Why does prog metal dominate the last 10-15 years?

Because the last 10-15 years were really metal.

I think it's down to two things,

Metal is very popular. It's never really been the next big thing, despite periods of big mainstream infiltration - pop metal like Poison and Europe in the '80s, Nu-Metal like Limp Ballsack in the '90s. It's (or certainly was) a common 'jumping off genre' for kids who perceived it as slightly seedy and rebellious. Even in a climate where the 'shock' image of Slipknot or Manson are considered mainstream, kids are still perversely attracted to it.

Virtuosity has always been held in high esteem, even when other (more) popular rock forms were going back to basics  - Nirvana, White Stripes, Oasis. Most notably, extreme metal has always cherished diversity and virtuosity, and it's mostly the influence of extreme metal - Thrash, Doom, Black, Speed, Death, Sludge, Grindcore etc. - that has filtered down to cross-pollinate more 'progressive' forms of rock. Think Dillinger Escape Plan, Between The Buried And Me, Mesuggah, Sunn0))), Mastodon, Opeth right down to bands that aren't metal but take it's influence on board like (sadly defunct) Oceansize, PTree, Riverside.

paganinio wrote: Metal being the (much) less popular and less accessible genre than rock, the common conception that prog metal is more accessible than prog rock may need some hard evidence. Pick a random person on the street, do you really think he will show more interest in prog metal such as Ayreon's Flight of the Migrator, than in prog rock such as Ayreon's The Dream Sequencer? He'll like Dream Theater's "Home" more than Porcupine Tree's "Lazarus"? I doubt it.

Random person on the street will tell you they don't want to hear it. It's weird. That's just the fact of life. Doesn't matter what you play.ten times as much in our hiphop/dance/Country/urban era. Rock in itself in any form is unpopular.

paganinio wrote:  A new listener typically gets into lighter stuff like Dredg and Neal Morse before he moves Into the Everflowing metal territory and embrace Riverside, Agalloch and Tool.

I embrace neither unconditionally and go for Radiohead instead.  No kidding, my first experience of prog was of the old prog and after that, I couldn't quite come to terms with all the technical bling of prog metal whereas in a band like Radiohead, there is at least evidence of the more embracing, holistic approach that characterizes my favourite prog rock bands.

paganinio wrote: Metal being the (much) less popular and less accessible genre than rock, the common conception that prog metal is more accessible than prog rock may need some hard evidence.

To be honest, I don't really know where the truth lies on this. But most of pop/soft rock/alt rock lovers I know aren't really that open-minded about changing their listening habits for something more sophisticated. Maybe they have become too comfortable with hearing only radio-friendly soundscapes? Maybe there is enough pleasant music around for them to never get tired of this? Maybe mellow-sounding prog alternatives just don't stand out among all the music? (prog bands are simply less commercially successful). Maybe metal is the easiest genre to discover prog because if one learns to embrace technicality, he starts to think about the process of how this music is really made, and, due to that, starts to appreciate and enjoy prog (as well as classical music or jazz, for that matter) more?

Just throwing out some ideas here, there is no way to conclusively prove them though.

Henry Plainview wrote:   purplesnake wrote: The thing is, "popular" music, which is controlled mainly by media, has generally been music with low levels of talent. At our time, its basically eternal sh*t, its just based on image and how good their hair looks, and the only music part of it is "can this person sing". I think we all understand and agree on this. Nope, music was never good. Metal is generally easier to explain as more complicated music, because of the faster playing, and so people can explain themselves more. And they feel belonged in a group that is relatively large. With Progressive Rock, its harder to communicate the intelligence. How does complexity equate to intelligence? What's more intelligent, someone singing over 4 chords played over and over again (not complicated) or an emotional masterpiece filled with harmonies and melodies that interact with each other (complicated). The outside listener must really understand music. Nope. It seems like you've absolutely misunderstood what I meant. I meant that in normal prog rock, the outside listener must really understand music. In metal its easier for people to relate. so you get lots of people who arent even that musically intelligent but lean towards progressive metal because they are like OMG I WANT TO PLAY SO FAST.

Edited by purplesnake - August 29 2011 at 23:44

Ugh, I'm not a prog metal fan, and I despise most metal, unless it's something really slow and extreme, like drone that concentrates more on riff than solo. I've always had a Sabbath/Blue Cheer/Melvins attitude, where I prefer slowness to speed.

The reason I stray away from metal though, is that it tends to go towards a "I'm heavier/can do a longer solo than you" approach, and forgets about all other aspects of the music.

Jbird wrote: I'd point out too that some of these albums and groups listed under 'prog metal' aren't really metal.   Haken, Porcupine Tree, and others.

I believe Haken and Porcupine tree are listed under heavy prog...

I'd point out too that some of these albums and groups listed under 'prog metal' aren't really metal.

paganinio wrote: The question is why. Why has metal become so prevalent during the last 10-15 years?

Maybe it's because those of us in the first wave of prog fans are beginning to die off?