Symphonic Metal: First Album

I've never thought staying on topic as rigidness. 

This reminds me of story from long ago of an old friend of mine who started learning German and knowing I spoke a little bit said to me genuinely  enthusiastic : "Ask me something, please!"

"wie heißt du?" (What's your name?)

To which he answered: "Ich lerne Deutsch." 

That's kind of the discussion here in this thread. 

 

 

I'm just waiting now for Cristi to tell me that Stratovarius aren't Symphonic Metal.

Yes, just like that.  So who do you suggest I replace them with? 

Again, as per my post in the Symphonic Heaven thread, if Paul is getting the bands from Wiki, then Symphonic Metal is one of the genres given to Stratovarius (along with neoclassical metal, power metal, and prog metal). I also know of several people who describe Stratovarius as either symphonic metal, or symphonic power metal.

Personally, I do think, as stated somewhere previously in either this thread or the other, that Paul’s idea of what constitutes symphonic metal is a complete clusterf&*k of disparate bands that really ought not to be put together the way he has. But I can understand why he has done so, particularly if he uses Wiki as his main source. And while I can also understand why you suggest other sources that have a more rigid and narrow definition of what makes symphonic metal, I actually think you are each as right as the other - which makes the good-natured arguing between the two of you even more humorous than it is already.

Symphonic as an adjective for any genre is as vague and ambiguous as prog is for any genre. If there are symphonic elements to music, that is enough for many listeners to describe the music as symphonic - and I see nothing wrong with that. Just as if there are prog elements to music, that is enough for many to describe the music as prog (even if it were never prog “enough” to be listed in PA).  Wiki gives prog metal as one of the genres to describe System of a Down, for example. Are they prog “enough” for PA? No? Would I expect to see them on PA? No? Do I think of them as prog myself? Yes. So I would never complain about seeing someone describe System as a prog metal band, because I can hear exactly why they are described that way by some (and agree).

If this were the Symphonic Archives, and there were clear symphonic genres within the archives, then it would make more sense to me to criticise Paul’s choices. But it’s not, so I see no problem with him taking whatever definition of symphonic he likes, and everything he has listed could be described as symphonic metal - even if it might not ever make it into a hypothetical Symphonic Archives.

Again, you’re not being a jerk. The funny thing is you are probably more stubborn than Paul, as despite his appearance of intransigence, he often takes onboard the suggestions and criticisms od others.

(NB, I meant no negative connotation when I said stubborn, either. It is possible to use the words rigid and stubborn, without ascribing any negative connotation. What you imply from it is, of course, up to you, and out of my control.)

Paul often does bait, but more often you see bait where there appears none to my eyes. Perhaps it’s a bit of a boy cried Wolf situation. You’ve seen genuine bait from Paul so often, you now see it everytime. But there is an awful lot that is not bait, which you still rise to as if it were.

And if you can’t see that Paul is open to suggestions, then that says more about your stubbornness to see it (or even see your own stubbornness) than anything else.

As you say, some of the things Paul posts, you “find as being wrong”. Your own words. Not that the things Paul posts are wrong, but that you find them as wrong. And yes, you’re right, there is a difference there.

That’s not to say Paul’s right or wrong, so much as you find yourself unable to see why he has come to the conclusions he has. Given he admits to using Wiki, it doesn’t take much effort to see why he has called all these bands symphonic metal - as all are described as such on Wiki. Does that make Paul wrong? Perhaps. Could you suggest other sources? Yes, and you have. Are they actually any better? Well, that depends on what someone wants to find. As I said, there are plenty of people who have a different understanding of what is or is not prog than what is on PA. Just as there are plenty of people who have a different understanding of what is or is not symphonic metal according to the “better” sources you provided.

I tend to agree more with your definition than Paul’s, but I can understand his, and I know plenty of other people who share it, or something more similar than yours and mine.

I listened to both bands first before I selected them and I know you don't have much confidence in Wikipedia's genre classifications, but Sonata Arctica are listed there as a Symphonic Power Metal band. The video below sounds symphonic to me. 

to be fair, I think SA finished being a straight up power metal band after Unia (much to the chagrin of the majority of their fan base)... I tended to feel that The Ninth Hour for instance (which is rather a swish album if you give it some airtime) is Power, Symph & Prog in equal parts?

of course, you may disagree...