The Odyssey Deceives!

First of all, Symphonyxjapan, you misquoted what i said in your initial post (which was reconciled later). Prog is INSTRUMENTAL masturbation, not just guitar masturbation... otherwise yngwie would be prog and that's kinda... wierd. Also, i have said many times that symphony x is not a prog band, they are prog METAL. Go back and look at other posts i have made on this subject. I say they are PROG METAL. i simply emphisize metal because you are doing exactly what you are bitching about, just the other way around. you complain because it's too many metalheads being into symphony x, but i complain because there are too many prog snobs bitching about stuff like that.

Another point i would like to bring up (someone mentioned it briefly before) is that by your standards, i could fit Dimmu Borgir, Nevermore, Vader, Kotipelto, etc. into the prog metal category. Just because Adagio used some death or black metal or whatever vocals on their latest release doesn't mean that they are death or black metal. Same goes for bands that use keyboards and have technical musicianship. I think it's bullshit to try to broadstroke it

Symphony x is prog metal. Not prog. Simple as that. Pure prog is bullshit. I don't like pure prog, and call me closed minded (or for the real prog snobs, less intelligent... fuck you) but it's not my thing. I find it really really boring. I think the classical and metal influences are much more interesting than their prog influences. And i have been into symphony x since V (obviously your winner for most "prog" album) and i'm into some death and black and thrash metal. What's wrong with fans of other music liking symphony x? That's pretty fuckin' stupid having the attitude that just because people mainly listen to another genre of music that you get pissed off that they like symphony x. Need i point out other groups that dislike, even hate people based on reasons so shallow as labels???
 
Whether they are prog or not, Symphony X kicks ass! Odyssey is a phenominal album!

symphonyXjapan said:
I just wanted to make a comment about The Odyssey album that has been bothering, or rather annoying me for a while now.

It aggrievates me that there are so many people who have become familiar with Symphony X because of The Odyssey. Not that I care more people get into SX, but it is just that since The Odyssey is their most heavy/power metal influenced album there are a lot of people who are misinterpreting what SX is all about. For example, I have read on many message boards, including this one, where people talk about progressive metal not really being "progressive" and no more than "guitar masturbation". And at the same time some will say that "Symphony X is categorized as prog but they really aren't. I have noticed that a lot of these people not only don't really understand what prog metal is, but usually only have heard or only like The Odyssey album. I think, even though I love the album, that the heavier amounts of guitars in The Odyssey deceive newbs to SX. I am not saying that SX shouldn't have made the album, just that some people base their opinion of SX on this one album, where in reality SX is one of the highest examples of progressive metal. I mean just look at the three albums DWoT, V, and Odyssey; these three alone are so different from each other, and even though The Odyssey is much heavier than other SX albums it still has plenty of technicality and keyboard rythyms. I mean really progressing just means using a wider variety of sounds with keyboards and each track moving along and changing as it plays through and not just playing the exact same riff and chorus 3 times and ending like any other kind of genre of music. Along with this description add great musicians with exellent skill and technicality, and thats prog. I mean I consider Rhapsody prog, and Pain of Salvation, Evergrey, Nightwish, and Adagio. I named these examples because I know a lot of people probably don't consider them prog.

Does anyone else feel the same that people mis-perceive what SX music really is, rather than thinking they are just about what was on The Odyssey. I mean a lot of people who only got into The Odyssey seem to automatically think their next album will be as heavy/power metal like as The Odyssey.
Click to expand...
 
symphonyXjapan said:
I think a lot of people here are losing track of what I am saying. I never said Symphony X is purposefully deceiving people, just that people who are new to the band by means of The Odyssey are acting like The Odyssey is all SX is about. They claim they are not prog metal and that the Odyssey sound is where SX plans to stay from here on. And here where BastrdDrmr says that just because a song isn't heavy doesn't mean it's progressive, shows the opposite of what my main point gets at. And that is just because a song is really heavy (The Odyssey), doesn't mean that IT'S not progressive either. I guess what I am really saying is that even though I want SX to accumulate more fans, believe me I try to convert people all the time, I don't like the kinds of people (the majority at least) it has brought in. They are heavy/death/thrash metalheads that don't want to admit they like a progressive metal group and claim that SX is not prog metal. There are just too many who assume music has to sound like the stereotypical prog sound of Dream Theater, Pagan's Mind, or Shadow Gallery, for a few examples, to be considered progressive.
Click to expand...
Dude, the later part of your statement is so hypocritical...
You say that you dont like all the Death/Thrash/Power metal fans that SyX have brought and that they dont like to call SyX prog because they look at all the steriotypical prog bands like DT ect (when there are brilliant 'prog' bands)...and say no.
Well you're just as bad as them. You don't like the Death/black/thrash fans as you look at 'their' sterotypical bands like Cannible Corpse, Immortal ect.and dont like them, while there are also brilliant death/black bands like Opeth, Dimmu ect..
So thats basicly saying that the death/black/thrash fans dont deserve SyX because prog is better.....which bassicly means.....PROG SNOB.

