Sabbath Bloody Sabbath the first prog met

Rocktopus wrote: I think both Sea Shanties and 2122 are prog metal from different times than now. Its complex, heavy, metal, plenty of riffs and prog. They have a natural place in the history of progmetal. One shouldn't listen to modern prog and try and apply its set of rules too the older albums. We can't dismiss the harder bands of the 70's as not being metal, because they don't sound like newer metal.

The 70s Classic Metal bands are much more similar to the other Rock bands of that time, than to modern (1980+) Metal bands.

Rocktopus wrote: That's worse than old proggers dismissing your Progmetal as not being prog. The metal term itself is from the 70's. So if young people can't relate to heavy 70's music as metal, because the newer stuff is so much harder, find a new name for this new music instead. Metallica and Slayer changed metal so much it became Thrash Metal and not 70's heavy metal anymore.

Of course it can be called Metal, but not Prog Metal. You argue on the basis of "They called it Metal back then, so it must be called Metal today", but I doubt that there is even a single newspaper/music magazine article from back then which described SBS as a progressive Metal album. So if nobody did that back then, why "force" it today?

Rocktopus wrote: pop from 60's and 80's is not very alike but both are still pop, from different ages. Its part of the same history.

When talking about music you can be more generic or more specific ... but not both at the same time. Prog Metal started in the 80s, with a couple of bands which all shared some common elements - on SBS these elements are not present. By calling that album Prog Metal you simply re-define the genre, and that's something you are telling us not to regarding the genre of "Metal" in general.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: con safo wrote: HIGH TIDE - Sea Shanties ok, let's settle this once and for all: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=26350&PID=2089479#2089479

^ did you notice the poll?

Equality 7-2521 wrote: ^^ I agree, its my favorite Sabbath album and has prog tendencies but it's far from being prog-metal. You can teach a Sabbath song to a beginner in a few mins. Far too simplistic to be prog metal.

Tool's not exactly the most technical band, and they're very progressive. Tons of Tool songs are easy to play (Schism, for example). I'm not sure "technical" has as much to do with "progressive" as some people think.


Edited by coffeeintheface - July 25 2006 at 03:05

Equality 7-2521 wrote: ^^ I was a little vague with my phrasing there. I was pointing out how they lacked technical ability, and then with that last bit was saying they're too compositionally simple to be prog-metal. Bits of Tool are easy to play, but their compositions are anything but simple.

Agreed on the "too compositionally simple" part about Black Sabbath. When I say Tool is easy to play, I'm saying in comparison to someone like Dream Theater. Compare playing the middle section of "In the Name of God" to playing the drop-d based riffs of "Schism". But of course Tool's compositions are complex.

At least in regards to 4. you should check out pretty much every traditional or stoner doom band ever. Pentadram/Bedemon/Death Row, Penance, Trouble, Saint Vitus, Sleep etc.

^^