I'm sure the prog metal team will be aware of Statovarius. What are your (and other members) views on them being listed on the site, either as prog metal, or perhaps as prog related?

 

It seems to me that much of what they do has strong prog connections, both in terms of individual tracks, and the way they put their albums together.

 

...I think there is a general consensus of oppinion that Masterplan should never have been included...

Otherwise let's include everyone who ever pulled the strings.

 

 

I have to be honest, I don't usually bother getting involved in these types of conversations on this site, as they tend to quickly become circular and ultimately pointless...but surely having a 'classical influence' just isn't enough, and there is a raft of difference between Symph X and Strato in style...an average Strato album has one or two tracks out of the 10 which may be considered more expansive in terms of structure, length and intracacy of concept, but then so do Vision Divine and a load of others; its become part of the Power metal mantle...

 

but in terms of time and tempo changes, and clear Progressive influence, they just don't come close to S X...not by a long way, and therefore shouldn't be added...

 

 

 

Master of Puppets and And Justice for All contain many prog elements.I consider them almost "proto prog metal".Same with Iron Maiden.

 

 

 

Seeing the "big" body of metal that you have reviewed, it's quite obvious it's not your favorite genre, and it's quite obvious from this wise post you made you actually see it with contempt. Save that great peace of wisdom for yourself please. We can't take so much knowledge in a single sentence.

 

Anyone who says Stratovarius sounds just like Symphony X obviously hasn't heard much Symphony X, and that is a FACT, not an opinion. Opinion is "I like it, you don't". But you can't say, for example, that The Beatles sound just like The Rolling Stones and that is "your opinion" that it is that way... This is no matter of opinions.... Stratovarius doesn't sound at all like Symphony X, a band that plays true and authentic progressive power metal. As does Adagio and Pagan's Mind (which at times borders in classical progressive metal a la DT). 

 

 

 

I wouldn't trust Lindsay Lohan for her knowledge on metal...

 

You could also say, Lindsay, that "according to this site, Genesis made after 1980= neo prog"...

 

And that would be as insulting as what you said about the bands in progressive metal.

 

Ah, the old my opinion is not an opinion it's a fact arguement. Not seen that one for a few days. Opinions are just that, opinions. If someone hears similarities between Symphony X and Stratovarius (or anyone else for that matter), they are quite entitled to say so.

 

Of course there are similarities, which is very different to say they sound the same...

 

But of course people are entitled to say whatever sounds the same as whetever... As far-fetched as the comparison can be, you're right.

 

Of course Symphony X shares elements with bands like Stratovarius... both play power metal, the big difference being that the former pley progressive-power metal, the latter traditional straight power metal. What I said is, "Anyone who says Stratovarius sounds just like Symphony X obviously hasn't heard much Symphony X," . One thing is sharing elements.. Another sounding the same.

 

 

 

If you visit All Music guide or read Rolling Stone or any other mainstream meedia outlet, you'll see how they label most power metal bands as progressive metal...Actually, Lindsay Lohan's definition of prog metal (read above: power metal + keyboards = prog metal) is pretty much what the mainstream music media uses to label something as prog-metal or not...

 

 No... read above... There's a member whose nickname is Lindsay Lohan and he gave that definition.... 

 

http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=1956 - http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=1956

 

I sincerely hope no-one is suggesting adding Sonata....

 

Mr Sleeper and I saw them live on Sunday night, because Pagan's Mind were their support band....and frankly, Sonata don't have a progressive bone in their body...

 

What "opinion" am I criticizing? An opinion would have been "I don't think metal belongs in the archives"... I would've said something about it, probably, but that would be an opinion. You just said "Add all the bands mentioned in this topic. Evertything is prog-metal or prog-metal-related or proto-prog-metal." I can see it's an ironic post, so there's no opinion there, just another attack on the genre disguised as wise humour... Or do you really think all bands should be added? Of course not. therefore, you have not expressed any opinion, but laughed at the discussion and essentially at metal with your wise remark.

 

if you would have said what you said in your reply, then THAT would have been an opinion, and one I would've disagreed with. You have the right to think so. But please, your message, your opinion, was encoded in that sentence you gave us in a way it really looks like you were just doing what I said you were doing.

 

And tell me about the "prog metal fans elite"... It's a very interesting notion... considering the relatively small amount of metal bands in PA and the fact that only ONE metal band is in prog-related (Iron Maiden)... so if there is such an "elite", it's a sure thing we are awful at having our "goals" being achieved here in PA.

