Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - The REAL problem with prog-metal: is not prog-rock
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedThe REAL problem with prog-metal: is not prog-rock

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 91011
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
martinprog77 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 31 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2523
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 25 2008 at 06:21
Originally posted by darkshade darkshade wrote:

a prog rock website without King Crimson?? watch your mouth. There are underage kids on this site!
LOLLOLLOLLOLLOL
Nothing can last
there are no second chances.
Never give a day away.
Always live for today.


Back to Top
sleeper View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 09 2005
Location: Entropia
Status: Offline
Points: 16449
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 25 2008 at 06:06
Originally posted by Avantgardehead Avantgardehead wrote:

Downtuned guitars + shredding + tons of keyboards + wailing vocalist = progressive metal

Clearly someone that hasnt listned to much prog metal.

Excellent post Teo, and the single best definition of porg metal that I've ever come across. I agree that a condensed version should be used as the sites definition for PM and this thread should be moved to prog blogs, it makes for a good counterpart to Certs "What is prog" blog.
Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005

Back to Top
darkshade View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: November 19 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 10964
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 25 2008 at 00:04
a prog rock website without King Crimson?? watch your mouth. There are underage kids on this site!
Back to Top
Avantgardehead View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: December 29 2006
Location: Dublin, OH, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1170
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 24 2008 at 23:43
Downtuned guitars + shredding + tons of keyboards + wailing vocalist = progressive metal
http://www.last.fm/user/Avantgardian
Back to Top
el böthy View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 27 2005
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 6336
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 24 2008 at 23:35
Now if you can explain Tech/Experimental metal, you are good to go!


jajajaja... good luck with that!


Edited by el böthy - August 24 2008 at 23:35
"You want me to play what, Robert?"
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65289
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 24 2008 at 21:19
Your postulation is correct, T --   having witnessed and participated in the 80s S.F. metal scene, I can say that progressive metal - at least the West Coast version - was indeed a relative of heavy metal even though some of the important early Bay Area PM bands as Vienna, Metal Church and Anvil Chorus did draw influence from Rush, Saga, Yes and Genesis.   Well done.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 24 2008 at 21:10
Originally posted by WinterLight WinterLight wrote:

Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

The thing is, the genre WILL be defined (because the site needs a defintion). There's is a definition already, one that is very valuable in my opinion. I would say is, this definition I talk about is mostly for US, as many people (also someplace else in this forum) are discussin the nature of this website because some people see it as a "metal-oriented" prog-website. I say, we have to understand the genre before judging it and jumping into conclusions.


Sensible enough:  well-constructed definitions can be useful.  However, I must emphasize (although I think that you recognize this already some clearly do not) that we shouldn't regard them as rigid, as carved in stone.  If they need be changed, then so be it.
With the notion that Progressive artists will progress (even if that is not what the term has come to mean in the Popular Music sense) then the definitions will change over time, or we have to create even more subcategories and tags (which is not a good thing in my estimation).
What?
Back to Top
WinterLight View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: June 09 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 424
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 24 2008 at 21:06
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

The thing is, the genre WILL be defined (because the site needs a defintion). There's is a definition already, one that is very valuable in my opinion. I would say is, this definition I talk about is mostly for US, as many people (also someplace else in this forum) are discussin the nature of this website because some people see it as a "metal-oriented" prog-website. I say, we have to understand the genre before judging it and jumping into conclusions.


Sensible enough:  well-constructed definitions can be useful.  However, I must emphasize (although I think that you recognize this already some clearly do not) that we shouldn't regard them as rigid, as carved in stone.  If they need be changed, then so be it.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 24 2008 at 21:05
Clap Very neatly put Teo... and inadvertently explains the big difference between Prog Metal and Symphonic/Power Metal. Both are Metal of excess (as you put it) but Prog Metal adds complexity (coupled with a degree of eclecticism) that is parallelled in Progressive Rock but not necessarily derived from it.
 
 
What?
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 24 2008 at 20:57
interesting read Teo... Clap
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 24 2008 at 20:57
Originally posted by WinterLight WinterLight wrote:

Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Should we, then, define prog-metal again? I think that it's necessary.


It's odd that you should draw such a conclusion after an insightful, well-reasoned essay.  All that precedes this conclusion is actually an argument to the contrary, i.e. it is unnecessary, if not futile, to define, to pigeonhole artists through genre labels.  Sometimes such labels can function as a convenient shorthand, but in themselves they're entirely unimportant.  Do we need to define prog-metal?  Emphatically no.  We need not give precise definitions to any of these descriptions.
 
Quite a good point you raise. The thing is, the genre WILL be defined (because the site needs a defintion). There's is a definition already, one that is very valuable in my opinion. I would say is, this definition I talk about is mostly for US, as many people (also someplace else in this forum) are discussin the nature of this website because some people see it as a "metal-oriented" prog-website. I say, we have to understand the genre before judging it and jumping into conclusions. Also, there's a proposal about a new definition for the genre and I write this mostly for that thread. But I realized I wanted to say this to everybody, so I created this one. Smile
Back to Top
WinterLight View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: June 09 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 424
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 24 2008 at 20:48
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Should we, then, define prog-metal again? I think that it's necessary.


