Allow me to differentiate myself from those like sortalikeadream and address some things real quick.



When you have a bunch of bands that start writing songs in odd time signatures like 12/8, lose the usual verse-chorus structures of songs and integrate similar elements into their music, the sound that comes from these bands is unique and much different then other metal bands. Progressive is a way of composing songs that CREATE a unique sound that is used to describe a sub-genre of music.

Basically, your statement is pretty much saying that Yes, Pink Floyd, Genesis, etc. did not really establish a new sub-genre of rock (I.E. Progressive Rock), they simply just wrote really long unique-sounding songs. I suppose since music is entirely subjective you are free to think this way, but I feel that not considering Progressive Rock, Progressive Metal, etc. as legitimate sub-genres of music is simply absurd.

Now, AAL is 100% progressive metal. (This is all based off of their debut. I have not heard their second album so cut me slack there.) Let me first define Progressive Metal: it is simply metal that incorporates complex time signatures and musical structures in its music. Dream Theater is obviously the band that really brought progressive influences into metal, and I don't think anyone would try to dispute that these guys are progressive metal. The biggest argument against AAL is not that they aren't progressive, but that they aren't metal. My question is, if they aren't metal, then what are these guys? They play riff based music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqUPhN-gsH8. A lot of people say that these guys are "core," but there is no punk element in any of their music. There are no breakdowns, (sorry sometimes playing triplets does not make you a core band) or vocals or anything that would even begin to suggest core influences. Essentially, what AAL plays is metal. It's has complex riffs and soloing written in odd time signatures, but that does not stop it from being metal.

Of course it's irrelevant; nobody's debating that.

As for Devil Doll, don't assume they'll always be on here. MA is, as always, a work in progress. Seems like they were added pretty early on. I agree, they're not a metal band, but I'm not going to fuss for their exclusion.

I agree with an above poster that certain bands who've been here for a while and have amassed a page with a good amount of content shouldn't be simply wiped off the site out of hand. A bit of this is personal; I was kind of upset when Flower Travellin' Band got removed, but really they're one of those borderline cases as well and not predominantly metal, even though I believe a fairly convincing case could be made for the metal content of Satori, at least in the context of 1971.

It's prog rock - 90% of the guitar work is leads, and the rhythm playing most of the time is just playing the open E on a bass, but palm muted and distorted on a guitar - that's not riffing. It's a new take on the progressive/virtuoso niche of hard rock, it's like Steve Vai with lower tuning and more distortion.

Because those are the "core" genres that crossover into metal the most, well apart from grindcore. I don't even see the point about bringing up other genres with core in the name, they're utterly irrelevant to this site more often than not.

And here we boil down to the subjectiveness of music. To me what you just described can easily be considered riffing. Is not one of the key difference between metal and rock that metal has more distortion and lower tuning? AAL undoubtedly has both of those things, and I do consider that palm muting around the E string riffing and "metal enough."

I think we have some miscommunication here. I never said progressive metal isn't a sub genre. If it's progressive metal, it's metal. Just as if it's progressive rock, it's rock.
You said that if MA take off one progressive metal band, they have to take away all progressive metal bands. That's silly. AaL is progressive, no doubt about that. But they are not metal, so they can't be classified as progressive metal. Simple as that.
Why is it so difficult to just call them progressive rock? Or just progressive music? That's what I don't understand.
From what I've heard, I'd classify it as progressive rock/fusion (as in rock/jazz fusion). I'm not saying anything about the quality of the music, but metal it ain't.

No, I said: "you might as well start hacking away any other band with too much progressive influence" My understanding originally was that the reason that AAL was removed was because it was too progressive and incorporated too many elements from other genres to be considered metal. But, now I think the reason is that AAL was suddenly decided to not be "metal enough" and is more rock. However, I feel that the music adequately heavy and distorted enough to be considered metal, and that has basically been my argument. However, some people obviously disagree with me, and I can't really change their minds.

The difference between rock and metal is riffing. Compare Iron Maiden to Van Halen, Metallica to Poison - there are certainly differences in their guitar riffing, it's not something that can easily and accurately be written out in detail.

Adding distortion and lower tuning's doesn't make something metal. Evidence:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxBelXU2h4o



Yo check this out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUxZW5RipN4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwA5PLi6oTI

Notice I said "one of the key differences." I did not say "the only difference."

Here's the key difference between the songs you linked and AAL. All of those bands are mostly punk/core of some sort. AAL is not punk/core at all in any sort of way. They do not play the open E string like Emmure do or any of those other bands. AAL uses it as a riff which is another key difference to rock and metal and why I think AAL is metal.

That's kind of strange. I haven't listened to the new album but I heard that it was less djent and more metal than their first release which sounded like metal anyway.

