| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Certif1ed 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
 Posted: October 08 2005 at 16:21 |
 MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Certif1ed wrote:
But how are they progressive? I've heard "Sound of Perseverence", and it's not very progressive at all, now, is it? Let's be honest here.
Just saying "They Are" is not a very convincing argument.
|
No offense, but why should I bother to even try to explain my reasons to you? I mean, you don't think that Dream Theater are prog, they're not even metal for you. There is no basis for a meaningful conversation.
|
Of course there is a basis for meaningful discussion.
I like to think that I know metal (and other types of music) when I hear it, and I post my opinions backed up with considered thought and careful research.
You don't have to bother doing anything - that is your choice.
But trying to claim that Death (the original Death Metal band) are somehow prog is laughable to say the least - especially when you (or anyone else) says that Cradle of Filth aren't, with the amount of evidence there is in the latter's music - unless there is some evidence outside of Death's music that backs that up.
I don't like Dream Theater, it's true, and I don't think they're very progressive or particularly Metal - Metal is partly about attitude, and DT just don't have it. Prog is about progressive music, and Dream Theater are simply stylised - it is not really progressive.
If you think my statements are meaningless, you obviously don't understand what prog really is - I have my doubts that you do.
Or maybe I don't understand what prog really is.
That's the point of discussions about prog music.
It really doesn't matter who is right or wrong, I just like to understand the reaonsing behind it and totally dislike the flat statements as if such things are common knowledge. They're NOT. It's up to the mindless minority to question this sort of stuff in my opinion.
And I AM that mindless minority.
Edited by Certif1ed
|
 |
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 20522
|
Posted: October 08 2005 at 16:35 |
Cert:
You're an intelligent person. What do you think is more likely:
- The hundreds of thousands of people who believe that Dream Theater are one of the core bands of Prog Metal are all wrong - the definition of prog (metal) needs to be changed and history rewritten.
- You are wrong - your rules to determine prog are highly subjective and are a mystery to everyone but yourself.
|
|
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: October 08 2005 at 19:17 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Cert:
You're an intelligent person. What do you think is more likely:
- The hundreds of thousands of people who believe that Dream Theater are one of the core bands of Prog Metal are all wrong - the definition of prog (metal) needs to be changed and history rewritten.
- You are wrong - your rules to determine prog are highly subjective and are a mystery to everyone but yourself.
|
Oh,oh.....
These two guys will show everyone how to have an impassioned, intelligent,cogent,but heated debate,but stay within the rules by showing respect...watch and learn everbody.
|
|
goose
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 4097
|
Posted: October 08 2005 at 20:58 |
Certif1ed wrote:
Prog is about progressive music |
I'm sure that part, at any rate, contradicts something you've voiced before? Prog with a big P as opposed to progressive with a small p?
|
|
hotbelly
Forum Groupie
Joined: August 04 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 41
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 00:53 |
Certif1ed wrote:
But how are they progressive? I've heard "Sound of Perseverence", and it's not very progressive at all, now, is it? Let's be honest here.
Just saying "They Are" is not a very convincing argument.
|
Before you go any further, I REALLY think you need to hear Symbolic...
If you already have, argue on 
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 20522
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 02:03 |
Certif1ed wrote:
I don't like Dream Theater, it's true, and I don't think they're very progressive or particularly Metal - Metal is partly about attitude, and DT just don't have it. Prog is about progressive music, and Dream Theater are simply stylised - it is not really progressive.
|
You're backing down a little bit from the bold statements you made in other threads about Dream Theater ... are they prog metal or not? And please don't try to avoid the subject by bringing new words like "stylised" into the discussion without proper definition.
Certif1ed wrote:
If you think my statements are meaningless, you obviously don't understand what prog really is - I have my doubts that you do.
Or maybe I don't understand what prog really is.
|
 I leave it to the others to decide who is more obviously wrong here.
Certif1ed wrote:
That's the point of discussions about prog music.
It really doesn't matter who is right or wrong, I just like to understand the reaonsing behind it and totally dislike the flat statements as if such things are common knowledge. They're NOT. It's up to the mindless minority to question this sort of stuff in my opinion.
And I AM that mindless minority.
|
There really is no right or wrong in this discussion ... we can all have our own definition of prog. But one can define right and wrong by taking into account which bands are historically considered to be prog. If your set of rules excludes many of these bands and includes some which are normally not considered to be prog, I would say that this set of rles of more wrong than right.
(We're taking all of this much too seriously.)
|
|
|
|
Gentle Ronnie
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 17 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 540
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 03:46 |
Human and Indie Patterns describe them even better than SoP as a progmetal band. Thing is, if Atheist and Cynic are in the archives, Death shouldn't even be a question, as the two bands based their career on Death's later efforts.