It's odd that you should draw such a conclusion after an insightful, well-reasoned essay.  All that precedes this conclusion is actually an argument to the contrary, i.e. it is unnecessary, if not futile, to define, to pigeonhole artists through genre labels.  Sometimes such labels can function as a convenient shorthand, but in themselves they're entirely unimportant.  Do we need to define prog-metal?  Emphatically no.  We need not give precise definitions to any of these descriptions.
Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 24 2008 at 20:39
Music -- Rock -- Progressive Rock

Music -- Metal -- Progressive Metal

imo
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 24 2008 at 20:29
(Note: this is basically about what we call "progressive-metal" here in PA. For post-metal and extreme/tech, I'll talk about them later).
 
I think that the biggest problem here is that we keep trying to define prog-metal in prog-rock terms. I have finally came to the conclusion that progressive-metal and progressive-rock are two separate entities with different intrinsic elements, even if they share some external ones (i'll define this later) and what really binds them together is, in my view, something extra-musical: the approach each genre has towards regularly-simpler music, rock in one case, metal in the other.
 
As Certf1ed has said 938729387 times before, and I agree, prog-rock was not really about odd times and unusual instruments but about freedom of form and constant experimentation/progression, and also about the combining of rock with more thematically-complex classical music.
 
Metal, "regular" metal to call it that way, is, in essence, simple riff-based music where riffs take center stage and distorsion and (sometimes) speed add to the mix (of course with different techniques). What we call progressive-metal is exactly that: still progressive-metal. It has to be seen under a different light: the light of metal.
 
And in that way the genre will appear in its own glory. Compared with 70's prog-rock, is thematically and harmonically much weaker (one can't do the same with a free harmonic open world as with a strict, rigid riff which is the building block of most metal music). But such a comparison is ABSURD.  Have you ever read people reacting like crazy when they see any genre (name it: punk, pop, etc) compared to prog in disfavorable terms? What's the usual answer? "They are two different things made with different purposes aimed towards different people. Well, that same reply we can also use for prog-metal. It's a different world, governed by different rules, for other people. IT JUST HAPPENS TO SHARE THE SAME NAME BECAUSE OF MINOR EXTERNAL ELEMENTS AND, MOSTLY, BECAUSE THE APPROACH TOWARDS MUSIC IS MORE ARTISTIC AND LESS COMMERCIAL.  
 
Really. Where was the last time you heard a prog-metal band doing a true symphonic song? I mean symphonic as in thematically-developed (let's agree on this poor and simple definition please), not, as many people do, symphonic as in with a symphonic orchestra in the background. (PLEASE: EXCEPTIONS TO THIS ARE PRECISELY THAT, EXCEPTIONS). Well..... I'm still waiting for that answer. When was the last time a prog-metal band's sound really sounded like it was influenced by YES, GENESIS or KING CRIMSON? "Oh, Tool sounds like Crimson!" some will say... really? I'd say CRIMSON actually metallized their music and that's why Tool somewhat reminds people of that band. Another argument: " Opeth and Riverside, among many others, sound like PINK FLOYD". Again, that doesn't help. What they emulate is the psychedelic/spacey sound of said legendary band, which wasn't even pure-prog-rock in 70's terms. "Oh, Portnoy said they are influenced by YES AND GENESIS". Oh yes? Well, DT for sure heard YES and GENESIS, they probably emulate their approach to music, and sometimes they actually emulate their style (like "A Change of Seasons"), but first and foremost the main influence in the music is METAL. The music is still METAL at its core. It hasn't been derived from classical music or jazz or anything. It's just A PROGRESSIVE FORM OF METAL.
 
So what is this progressive-metal that I love and think i finally understand? Well, riff based music with distortion and (sometimes) speed, with different techniques, but... enhanced. Made more "artistic". Unlike the direct, violent, immediate approach of regular "commercial" metal bands, prog-metal bands dare to make music that is more "complex" with much longer songs (not a prog-metal's exclusivity) , displays of technical prowess (not a prog-metal's exclusivity), odd-time signatures and sudden tempo changes (not a prog-metal's exclusivity), and unusual instruments (not a prog-metal's exclusivity). All of these you can also find in more regular metal bands. But the main factor that divides one of the other is, in my view,  that while in regular metal those elements are few, far between, and just little ornaments in songs, in prog-metal they are essential, happen regularly, and used mostly for artistic purposes. Unlike prog-rock where form was free for artists to explore, in prog-metal, the freedom the artists have is that of escaping the prison that a riff-based verse-chorus-verse structure constitutes by doing, in simple terms, whatever they want. I know it sounds poor and it would ultimately mean that a band playing chaotic music is also prog-metal. Well, that's quite true. Think of prog-metal as a metal of EXCESS. Blissful, glorious excess for me. But in general, that's what it is. What other artists like Testament say in two minutes with one 15-second solo and two riff changes and a single tempo, Dream Theater says in 10 minutes, with two 2-minute instrumental sections, with 12 riffs, 4 tempo changes, three different meters, and adding lush keyboards and very technical bass-playing with complex harmonies to the mix. While Testament's bassist plays root notes till exhaustion, Myung plays impossible scales and jazzy figures that dazzle the listener. BUT BOTH ARE SAYING, IN ESSENCE, THE SAME DAMN THING.
 