I came back to say three things.

First of all, many of you are acting like for a band to be metal, it HAS to include elements A, B, C, and so on. If these other elements aren't clear, then it's not metal. People saying this are making a terribly stupid assumption. If it's not metal, what is it? Some people say it's not metal, some people say it's not rock, some people say it's not punk. It's sure as hell not rap or pop, so then what is it? Your argument of 'It has no distinct metal sounds' can be used against you saying that 'It has no distinct punk sounds' or 'It has no distinct rock sounds'. Stop making assumptions and take a minute to realize that the 'metalness' of a band is not a linear scale. There are multiple different factors that can make a band metal. And a band isn't -core or rock if they're not metal. A band is -core or rock if they're fucking -core or rock. If I'm not white, that doesn't mean I'm black. I'm black is my skin color is black.

Secondly, as someone said a little while back, -core isn't really a genre. It's implies hardcore influences but in hybrid genres/influenced genres, the -core could be insignificant or sometimes unapparent. The only thing most -core bands have in common is the breakdowns. The drumming style, the chord style, and other minor things like singing and stuff like that is not unanimous across -core genres. People are actually pretty hypocritical about this too. If they hear a song, regardless of what's in the song, if they hear a breakdown, they label it as -core. If the first 4 minutes of a song is not -core and then the last 30 seconds is a breakdown, they'll label it -core. And yet when the punk/metal discussion comes around, they're argue to the death that that song is in fact 100% punk and not metal, all because of a silly breakdown. If you want proof, listen to these 4 songs and tell me any of them sound alike. The only thing you'll find in common with these genres is the breakdowns (and other obvious things like distortion, and a slight possibility of tuning, but those are similar in more than just -core).

(Happy Hardcore) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88hfEqJaCtE
(Technical Deathcore) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMqharSmJxI
(Deathcore) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ca6B2uMCoc
(Metalcore) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlQ0m6jtKEo

I can keep going and start listing rapcore, mathcore, grindcore, thrashcore, trancore, and more but I know little to nothing of those genres.

And finally, if AAL gets deleted, I think we should remove Dream Theater too. My grandma is more metal than they are. I realize Dream Theater had a huge influence on Progressive Metal but the admins have shown time and time again and that influence on its own means diddly squat.

Going to have to disagree with you, Bearkin. There are plenty of bands on this site that are deathcore and metalcore and remain hear because they have stronger metal influences than their peers. There are also some metal bands that have the odd breakdown too. Neither of those are labelled 100% or non-metal by at least the majority here. I'm loathe to agree with the mods so easily, but they have to draw the line somewhere or else just rename the site "guitar-music-archives.com" and be done with it.

I think you misinterpreted my post. I wasn't at all trying to make the point that more metalcore and deathcore bands should be on the archives. All I was saying is people are labeling stuff as -core way too loosely.

Well that is true. However, core "influences" is a fair label to apply to certain bands, like the treacherous Holy Grail tosspots, for example. Even if the overall music isn't metalcore, I know a core chug when I hear one.

Yeah, you can't really just say there's a genre of music floating around called "-core." However, I think most people just say -core to refer to any metalcore, deathcore, etc. influence present in the music. At least, that's how I use the term.

I understand your point of view, but I don't think that's how the Archives really works. If Black Sabbath broke up in the mid 1970s I seriously doubt they would even be on here, but they clearly made some metal albums in the 1980s.

I've always assumed that's what the vast majority use that term for, too. There are many genres/subgenres with the term "core" tacked on the end, but I seriously doubt anyone that accuses a band of having a strong "core" sound means they sound like Black Flag. Chugs and core are synonymous around most metalheads with the words deathcore and metalcore.



Ha ha, are you serious?

If I say the -cores, I mean genres that end in -core, usually metalcore and deathcore, but the other ones as well. But I think it's more of a collective group that an entire genre. Kind of like djent. Djent bands have similarities but they can still be different genres.

Are you kidding? That's a melodeath/metalcore song.

They sound pretty talented, shame they have to write their music within such a shitty frame that is metalcore.

I'd like to seize the opportunity to ask why Steel Panther are not on the site.
They're a heavy metal band, straight up. If glam/hair metal isn't allowed or something then Motley Crue shouldn't be on here either.

I listened to a song, there were no metal riffs and a lot of crappy noodling.

Also, Human666, is it possible that the dreaded failsafeman was behind Animals as Leaders's rejection? Think about it, man!

I don't think you know what a riff is, AAL doesn't have any riffs, it's just some dude's guitar practice that happens to include some chugging in drop E.



Yeah that's it.

Well, I always label it as Technical Melodic Deathcore, which it is. I just left out the 'Melodic' since it wasn't really key in my point.

