A brief note on the roster...

[Jim LotFP]

(I could probably rattle off 100 easy)

Go.

 

[Cheiron]

There's also 'technical mathcore' 'technical grindcore' and lots of other shit people make up to make their minds happy.

 

[Prog_Muse]

Prog_Muse,

Once again there is no such genre is technical metal. There is a genre called technical death metal (tech death for short), because there are a group of death metal bands that have similar riffs and musical themes (Yngwie style solos is one of the main staples) and thus, we have the subgenre. There are plenty of metal bands that are "technical". Dream Theater is technical. Symphony X is technical. One can even argue that Slipknot is technical. To say that all three of these bands could be lumped together into one subgenre is just incorrect. And as I have said earlier, you're entitled to your opinion. I'm entitled to mine though and I think you are simply wrong.

*sigh*
Okay, dearie.
We're not discussing UFOs here.
You can say that there's no such thing as tech metal, and I can say that sun doesn't rise in the East...but that doesn't make either of us right, does it?
You either truly have no idea what you're on about, or you use Urban Dictionary for all your metal needs...but tech metal does exist, really and truly, and it would be highly presumptious and megalo of you to continue on like this, denying its existence and decreeing that it never was.
Assuming that you were right, I suppose that this board was a figment of our collective imaginations, and you'd better let Ken at Laser's Edge (you know, the guy whose adverts are at the top of every page in the forum) in on your little discovery so that he might stop selling these imaginary CDs from imaginary bands who don't exist because there's no such thing as tech metal.

Oh, and for you to imply that nine guys in pink jumpsuits and masks banging on beer kegs and grunting at prepubescent angry goth kids and sweaty drunk jocks at Ozzfest can be considered "technical" just completely obliterates any shred of credit you had left for this discussion.

I think we're done here.

 

[...AndTimeBegan]

Go.

If you'd really like I'll PM you but I'm not going to shit on the thread that hard by doing that haha.

*sigh*
Okay, dearie.
We're not discussing UFOs here.
You can say that there's no such thing as tech metal, and I can say that sun doesn't rise in the East...but that doesn't make either of us right, does it?
You either truly have no idea what you're on about, or you use Urban Dictionary for all your metal needs...but tech metal does exist, really and truly, and it would be highly presumptious and megalo of you to continue on like this, denying its existence and decreeing that it never was.
Assuming that you were right, I suppose that this board was a figment of our collective imaginations, and you'd better let Ken at Laser's Edge (you know, the guy whose adverts are at the top of every page in the forum) in on your little discovery so that he might stop selling these imaginary CDs from imaginary bands who don't exist because there's no such thing as tech metal.

Oh, and for you to imply that nine guys in pink jumpsuits and masks banging on beer kegs and grunting at prepubescent angry goth kids and sweaty drunk jocks at Ozzfest can be considered "technical" just completely obliterates any shred of credit you had left for this discussion.

I think we're done here.

I'm referring to what's generally accepted by most of the metal community. Nobody uses "technical metal" as a genre title, only as a description. (as in, "this band is pretty technical") Technical death metal, or tech death, is however an accepted genre title since most tech death bands have a specific sound. But as I said before, if you want to lump Dillinger Escape Plan, Meshuggah, and Symphony X (all bands are technical and all are considered metal) in the same subgenre you can go right ahead but most people will think you are insane.

And FYI that site you linked me to uses the term "technical metal" as a description, not a genre title. In fact from looking at the threads, most of the bands are referred to as prog or power metal for their genre title (surely a thread dedicated to this subgenre "technical metal" would refer to all bands in this fashion). Way to destroy your entire argument.

edit: and while I strongly dislike Slipknot and never once stated in my argument that I enjoyed their music, there are PLENTY of arguments (from actual musicians and intelligent people; not the aforementioned goth kids) for their technicality (especially with regards to their drummer). The fact you took your time out to add a nice little blurb at the end there securing your "metalness" is pretty sad and ignorant.

 

[Jim LotFP]

If you'd really like I'll PM you but I'm not going to shit on the thread that hard by doing that haha.

No fun.

