system of a down?

First of all, let me welcome you here ...

Just to let you know, if you are kind of surprised about many people's radish posts here, let me tell you, when I was new here, I openned a discussion about System of a Down's progressive influences, and the reason why they should or shouldn't be included in the archives.

At least 80% of the population here was against it, and I almost have my butt kicked ...

I really don't know why people got  at it .. And they still are any time it is discussed.

The reason why I started this discussion before was because I found the band System of a Down listed as an example of a band that has incorporated prog-influenced elements, although they are not considered as a prog-metal band like it is mentioned below:

In recent years, the most commercially viable category of prog has been progressive metal. These bands are usually happy to be known as progressive, and produce very long pieces and concept albums. Several of the leading bands in the prog-metal genre (particularly Dream Theater) cite pioneer progressive hard-rockers Rush as a prime influence. Meanwhile, other heavy metal bands not generally considered prog-metal, such as System of a Down, have nevertheless incorporated prog-influenced elements like bizarre shifts in time signatures and tempo in their music.

Now, since it explains that the band has incorporated prog-influenced elements in their music, and given the fact that there is a category labeled as Prog-Related, which doesn't makes sense to me, why shouldn't they be included???

I am surprised that they have included bands such as Primus and The Mars Volta, which are not progessive, but have incorporated progressive elements in their music.

Now, my question is, do people consider them as progressive for being here in the archives? Or, are they just prog-influenced? If they are prog-influenced, and SOAD is considered too, regarding the text shown above, then why shouldn't they be in? Isn't that one big contradiction? What do you think?

I agree with you that they are commercial ... But, isn't Asia a pop (commercial) rock band, and still considered as prog-related within the archives?

I now that their members are prog rockers (Wetton, Downes, Palmer, Howie), and SOAD's members are not, but still, Asia's music isn't a 100% progressive, and I think that music is what really counts here, not only the musicians ... Isn't it?

Yes, I have listenned to many progressive stuff wayyyyyy before, and I know the difference ... In fact, my favorite band is a progressive rock band  ... And perhaps you have notice it.

But people really have to be careful by giving definitions to the term, and opening categories like prog-related if they know that things like this are going to happen in the future ... Don't you think????

I believe that it's either prog or not-prog, but there is not in between ... So, there is no such thing as prog-related in my opinion. In such a way, we would avoid discussions like this where the issue is open to fit in ... No matter what!

Harold Dupont wrote:   3-4 minutes songs with 2 verses and a chorus isn't enough to be called art.

Why thats a rather close minded statement