They are very talented though. Amazing leads, crazy complex and original drumming. They would be a LOT more liked if they didn't have any breakdowns (which they have quite a lot of). But their breakdowns are pretty original and different so it's not really a bad thing (definitely not for me, I like a good breakdown.)

I think we just have different definitions of the word "riff" and yours happens to be far more discriminatory than mine. For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lY23BE2JnnY

At the very beginning of the song the melody played on the clean guitar is basically a riff because it is repeated a few times. Of course, you will probably deny it being a riff most likely because it is played without distortion (which I think is silly to require a riff to have distortion). However, how can you possibly tell me that the melody at 1:05 is not a riff or metal? The melody at the beginning is repeated around 1:35ish and is distorted so how could you deny that as a riff?

It was a dumb decision; a truly ignorant, biased, and close-minded one at that. Why couldn't this band just be left alone as it was? Instead this site has to become all 'high and mighty' and delete AAL for being a 'different' breed of metal. Or maybe even a 'popular' breed, but who knows what the true intent of MA really is. It certainly devolves this site's credibility as the go-to place for metal.

And whoever here argues that AAL is 'progressive rock/ jazz fusion' and not metal, clearly needs to get their ears checked. I don't ever remember progressive rock and/or jazz fusion having anything to do with heavy, distorted guitars and heavy drumming.

Good riddance.

I'm definitely not knowledgeable in deathcore, but it doesn't sound like the deathcore I've heard before, and has little of the elements I considered to be defining deathcore characteristics. Sounds like melodic metalcore/melodeath to me, or like a combination of early/mid Amoral and your average metalcore group like As I Lay Dying etc.

I don't like the kind of breakdowns you get in modern hc, metalcore etc. Anyhow it's not the breakdowns that ruin that song, it's the go-nowhere songwriting, deadpan performance, lack of riffs to go with the cool licks and of course terrible production (sounds like Soilwork for godssakes). It has cool sounding parts, but that song would get 25% on my review rating scale.

Horrible garbage. Not only should they not be on this site but they should kill themselves promptly. I have to listen to probably 5 of these fucking lame scene fag type bands play at our rehearsal space when we practice. All bosting they are METAL AS FUCK. What a joke...

Fact, undeniable: If you're honestly upset about the removal of a band from this site, you need to do one of two things: grow up or re-evaluate your priorities in life. Probably both actually, in the case of most people here.

Then there's really no point discussing with you, since the premise for a music discussion is that you know some basics about music, which you obviously don't. You're welcome back once you do.

Ow cmon! dont be so butthurt about the removal of the noodliest of noodle bands which may or not meet the requirements for this site.. As other people have said, its just some guy screwing around with some chugga chugga riffs underneath it. Sure, you can like them, and I know lots of people who like them, but that doesn't make it metal.

AAL are being labelled "progressive Metal / Djent / instrumental Rock" on Wikipedia.

I'd say they play some sort of progressive Djent and thus think they shouldn't be on this site.

I don't need to discuss anything with you at all. The fact in point is that its a false description. The influence is there, absolutely, but to go off and label this music as such is just plain wrong. Its not really that hard to make out. Oh, right, but the lot of you didn't even really listen to the music in the first place. Typical.



No, this site needs to grow up and possibly re-evaluate its priorities on what metal truly is. This is nothing short of a shoddy contradiction and one retarded fuck-up on their part. Despite the OP's idiotic approach, its quite true and obvious in his statements that this site has dumbed down by this one act. The AAL profile could have just been left alone as it was, but it had to be taken down because a mod didn't like a couple of tunes on youtube. Tough shit if no one likes it! It is still progressive metal, I mean, does it need to spelled out?

All I can say is, surprised they were in the archives before. They're just a wankery jazz band with a nu-metal influence. Sorry you guys are so mad.

Read your own posts, dude; you sound absolutely ridiculous. How do you even function in the real world if you get this uptight over something so small and insignificant?

Those are riffs and that is metal. Here's another metal song that starts off with a clean riff: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVewgdyQvkE



Perhaps you were looking for this site: http://www.metalsucks.net/

I'm glad we agree. So then AAL is metal, almost all of their songs from the first album (exception would be "modern meat") sound like that. Full of riffs written the exact same way. Maybe you should listen to their debut again. Song of Solomon sounds just like the rest of their songs.

If Tosin Abasi wasn't a black guy, then Napero wouldn't hit the "delete" button.
"N!GGA$ A!N'T TRV3!"

OK, that's it. Bye.

I sound ridiculous? How do you even function with replying with such nonsense, telling people to "grow up and re-evaluate their priorities in life?" Get over yourself. You bring nothing to table about what happened here. And I'm being uptight because this site claims to be "metal," yet deletes a metal band because of a personal dislike. How is this right? Can you at least answer that?