 

[Prog_Muse]

Technical Metal as a subgenre was around long before tech death, tech grind, math, grind math, algebra rock, trig prog, etc etc etc.
It's a classic subgenre, albeit a small one...but in the beginning, metal was a very small genre as well.
Of course labels aren't perfect and are born of our deisre to categorize, but when the music communtiy collectively acknowleges and validates a label, one should not deny its existence...perhaps some of us here in this discussion are simply too young to remember.

Rick, you are absolutely correct about Spiral Architect; they were inspired by some of the forefathers of technical metal, and even had the same singer as Manitou had.
They spawned kind of a second generation of technical metal...and I'm pretty sure their album had a big ole sticker on it that said "TECHNICAL METAL MASTERS" or something to that effect...

 

[Prog_Muse]

I'm referring to what's generally accepted by most of the metal community. Nobody uses "technical metal" as a genre title, only as a description. (as in, "this band is pretty technical") Technical death metal, or tech death, is however an accepted genre title since most tech death bands have a specific sound.

You have your ass hanging in the wind as you continue to attempt the verbal equivalent of reversing the Earth's fucking orbit.
Your quest to defy the relevancy or existence of an historically significant subgenre which probably inspired many of the bands you're naming in the other categories lends less credit to your knowlege of this music as a whole, and has grown increasingly tiresome.
Please do your homework before embarking on such a topic.

 

[Prog_Muse]

THE KITTEN HAS SPOKEN.


*out*

 

[General Zod]

Cynic was credited as a death metal band because of their demos and because of Paul and Sean's involvement with Death.

Be that as it may, if you asked most people to categorize Cynic, they would place them squarely under the umbrella of Death Metal. And to that end, them headlining the Maryland festival is hardly a stretch.

Also, Mastodon is definitely progressive (the band's own admission). I fail to see how they are not.

Well, the band could claim they're Keebler elves, but that wouldn't make it so.

In all seriousness, I'm not sure by what definition they would be considered progressive. I wouldn't call them progressive in the sense that Amorphis is progressive, in that their sound is constantly in flux. And I wouldn't call them progressive in the sense that their roots tie back to Dream Theater, Yes, etc. And I wouldn't call them progressive in the sense that they are virtuoso musicians. And I wouldn't call them progressive in the sense that they've broken new ground musically. So, in what sense of the term are they progressive? That said, regardless of what Metal sub-genre they best fit, they certainly don't fit ProgPower. And certainly not as well as Cynic would fit a Death Metal festival. I would say this is evidenced by the fact that the Maryland promoters chose them as headliner, while I seriously doubt Glenn would select Mastodon as a headliner.

Zod

 

[...AndTimeBegan]

Be that as it may, if you asked most people to categorize Cynic, they would place them squarely under the umbrella of Death Metal. And to that end, them headlining the Maryland festival is hardly a stretch.

Well, the band could claim they're Keebler elves, but that wouldn't make it so.

In all seriousness, I'm not sure by what definition they would be considered progressive. I wouldn't call them progressive in the sense that Amorphis is progressive, in that their sound is constantly in flux. And I wouldn't call them progressive in the sense that their roots tie back to Dream Theater, Yes, etc. And I wouldn't call them progressive in the sense that they are virtuoso musicians. And I wouldn't call them progressive in the sense that they've broken new ground musically. So, in what sense of the term are they progressive? That said, regardless of what Metal sub-genre they best fit, they certainly don't fit ProgPower. And certainly not as well as Cynic would fit a Death Metal festival. I would say this is evidenced by the fact that the Maryland promoters chose them as headliner, while I seriously doubt Glenn would select Mastodon as a headliner.

Zod

I am not going to lie, you make valid points and I do agree with your argument, but my main point is that there are bands that can be multi-categorized. These bands seem to get better recognition from different audiences. All I'm sayin'.

and I'd probably consider Mastodon progressive because their music combines metal with post rock in a fairly interesting and unique way. The result is a sound that is ethereal and sometimes dissonant, but the band also throws in complex riffs and some odd time signatures as well. Sounds prog to me.

