My previous post contains no trick.Originally Posted by Scrotum Scissor
Actually, I just discovered that you are a fan of the growls - especially if they are extremely awful like on Cynic's Focus, lol, - what's something new and funny to me.
My previous post contains no trick.
Actually, I just discovered that you are a fan of the growls - especially if they are extremely awful like on Cynic's Focus, lol, - what's something new and funny to me.
Agreed 100%. Dream Theater, at the time, had nearly zero effect on the trajectory of progressive rock. They were considered a metal band. They were often mentioned as "a band you might like if you like Rush," but nobody was calling them progressive rock. I purposely didn't mention them in my thread opener, because I figured they were outside the scope. They weren't absorbed into the scene to much of an extent until the later 1990s.
This is a discussion forum. You answer by countering arguments (alternatively *writing* something, anything), not by posting emoticons and certainly not six stupid ones in a row. And you should learn how to read texts; I never said I was a particular fan of Focus myself or that I enjoyed its "growls" - but what if I was? I suppose you yourself prefer castrate vibratos, right? Well, that's your wonderful prerogative. And you may drop the "lols", as they don't serve you any good. In fact I'd rather see you post yet another Smak clip to solve dilemmas.
The discussion continues.
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
Exactly how it was here as well. Furthermore, and this is of *some* importance; never ever did I stumble across a person wearing a Dream Theater T-shirt at the time who a) referred to the band as progressive rock or b) knew rat's ass of the term itself, its history or etmyology. Quite the contrary; I remember at least a handful such T-shirters running with a scare from Berns Salonger in Stockholm in '96 after spotting a violin and a saxophone stand on the stage. Dream Theaters apparently didn't allow for that. Not quite yet anyway.
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
I've tried harder to really like Dream Theater than just about any band. I've heard the majority of their studio albums up until around 2007 or so, and a couple of the live ones. But alas, I had to eventually conclude that- a few things on Images And Words and most of the Scenes From A Memory album aside- they just don't really do it for me, and my tastes have changed a lot since those days. Part of it is down to LaBrie's vocals but most of it is down to what I see as a lack of taste, in both the writing and the playing.
As to their place in 'prog' history? I think that's a given, but yes, the 'metal' crossover will always be somewhat divisive to some prog fans. I personally remain unconvinced by 'prog-metal' generally, but that's just a personal thing.
An issue with some of the groups like Anglagard is that their work has been in-and-out of print; I don't know that I've ever seen a copy of their albums in UK stores, and I'm surprised no specialist label (Nosound, Esoteric, Inside Out etc.) has addressed this, maybe they have tried. Meanwhile bands like Spock's Beard, Flower Kings, Transatlantic etc. have remained available and easier to get hold of.
Due to the agressive haters of Dream Theater, I have to shamelessly quote myself:
"the album [Images & Words (1992) by Dream Theater] was the begining of modern progressive metal as a new NUMBER ONE genre of progressive music and symphonic rock ("Neo Prog") was removed from the throne."
And I shit on the ad-hoc created fairy-tale that the prog-heads were accepted (very) awful death vocals on Cynic's Focus more than LaBrie's clean, beautiful vocals at Images & Words and on the big lie that nobody recognized the progressivnes at Images & Words when it was released.
p.s. Hey SS, when it was released, Cynic's Focus (1993) wasn't regarded as a progressive metal album but as a death metal album due to the growls.
Last edited by Svetonio; 09-08-2016 at 04:16 AM.
I have to admit, when I first heard V, my first thought was exactly this...and Richard Marx. I still kind of struggle to reconcile those vocals with the music, but I got to like the album anyway.
First, Cynic's Focus was absolutely regarded as a "progressive metal album" - in the US as here in Scandinavia.
Second, I asked if perhaps you'd might want to actually read the posts you supposedly think you're arguing against. No one ever claimed the that "prog-heads were accepted these awful death vocals more than LaBries [...]" [sic] apparently exceptionally fantastic and "clean" eEeEeEeEe outcries of masculine bewilderness (neologics if there ever were any). What I stated was captured in the phrase I reproduced for you to address - which of course you didn't. But please try again, and answer this: The "prog" fanzines didn't write about them, the new artists didn't reflect their potential influence, the audience didn't speak of them, they weren't discussed, - And they themselves or their audience didn't identify with it - any more than the members and (most) fans of Talk Talk on releasing Spirit of Eden did.
