Rhapsody

abyssyinfinity wrote: As Hammill said, try Warlord or Sieges Even in this stuff...

Sieges Even? I remember them being more Progressive Metal, not symphonic stuff.

Paco Fox wrote: c) It's not metal: well, they use that monotonous metal rythmic section, they use agressive riffs, they metal hero-like solos, the singer is in the metal vein (although not as annoying as others, and I'm thinkin Blind Guardian)... And, yes, sometimes I'm ashamed of the hogh levels of cheeseeness of this band. But, alas, I also am when I listen most of Rick Wakeman's King Arthur, and I'm not deniying it being prog rock.

The Rhapsody singer might have a more pleasant voice than the Blind Guardian singer, but he (Rhapsody) just kills any attempt to enjoy the music with his I-sing-english-with-a-strong-italian-accent-and-I-don't-want -to-change-anything-about-it attitude. 

Hi all:

There's A LOT of virulence towards this group from both the prog and the metal world, and I can't quite understand it. Let's see:

- The metal heads: There's the rumour that they really don't play a note. I doubt that, but I really don't care. I'm not a metal fan, so I don't know why it's so hated. Maybe it's that they do some things that are just not your average Manowar-ish stuff, or they go mellow sometimes, or it may be the baroque influences... most of my metal friends just want to stick to the formula

Never heard that rumour, and it doesn't affect my judgement... I don't hear any really true baroque influences, either.

- Proggers (this site): For what I've read, there are given few critical objetive evaluations. Just things like 'I realised they suck' or, simply, they suck. Several complaints:

a) sh*tty keyboards: Well I HATE when people complain about keyboards being used as orchestra substitutes. This groups keyboards are as cheese as for example The Enid's. It's a budgetary constraint. If you want to write orchestral music but you don't have the money, that's what you have. Of course, I wish Robert John Godfrey had an orchestra, but he has to make this kind of music, because it's his style. Rhapsody managed to get and orchestra for thir latest. Now we can argue about the arrangement, being not very subtle and muddle (hey, I never said I was a fan of the band), but, depending on who complaints, this may be a minor problem...

I don't like the Enid either but it's a lot more tastefully done than Rhapsody.

b) Fantasy lyrics: ok I'm just fed up of people complaining against fantasy. Please, complain about being poor fantasy, but not the tipycal dragons-elves-are-for-nerds-and-that's-sh*t mantra.

OK, It's poor fantasy (and poor English). I'm not saying I'd like it if it were good fantasy, but it isn't.

c) It's not metal: well, they use that monotonous metal rythmic section, they use agressive riffs, they metal hero-like solos, the singer is in the metal vein (although not as annoying as others, and I'm thinkin Blind Guardian)...

Agressive? Nah. Sure it's metal, but it belongs to that ever growing pool of indistinguishable Italian/occasionally German/occasionally rest of Europe happy-crappy power metal groups with vocals/drums/keys way too high in the mix - I'm not saying this applies to Rhapsody in particular, it's just a general "feature". I don't think the solos are in much of a heroic fashion either, although happily it's been some time since I listened so I may be wrong on that point.

d) It's not prog: Well, they are not the most innovate prog band, but they are not your average verse-chorus-verse-chorus band either. Many songs have long instrumental baroque breaks that are what make me more or less like this people.

I've yet to hear any sections that owe very much to baroque music, other than a superficial sound.

Ok, sometimes the songs are pretty straightfordward, but many of them are not. And just one thing: 'Hollywood metal' => Soundtrack metal. Soundtrack=> orchestral, not tight structures, use of different isntruments, compositions based on recurrent themes modified=> using progressions => prod. And metal=>heavy rock. So Hollywood metal = prog heavy rock.

Or... 'Hollywood metal' =>unoriginal soundtrack metal. Soundtrack => not neccesarily orchestral, very tight structures to fit the onscreen action/dialogue. Power metal => light metal =>'light heavy rock'?

And, yes, sometimes I'm ashamed of the hogh levels of cheeseeness of this band. But, alas, I also am when I listen most of Rick Wakeman's King Arthur, and I'm not deniying it being prog rock.

Regards:

Paco Fox

I'm not saying it isn't prog because it's cheesy, I'm saying it isn't prog because it exhibits neither progression nor any influences from the older prog groups.

oh my god, what are you talking about? symphonic power metal at its worst! hollywoodian band with sh*t keyboards string arrengements and an horrible heroic fantasy gimmick for kids

(and they are in the archives)