New Category, Post metal/ Sludge or Doom

Ghost Rider wrote: sleeper wrote: ^The problems with your examples, Gamemako, is that Canterbury and Italian Symphonic Prog were established in the late 60's and 70's, along with Krautrock, as independant styles of music that grew up alongside the rest of prog, they are not genres created by this site but have been recognised for 30+ years, who are we to disregard that? Plus, I believe that ISP isa  bit of a mis-nomeaner in that not all bands are symphonic and that the genre should be known as Rock Progressive Italiano (RPI), at least thats what I recall reading from our resident expert micky so I'll bow down to his superior knowledge here.  I'd like to make one thing clear, in Micky's absence: the name ISP should have been changed a long time ago into RPI. The bands included in the subgenre are in most cases anything but symphonic, as in the case of Area. The subgenre was created because the prog movement in early Seventies Italy was probably the biggest in Europe,  and one of the most influential, especially in places like Japan and South America. I know because I was there at the time... My first introduction to prog, at the ripe old age of 11, was through RPI. I'll tell Micky to insist for a name change, because lots of people don't understand that RPI is a category very much similar to Canterbury and Krautrock, and has nothing to do with a national division of symphonic prog.

I won't argue your point; as I said, my knowledge of ISP/RPI is quite limited. (But Aton's still sounds like symphonic prog to me. )

However, as for growing up separately, I think it's also safe to say that different parts of prog metal grew up separately. Atheist and DT are quite at odds (Atheist's 1991 Unquestionable Presence and DT's 1992 Images and Words would be the hallmarks). But you now see mixing of styles. You're not separating based on root but on quality. The question is what your criteria for making a genre is -- you're going to have to pick and choose who is going to be left out because you can't have 50 genres at the top. You also have bands that have releases in multiple categories (such as the aforementioned Dark Suns or even the ever-popular Opeth with their completely clean versus completely growled vocals on different albums or, for an amusing example, Sieges Even, whose Art of Navigating by the Stars release is arguably not metal at all).

Alright, let me put it this way: there are too many genres already, and you're suggesting yet more. It's already a mess, that giant line of names. Soon you'll have four lines of 25 or 30 genres. It's too many. It's not navicable or, to anyone but a prog expert, logical. It's a giant damn mess, and cracking up the prog metal genre will only make it worse.

Amusingly, the Atheist profile makes reference to the Florida prog-metal scene. There really wasn't one. They were pretty much it -- which is part of the reason their incredibly complex music didn't exactly pick up. It was the Florida DEATH METAL scene (Deicide, Morbid Angel, Massacre, et cetera). Cynic came later, and Death picked up the style later.

angelmk wrote: to many categories are mentioned here. you can not simply divide  prog metal into melodic prog, power prog , technical death .math prog .. it will cause total chaos , one band do not simply play for ex. power prog  or post metal, some of  the bands varied in their style ,experiment with new ideas , diversity in their music. that' s prog about , diversity.i agree that doom metal has very much in common with prog metal, but we cannot simply label all doom bends  as prog metal, doom metal bands follow strict line,do not change style, it is  what it is ,from the very first to the last album (ok, there are exceptions to this, of course), so we cannot just put  for ex. my dying  bride, paradise lost, katatonia, solitude aeternus, ...here , they belong to doom genre and should stay there.

Ghost Rider wrote: sleeper wrote: ^The problems with your examples, Gamemako, is that Canterbury and Italian Symphonic Prog were established in the late 60's and 70's, along with Krautrock, as independant styles of music that grew up alongside the rest of prog, they are not genres created by this site but have been recognised for 30+ years, who are we to disregard that? Plus, I believe that ISP isa  bit of a mis-nomeaner in that not all bands are symphonic and that the genre should be known as Rock Progressive Italiano (RPI), at least thats what I recall reading from our resident expert micky so I'll bow down to his superior knowledge here.  I'd like to make one thing clear, in Micky's absence: the name ISP should have been changed a long time ago into RPI. The bands included in the subgenre are in most cases anything but symphonic, as in the case of Area. The subgenre was created because the prog movement in early Seventies Italy was probably the biggest in Europe,  and one of the most influential, especially in places like Japan and South America. I know because I was there at the time... My first introduction to prog, at the ripe old age of 11, was through RPI. I'll tell Micky to insist for a name change, because lots of people don't understand that RPI is a category very much similar to Canterbury and Krautrock, and has nothing to do with a national division of symphonic prog.

puts it on the list of things to do..