 

[nailz]

Your quest to defy the relevancy or existence of an historically significant subgenre which probably inspired many of the bands you're naming in the other categories lends less credit to your knowlege of this music as a whole, and has grown increasingly tiresome.
Please do your homework before embarking on such a topic.

TOO MANY WORDS OVER 5 LETTERS CRITICALLY HITS YOU FOR 10,000 HP! YOU DIE INSTANTLY.

*ducks and runs*.

 

[dcowboys311]

You have your ass hanging in the wind as you continue to attempt the verbal equivalent of reversing the Earth's fucking orbit.
Your quest to defy the relevancy or existence of an historically significant subgenre which probably inspired many of the bands you're naming in the other categories lends less credit to your knowlege of this music as a whole, and has grown increasingly tiresome.
Please do your homework before embarking on such a topic.

I think what he's trying to say is that "technical" isn't so much a subgenre as much as it is an adjective to further describe a band's sound. I would agree with that argument. "Avant-garde," "symphonic," and "melodic" are all words commonly seen in genre descriptions, but they are not part of the genre, if that makes sense. They simply clarify the band's sound even more. The same thing goes for "technical" metal (including tech-death IMO)

 

[Rick Pierpont]

Technical Metal as a subgenre was around long before tech death, tech grind, math, grind math, algebra rock, trig prog, etc etc etc.
It's a classic subgenre, albeit a small one...but in the beginning, metal was a very small genre as well.
Of course labels aren't perfect and are born of our deisre to categorize, but when the music communtiy collectively acknowleges and validates a label, one should not deny its existence...perhaps some of us here in this discussion are simply too young to remember.

Rick, you are absolutely correct about Spiral Architect; they were inspired by some of the forefathers of technical metal, and even had the same singer as Manitou had.
They spawned kind of a second generation of technical metal...and I'm pretty sure their album had a big ole sticker on it that said "TECHNICAL METAL MASTERS" or something to that effect...

Trig prog! My favorite band in that genre is Law of Cosines. They rock!! And for the record, my favorite algebra rock band is Quadratic Formula. They have a unique sound a riveting lyrics. For instance, from their self-titled epic track:

"Negative B plus or minus
the square root
Of B Squared....
Minus four A C
All over two A"

Pretty deep stuff.

Thanks D. As a matter of fact, I was just wearing my Spiral Architect shirt the other day and it has the words "Thinking Man's Metal" on it. That what was written on that piece of paper folded around the spine of the CD case.

 

[skyrefuge]

Once again there is no such genre is technical metal. There is a genre called technical death metal (tech death for short)

I think the confusion stems from the fact that you two are just using different references for The Complete Set Of Noble And True Genre Names. Sounds like ...ATB is using The United Nations List Of Genre Names (Volume: Heavy Metal), v2007.01.01, while Prog_Muse is obviously using The World Bank's Genrelogical Index, Seventeenth Edition.

Bah, they're both worthless! *Everyone* knows that the only REAL Complete Set Of Noble And True Genre Names comes from William F. Ikantbelieveucare's GENRES: The List (and of course his list is so respected because it is built solely out of astronomical calculations, freeing it from human influence.)

Unfortunately I don't have a copy of GENRES handy, but a Google search for "tech(nical) metal gods" turns up 10 hits, and "tech(nical) death metal gods" turns up 4.

Neil

 

[nailz]

I prefer The Book of Heavy Metal.

 

[Prog_Muse]

TOO MANY WORDS OVER 5 LETTERS CRITICALLY HITS YOU FOR 10,000 HP! YOU DIE INSTANTLY.

*ducks and runs*.

No way, man.
*plunks down Regenerist card*

Now you have to wear the Dunce Cap of Defeat until your next roll.

...Wait.
What are we playing?

Trig prog! My favorite band in that genre is Law of Cosines. They rock!! And for the record, my favorite algebra rock band is Quadratic Formula. They have a unique sound a riveting lyrics. For instance, from their self-titled epic track:

"Negative B plus or minus
the square root
Of B Squared....
Minus four A C
All over two A"

Pretty deep stuff.

Dude, if you dig trig prog, you have to check out Hypotenuse. They own, pwn, and generally slay all. Oh, and fans of the trig prog genre ALL LOVE pre-calc folk metal.