Now if you still want to shit on a "fairy-tale", do it on your own such.
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
Lol. Just another of many lies that were coming with the Internet forums and guys like you who wrote a lot of bullshit on those forums. Due to the growls, Cynic's Focus back in 1993 was regarded as "Technical Death Metal" album at the best (due to jazz fusion influence).
Last edited by Svetonio; 09-08-2016 at 04:47 AM.
Are you somehow cognitively impaired? Are you mentally or perhaps physically unable to read a posted text? If you're not, then why the fuck aren't you referring to and commenting on what I actually wrote, and not what you'd rather want me to have written in order for you to "get" the "right" picture?
"Guys like you" - Christ, the preposterously infantile irony! Address the arguments! Answer the questions! When and where were they referred to in the 'zines? Which significant progressive acts in, say, Scandinavia, were influenced by Dream Theater and namechecked them? Which "progressive" festivals highlighted such bands any time before the late 90s? And what renders "technical death metal" an idiom of apparent lesser worth than "progressive metal" - which is, etymologically and semantically, a branch of heavy metal music?
Huh-huh... lol. That'd do the trick, I'm sure. Of that I'm absolutely certain, sorta.
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
Don't forget David Overstreet, they were partners in cryme.
"Always ready with the ray of sunshine"
@SS
Once more time as repetition is the mother of learning: Cynic's Focus features the death growls and consenquently the album were regarded as death metal when it was released; due to jazz fusion influence, it earned to be called "technical death metal"; but it couldn't have been concerned as prog metal because back then the death growls were regarded by the prog-heads as an antithesis of prog.
How does Marillion fit into this post-neo category? They were quite the epitome of neo prog right up to the Afraid Of Sunlight album, before becoming enchanted with groups like Radiohead. I believe that their post AoS sound owes much less to neo and can easily be categorized as post-neo.
To be or not to be? That is the point. - Harry Nilsson.
As a fan of Cynic, I have to say that I personally found their work only to be progressive in that they pushed the boundaries of death metal to their end conclusions. Their jazz influences were more subtle and hidden and I believe they get too much credit for it.
Last edited by StevegSr; 09-08-2016 at 06:03 AM.
To be or not to be? That is the point. - Harry Nilsson.
Well, I have no doubt that Cynic wanted that their audience take their music seriously, but sadly they were not categorized as "progressive metal" back in 1993; it's not categorized as progressive metal even at your favorite prog site called progarchives.com where Cynic are in "tech / extreme" section.
Last edited by Svetonio; 09-08-2016 at 06:15 AM.
But you don't have anything to teach me, Svetonio. Not on whether Gnidrolog were actually considered "symphonic" or if Dream Theater were somehow immensely important in the formative years of an alleged "prog resurgence" as conditioned by the underground ethos and aesthetic reflected in a long string of record labels, artists, festivals, 'zines and more that I've mentioned and which you don't seem to know much or anything about and consequently are unable to comment on. And death growls were not "regarded by the prog-heads as the antithesis of prog", seeing how there was no singular segment of "prog-heads" to speak of and neither no defined indentification of genre templates.
I was describing the context of Scandinavia and the rise of phenomena like the Colours label, the Record Heaven retailer's house, a number of fanzines and countless bands and names - none of whom were in any way indebted to anything remotely related to Dream Theater. To the extent that those phenomena were of any importance to the overall resurgence of a new coonception on progressive rock, Dream Theater had preciously little to do with it.
Since repetition is the mother of Learning, I mean. Or perhaps you were around these parts back then, in, say 1992? Did I somehow miss your written work, your presence, your name mentioned?
1993 is the year of Varg Vikernes' murder of Euronymous here in Oslo. The latter ran the shop Helvete (meaning 'Hell'), selling mostly rubbish and the odd spots of quality to kidsters. He even kept a bin of progressive rock vinyls there, and was quite crucial on dealing Änglagård, Thule, Landberk (and some older stuff) to lost teenager corpsepainters. I guess this is only one small factor in explaining how a 'death growl' never became anything as ludicrously conceived as an "antithesis of prog".
Last edited by Scrotum Scissor; 09-08-2016 at 06:56 AM.
