What happens with maiden?

Unless there's a 'Completly not prog' section in PA, they shouldn't be here.

Still wan't to debate that once again? I really am sick of that...

Kohllapse wrote: Borealis wrote: Unless there's a 'Completly not prog' section in PA, they shouldn't be here. Still wan't to debate that once again? I really am sick of that...  I disagree!

Hey, I appreciate your devotion to "the Maiden," but I have to tell you, I think you're fighting an extremely uphill battle with this one. Genre's are loosely defined boundaries, but they are still that---boundaries.

Iron Maiden fits too closely into another genre. My question to you is, "why do you care if they get recognized as prog or not? What "mantle of authority" does having it classified as "prog rock" add to the band?" They need no help from the prog world. They rock their own world better than any prog band will ever rock the prog world. Revel in that, give them that. And tell the lean-built "Soft Machine" fans that they'll never experience this kind of stuff. And then proceed to play electric guitar out of a distorted practice amp

Kohllapse wrote: bluetailfly wrote: Kohllapse wrote: Borealis wrote: Unless there's a 'Completly not prog' section in PA, they shouldn't be here. Still wan't to debate that once again? I really am sick of that...  I disagree! Hey, I appreciate your devotion to "the Maiden," but I have to tell you, I think you're fighting an extremely uphill battle with this one. Genre's are loosely defined boundaries, but they are still that---boundaries. Iron Maiden fits too closely into another genre. My question to you is, "why do you care if they get recognized as prog or not? What "mantle of authority" does having it classified as "prog rock" add to the band?" They need no help from the prog world. They rock their own world better than any prog band will ever rock the prog world. Revel in that, give them that. And tell the lean-built "Soft Machine" fans that they'll never experience this kind of stuff. And then proceed to play electric guitar out of a distorted practice amp Perhaps you were unclear on what I meant by "I disagree".  What I disagree with is saying "completly not prog" I never said they were, if you would have read all of the post in this thread you would know that.I said they could be put in the "Proto prog" "you're right , you never said they should be put in the "prog metal"category, only that they should be added to the site . With all of the  different "genre" categories available i'm sure that they would fit in one of them. "

But what you say sort of begs the same question. Why? And I have no real stake in the matter either. I am just honestly wondering why having them seen as "prog-related" matters. I wouldn't want AC/DC classified as prog-related, even though I suppose one could mount an argument for it (a skilled orator). As a Maiden fan, I don't want them to be prog-related. Why throw in with Anderson, Phil Collins, Ambrosia? They don't want to be there; they don't want to be "related" to them.

They want something else. 

And i see it as important that we maiden to the archives to listen to where most prog-metal bands got their influences from..afterall that is what is the point of the proto-prog genre right

I also see maiden as the first real prog metal band there ever was...and dont bring me Deep  Purple,Black Sabbath and Zeppelin and all those...they are bascially just hard rock bands...

And why the obviosly stupid comparisment to AC/DC wich is the least original band on this earth...Britney spears is strikingly more progressive than AC/DC wich is a horrible band that truly goes way beyond the definiton of crap...

Please people listen to a song like forexample The unbelivier and tell me that is not prog...

maidenrulez wrote: And i see it as important that we maiden to the archives to listen to where most prog-metal bands got their influences from..afterall that is what is the point of the proto-prog genre right I also see maiden as the first real prog metal band there ever was...and dont bring me Deep  Purple,Black Sabbath and Zeppelin and all those...they are bascially just hard rock bands...

First of you need to read the definiton of proto-prog.  It sstates bands that were formed or did the majority of their work prior to 1969.  I hardely think Iron Maiden fits into that. 

I will bring those other bands because without that foundation you would have no Iron Maiden or any other metal band that came in the 80's.

Metallica influenced far more (prog) metal bands and redefined the entire metal genre more often and more deeply than Iron Maiden did, and both Rainbow and Dio had many proggy elements.

Just a couple of points worth considering .

Certif1ed wrote: Metallica influenced far more (prog) metal bands and redefined the entire metal genre more often and more deeply than Iron Maiden did, and both Rainbow and Dio had many proggy elements. Just a couple of points worth considering .

