sort of. i dig the less is more oftentimes. but sometimes the more actually is more.
, many of whom are neither particularly powerful nor very metal. To make matters worse, “prog” started being lumped in with the power metal genre as well, as if they were the same thing; indeed it wasn’t long before the word “prog-power” began to appear and started to be bandied around with such abandon that pretty soon every group with melodic vocals and keyboards found themselves being referred to as such, even if there wasn’t the slightest hint of “prog” in their sound. “Prog” in itself is a problematic term anyway, as it can refer either to a band that utilises so-called “progressive” elements in their basic style (jazzy sections, ambient parts, frequent time-signature changes, spacey Pink Floyd-esque passages, and ridiculously contrived arrangements seem to be among the more popular aspects), or to bands that ape the progressive stylings of 70s bands like Yes, Genesis, Kaipa, Rush and others without actually being that progressive (such as Dream Theater and the myriad of bands who want to be them). While it’s true that Dream Theater is a truly progressive band, it’s also true that many of the copyists who have sprung up in their wake just do whatever Dream Theater does, and therefore aren’t really very progressive at all. Similarly, it’s just as true that putting a sea of keyboards under a melodic vocal line doesn’t necessarily make a power metal band a progressive one. Neither does working with an orchestra, which was certainly a bold and experimental move when Deep Purple did it in 1969 but had become almost de rigueur by the time Iced Earth got around to it.
And to me genre doesn't matter, as long as the music rocks! but as forgottenglory, i wouldn't call threshold a power metal band, atleast not in my ears 