 

You were there months ago in the Metallica discussion. Then you return for this discussion. What else have you done?  You have a big body of reviews, but basically you seem to appear only when some metal addition is being discussed.

 

Again, I'm not criticizing your opinion. Because you didn't give one. You just now did.

 

And, if you read, you will see I oppose the addition of Stratovarius. The "elite" is divided it seems....

 

By the way, I'm also failing to express an opinion about your opinion. Regarding your point, it's tre that every band is judged in its own merits. And also, it's true there is a strong connection between most bands, as most share the same heritage. But case by case, each team genre analyzes what band should be here or not. Stratovarius has some prog elements, but too small to make it here. Sonata Arctica has just one album (UNIA) that deserves inclusion, in my opinion. Metallica, on the other hand (and it's NOT the focus of this discussion) was the main influence on most every progressive metal band starting with DT. And they have two and even three albums of progressive metal. But you're right: only a FEW decide. And in this case, even FEWER: the OWNERS of the site decided Metallica won't be here, and it won't. If you want a site where "thousands" make the deicisions, this is not one. And don't accuse us of doing things for our own behalf. I would have added a few bands if it was just for my own behalf. We think in PA and that's why most prog-metal additions have never been disputed. Most disputed additions have actually been metal-related, like Sabbath or MAiden.

 

Sadly, biographies sometimes reflect the opinion of the person writing the biography, they don't reflect PA's position. So this kind of error, I guess, should be more common than we think it is.

The T wrote: And tell me about the "prog metal fans elite"... It's a very interesting notion... considering the relatively small amount of metal bands in PA and the fact that only ONE metal band is in prog-related (Iron Maiden)... so if there is such an "elite", it's a sure thing we are awful at having our "goals" being achieved here in PA.

I don't think there is a small number of prog bands in PA, considering prog metal is somewhat new and that the peak of progressive genre was much before prog metal was estabilished. I also think that "prog metal elite" is one of the most prolific collaborators in adding bands. Sometimes I even argued about the urgency of adding a 'prog metal' band that had just released one album that had some prog influences (and this applies to other genres as well), but to no avail, because the "elite" accused me of hating prog metal, which is not true and can be proven by my ratings.

The T wrote:   You were there months ago in the Metallica discussion. Then you return for this discussion. What else have you done?  You have a big body of reviews, but basically you seem to appear only when some metal addition is being discussed.

Not true, but I don't expect you to know every discussion I have entered. And if at that time I was against the band, this time I'm for the band, so it is not calculated. Nowadays I only enter discussions of bands I know because in the past I used to propose many discussions and nobody gave a f***, so I don't give a f*** for discussions about bands I don't know well.

The T wrote: Again, I'm not criticizing your opinion. Because you didn't give one. You just now did.

Same bs as before, I will not comment

The T wrote:   And, if you read, you will see I oppose the addition of Stratovarius. The "elite" is divided it seems....

Never said it shouldn't be divided, but it seems only the "elite" opinions are taken seriously. If someone from "elite" posts "I don't see any trace of progressiveness in band X", the answer is ok. If it is a person outside, the answer is either "you are trolling the discussion" or "you said that because you didn't analyse properly their music" or "you hate prog metal, but it is valid" and so on.

 

The T wrote:   By the way, I'm also failing to express an opinion about your opinion. Regarding your point, it's tre that every band is judged in its own merits. And also, it's true there is a strong connection between most bands, as most share the same heritage. But case by case, each team genre analyzes what band should be here or not. Stratovarius has some prog elements, but too small to make it here. Sonata Arctica has just one album (UNIA) that deserves inclusion, in my opinion. Metallica, on the other hand (and it's NOT the focus of this discussion) was the main influence on most every progressive metal band starting with DT. And they have two and even three albums of progressive metal. But you're right: only a FEW decide. And in this case, even FEWER: the OWNERS of the site decided Metallica won't be here, and it won't. If you want a site where "thousands" make the deicisions, this is not one. And don't accuse us of doing things for our own behalf. I would have added a few bands if it was just for my own behalf. We think in PA and that's why most prog-metal additions have never been disputed. Most disputed additions have actually been metal-related, like Sabbath or MAiden.