AND MAIDEN INFLUENCED METLLALLICA...think about that

RAINBOW is exactly the same stuff as DEEP PURPLE ie not metal and DIO does not suddenly get proggy because it feutures DIO on vocals and also DIO came later than IRON MAIDEN

maidenrulez wrote: Certif1ed wrote: Metallica influenced far more (prog) metal bands and redefined the entire metal genre more often and more deeply than Iron Maiden did, and both Rainbow and Dio had many proggy elements. Just a couple of points worth considering . AND MAIDEN INFLUENCED METLLALLICA...think about that RAINBOW is exactly the same stuff as DEEP PURPLE ie not metal and DIO does not suddenly get proggy because it feutures DIO on vocals and also DIO came later than IRON MAIDEN

A different discussion really, but since you bring it up...

There is not much Iron Maiden influence in Metallica's music - but there is a more direct link from Metallica to, say, Dream Theater or just about any band playing metal from the 1990s onwards.

Rainbow has Ritchie Blackmore, but the style of music is different to Deep Purple - less improv and more classical allusions, with mystical themes to some of the lyrics and long song structures every now and again.

Dio's own band continues the fantasy themes to new depths (heights?), with startlingly accurate guitar work, obviously inspired by but not copied from Van Halen, and precision riffing similar to Black Sabbath's "Heaven and Hell" - there is a direct line that is crowned by the voice of RJD that shows a progression from Metal as it was in the 1970s (yes, it did exist back then) through the NWOBHM (New Wave, remember!). Iron Maiden's sound is unique to Maiden (and the rip-off bands like Helloween, etc.) - it is not a general influence on the metal genre, and it has not particularly changed over the years. Each Iron Maiden album sounds unmistakably like an Iron Maiden album, with the same song structures and riff patterns done slightly differently - like AC/DC or Motorhead.

Iron Maiden in 1983 released "Piece of Mind". In my opinion, Dio's "Holy Diver" is a much better album - much stronger all round. "Piece of Mind" was hardly prog... and nor was "The Number of The Beast" or anything Paul DiAnno recorded with IM. Sure there are moments, like "Phantom of the Opera", but Rainbow had been doing proggy things way before then. "Holy Diver" contains many proggy themes, the songs are very well and dramatically structured, and there are moments where the band are each doing their own thing. Note "moments", not entire passages as with bona fide prog. This is something that Iron Maiden lack.

Remember also that RJD was in a band called Elf before he joined Rainbow in 1976 (or was it 5?), so he predates Iron Maiden by a VERY long time! The best Bruce Dickinson can manage is a band called Samson, who were amazing, and put out two very raw-edged metal albums in the late 1970s. "Head On" is well worth checking out. Quite progressive.

Metallica obliterated all of that with a single stroke - aptly named "Kill 'Em All", which rips the pages out of the history book as far as the metal genre is concerned, by introducing the concept of thrash, without succumbing to the undiluted form, unlike most other thrash bands at the time.

Metallica always denied being a thrash band - and they were right. They used thrash techniques to develop a very progressive form of metal right up to "...And Justice For All", whose riffs can be heard virtually verbatim in Dream Theater's early work. As if to underline this, "Kill 'Em All" has fantasy themes in some of the lyrics - indicating prog pretensions. This is underlined by the developing riffs - "Seek And Destroy" has some of the most organically developing riffs in metaldom, and "The Four Horsemen" relates all the material back to itself. A stark contrast to those sad bands who go off at tangents because they cannot think of a way to develop the existing material.

And that's (partly) why Metallica are more progressive than Iron Maiden, and should be considered over IM as prog related.

