-related or proto-prog-metal. Seeing the "big" body of metal that you have reviewed, it's quite obvious it's not your favorite genre, and it's quite obvious from this wise post you made you actually see it with contempt. Save that great peace of wisdom for yourself please. We can't take so much knowledge in a single sentence. No you're wrong. That is because I think if this site is coherent, it should do exactly what I said. Metallica, Stratovarius, Sonata Arctica, etc, are at the same level of many prog metal/prog related (included because they are either prog metal related or proto-prog metal) bands in the site. Of course a main argument for not including Stratovarius, Metallica and Sonata Arctica when many other similar metal bands are included is that "every band is judged by their own merits".  But since many prog-metal fans and lovers feel that there is a strong connection among the bands aforementioned and those included in the site, this argument seems to be an excuse to hindering something tricky or unjust, that is to give the power of a few to decide what should be on the site or not on the behalf of thousands, when they are deciding only on their behalf. And the way you criticize my opinion just because I'm not a huge prog-metal fan just shows that you are one of those who believe that the is some kind of "prog metal fans elite" that should take the decisions according to their interests, not the interests of the huge number of users in this forum/site. What you have been doing is trying to disregard any poster that is not from the "prog metal fans elite" (like me). You should be ashamed of that.   What "opinion" am I criticizing? An opinion would have been "I don't think metal belongs in the archives"... I would've said something about it, probably, but that would be an opinion. You just said "Add all the bands mentioned in this topic. Evertything is prog-metal or prog-metal-related or proto-prog-metal." I can see it's an ironic post, so there's no opinion there, just another attack on the genre disguised as wise humour... Or do you really think all bands should be added? Of course not. therefore, you have not expressed any opinion, but laughed at the discussion and essentially at metal with your wise remark.   if you would have said what you said in your reply, then THAT would have been an opinion, and one I would've disagreed with. You have the right to think so. But please, your message, your opinion, was encoded in that sentence you gave us in a way it really looks like you were just doing what I said you were doing. I will not discuss this because I gave an opinion and if you and to find hair in a egg or irony in my post, attack on the genre, it is not my problem. If I was against the genre, why the average score for my prog metal reviews would be more than 3? Your original post  sounded ironic and showing contempt for this discussion and therefore for the genre. if you have (as now we know) so many interesting points to make, why didn't you instead of your original "add all of them" "opinion"? About your rating average for metal, you have 10 prog metal reviews averaging 3.20. Ok. Even if you averaged 1, none can complain about that. You also have 2 reviews for exp/post metal and 1 for tech/extreme. That's a total 13 reviews. 13 reviews on 247 is about... 5%. So it's obvious that metal is NOT your favorite genre. And that's fine. you don't have to like it. I'm just pointing out that why a person that doesn't care much about metal has to come and make an ironic remark? You say it was an opinion... You could've explained it, you know, as you did later. The T wrote: And tell me about the "prog metal fans elite"... It's a very interesting notion... considering the relatively small amount of metal bands in PA and the fact that only ONE metal band is in prog-related (Iron Maiden)... so if there is such an "elite", it's a sure thing we are awful at having our "goals" being achieved here in PA. I don't think there is a small number of prog bands in PA, considering prog metal is somewhat new and that the peak of progressive genre was much before prog metal was estabilished. There's a general consensus about that "peak" you talk about so I won't discuss that, even though I could've said you show your "love" for the genre again. But the consensus is there. And, by the way:   prog metal bands: 278 exp/post metal : 78 tech/extreme : 115   Total metal bands in PA:  471   Total number of bands: 3460   Percentage of metal bands in PA: 13%   Is it really THAT much? Considering there are MORE metal bands than symphonic (for example) bands in the world? Believe me, we reject a LOT.     I also think that "prog metal elite" is one of the most prolific collaborators in adding bands. Sometimes I even argued about the urgency of adding a 'prog metal' Your use of 'quotes' clearly shows what you think of the genre. And please, I invite you to check all metal bands and tell me those that are here only because of minor influences... Nightwish? Too late to do anything about that. band that had just released one album that had some prog influences (and this applies to other genres as well), but to no avail, because the "elite" accused me of hating prog metal And I wasn't there, so it was not me, so it means you usually express yourself in a way that makes people believe you hate prog metal. Maybe? , which is not true and can be proven by my ratings. Barely proven. We could also prove that I LOVE RIO because I have an average rating of 5. But that's because I've reviewed only ONE RIO album, not because I like the genre. The T wrote:   You were there months ago in the Metallica discussion. Then you return for this discussion. What else have you done?  You have a big body of reviews, but basically you seem to appear only when some metal addition is being discussed. Not true, but I don't expect you to know every discussion I have entered. You're right. My mistake. And if at that time I was against the band, this time I'm for the band, so it is not calculated. Why? Anyway, why don't you give the opinion instead of writing a single sentence that sounds disrespectful to the discussion and ergo to the genre?  Nowadays I only enter discussions of bands I know because in the past I used to propose many discussions and nobody gave a f***, so I don't give a f*** for discussions about bands I don't know well. I do the same. The T wrote: Again, I'm not criticizing your opinion. Because you didn't give one. You just now did. Same bs as before, I will not comment It is no "bs". IF your post has an opinion (which I insist it hasn't, but maybe you know better), it was poorly expressed and came off as ironic and disrespectful. The T wrote:   And, if you read, you will see I oppose the addition of Stratovarius. The "elite" is divided it seems.... Never said it shouldn't be divided, but it seems only the "elite" opinions are taken seriously. What's this "elite" man? Denounce them!  If someone from "elite" posts "I don't see any trace of progressiveness in band X", the answer is ok. If it is a person outside, the answer is either "you are trolling the discussion" or "you said that because you didn't analyse properly their music" or "you hate prog metal, but it is valid" and so on. I haven't seen that in countless threads about metal... eventually a post like that appears, as it does in EVERY genre in PA... so maybe there's a "neo prog elite" or a "post rock elite"... the fact that you focus only on metal is what makes me doubt if you really like this genre... and again, you're free not to like it!   The T wrote:   By the way, I'm also failing to express an opinion about your opinion. Regarding your point, it's tre that every band is judged in its own merits. And also, it's true there is a strong connection between most bands, as most share the same heritage. But case by case, each team genre analyzes what band should be here or not. Stratovarius has some prog elements, but too small to make it here. Sonata Arctica has just one album (UNIA) that deserves inclusion, in my opinion. Metallica, on the other hand (and it's NOT the focus of this discussion) was the main influence on most every progressive metal band starting with DT. And they have two and even three albums of progressive metal. But you're right: only a FEW decide. And in this case, even FEWER: the OWNERS of the site decided Metallica won't be here, and it won't. If you want a site where "thousands" make the deicisions, this is not one. And don't accuse us of doing things for our own behalf. I would have added a few bands if it was just for my own behalf. We think in PA and that's why most prog-metal additions have never been disputed. Most disputed additions have actually been metal-related, like Sabbath or MAiden. Yes, the owners can do anything they want about the site, even shut it down or remove all the content and exchange the subject of it. But I'm not talking about his decisions, but about the decisions taken by those with power to add the bands or power to ask the owner about adding a band. Then the "elite" is quite big, as there's a LOT of collaborators in PA...These decisions ignore many people that joined the discussion with valid points because the person is not from the "elite" Join the "elite" then, That mighty over powering "elite" you talk about. , so his arguments are always counter-argumented by those default answers: "you hate prog metal", "you don't analyse properly the sound of the band", and so on. I really haven't seen the "elite". But if you think that my opinion doesn't count to any prog metal discussion because "I hate prog metal" or "I don't analyse properly the sound of prog metal" or "I post in prog metal discussions just to troll them, by being sarcastic, ironic, hideous, etc", I will never again waste my time giving my opinion about any prog metal band and I recommend other people to do the same, just for not wasting their time and not receiving the standard answers I mentioned before. Your opinion woul;d be so welcomed if you EXPRESSED IT. If i went to a post-rock discussion (as I think i did many months ago) and said "yes, add all of them. Everything is post or proto-post or post-related" I'm pretty sure somebody there would have complained and also rejected my "opinion" as being vacuous, empty, ironic, even disrespectful. I'm sorry if in any way you feel offended. Sadly, I stand on what I said about your first post. *** edited because quotes where malformed***