But in the end, who really cares WHO likes SyX as long as YOU like SyX.
 
I agree with the intended statement of this thread. Many fans of power metal listen to the Odyssey and believe that's the mode of SyX. This is probably because the typical progression (not meaning prog style) for a heavy band is to start out the heaviest they can be, then over time they lighten up (i.e. Metallica, Megadeth, Ozzy, and a slew of other now defunct metal bands from the 80's and 90's). So most people who hear the Odyssey probably assume SyX was more basic and heavier in earlier albums, which we all know is not the case. Therefore, they probably just assume that's what SyX is about.

However, what's the difference? If someone likes the Odyssey and not any of the earlier albums, so what? Let them enjoy the Odyssey and put a little scratch in the guys pockets and move on. Why should they not be "entitled" to listen to SyX because they don't like everything they've done. Under these guidelines we'd have to discount all the once great bands who went sour and say we can never listen to their early work anymore because we don't like their later stuff. If they like 1 album, so be it. They just don't know what they are missing.

Anyway, my last thought on a subject that's come up in this thread: I don't want SyX to get "heavier" with their next album if that means stripping out more keyboard and simplifying the writing. I think the Odyssey is a great album (#3 in my favorites list of SyX's work) but I want them to go in a new direction for the next album. Not lighter or heavier, just different. Of course, even if they stayed the same it would suit me as I'm sure it would still be awesome!
 
No one ever said stripping out more keyboard and simplifying writing. They said heavier. You are making the assumption that heavier means less... um... "prog"

I think it should get heavier, not simplistic. No, fuck that. they should release st. anger part 2 :D
 
Ok.....-sigh-.......I once again feel I am being misinterpreted, so I will try and clear some things up that have come up since my last post on this topic. I am not going to remember who wrote what so I will just bring up what people said without giving names.

First off I never said SX was prog. I know I probably said prog a few times but I didn't expect anyone to misinterpret it when I was just writing it to save time. I said plenty of times as well progressive metal so I assumed when I just said prog that people knew I meant a metal band with prog as well. That correlates to my next thing, where someone greatly defended SX saying they are METAL, a metal band. Well yeah of course, progressive metal DOES have 2 words doesn't it? Next is where I have been accused of saying I don't want death/thrash metal fans liking SX. I said much earlier that there are SOME bad ones. My initial post was about some of the death/thrash metal fans that Odyssey has attracted.......yeah and you know the rest. I am not saying I HATE death/thrash metal and I don't want any fans of it to like SX, heck, I know there are plenty of them that are not the way I described in my initial post. I have friends that are hardcore death/thrash metal fans that only like about as much prog "metal" as I do death/thrash. Yes, I have been known to listen to some Soilwork and Children of Bodom! I even have a Soilwork decal on my car. Another thing, the one who was talking about Adagio being progressive metal even though they use some black metal influences. YES, I know! There may be hope for some after all! I don't know if you knew, but I have a post earlier talking about bands I consider progressive metal that most probably wouldn't. Adagio is one of them. Them using black metal influences shows how versatile "progressive" prog metal is. Also, they use sounds of oregons, bells, chimes, harpsichords, cellos, and even full orchestras. Also, someone said I misquoted "instrumental masturbation" for "guitar masuturbation". Yes I did the first time, and it was corrected in a more recent post of mine. Anyway, it is worse to say "instrumental masturbation" anyway because it is putting down the music as a whole rather than just the guitars. Someone else said that they think SX is more of just a pure metal band because they have so many straightforward songs along with longer songs. This is once again describing the stereotypical style of prog metal, every song doesn't have to be real long epic style songs. They still contain good writing, technicality, and keys. Even more so with the solos and neoclassical sounds displayed by most.