Think about that

Certif1ed wrote: maidenrulez wrote: Certif1ed wrote: Metallica influenced far more (prog) metal bands and redefined the entire metal genre more often and more deeply than Iron Maiden did, and both Rainbow and Dio had many proggy elements. Just a couple of points worth considering . AND MAIDEN INFLUENCED METLLALLICA...think about that RAINBOW is exactly the same stuff as DEEP PURPLE ie not metal and DIO does not suddenly get proggy because it feutures DIO on vocals and also DIO came later than IRON MAIDEN A different discussion really, but since you bring it up... There is not much Iron Maiden influence in Metallica's music - but there is a more direct link from Metallica to, say, Dream Theater or just about any band playing metal from the 1990s onwards. Rainbow has Ritchie Blackmore, but the style of music is different to Deep Purple - less improv and more classical allusions, with mystical themes to some of the lyrics and long song structures every now and again. Dio's own band continues the fantasy themes to new depths (heights?), with startlingly accurate guitar work, obviously inspired by but not copied from Van Halen, and precision riffing similar to Black Sabbath's "Heaven and Hell" - there is a direct line that is crowned by the voice of RJD that shows a progression from Metal as it was in the 1970s (yes, it did exist back then) through the NWOBHM (New Wave, remember!). Iron Maiden's sound is unique to Maiden (and the rip-off bands like Helloween, etc.) - it is not a general influence on the metal genre, and it has not particularly changed over the years. Each Iron Maiden album sounds unmistakably like an Iron Maiden album, with the same song structures and riff patterns done slightly differently - like AC/DC or Motorhead. Iron Maiden in 1983 released "Piece of Mind". In my opinion, Dio's "Holy Diver" is a much better album - much stronger all round. "Piece of Mind" was hardly prog... and nor was "The Number of The Beast" or anything Paul DiAnno recorded with IM. Sure there are moments, like "Phantom of the Opera", but Rainbow had been doing proggy things way before then. "Holy Diver" contains many proggy themes, the songs are very well and dramatically structured, and there are moments where the band are each doing their own thing. Note "moments", not entire passages as with bona fide prog. This is something that Iron Maiden lack. Remember also that RJD was in a band called Elf before he joined Rainbow in 1976 (or was it 5?), so he predates Iron Maiden by a VERY long time! The best Bruce Dickinson can manage is a band called Samson, who were amazing, and put out two very raw-edged metal albums in the late 1970s. "Head On" is well worth checking out. Quite progressive. Metallica obliterated all of that with a single stroke - aptly named "Kill 'Em All", which rips the pages out of the history book as far as the metal genre is concerned, by introducing the concept of thrash, without succumbing to the undiluted form, unlike most other thrash bands at the time. Metallica always denied being a thrash band - and they were right. They used thrash techniques to develop a very progressive form of metal right up to "...And Justice For All", whose riffs can be heard virtually verbatim in Dream Theater's early work. As if to underline this, "Kill 'Em All" has fantasy themes in some of the lyrics - indicating prog pretensions. This is underlined by the developing riffs - "Seek And Destroy" has some of the most organically developing riffs in metaldom, and "The Four Horsemen" relates all the material back to itself. A stark contrast to those sad bands who go off at tangents because they cannot think of a way to develop the existing material.     And that's (partly) why Metallica are more progressive than Iron Maiden, and should be considered over IM as prog related.   Think about that

First off Lars Ulrich said that maiden had a huge affect on them and a reason why it does not sound like maiden is because metallica messed it up trying to show the world how fast they can riff their gutiars and how agressive they can sound and the main reason why you dont want maiden to be added is basically because you seem to like metallica, dio and rainbow over maiden and that is fine but you cant use that to back up your argument why it is not progressive. And comparing it to ac/dc shows what a complete moron you are

Obviously rainbow had about two albums with dio before they went totally 80's synth pop and also DIO's song structure is just plain heavy metal as done by judas priest.

All the maiden songs sound the same eh? Ah ok have you heard

Prodigal Son

Blood Brothers

Sign Of the Cross

The Unbelivier

Seventh son of a seventh son

Genghis Khan

Dance Of death

To tame a land

Revelations

Hooks in you

Deja Vu

Another Life

Gangland

Transylvania

Wastin love

Montesegur

Dream of mirrors

The Nomad

Judgement of heaven

How the f**k can you say that these songs sound the same?  

I dont care how much metallica is your favorite band...they where not the first PROG METAL BAND ON THE SCENE REMEMBER THAT YOU LITTLE TWAT