Metallica ?

Mr ProgFreak wrote: I still think it's better to think on a per album basis than a per artist basis ... especially when it comes to prog-related.

  Agreed 100%

That's what I said a while back.
Because some bands really DO have proggy albums, even some that are true prog-metal but can't be considered a prog band overall.

However, the usual response to me was....it's simply too much work to do that.

I understand that, I could imagine how long it would take....but then be careful what bands you include, it can open up the flood gates. As I said Megadeth should be included here no doubt, (given Metallica is) and several times my requests for Necrophagist have been denied, even though bands similar to them are included.

Also, last time I checked Nevermore was not included. How they didn't get on but Metallica did I do not know.


Edited by JJLehto - July 04 2009 at 13:00

I'm never one to bash the decision makers, but since this thread is here...

I personally don't like it.
I love Metallica, one of my top 10 favorite bands  but inclusion here??? No way

They have some prog-ish elements on Ride the Lightning, Master of Puppets, and And Justice for All.
But 3 albums does not prog-related make.

That's why even though Death is one of my favorite bands, they simple don't have albums out IMO to say overall they're a prog/tech metal band.

Since Metallica is here I think Megadeth should be put on. They had even more Proggy elements and overall structure than Metallica.

What? Metallica in prog archives? So everything in metal/rock is prog music...
Come on, the Metallica's songs have simple structure: strophe-refrain-solo-strophe-refrain with intro or outro.
Yes, there are prog influences in "...and justifce for all" and (maybe) in "Master of puppets". But the root of Metallica's songs remain and IS simple: strophe-refrain-solo-strohpe-refrain. PERIOD.
Megadeth, with their first four albums, have a structure-form song COMPLETLY in progression and they were (and are) more important than Metallica for technical metal music.
Megadeth was (is) one of the first band (together with WatchTower) to introduce (and focus on) techincal skills in "modern metal" (the Thrash metal era). Chek out, obviously Rust in Peace: a Real progressive (in Megadeth's personal way) thrash metal album; or the other 3, first Megadeth albums (Killing is my business..., Peace sells.., So far, so good...) with songs that have a free structure-form, always changing, and without the classical strophe-refrain AS Metallica's have! Songs like The Skull beneath the skin, Wake up dead, Good mourning/Black Friday, Bad omen, Into the lungs of hell-set the world afire, Mary jane etc.

If Metallica is "prog related" than certainly Megadeth is too (and definetly more prog than Metallica). It's a fact NOT an opinion.
And, with the inclusion of such bands like Metallica and Iron Maiden in Prog Archives (!!!) how many other metal bands needs to be included on?
I'm thinking about :
Megadeth
CORONER (!!!) (unquestionably more prog than Metallica and Iron Maiden)
and other techno-thrash bands such as Toxik (listen to "think this" 1989), Realm ("Endless war"1988, "suiciety"1990), Deathrow (only for "Deception ignored", 1988), Target ("Master project genesis", 1988) , Blind illusion (the sane asylum, 1987), DBC (Universe, 1989) etc..

And what about bands like
Death Angel (listen to Act III, is this not more prog related than Metallica?)
Annihilator (unquestionably more prog related than Metallica)
Nevermore
Celtic Frost (an avantgarde album such as "Into the pandemonium" I think that is "prog related")
Dark Angel (if "...and justice for all" is prog related than "time does not heal" is prog related too!)

Or other prog-thrash bands such: Juggernaut, Believer, Hexenhaus etc..

These bands are just examples to see that there are a lot of "prog related" metal bands that are not only as "prog related" as Metallica but much more prog than Metallica is.

P.S. Sorry, if I have made grammar errors.
   
 

Alberto Muñoz wrote: Something of which I gladly thank this person for

Posts are impossible to track when you just came back from not posting on the site for a good year.

debrewguy wrote: Of course, you could just be trying to be funny. In which case , well ... you're having as much success as when you've tried to prove you're intelligent. P.S. If you need to actually figure what these last two sentences mean, PM me. I can use simpler words.

Everything was valid up until the point of which you made those statements.


The point of which I was trying to make is that this isn't "music archives", this is progarchives, and that of which should be dedicated to progressive music, despite influences.  Metallica's inclusion was that of a poor choice, for they have little to no progressive elements in their music.  They started thrash, not a new wave of progressive music.

I admit their influence on bands such as Dream Theater and Fate's Warning, but it doesn't mean that they are progressive.

So, I feel as if they shouldn't even touch the boundaries of this website.


There, are you happy now that I'm being all literal and super serious?  Or do you want me to make it so that I'm a super conservative anti-abortion christian douche?

Your choice.


Edited by Lucent - February 10 2009 at 17:41

Lucent wrote: Hey guys, lets add in Cream next to the prog related section because they influenced every 70s band known to man. Oh, as well, we should add in The Sex Pistols for their influence on the music industry as well. Depeche Mode anyone?

Ah, you're showing some retrograde thinking. Cream was considered, but ultimately rejected. Although it was a close call. And the tipping point, if I remember was how much their influence balanced out the comparative lack of actual prog content. I don't know about their having influenced every band in the 70s known to man. I am sure some groups never heard of Cream. This  may change given the quality of their musical work. You , unfortunately, will never face that possibility.
The Sex Pistols have their supporters here. And so far, they lavish praise at every chance on the Johnny,Steve,Glen, and Paul. But only PIL has been put up for discussion. As for their influence on the music industry, do you mean the record labels opposition to monetizing P2Ps ? Their preference for top 40 pablum ? The decision by label heads to not go to punk shows in case they get snot on ?
As for Depeche Mode ... you'd be surprised that their name has been mentioned a few times. So far, the compelling arguement has yet to be presented. Mind you, they could be one of those bands whose detractors know the stereotype in detail, but no have no actual knowledge of the whole of the band's music.

Of course, you could just be trying to be funny. In which case , well ... you're having as much success as when you've tried to prove you're intelligent.
P.S. If you need to actually figure what these last two sentences mean, PM me. I can use simpler words.

Lucent wrote: Hey guys, lets add in Cream next to the prog related section because they influenced every 70s band known to man. Oh, as well, we should add in The Sex Pistols for their influence on the music industry as well. Depeche Mode anyone?

No Metallica means no prog metal.

Their early albums had such an influence on prog metal, I don't question at all that they belong here.

^

What about Hendrix?? It's about time for an addition