Once again I will state my complaint hoping to not be misinterpreted this time around. I am angry at a lot of the death/thrash metal fans who like The Odyssey (not ALL of them), and refuse to admit that they are progressive metal just because they are the same people I see on the UM boards bashing progressive metal. They do so because I beleive they do not understand quite well what prog metal is because they connect the genre with more stereotypical prog metal bands such as DT, PM, and SG, to give a few examples. I guess they do not understand how "progressive" prog metal really is because their is some prog metal out their that resembles much heavier tones that they could relate to more than others. For some examples, SX (Odyssey), Evergrey, and Adagio (Underworld). I got one of my friends who listens to death/thrash metal to finally listen to Evergreys' new cd. He told me he has never heard such heavy bass riffs before, which made him surprised it was prog metal. I don't really care that these few death/thrash metal fans who like Odyssey that do say they are not prog metal are buying the cd's. By all means, whatever money it takes to keep SX enough money to continue doing what they do! But I do get angry reading their posts saying they are not prog metal, cause prog is "wankery" and yada yada yada...
And when people say that SX want to make future music in the same style as The Odyssey because music that sounds like The Odyssey is all that THEY want from SX. I love the Odyssey and don't care if later they do another as heavy sounding as it, but I just get angry at those who say that they are good only if they continue to make their music just the same as it.
 
I think you are misinterperating what i have been saying. Prog IS wankery in my oppinion. I don't like prog. Symphony x is prog metal because it's metal with prog influences, not prog with metal influences (hope that makes sense). Also, i was under the impression that adagio is prog metal, and i have never heard them classified otherwise, so i don't know who has been saying they aren't. The point of my comment about adagio is that since they have black metal influences on a few songs and such, that doesn't make them black metal. same goes for symphony x. Just because they have some prog influences doesn't make them strictly prog. they are prog metal. and about the instrumental masturbation thing, the point WAS to put down the music as a whole. if you like prog, that's cool, but i think it's technicallity for the sake of technicallity... symphony x minus all feeling and emotion in essence.

Anyway, i think we are on the same page, just different viewpoints. But we agree they are prog metal (i know, classifications suck). I just don't think it's cool to bitch about people who disagree with your oppinion of what their music is. It's still symphony x, no matter who you are.
 
SyX don't need fans that just listen to one album and assume that album is all that SyX is about; whoever wants to listen to the band should check their entire catalogue, if not, they don't need them.
Click to expand...
This is really true for a band like SX. The first two albums were neoclassical, Divine Wings was more proggy, TiO was neoclassical/power, V was prog/power, and Odyssey is mostly just metal. Not that I'm into genres, I'm just describing.

That's what's great about SX... you get so many different genres that you don't HAVE to classify them.
 
prog prog prog?? prog prog metal prog progmetal prog death thrash prog death prog metal metal metal!! PROGPROGPROGPROG metal prog death black hiphop bluegrass prog. epic prog death metal melodic hollywood fuzzy bunny prog!

....prog


yeah....
 
I think it's strange to hear someone say that The Odyssey deceives, because I think that V is the most unlike the rest of Symphony X's releases. If I play V for someone before anything else, I always have to include the disclaimer that it differs from their other releases quite a bit.
 
Yngvai X said:
prog prog prog?? prog prog metal prog progmetal prog death thrash prog death prog metal metal metal!! PROGPROGPROGPROG metal prog death black hiphop bluegrass prog. epic prog death metal melodic hollywood fuzzy bunny prog!

....prog


yeah....
Click to expand...

sweet!........bluegrass rules!
 
OfSinsAndShred said:
This is really true for a band like SX. The first two albums were neoclassical, Divine Wings was more proggy, TiO was neoclassical/power, V was prog/power, and Odyssey is mostly just metal. Not that I'm into genres, I'm just describing.

That's what's great about SX... you get so many different genres that you don't HAVE to classify them.
Click to expand...

You just described why SX is not only prog metal, but why they are one the BEST prog metal bands out there!
 
oh... and i think saying that symphony x doesn't need fans that like only one of their albums... well, take that up with the guys in the band. i personally think it's bullshit.

