Metallica ¿Are a Progressive Rock Band?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Suggest New Bands and Artists
Forum Description: Suggest, create polls, and classify new bands you would like included on Prog Archives
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=51067
Printed Date: February 17 2025 at 20:36
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Metallica ¿Are a Progressive Rock Band?
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Subject: Metallica ¿Are a Progressive Rock Band?
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 12:00
|
Well my friends i need to set this up, Metallica is a Progressive rock band??
Let me know
Cheers! -------------  |
Replies:
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 12:02
No - they're a Thrash band. Or at least they used to be, until the 90s.  ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to: 
|
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 12:05
|
Mike, later i will send a PM to you.
For an opinion.
Cheers
------------- |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 14:37
|
No - they were a Progressive Metal band that used Thrash as a core innovative technique.
This has almost nothing to do with Progressive Rock and almost everything to do with Progressive Metal - the two are dissimilar genres in many ways.
They were never just a thrash band, so I have not voted. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 14:40
^ I don't think they were ever a Prog Metal band. They were quite progressive though.
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 14:47
I agree entirely there.  (With an emphasis on the WERE in progressive however   )------------- 
|
MikeEnRegalia wrote:Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 14:52
|
Define Prog Metal. We have, on this site, the following http://www.progarchives.com/subgenre.asp?style=19 - http://www.progarchives.com/subgenre.asp?style=19 ;
Progressive Metal definition: This category represents the core movement of what is called “Progressive Metal” in the literal sense. Throughout the years many new styles of progressive metal emerged more or less independently of the original Progressive Metal bands. Separating these styles from the core movement helps to prevent the definition of Prog Metal from “watering down”.
But what is the definition?
Progressive Metal: The Early Years Progressive Metal emerged in the second half of the 1980s. The first bands were essentially attempting to combine influences from classic prog rock of the 1970s (bands include YES, GENESIS, KING CRIMSON) and the NWOBHM (New Wave of British Heavy Metal – bands include DIAMOND HEAD, IRON MAIDEN, JUDAS PRIEST). Who actually did all of this?
Classic Progressive (Proto-)Power Metal These bands were staying close to a style which would eventually be evolve into "American Power Metal". This type of Power Metal is not to be confused with the European style which emerged with bands like HELLOWEEN a few years later and would lead to a second wave of Progressive (European) Power Metal bands in the late 1990s. But what's the actual difference in style?
Classic (Eclectic) Progressive Metal This style came to full bloom in the 1990s. The NWOBHM influence is still present in the music, but it's not the main ingredient anymore - in fact one of the trademarks of this style is that it draws from a broad range of influences which all seem equal in proportion. The resulting music is very diverse, making it difficult to describe or pin-point. But it's always melodic and often symphonic, and generally not too explicitly technical – although bands like DREAM THEATER are often accused of being too technical and virtuous there are many bands which take technicality to yet another level. So Dream Theater are Classic (Eclectic) Progressive Metal? Their early work contains music that is almost identical in structure to Metallica's - there's virtually no essential difference.
Progressive Metal: The 1990s In the 1990s American Power Metal continually lost its dominance over the core movement of Progressive Metal. Instead eclecticism and melodic/symphonic elements became the dominant attributes. DREAM THEATER quickly established themselves as the most popular band of the genre, which also led to them becoming a reference in terms of style. Every new Progressive Metal band was compared to them, similarly to neo prog bands being compared to MARILLION, or new Prog Rock bands of the 1990s being compared to SPOCK'S BEARD. This is the most helpful so far - it appears to state that Dream Theater are a kind of reference. See my above point on Metallica. I can't see why Metallica aren't Progressive Metal from this description.
Modern (Eclectic) Progressive Metal These bands and albums represent the “heart” of Progressive Metal. They managed to refine their music compared to the beginnings in the 1980s, yet they managed to stay true to the style they had defined with their early albums – at least at the beginning of the 1990s. Of course there were fluctuations – some bands are more technical, some are more symphonic, some albums are more experimental, some are spacey ... but they all maintain a balance between the influences, and that's why they're listed here. You'd have to know "these bands and albums" to understand this...
Modern Progressive Power Metal (American Style) In a way these bands revived the music which had sparked the Progressive Metal movement in the 1980s. In the meantime the musical environment had changed a lot, for example neo-classical elements had been made popular by one Yngwie J. Malmsteen. This was influential for most Progressive Metal bands which were rooted in Power Metal. The following bands can largely be attributed to American Power Metal, although some are borderline to the Eclectic/Mainstream Progressive Metal bands. Which following bands?
Modern Progressive Power Metal (European Style) These bands have even more neoclassical elements, the most extreme example being RHAPSODY who can be called “Classical Metal”, which doesn't qualify as being prog for many people. Nevertheless their music is quite demanding to play and contains many elements of serious classical composition and form, which is a strong indication of progressiveness. The following list of bands is quite diverse ... despite of them all being related to European Power Metal they really sound very, very different. I'll have to explore Rhapsody a bit, I can see. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: laplace
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 15:00
|
Voted "thrash". Semantics aside, I'll vote for any "no" option available. becoming less and less of a fan of how expansively prog metal is handled here and this is really the only way of showing it since the teams are so tiny ------------- FREEDOM OF SPEECH GO TO HELL |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 15:03
| I don't mean to be rude, but how many threads devoted to this band do we really need? |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 15:11
|
From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_metal - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_metal
Progressive metal (often referred to simply as prog metal) is a sub-genre of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_music - heavy metal music which blends the powerful, guitar-driven sound of metal with the complex compositional structures, odd http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_signature - time signatures , and intricate instrumental playing of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_rock - progressive rock .
Actually, it very, very rarely does this - if ever, as my recent "What is Prog?" blog shows very clearly. This is an ambition of Progressive Metal, nothing more.
