Are Opeth a death metal band?

[Nasty-Fire]

I'd say jazz-influence only for strange chords.

 

[Chinese Whispers]

lol thats from their myspace, so thats what they claim to be...

I think you'll find it is best to not always listen to the superfluous and often over-the-top press releases that Roadrunner (or anyone for that matter) write up for bands. The fact that it is on their official myspace is even more laughable because someone clearly doesn't know what free-form jazz is, and if Opeth even had a hint of jazz influence it certainly isn't free form in any sense of the meaning.

 

[Nasty-Fire]

The forward-thinking Swedish titans, who seamlessly and fluidly combine metal, classic rock, prog, folk and free form jazz

I don't know what it is. Can you refer me?

 

[Chinese Whispers]

I don't know what it is. Can you refer me?

Though the music produced by free jazz pioneers varied widely, the common feature was a dissatisfaction with the limitations of bebop, hard bop, and modal jazz, which had developed in the 1940s and '50s. Each in his or her own way, free jazz musicians attempted to alter, extend, or break down the conventions of jazz, often by discarding hitherto invariable features of jazz, such as fixed chord changes or tempos. While usually considered experimental and avant-garde, free jazz has also oppositely been conceived as an attempt to return jazz to its "primitive," often religious roots, and emphasis on collective improvisation.

Or alternatively, just imagine a group of musicians all improvising a different song at the same time. Opeth is anything but 'free'. I think we can safely assume that the myspace statement is just complete and utter non-sensical in every conceivable way in stating Opeth combine it into their sound.

 

[Nasty-Fire]

Oh yeah. I got a friend who's into that stuff. Sounds interesting, but is anything but Opeth. You're totally right. I believe they are taking the term too largely.

 

[norvegian ghost]

I tend to call it progressive death metal when speaking to people who have not heard the band. that said, Opeth has elements from progressive rock, death metal, folk music and much more in most every song. I think Opeth is the best band i know of at being original, not like any others, not fitting in one genre. To try to classify Opeth in 1 niche which also fits other bands, is ridiculus. Opeth is Opeth. you got to experience it, cause it cannot be compared satisfyingly to other bands. (at least that I know of).

 

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Yeah, Fred is a phenomenal guitarist.

Mutatis- you pretty much hit it on the head. Opeth is my #1 band right now too, but they just arn't full on death metal. Which is fine by me.

Exactly, that is what I like about them. I love their heavy metal sound, but the mellow interludes with Mikael's awesome clean vocals is what makes it great.

And I don't hear any jazz. It seems like when a band is at all progressive (especially when it comes to metal) it is "cool" to say things such as it having "jazzy influences." I don't hear any jazz influences. . . they don't even do many odd time changes/time signatures which is the largest jazz component (at least to me, I'm not a huge jazz buff). I would agree with the blues influences, though.

 

[Lateralus14]

Pretty much the whole point of putting the term progressive on a band is to imply that band is somehow objectively better than the rest. Hardcore prog fans really go overboard just to make their tastes sound sophisticated (sp?) - I remember reading the little bit on Opeth on prog archives and the writer went on about how Morningrise was 4 prog metal songs and then to bid you farewell was a pure prog song. One of the most retarded statements I've ever heard - or does any band that uses acoustic guitars and all clean vocals = pure prog now?

 

[affinityband]

lol prog is awful

 

[Lateralus14]

Bands that have been classified as prog like Pink Floyd, Camel, and Porcupine Tree are good. Here's two bad things:

Bands trying consciously and way too hard to be prog. Writing down stuff that sounds cool is great but trying to put out the most diverse or trippy thing out there is just ridiculous. Try focusing on making good music instead...(not saying really progressive stuff is bad but when your goal before making the music is to be ultra-progressive, the stuff gets really pretentious)

Prog fans. There's discussion about how ignorant metal fans are to the outside world of music, and some really bad metal fans. But prog fans are easily the worst as far as being arrogant about their own tastes..