By the way matt, that's going in my sig. :lol:
 
theodyssey said:
I think you are misinterperating what i have been saying. Prog IS wankery in my oppinion. I don't like prog. Symphony x is prog metal because it's metal with prog influences, not prog with metal influences (hope that makes sense). Also, i was under the impression that adagio is prog metal, and i have never heard them classified otherwise, so i don't know who has been saying they aren't. The point of my comment about adagio is that since they have black metal influences on a few songs and such, that doesn't make them black metal. same goes for symphony x. Just because they have some prog influences doesn't make them strictly prog. they are prog metal. and about the instrumental masturbation thing, the point WAS to put down the music as a whole. if you like prog, that's cool, but i think it's technicallity for the sake of technicallity... symphony x minus all feeling and emotion in essence.

Anyway, i think we are on the same page, just different viewpoints. But we agree they are prog metal (i know, classifications suck). I just don't think it's cool to bitch about people who disagree with your oppinion of what their music is. It's still symphony x, no matter who you are.
Click to expand...

From what you just said I understand what you are saying. But I still get the feeling you are stereotyping progressive metal. A prog metal band isn't either a prog band with metal influences or a metal band with prog influences, progressive metal is one entity. This is because adding the word progressive implies more than just a genre, it is more of a way music is written, the way a song is structured so to speak. I guess I could also say this to maybe help you understand, there is no such thing as "strictly" prog, hell.....scary enough to say but there could probably be (if someone really wanted to try) a such thing as progressive rap! Lol......anyway, i'm not going to name those bands again but I understand that people usually think of those stereotypical bands as what progressive metal is because that is how most of the first progressive metal bands sounded. I like some bands that sound like that but also understand why you hate them, but progressive metal doesn't alway HAVE to be THAT technical. A song doesn't have to always be techinical in a single instrument ( like a guitar ) kind of sense, but it could also be technical in how all the instruments as a whole sound at once and how they work together at some points of the music, and others. I guess that is what I mean when I said one of the three things that make prog is musicianship, kinda more of a music theory and writing type thing. Prog is also expirementalism with using different kinds of sounds and instruments. Keyboards usually have the job of adding this effect very well as they can mimic so many different instruments and sounds. A thing that makes a lot of people not really understand prog metal is that with all the different working together in a technical manner (as described above) and many other sounds being used all at once, the majority of people don't comprehend that much all at once at every second of the music. Not that they are dumb or stupid, it is just how they are. What you said about Adagio, I never hear anyone call them progressive metal, on the cover of Sanctus Ignis it says "melodic progressive metal" but Underworld sounds a lot different and I have never seen anyone categorize them into a genre. I guess I can sum up saying that progressive metal is a genre, it is metal written with a progressive sense of technicality (not necessarily single instrument extreme technicality) and instrumental expirementalism. May I ask if you consider Evergrey prog metal? If you have even heard them. I listen to Evergrey and even though they are not very technical single instrument wise, they are pretty technical in a structural sense, and they use keys to mimic other things such as pianos and oregons, or synthesizers. When I listen to them I am hearing exactly what each instrument is doing at every moment and recognizing moments where two or more of them complement one another. I will say that some prog metal/prog rock groups have more or less progressive elements to them, so its not like they all have to be on the dot, have every prog element to them, progressive metal bands. There is plenty of progressive metal music I don't like and you should probably delve some more into progressive metal before you make the assumption you hate it. I don't remember if you were the one who said they hated Pain of Salvation, but if you weren't then maybe try them out. They are more of a progressive rock rather than metal, although they change drastically from song to song so some of them are more metal sounding.

Ok....I have wasted so much time writing on this thread so I should just go write a book! I am not angry at you or anything so I hope you don't bite my head off! I know I am not the GOD of progressive metal or anything its just that I don't think that the bands that started progressive metal meant it to be classified into a genre of music that sounded just like them (once again those stereotypical bands I have mentioned a lot!). It is just how the beginnings of it sounded. But if you still disagree with me we can agree to disagree....I promise I won't hate you!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
new fan, love "Odyssey", which CD should be next?
Replies
19
Views
742
Symphony X (Unofficial)
Kronikle66
K
SiRo
"Best" SX song?
Replies
14
Views
892
Symphony X (Unofficial)
Dtrule
D
A
Heavier is not Worse
Replies
133
Views
7K
Symphony X (Unofficial)
Detective Clarence Beauregard
D
mark_bwaite
Question on the Odyssey
Replies
3
Views
443
Symphony X (Unofficial)
the_satanic_rabbit
T
S
After hearing The Odyssey.....
Replies
38
Views
1K
Symphony X (Unofficial)
urinalcakemix
U
Top Bottom
Back