The reality is that it's an extension of what Metallica did.
Some progressive metal bands are also influenced by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazz_fusion - jazz fusion and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_music - classical music .
Without wishing to be rude, so were Spinal Tap. And so was Cliff Burton.
Point me to a Prog Metal band that really shows jazz fusion influences - other than, say Spastic Ink. Bands with actual Classical influence are rarer than bands with actual Classical influence in Progressive Rock. Even Metallica had some Classical influence.
Like progressive rock songs, progressive metal songs are usually much longer than standard metal songs, and they are often thematically linked in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept_album - concept albums .
Like "Master of Puppets".
As a result, progressive metal is rarely heard on mainstream radio and video programs.
Nor is early Metallica.
There is NOT ONE definition of Progressive Metal that accurately describes what it is, or excludes Metallica - so what is the problem? ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 15:22
|
I really can't stand thrash metal and yet I am or at least used to be a big Metallica fan. Growing up, I never really considered Metallica to be a thrash band. Of course, people here on PA refer to Judas Priest as a thrash band and I never considered them to be thrash and they are one of my all-time favorites. My idea of thrash back in the day was bands like Exodus, Slayer, Venom, S.O.D., and Overkill, which were generally all bands that I didn't really care for. And Megadeth was kind of a bridge between Metallica and thrash. IMHO, the only Metallica album that I might consider as a thrash album would be their debut Kill 'em All, and maybe some of the songs on Garage Days, otherwise they were kind of a one of a kind heavy metal band. I bought Kill Em All and Ride the Lightning LP's shortly after Ride the Lightning was released from an advertisement in a Heavy Metal magazine. To my mind, Metallica were playing a brand of heavy metal that noone else had really ever played before. I don't know that the idea of "progressive" metal would have existed at the time, but looking back at it now I would say that yes, Metallica "progressed" heavy metal and I believe that they are one of the major influences on progressive metal. Not being a musician I don't know much about time signatures and complexity of playing so I have no input from that point of view, however, one of the major things that impressed my friends and I about Metallica is the way that they did change the time signatures within a song. Not being musicians maybe this was just an illusion but that was definitely the impression that it left and was one of their main appeals. My two cents. Not sure how useful or worthless this opinion is, but it is my opinion to share so do with it as you please.------------- 
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 15:34
|
Don't see how this 3rd thread being created is necessary at all... we have two threads already going on the topic. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 15:41
Come on, i really learned some and enjoyed discuss the topic, and see guys like Certif1ed , WinterLight and T streching his muscles and defending his ideas... i think that is the most fantastic thing to discuss not only this theme but all for...
cheers  ------------- |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 15:43
Well i do not see Edguy in the site maybe them can get PA ------------- |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 15:44
I'm glad you learned and enjoyed the discussion, but I think the discussion could be limited to a single thread, not spread across several. |
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 15:46
^ Should the discussion be adjourned to the Suede Room?  It can be mixed in with miscellaneous Rush bashing and Magma worshipping.-------------
|
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 15:49
No. Suede Room is not amused. |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:08
|
The questions are wrongly stated. The question is "is metallica prog rock?" the the answers should be YES and NO... You can't add "no, THEY"RE THRASH" without adding a simple "NO" option. Your poll is biased and it has no logic whatsoever. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 16:21
Why not???
No are not biased, you are biased about Metallica.
BTW WinterLight has stated that Metallica are a Prog Band, ask him... ------------- |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 18:31
It has nothing to do with opinion. It's pure LOGIC.
Translate it like this:
Question: "Is X a Y?"
Answers: " Yes, X is Y"
"No, X is NOT Y"
That would be a logical unbiased poll. But if the second option is :
"No, X is Z"
And that Z is actually almost EXCLUSIVE of Y, then you're biasing the answer. There's no way to answer "NO" in your poll without also having to agree that Metallica is thrash.
-------------
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 18:32
|
^ is it that big of a problem? I had no problem agreeing to them being a thrash band.
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 23:33
|
^Mike, Metallica was a 100% thrash band only in ONE album... ONE. Here calling them thrash i'ts like equivalent to saying "not PA material". -------------
|
Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 23:39
Don't worry, Pat and I at a minimum fire back at the heathenous Rush bashers.  -------------
|
Posted By: Pekka
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 23:50
|
They were a thrash band in 1981-1983 but in 1984 they already released some more complex pieces. Is The Call of Ktulu a thrash song? Put it on a DT record and it's progressive metal. But nah, Metallica is a very diverse metal/heavy rock band with some progressive leanings, so if you really had to put them on the site, it would definitely go to prog related, I think. But I guess this has been discussed many times before and we all see the results. |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: August 19 2008 at 23:52
hey let's keep politics out of it that's a little joke |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: August 20 2008 at 03:44
Priest's more recent output has certainly used thrash techniques - but the thrash techniques pretty much originated with Priest in the track "Exciter", which uses the fundamental alternate picked riffing ("thrashing" technique.
Thrash carries dumb connotations, but really, it's a guitar technique the same as two-handed neck tapping (as pioneered by Steve Hackett and developed by Eddie Van Halen) or sweep and alternate-picked leads(shredding) - and so many metal bands use it (including "Progressive" ones like Dream Theater, Meshuggah and Opeth), that any "dumb" connotations with the word "thrash" are in the minds of those that have them.
It's actually a Progressive technique, in the same way as the others I mentioned.
Metallica are a thrash metal band in EXACTLY the same way that Dream Theater or Meshuggah are.
They are also a Progressive Rock band in the same way. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: August 20 2008 at 03:49
|
We don't need three virtually identical threads people - Please use this one:
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=50828 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=50828 This one closed. ------------- 
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012 |