Math Rock vs. Math Metal Bias

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

As has become apparent through my searching over the site and from several ill-fated suggestions, PA does not seem to be receptive of math metal unless it also carries other prominent progressive qualities. This is especially true of djent bands, though there are a couple of glaring exceptions.
Now, this is juxtaposed with the inclusion of various math rock bands who, on the whole, do not have any other major prog elements (WARNING: Lots of opinion here, obviously).

To create a baseline, we'll define the major aspects of math rock (as defined on PA):

- Complex structures (kinda vague, but worthy nonetheless)

- Angular melodies

- Atypical rhythms/time signatures/keys/polyrhythms (my own logical conclusion about the genre, not explicitly mentioned on PA)

- Abrupt musical changes

For the purposes of this argument, we shall assume that math metal retains these same qualities, but in a more extreme and heavy environment. Furthermore, PA does not contain an (obvious) math metal section or definition.

Evidence, you ask? Here we have the math pop band This Town Needs Guns; I love them, they are brilliant musicians, and they definitely deserve to be on PA, which they are. However, aside from the heavy use of atypical rhythms/time signatures and interesting modal changes, they are not progressive; they are very much an indie pop band besides their heavy 'math' qualities.

Using this line of evidence, it becomes clear that math rock bands that exhibit no other prog facets can be accepted into the welcoming arms of PA. I have nothing against this, and am in fact very much in favor of this; 'math' bands are, indeed, proggy.

However, when one examines the states of math metal. djent, and mathcore on the site, the situation is starkly different. As of the writing of this, Volumes, one of the premier math metal bands in the United States that is gaining acclaim for their innovative songwriting and complex musical structures, has two 'No' votes on Progfreak.

(Note: For those who claim these are singular cases, I may easily provide more examples.)

The conclusion to be drawn here is that bands existing in the extreme 'math' realm are discriminated against for lacking prog qualities outside of being mathy, whereas those artists residing in the less-than-metal area are given permit to enter on that merit alone. I was, in fact, once told (over a year ago) following one of my suggestions to the site that math metal and especially djent bands were not always welcome on the site; my suggestion did, however, work out.

Have a listen:

Unless you consider experimentation a 'prog' quality in and of itself, these bands exhibit few progressive aspects other than the aforementioned math rock qualities.

Now for some math metal:

Djent:

The first three are rejected or in danger of being rejected artists that exhibit the qualities of math rock mentioned above, only in a more extreme sense.

Interestingly, the final video is Meshuggah's hilarious music video for my favorite song (also one of the hardest songs for a guitarist's picking hand ever written). You may notice how repetitive and consistent the song structure of their songs are, but the overlaying polyrythms and intense musical phrasings create the first incarnation of djent and math metal. Meshuggah is not a proggy band, but they are mathy as all holy hell, which clearly counts around here...at least for them.

So, several ideas/questions:

Are djent bands looked down upon at all? Meshuggah, the progenitors of the genre are here, as well the biggest names, such as Periphery and Monuments, but the inclusions feel spotty.

Are mathcore bands looked down upon? Does PA consider a focus on highly technical and intense displays of irregular time sigs and rhythms to be progressive in its own right? As an example:

Botch was included,

As well as Dillinger, but what about a band such as Benea Reach?

They were rejected, though that was admittedly before their latest effort was released.

Why the lack of math metal support? Math metal/djent is becoming a global phenomenon, and I see little to no support on the site as far as definitions of the genre and clear acceptance of it as a genre go. Hell, you could create a whole new subdivision of Tech/Extreme for math metal/mathcore alone.

If you need someone to head a new Math Metal or Mathcore team for you in pursuit of such goals, I know my fair share about these genres   they are my favorite, after all.

As was mentioned, there are clear exceptions to these opinions, and I do not believe a lack of support for math metal is necessarily the norm. It could in fact just be that the team members found the level to which these bands exhibited their 'math' qualities was insufficient. If that is the case, then I disagree with but understand and support their decisions. I have nothing but respect for the members of all the various teams 

My main question remains: Are 'math' qualities sufficient for inclusion on PA? I think they should be, and I do believe there is evidence in math rock that suggests it is acceptable on its own, but what do you all think?

Edited by CoolJimmi - May 18 2014 at 21:17