Yes, the owners can do anything they want about the site, even shut it down or remove all the content and exchange the subject of it. But I'm not talking about his decisions, but about the decisions taken by those with power to add the bands or power to ask the owner about adding a band. These decisions ignore many people that joined the discussion with valid points because the person is not from the "elite", so his arguments are always counter-argumented by those default answers: "you hate prog metal", "you don't analyse properly the sound of the band", and so on.

But if you think that my opinion doesn't count to any prog metal discussion because "I hate prog metal" or "I don't analyse properly the sound of prog metal" or "I post in prog metal discussions just to troll them, by being sarcastic, ironic, hideous, etc", I will never again waste my time giving my opinion about any prog metal band and I recommend other people to do the same, just for not wasting their time and not receiving the standard answers I mentioned before.


*** edited because quotes where malformed***

 

Thanks! Obrigado! Gracias!

 

My thoughts exactly.

 

Metallica have two records that are particularly proggy in nature, but what really counts against their inclusion (IMO), is that the vast majority of their discography is not at all or barely related to prog.

 

Excellent. Now the rest of the crowd can hear your opinion, if you want.

 

Stratovarius style is simple and barely progressive. They don't have one single album that can be called fully progressive. On the other hand (and just to mention) Metallica has TWO albums where, in my view and that of others, they played almost 100% pure prog-metal, where they laid they foundations for the genre even without really knowing or wanting to do it. The case for Stratovarius is weaker and has no strength. If we were to add the band then we could start adding them all, like someone suggested. No, we can't start adding every band out of spite.

 

There are teams who decide what is part of a genre and what is "volatile". And there are members who have the possibility of deciding about those volatile artists, usually after some public (or not so public) discussion. I think the system is fine as it is. And as such, it seems Stratovarius won't be in PA soon...

 

That's one of the strongest arguments that people who oppose Metallica have, and I think it's partially true. I think by influencing prog-metal is influencing a prog genre and therefore prog, but that can be debated. I would've added Metallica to the prog-metal genre, directly, not to a proto genre. But again, that discussion was over long ago when owners said NO  so we better go back to Stratovarius...

 

I disagree. Without Metallica, there hardly could've been an Images And Words.... The riffing in that album is so much influenced by Metallica... As are the structures... You have to take the "influence" thing not only as "sounds like" but as the influence in the playing itslef, in the type of riffs, in the harmonies, even in the drumming... Without Metallica I'm not sure my favorite band, DT, would exist as it is.

 

Muse, on the other hand, is a NEWER band than DT. Yes, DT has been influenced by Muse in some songs in the latest albums wherein they have used some very similar riffs and ideas... but that doesn't mean DT's overall sound has been influenced by Muse, just some of their most recent songs. Muse wasn't there where DT released more than half of their albums...

 

 

 

By the way, if there ever is a 30 minute nu-metal song, that would be torture...

 

However...this topic of discussion is...............................(let me behave rather :))

 

Stratovarius not considered a prog band?  Yet you include Metallica on these forums?  You go as far as saying Metallica influenced Dream Theater? IMO Metallica has not influenced any band on the same league as Stratovarius so I don't know how that conclusion was made.  Put the two head to head on stage together?  Now let us talk.

 

Nightwish? Not meant to be on these forums either? hmmmmmm......

 

No matter what roots a band has, no matter whether or not they incorporate classical, jazz, pop, country or blues in their music it should make no difference.  Progressive music in my opinion is all about the structure, or rather the lack thereof.  This simple difference in this genre defines a musician because, well lets be frank...what's more difficult?  Following your typical verse chorus structure or trying to remember an entire song from start to finish?  And honestly anyone who says Stratovarius are not musically talented deserves a kick up the @rs*! You try pick up a guitar and play to them! (There is more than one thread on this topic so I relate these comments to all)

 

Listen I can go on and on but bottom line is that Stratovarius is progressive and I am quite amused this topic is even open to debate especially considering some other bands in the mix here.  Take another listen to them and tell me you can consider it purely power metal.

 

(BTW I am not a fan of Stratovarius)

 

Could you explain what's power metal in I&W?

 

Though related wouldn't hurt.                  

 

The Yes influence in keyboards was the first thing I noted when I first listened to them. And I didn't even knew Yes!

 

 

 

And their first record was released in 1989 but they were formed since the mid 80's the same time as Helloween. They are at least as important as some of the bands under the prog metal.

 

whatever it is PA are paying you Olav, it just isn't enough...