 

[affinityband]

well modern prog is just noodly keyboards and plagiarism of a handful of good bands from the late 60's n 70's. cept anglagard, they of course destroy

 

[Chinese Whispers]

Bands that have been classified as prog like Pink Floyd, Camel, and Porcupine Tree are good. Here's two bad things:

Bands trying consciously and way too hard to be prog. Writing down stuff that sounds cool is great but trying to put out the most diverse or trippy thing out there is just ridiculous. Try focusing on making good music instead...(not saying really progressive stuff is bad but when your goal before making the music is to be ultra-progressive, the stuff gets really pretentious)

Prog fans. There's discussion about how ignorant metal fans are to the outside world of music, and some really bad metal fans. But prog fans are easily the worst as far as being arrogant about their own tastes..

Agree. Totally. Way to many bands have 'prog' constituting a few unrelated ideas shoved together in a convulted arrangement, as much stealing (with very little understanding) from differing music styles, and some 'technical' playing and having it drag on for ten plus minutes.

Also agree with affinityband - 'prog' is now just a static musical style snagged from the 'leading lights' of late-60s and 70s.

People who describe their music as 'prog' are usually missing the point entirely. It is a very over-rated commodity.

 

[affinityband]

everythings overrated

 

[Chinese Whispers]

everythings overrated

Calling something overrated is overrated

 

[Iki-ilkkuja]

Well, prog musicians are often more ambitious and more aware of what they're playing than an average musician (many keyboard players at least have been classically trained). Thus it's more easy for an prog musician to fail than your average rock musician because prog is rarely safe music. Inventing the wheel every time when composing an album has it's risks. Being "progressive" requires musicians to take risks. If you do the same album all over again (Dream Theater) you suck. If a band wants to be truly progressive, it has to take risks and be experimental. I understand people who don't like prog, but it's a musician's genre sometimes.

 

[toast reveries]

but didnt opeth made the same album over and over (wit h exception for damnation, are they progessive?

 

[Walls1441]

bad troll is bad.

 

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

but didnt opeth made the same album over and over (wit h exception for damnation, are they progessive?

No. . . there is noticeable growth from each Opeth album, but it is subtle. Each album has its own sound. They just don't make drastic leaps in style changes like other prog bands do, because I think Akerfeldt writes and plays the kind of music he wants, rather than worrying about being more progressive.. Probably the most drastic would be the change in their sound from Ghost Reveries to Watershed.

 

[Holocaust on the Moon]

No. . . there is noticeable growth from each Opeth album, but it is subtle. Each album has its own sound. They just don't make drastic leaps in style changes like other prog bands do, because I think Akerfeldt writes and plays the kind of music he wants, rather than worrying about being more progressive.

The same can be said for Dream Theater, yet people still claim that they put out the same album over and over again.

 

[Chinese Whispers]

Well, prog musicians are often more ambitious and more aware of what they're playing than an average musician (many keyboard players at least have been classically trained). Thus it's more easy for an prog musician to fail than your average rock musician because prog is rarely safe music. Inventing the wheel every time when composing an album has it's risks. Being "progressive" requires musicians to take risks. If you do the same album all over again (Dream Theater) you suck. If a band wants to be truly progressive, it has to take risks and be experimental. I understand people who don't like prog, but it's a musician's genre sometimes.

Most contemporary 'prog' rock/metal bands are the least ambitious of late. Most of it is retrograde and regressive and to say they know what they're playing more than an 'average' musician is just foolish. To say a great songwriter such as a Neil Young doesn't know exactly what he doing is just foolish. Prog is far more meandering, as in as much as it is almost train-of-thought, which isn't inherently bad, but no more but no more focused than a good pop song writer.

'Prog' bands these days, for the most part (there are exceptions to the rule bu you'd be hard pressed to call them 'prog') are less risky than most. It is quite easy to have a mess of riffs glued together, relying on the same old formula. And the best 'prog' bands, primarily those of the late-60s and 70s, where just as good at carving memorable songs and melodies as they were at 'expanding' their musical pallete. And let's not forget many of them where quite commercially successful as well, so obviously it is no more a 'musicians genre' than any other style. That is just an excuse that is bandied around to make those musicans listening feel as though they are on a far more higher plan musically.