Thanks D. As a matter of fact, I was just wearing my Spiral Architect shirt the other day and it has the words "Thinking Man's Metal" on it. That what was written on that piece of paper folded around the spine of the CD case.

That's right...I used to have a Spiral shirt.
I think it was stolen by an ex.

I think the confusion stems from the fact that you two are just using different references for The Complete Set Of Noble And True Genre Names. Sounds like ...ATB is using The United Nations List Of Genre Names (Volume: Heavy Metal), v2007.01.01, while Prog_Muse is obviously using The World Bank's Genrelogical Index, Seventeenth Edition.

Bah, they're both worthless! *Everyone* knows that the only REAL Complete Set Of Noble And True Genre Names comes from William F. Ikantbelieveucare's GENRES: The List (and of course his list is so respected because it is built solely out of astronomical calculations, freeing it from human influence.)

Dammit, that's so right.
Shit, I wish we could have just brought this up sooner so that what's-his-face and I could have avoided this whole nasty argument.
OBVIOUSLY had he turned to chapter 14 page 462 paragraph 8b of the The World Bank's Genrelogical Index, Seventeenth Edition, he would CLEARLY have known what I was talking about and we could have met for champagne and strawberries after our discussion.

However, I find that Mr. William F's "GENRES" writings are severely flawed because of the recent discovery by Dr Stephen Hawking that all astronomical calculations are rendered inaccurate due to the earth shifting on its axis when a butterfly flapped its wings in China and a worm farted somewhere deep within the San Andreas fault.

Unfortunately I don't have a copy of GENRES handy, but a Google search for "tech(nical) metal gods" turns up 10 hits, and "tech(nical) death metal gods" turns up 4.

Thus proving that the genre is superior to the subgenre.
...It's all mapped out in the The World Bank's Genrelogical Index, Seventeenth Edition chapter 5 pages 282-284.

 

[JayKeeley]

In all seriousness, I'm not sure by what definition they would be considered progressive. I wouldn't call them progressive in the sense that Amorphis is progressive, in that their sound is constantly in flux. And I wouldn't call them progressive in the sense that their roots tie back to Dream Theater, Yes, etc. And I wouldn't call them progressive in the sense that they are virtuoso musicians. And I wouldn't call them progressive in the sense that they've broken new ground musically. So, in what sense of the term are they progressive?

I think it's because people have a hard time pigeonholing them.

And you know the old saying....when in doubt, call it prog.

 

[General Zod]

and I'd probably consider Mastodon progressive because their music combines metal with post rock in a fairly interesting and unique way.

Than can't we just call them Post-Metal?

The result is a sound that is ethereal and sometimes dissonant, but the band also throws in complex riffs and some odd time signatures as well. Sounds prog to me.

I just wish I didn't hate the vocals.

I think it's because people have a hard time pigeonholing them.

See above... I just did.

Zod

 

[...AndTimeBegan]

The same thing goes for "technical" metal (including tech-death IMO)

I agree that it's a stupid name for a genre (tech death), but I didn't come up with it, and that's the accepted term for bands such as Necrophagist, Spawn Of Possession, and their ilk.

 

[...AndTimeBegan]

I think the confusion stems from the fact that you two are just using different references for The Complete Set Of Noble And True Genre Names. Sounds like ...ATB is using The United Nations List Of Genre Names (Volume: Heavy Metal), v2007.01.01, while Prog_Muse is obviously using The World Bank's Genrelogical Index, Seventeenth Edition.

Bah, they're both worthless! *Everyone* knows that the only REAL Complete Set Of Noble And True Genre Names comes from William F. Ikantbelieveucare's GENRES: The List (and of course his list is so respected because it is built solely out of astronomical calculations, freeing it from human influence.)

Unfortunately I don't have a copy of GENRES handy, but a Google search for "tech(nical) metal gods" turns up 10 hits, and "tech(nical) death metal gods" turns up 4.

Neil

Would be nice if you actually read my posts rather than make fun of me for no reason. My basis is formed from generally accepted terminology in metal circles.