Much like Marillion wasn't in the archives, while the other neo prog bands would be.
|
|
|
|
Eetu Pellonpaa
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 17 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 4828
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 04:34 |
By the way, maybe this should be moved to some another area than "non-prog music"? 
|
|
Pafnutij
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: Russian Federation
Status: Offline
Points: 415
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 04:45 |
First, remove Deep Purple from the Archives! 
And regarding the topic, I dont think Death should be added. Just not enough prog elements.
Edited by Pafnutij
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 20522
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 04:53 |
Eetu Pellonpää wrote:
By the way, maybe this should be moved to some another area than "non-prog music"? |
yes ... Death to the prog area!
|
|
|
|
krauthead
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 30 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 509
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 05:00 |
maidenrulez wrote:
BRING DEATH TO PROG-METAL |
That would be a great Christmas gift 
|
|
*Dancing madly backwards on a sea of air* - Captain Beyond
|
|
Eetu Pellonpaa
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 17 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 4828
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 05:39 |
krauthead wrote:
maidenrulez wrote:
BRING DEATH TO PROG-METAL |
That would be a great Christmas gift
|
|
|
Gentle Ronnie
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 17 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 540
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 06:12 |
|
^ I have a strange feeling, looking at that picture, as if I saw it before, like, 10 years ago.
Edited by Gentle Ronnie
|
|
|
|
S Lang
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 01 2005
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 441
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 06:17 |
Sorry to interrupt the "family dinner table" discussions, but I could think of many artists that are not featured on the Archives. Never mind that they are prog in the classical sense and they have been for the last 30-35 years! I have little sympathy for another forced inclusion debated in the metal genre - while other, undisputable articles are ignored.
The reason being that many of you weren't even born at the time of their input, they have little recognition and support on the pages. How could they? Few of you ever heard some of the names, let alone being aware of long deleted albums. And as such, those albums will not be re-released without demand. Your loss is my loss, too.
What I really meant to say is that stretching the boundaries is fine by me, but not at the expense of articles gathering dust for lack of exposure. Gee, it makes me feel like an old fart and perhaps that's what I am in comparison, but that doesn't quell my passion for prog as I understand.
Oh, somebody get that colostomy bag ready, please...... and don't remind me of "death" either....
Edited by S Lang
|
|
Eetu Pellonpaa
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 17 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 4828
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 07:58 |
^ Well, most of the bands I appreciate did their records before I was born (1976 that is). I also think that the boundaries of the prog classification have been stretched with the bands from the old days as much as newer bands, by adding DEEP PURPLE and QUEEN to the archives for example. They suit me fine, so why should anybody be upset about adding DEATH here? I'm quite sure that many of the opposers of this band haven't even heard their music, or would want ever to hear it, as it has groaning vocals and transistor amplifiers. I think they are prog, though most of the prog I listen are categorized as prog folk, jazz, psychedelia and kraut. I listened death metal as a kid during the early 90's, and still I like to listen some of them in small amounts.
If you have some old gems to be added, lets do work for getting them listed here! I collect vinyls, and I would appreciate information of the material you described!
|
|
Pafnutij
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: Russian Federation
Status: Offline
Points: 415
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 08:23 |
|
You guys should start a new "extreme prog metal" category and move bands like Opeth and Cynic there (and add Death too). There's a big difference between extreme metal bands that do progressive music , and classic prog-metallers like Dream Theater.
|
|
Doesburger
Forum Groupie
Joined: September 14 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 50
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 08:45 |
What we have here is very simply stupid. Prog-this. Prog-that. Prog-rock. Prog-metal. Prog-jazz. Prog-disco. Prog-opera. Prog-country. Prog-western. Prog-festival. Prog-dinner. Prog-bed. Prog-man. Prog-woman. Prog-sh*t. Pfttt. Prog-stupid.
|
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 08:59 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Certif1ed wrote:
I don't like Dream Theater, it's true, and I don't think they're very progressive or particularly Metal - Metal is partly about attitude, and DT just don't have it. Prog is about progressive music, and Dream Theater are simply stylised - it is not really progressive.
|
You're backing down a little bit from the bold statements you made in other threads about Dream Theater ... are they prog metal or not? And please don't try to avoid the subject by bringing new words like "stylised" into the discussion without proper definition.
Um, where's the backing down? Anyway, such talk is just an attempt to divert from the subject at hand - you're not answering my questions or defining your meanings either, just attempting to paint my approach with the same colours as your own. A reasonable debating tactic, but 2 out of 5 stars.
Certif1ed wrote:
If you think my statements are meaningless, you obviously don't understand what prog really is - I have my doubts that you do.
Or maybe I don't understand what prog really is.
|
I leave it to the others to decide who is more obviously wrong here.
That's fine. I'm sure that there are people on both sides. I'm not claiming to be an expert - more someone who doesn't understand - as my words quite clearly state.
Certif1ed wrote:
That's the point of discussions about prog music.
It really doesn't matter who is right or wrong, I just like to understand the reaonsing behind it and totally dislike the flat statements as if such things are common knowledge. They're NOT. It's up to the mindless minority to question this sort of stuff in my opinion.
And I AM that mindless minority.
|
There really is no right or wrong in this discussion ... we can all have our own definition of prog. But one can define right and wrong by taking into account which bands are historically considered to be prog. If your set of rules excludes many of these bands and includes some which are normally not considered to be prog, I would say that this set of rles of more wrong than right.
My "rules" are not clearly defined - they are based on experience and observation. As you say, they may well be wrong. I'm perfectly willing to accept that, if there's an argument strong enough to counter any of those that I put forward.
Consensus is not an argument. The majority of people do not understand music or even want to. The rest of us just try to understand it, and we are at differing levels.
I have argued with text books and convinced University Professors that my theories carry weight. I have written a paper on Progressive Rock music and received a starred first as part of my degree.
None of which makes me right or better than anyone - more it shows that I love to learn about and more importantly question aspects of music. It also proves that I believe what I say and you'd better have a damned good argument to convince me otherwise.
(We're taking all of this much too seriously.)
I always take music seriously - I would never admit to taking it too seriously, as I frequently have a good laugh about it - and when we're considering a band for entry into the archives, we need to ask a few questions;
1) Is it prog or prog related.
2) What is the consensus, given that there will always be at least two sides.
3) Are you just plugging the band because you like them and a band who is already here, or do you really think it's prog?
It's not up to me to make a strong case against Death, because that is very clear to me. It's up to you guys, the fans of their music that think they are somehow Prog Rock related to make the case.
I like Death's music very much - with an admitted preference for the early stuff, and I agree with the sentiments that Chuck had a kind of genius for what he was doing. However, 1) I don't think it's progressive, just technical with a lot of riff ideas and 2) There are other bands more deserving of consideration like Megadeth or Metallica. If it's understood that neither of those bands will ever make it, then how can a more second-division band like Death make it? |
Edited by Certif1ed
|
|
vogre
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 14 2005
Location: Israel
Status: Offline
Points: 189
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 09:19 |
|
Certif1ed - did you hear any of the last albums except Sound of Perseverance?
Try listening to the Individual Thought Patterns and Symbolic.
Anyway techno thrash like Voivod and Watchtower *is* progressive and
included on this site. So a band with close songwriting with growls
instead of clean singing should be differently categorized.
About your Cradle of Filth comment - I am not that familiar with them
but from the songs i heard they seemed like a very generic band with
boring thrash like riffs and some synthesizers. Maybe it's catchy but
it didn't seem very prog to me.
|
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: October 09 2005 at 09:30 |
vogre wrote:
Certif1ed - did you hear any of the last albums except Sound of Perseverance?
Try listening to the Individual Thought Patterns and Symbolic.
Anyway techno thrash like Voivod and Watchtower *is* progressive and included on this site. So a band with close songwriting with growls instead of clean singing should be differently categorized.
About your Cradle of Filth comment - I am not that familiar with them but from the songs i heard they seemed like a very generic band with boring thrash like riffs and some synthesizers. Maybe it's catchy but it didn't seem very prog to me.
|
Nope - "Sound of Perseverence" was recommended to me as one of their most progressive albums. It's enough to let me know that their overall style has changed somewhat, but I doubt very much that anything else they've done will instantly make me think "Hmm. Prog", as the standard of composition is too basic. Riffs that go off at tangents are not progressive - they show a deep non-understanding of how to grow music organically. Gentle Giant are perhaps the best illustration of how this should be done.
I don't think that VoiVod are progressive either - at least, not progressive as in Prog Rock. There is progressive as in Led Zeppelin, and Prog Rock as in King Crimson, and the two have a very fuzzy border.
As far as CoF are concerned, I'm not bothered about the catchiness, but the orchestration, the lights and shades, the key and time changes - you know, all the stuff that makes up prog - the elements. I'm not saying I think the band are prog, just more prog than some bands I could mention who are in the archives, and some that are under consideration.
Oh, and I get lazy with my Shift key, which is why sometimes I use prog with both small and large "p"s. 
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Bring DEATH in the archives!
