Coheed&Cambria Prog??

exactly Dean... people here aren't saints.. we are human..  and first impressions are often lasting ones.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: Floydian42 wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ which is why they're in the prog-related category. It seems like people just don't get it ... bands in that category are *not* prog. Well, I don't even see any clear relation, but hey, everyone has an opinion, right? The prog elements they use were outlined many times in this thread ... you're free to ignore these posts of course. You also don't have to agree with them, but consider this: http://www.last.fm/music/Coheed+and+Cambria As you can see by the tags most user seem to think that they're even fully fledged prog rock ... so the position of PA could even be described as "conservative".

Prog Elements I have seen listed:

Conceptual Story (Need I Say Greenday? They're not regarded as Prog related?)

Change in Time Signature (Plenty of Genre's have this, Metal, ALTERNATIVE (at times), classical, Jazz.)

Lengthy Songs (Come on, so a song is prog because it's sort of long? What does that have to do with anything? Also, need I mention, that Green Day also had several long songs roughly 10 minutes in length.)

Changing Moods (All artists have songs that change moods! Everyone from David Bowie to the Red Jumpsuit Apparatus. And again, Greenday.)

If anything, I put them as a crossover between Alternative and Metal. Also, Green Day have 3 of these 4 requirements, so why aren't they included? Or even R. Kelly for that matter? (Not that I want them to be, I'm just saying for argument sake.)

I would like to bring up as well that other artists such as Sufjan Stevens contains ALL FOUR of these elements even more so then Coheed and Cambria, and he's not even so much as being considered to being added onto this site. (Okay, well, he's not quite as Conceptual as C&C, but he still has three concept albums.)

MikeEnRegalia wrote: Green Day have meet some of these requirements on their last album ... you're free to propose their addition, but in all honesty I think that American Idiot is still a lot less complex than any Coheed & Cambria album (I only heard a few songs off of it though - but I've read many reviews). In the end which band gets accepted as prog-related and which is rejected is a subjective decision. Coheed and Cambria though was an obvious case because they not only meet these requirements but are also described as being prog in the media and by their fans, which can't be said at all about Green Day.

I'm not purposing there inclusion, I think it's obvious that there not Prog in the slightest. What I was going for was that I don't see how that sort of rational (looking at the technicals) can be used to claim a musician as prog or not, or any other genre for that matter. A person can be judges as a genre or not based on what, for lack of a better term, feels right.

I think a lot of the C&C fan based that claimed them as prog listened to people like Rush and other heavier rock based prog musicians and got the wrong impression of Prog.

I would say prog related.

Floydian42 wrote: Prog-jester wrote: long tracks time signatures and ever-changing moods concept story not enaff eh? Not for me, they still scream alternative whenever I listen. The only difference is they have a concept behind there works.

Edited by adammcdorman - December 22 2007 at 02:04

well I don't like Coheed And Cambria too much, but I do consider them prog-related, just because of the concept of the band and the lengthy songs

Prog? No. Prog Related? Yes.