And thus is how I came to realize that prog-metal is not just a secondary, second-grade version, poor-man's edition of prog-rock. Prog metal can be seen in all its glory precisely as that: as PROGRESSIVE-METAL.  And thus, also, the comparisons end and are balanced: you can't compare the thematic depth of prog-rock with that of prog-metal, but why would you? Would you compare jazz with punk? New-age with blues? I could also say "prog-rock has none of the power that prog-metal has". Why would it? In my view, both are equally capable of deep emotions. YOU JUST HAVE TO FEEL IT IN YOU. If you love metal and see what metal is, you''ll find treasures most non-metal fans will miss. Please, apply the same logic that you apply to other genres when you compare prog-metal with prog-rock. PROG-ROCK IS A PROGRESSIVE FORM OF ROCK. PROG METAL IS A PROGRESSIVE FORM OF METAL. And, especially since METALLICA, rock and metal have been separated so much that they don't even seem to have come from the same father. Actually, they don't. Probably both were born off blues and then rock n' roll. But prog-rock and prog-metal have different fathers. For one, people mention The Beatles, Moody Blues, and, mostly, KING CRIMSON, YES, GENESIS and all the rest. For the other, you can pretty much go back to PURPLE, ZEPPELIN and, of course, the riff-factory called BLACK SABBATH. Then IRON MAIDEN added some elements to the mix, but unlike many people think, more in the external (longer songs, soloing, virtuosism, flashy bass harmonies) than in the internal (thematic development). In all of these cases, metal was still metal. Faster, more virtiosic, more melodic, more "orchestral", but still metal, with some remaining blues in its genes. The real father, in my view, was the band that actually killed the rock/blues part and truly created pure progressive METAL, pure METAL "progressed": the one that, quite adequately, is named after the genre, in the most honest and precise manifestation of principles ever conceived in a band's name. Posterior changes in the band's music and quality, -though that is subjective- don't alter the fact that, for 4 albums, METALLICA really "progressed" METAL , not rock, but METAL. Certf1ed open my eyes to the fact that, really, even "Kill 'Em All" contains a radical new approach where riffs were used, not a chain at a time, but one single one, explored, analyzed, developed. Check the album with open ears and you'll detect it. No question, of course, exists about the other three albums, where all the foundations of what would become DREAM THEATER, FATES WARNING and the rest were created.
 
Basically, prog-metal giants (the equivalent to YES and GENESIS) like DREAM THEATER and FATES WARNING drunk from three fountains, in my opinion: just a little sip from the prog-rock fountain, mostly in its artistic approach towards simple music, and also in their love for musical "excess" (Oh Ye Glorious Excess!!). A larger sip from the school of Iron Maiden and Judas Priest (mostly for technical elements), and the largest one, the definitive one, from the 4 albums that METALLICA released in the 80's. Of other bands usually mentioned like QUEENSRYCHE they mostly copied the decision, the brave idea of creating conceptual music in metal terms.
 
That's why, in my view, a prog-rock website does NOT need Metallica, for example (and this thread/blog/rant/whatever is NOT about that subject, I bring this up because it's just necessary to explain my opinion), and it would be ultimately incoherent to have such an artist in a pure prog-rock site. On the other hand, a progressive-METAL website excluding said band would be like a prog-rock website excluding King Crimson. I don't care what band members say about their music. We HEAR music and WE are here to judge and give opinions, aren't we? And this is what I hear.
 
So, my point is, if this is a website mostly about progressive music, then prog-rock and prog-metal can co-exist. BUT EACH GENRE IS DEFINED IN ITS OWN TERMS. (in my view, prog-metal CAN be defined for its elements). In a prog-rock website, the only way we can understand metal's inclusion is as a side-effect, illegitimate-son of rock, a b*****d child that lived in a different world in a different culture and learned different things. And that's deep inside, what many prog-rock purists feel in their hearts. I understand you. It's logical. We're two different things.
 
It so happens, that many of us actually LOVE BOTH WORLDS. But that doesn't make them the SAME THING.
 
Should we, then, define prog-metal again? I think that it's necessary. A separate entity that shares the artistic approach of prog and some external elements but that is intrinsically different than prog. A genre that has its own artistic values, and that, when understood, can be as glorious and expressive as progressive-rock.
 
It's just a different thing.  
 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 91011

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.145 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.