Honestly, I think this argument is going in an endless circle, and there is just way too much opposition for the inclusion of Stratovarius. Metallica stands a much better chance of making it into here, with at least 3 proggy albums, 2 of which were noticeably proggy in nature, but I don't see Metallica here, so if a band that has influenced so many prog metal bands is here, face it, Stratovarius doesn't stand a chance, because they are surely big in power metal, but not many prog metal bands really cite them as an influence. I think this would just be easier, if everyone that has posted in this thread just said "yes for inclusion" or "no", but I think we already know the answer to that

bluesynight wrote: HughesJB4 wrote: Metallica stands a much better chance of making it into here again with the metallica!!! look at the prog metal page, and tell me what type of prog metal would you consider metallica. statovarius can be easily considered as "modern Progressive Power Metal (American Style)". metallica can be considered as prog realeated(in my opinion not even that) but not as prog!

Metallica can be considered to be Proto-Prog Thrash Metal. They're not so much "Prog" in terms of style, but on Master of Puppets and And Justice For All they were ground-breaking, very technical and quirky ... much more so than Stratovarius, I'm sorry to say. Of course you can call Stratovarius "modern Progressive Power Metal (American Style)" ... but I think that their songwriting is simply not sophisticated enough to make it into the archives.

Listen to the track "And Justice For All" by Metallica ... how can it not be called progressive?

^ of course that's true ... genre per artist is really a problem for such "volatile" artists.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ of course that's true ... genre per artist is really a problem for such "volatile" artists.

When a "volatile" artist should be considered prog or prog-related? I think that all the controversy lies in that, because there are millions of volatile artists that eventually made something related to prog, but when the inclusion is valid? It may be based on the taste/judgement of the owner of the site, like in cases of Iron Maiden and Metallica, but it would be far better if there was a consensus or rule.