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
THIS I promptly agree with. As with DT, Cynic were judged by the standards of their idiomatic origin - i.e. metal, not "rock" as such - and back in '93 there wasn't really all that much needed to be perceived as a "reformation" of that genre. Black metallers were supposedly doing it, doom metallers as well, not least death metallers - why shouldn't there be "prog" metal? I found and still find Focus somewhat dull myself (their second album was better, although essentially containing merely a perfection of the first more than a development on it), but I can easily see how someone from the inside of their camp must have concluded this to be the new gold. I also witnessed many a "prog-head" [sic again] report enthusiastically about Cynic, mostly because they were seen as genuine (as opposed to the "Maiden with more chops" that apparently was DT), in fact often the same folks who went nuts over Mr. Bungle on their release of Disco Volante a short while after.
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
Of course I have what to teach you. For example, this is a proggy vocal:
...and this is not:
You didn't know it...so sad.
Last edited by Svetonio; 09-08-2016 at 07:54 AM.
They didn't write even about more complex metal bands that came earlier, like Watchtower, or Sieges Even. This heavy scene, that some metal fanzines began labelling as progressive metal, was discussed and media-covered in the late 80s/early 90s under a metal context and the prog/psych/space scene was largely ignoring it; at the stage of indifference. At least in Central Europe (Belgium, Netherlands, France) where I was living at the times. How many times did I talk about the progressive tendencies of "Awaken the Guardian" by Fates Warning (with the Crohinga Well crew f.e.) to get the response that they were a METAL band with many progressive rock influences but the Maiden factor outshadowed everything in their sound... And of course none of us was considering that sound part of the big P word. Simply a subgenre of heavy metal.
Last edited by spacefreak; 09-08-2016 at 08:15 AM.
Hell, yeah! I confirm! I received the 3ple TANGLE EDGE live upon release, in a trade with Metalion (Jon Kristiansen) of the infamous Slayer Mag. Wrapped in a Helvete's plastic bag.
I didn't "know" it because this is not the way it was in terms of the context to which I was referring. And what's actually "sad", as you say, is that ignorance - pure, complete lack of respect for the basic rules of argument as a condition of discussion - is by and far degrading participants' options in places like PE. You have now been posed the same set of questions three or four times, yet you obviously aren't able even to begin to figure out how to get out of their consequential grasp. Then please resign from pretending that you do or in any other way bring anything fruitful to the table we're at just now. May I suggest some more videos of your recommendation? You're much better at posting videos, Svets.
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
Without reading the rest of the post, my opinion is it would start with Anglagard's hybris and Dream Theater's images and words(both released in 1992). There was post neo prog before that(I am reluctant to say "modern prog" because it's been over 25 years now)but imo that is when the modern prog resurgence officially began(albeit very slowly).
Which only goes to show how absurd the whole deal was as a post-modern token of sorts. Would you believe that there are still so-called "prog-heads" out there who still refuse to see the blatant tongue-in-cheek evident in the liner notes enhanced to that debut Änglagård album? About the "musical nonsense of today" - backed by the pic of a 'tron by the woodside?
Good times though, they were.
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
Yes, because I had no high-hopes having asked for it from the biggest supporter of Norwegian black metal and not only he managed to locate it but additionally in the most extreme metal record store of the times.
But Euronymous was not selling Dream Theaters. He'd rather freesbeed them instead.
Lesson for SS No. 2
The origins of progressive metal can be found in the music of melodic hard rock bands of the late sixties to mid-seventies like songs of early Uriah Heep, Rush (especially their 2112) and Rainbow; these bands had many qualities of progressive metal. However, progressive metal did not developed as a distinct genre until the late 80s in the United States. It was manifested in music of the bands like Fates Warning, Queensrÿche and - finally - Dream Theater with their sublime Images and Words the album from 1992 were they were taking elements of symphonic rock - primarily in instrumentalization and compositional structure of songs - and combine them with the music style of the English bands which were belonging to "New Wave of British Heavy Metal" and hence with fierce style of Iron Maiden and Megadeth.
In terms of genre, progressive metal is most close to the American power metal as it also has grown from the influence by above mentioned 1970s bands. And in terms of music, power metal and progressive metal are quite similar genres, and for a newbie it's hard to make the distinction between American power metal and progressive metal. Both genres serve melodic elements with an accent on instrumental virtuosity.
On other side, regarding death metal - even with the elements of progressive metal like in the case of death metal band Atheist - who actually was the first death metal band who pioneered that experimentation with proggy sounds at their debut released in 1990, and of course Cynic with their 1993 debut - it's very easy to make difference even for a newbie due to the death vocals because without these idiotic vocals that death metal simply not exists.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks