Is Progressive Metal the new Cock Rock?

[amonb]

I was watching Youtube last night, and in particular Anthony Fantano's recent take on Lil Yachty, and it made me think about the last time I heard a "revolution" in music I listened to, and it made me think of Smells Like Teen Spirit. It is widely perceived to be Nirvana that spelled the end of "cock rock", primarily the idea that a bunch of scruffy kids with cheap (oh god I wish this was still true) Fenders and a rip off of "More Than A Feeling" could make people think "Wow, I don't need to know five hundred scales, wear spandex and my mum's wig to get signed, or even just be appreciated".

This brings me to the current state of progressive metal. While nowhere near as popular as cock rock was back in the 80s, I can see some murky parallels... the advanced technique, the reliance on very similar (and expensive) gear, a very vocal "scene" with a million rules... I'm sure there's more.

This is not a hate post. One of my favourite albums of all time is Tesseract's Altered State, and I'll lap up anything Devin puts out (Ocean Machine sits even higher than Altered State in my rankings). Just trying to provoke some thought and listen to some opinions, as it has been a while since I have chatted in any meaningful way on here.

 

[Lasik124]

...Yes

 

[oc616]

Funny story, one of the kids in the school where I work has started his "Stylistic Development" essay based on this topic. Whilst he's doing comparisons of BMTH or Asking Alexandria to Sex Pistols or The Clash (shudders), he's drawing parallels between Rush era prog to today's bands, being the "musicians music" more than music you could dance to.

Speaking personally, I've gone back to listening more to my nostalgic roots like Deftones, Korn, Slipknot and Fear Factory. I've gotten over the technical razzle-dazzle of AAL, Chon, The Faceless et al. Something just feels very sterile and clinical about it now, even though that's something that SHOULD appeal to me (hey, I mentioned FF didn't I?)

As far as new(ish) bands go that I think fly in the face of this somewhat within the "modern, slightly progressive, metalcore" world, anything Josh Travis touches has a raw and violent edge to it. I just finished up a cover of Emmure's "Torch" (shameless plug), and whilst doing it I realised something. I've never liked the band before, and the metal-swag image is so cringe inducing, but there was more appeal and evocative...power?...in playing those chugs than any Born of Osiris track I've covered for example. The subtleties in where the palm is placed for different dynamics to get the chugs to stand out in particular parts was thrilling to figure out, instead of the chore of trying to get the 6th note in 2 seconds worth of lead to fit. This is all anecdotal I know, but I do believe something will soon come along that drags us back to something more natural and raw sounding. Production, loudness and £6000 rigs can only go on so long.

Oooh! Frontierer is also a good example of this, possibly a candidate if they manage to keep up their momentum from Orange Mathematics.

 

[amonb]

Production, loudness and £6000 rigs can only go on so long.

I actually mentioned the Loudness War in my original post but deleted it... I figured I was being controversial enough

Simple music IS satisfying, and it may not be simple when you break down the intricacies of it, such as your Emmure example.

I for one can't wait to hear what the next trendcrusher (see what I did there) sounds like...

...Yes

/thread

 

[oc616]

I remember an interview with Shawn when he played backing guitar for Korn. He said anyone can play the songs note for note, but their charm was in the WAY they played the track. "I'm reading the tabs and those guys are saying I'm too clean, it doesn't sound like Korn."

 

[CaptainD00M]

"I'm reading the tabs and those guys are saying I'm too clean, it doesn't sound like Korn."

Its kind of related - but I saw an interview with Rob Zombie and he mentioned on the recent album he had to keep telling John 5 to play is less clean.

I went off technical music quite a few years back and went back to my love of Doom and worshiping riffs - the Doom scene has become pretty dam huge nowadays with the inter webs and connecting people, and I've been wondering if this is a reaction to what you guys are talking about. Similar to how punk was in part a reaction to the excess of 70's prog. I'm just throwing ideas around I'm not sure I'm convinced of my theory.

I went and saw High on Fire on their last tour with Meshuggah, in Amsterdam. Matt Pike commented that it was an odd choice of bands for a tour, but thanked Meshuggah for inviting them. I had to agree as it may as well have been two separate shows. After HoF finished I think about 65% of the HoF guys left or went off to a coffee shop, then all the Mesh fans turned up and the place was packed out it took me five minuets to get to the door that was 30m away.

I mean Mesh have always been popular but seeing them in 2008 v now there were definitely MORE people coming to the show. So in that sense it seems reminiscent of what OP's talking about with 80's cock rock.

 

[JustMac]

There's all these subsets of "prog metal" today though. You have this Plini, Sithu Aye, Polyphia, Intervals, Helix Nebula, CHON-type instrumental stuff that to me just all sounds the same, and then you have Meshuggah, SikTh, Protest the Hero etc., which is just good music that has little regard for what's trendy. I'm not really into the first bracket at all, because it's all very homogeneous -- pleasant, but I can't listen to a whole album of diatonic fretboard wanking (honestly, people who call CHON "jazz" are insane).

I realise the first set is all instrumental, but I wouldn't put AAL in there, for example.

 

[Demiurge]

I think that it's a different set of circumstances. While the whole "____ was a reaction to ____" is a nice story for journalists to tell in hindsight, it kind of avoids the whole possibility that some people were just doing their own thing and didn't care what was popular. Especially in metal, where there is no monoculture, people can live entire musical lives playing & listening to what they like without ever knowing of any of the so-called progressive bands are. Comparatively, cock rock was more popular, prevalent, and in some ways unavoidable; progressive metal is double-niche.

 

[CaptainD00M]

I think that it's a different set of circumstances. While the whole "____ was a reaction to ____" is a nice story for journalists to tell in hindsight, it kind of avoids the whole possibility that some people were just doing their own thing and didn't care what was popular.

Yeah you raise a valid counter point - I know from having studied popular musicology in the case of punk some bands are on record saying they were reacting to the excess of 70's prog, but I suspect that the majority were doing their own thing and it happened to transpire at the same time.

I think your point is perhaps even more valid today than in the 70's because of that lack of monoculture, and its these days music is even more driven by interconnected scenes that are connected through the web and so on. So the chance of people looking at other scenes and thinking 'hey they are doing something similar I like lets do this' even though they might be separated by many thousands of miles - is a reality.

 

[amonb]

I went off technical music quite a few years back and went back to my love of Doom and worshiping riffs - the Doom scene has become pretty dam huge nowadays with the inter webs and connecting people...

It's funny you mention that, as I definitely see doom/sludge as having that same 90s grunge aesthetic... that was the genre I was primarily thinking of when I wrote the thread (hence the tag).

 

[amonb]

I think that it's a different set of circumstances. While the whole "____ was a reaction to ____" is a nice story for journalists to tell in hindsight, it kind of avoids the whole possibility that some people were just doing their own thing and didn't care what was popular.

Well said, I 100% agree, which is why I worded the original post the way I did... that story is just how journos told it. At the time, being just a 14 year old music fqn when Nirvana broke, I didn't see it as a changing of the guard, I just saw it as being a bunch of guys who weren't dressed like girls playing huge riffs. That appealled to me. It wasn't until later, when Def Leppard put out "Slang", Poison put out the Ritchie Kotzen album and Motley Crue put out the self-titled album, that I started to really see that something had happened.

 

[CaptainD00M]

It's funny you mention that, as I definitely see doom/sludge as having that same 90s grunge aesthetic... that was the genre I was primarily thinking of when I wrote the thread (hence the tag).

Yeah - while I think dimurge has a point I know I went back to Doom and Sludge because somehow a riff that you can move like a seasick sailor too has much more appeal to me than overly staccato playing.

In 2008 I saw Mesh and enjoyed it, but felt then it was lacking something. When I saw them 8 years later I was like 'Meh, not for me' and left a half hour into their set. I wanted to have a groove or something I could get into, Meshuggah was a bit too much like watching brain surgery for me.

 

[TedEH]

This brings me to the current state of progressive metal. While nowhere near as popular as cock rock was back in the 80s, I can see some murky parallels... the advanced technique, the reliance on very similar (and expensive) gear, a very vocal "scene" with a million rules... I'm sure there's more.

I honestly don't see the point anyone is trying to make. Neither prog nor metal are new, and neither has taken a recent culturally relevant place like any major wave of historically significant music. There's a trend for noodly djent solo albums being appreciated by the guitar-forum-following crowd, but there's no "revolution in music" happening here.

The closest thing to a musical revolution that I think is happening or relevant at all is the lowering of barriers to entry for independent / home recordings and distribution, at the same time that the traditional "biz" is dying a slow painful death. This means that niche genres, and music born from hobbies and side projects and people who have day jobs, have the opportunity to thrive in their own small way, while nobody feels obligated any longer to listen to whatever the radio wants to beat us over the head with. It's a distancing of the art form from the business side of things. We're hearing more passion products and less just the "products" being sold to us.

But no, "modern prog metal" is not the new anything. I don't think there's even a consensus as to what that even means as a genre- it's one of those giant umbrella terms that covers such a vague variety of stuff that two people can claim to be fans of the "same genre" but not like any of the same bands. I can understand the desire to make your own interests culturally relevant, but lets not pretend our niche interests are some kind of revolution.

 

[Herrick]

I don't see much of a connection between Hair "Metal" and modern Prog Metal. The work ethic and outlook on writing music is just too different. Prog Metal bands tend to take their work very seriously. They're not trying to write hit singles or get on the radio or MTV. They're not trying to become "rock and roll stars" or "take over the world".

That being said, I don't listen to a whole lot of Progressive or Technical Metal especially Tech Death or Djent. The Tech Death can come off like like an indecipherable flurry of notes flying around and the Djent stuff can sound like random start stop riffing. I know I'm being extremely general here but where are the heavy memorable RIFFS?

 

[vilk]

Cock rock, in my mind, was essentially pop music. It was about the singing and the lyrics. There was guitar solos, but outside of that the songs are pretty simplistic, like pop music always is. Like You Give Love a Bad Name by Bon Jovie.

Progressive metal is usually complex, with tendency for longer songs that change as they go on (progress, if you will). That's a turn off to pop listeners right there. It's organized around the instruments more than "singing the words", which is boring to pop listeners, as they're mostly only concerned with singing the words.

Short of impressive guitar solo sections and use of clean vocals, I don't see many other similar elements between prog metal and cock rock.

 

[extendedsolo]

Name me a musical movement that doesn't have a set of "rules" that seem too extensive. Really the beginning and end of it is that players in the 80s and prog now can play fast. That's where the similarities start and stop in my mind. There were guys in the 80s that were technical, but I think players now are so much more technical it's not even fair to compare. Many of the hair bands used progressions that had been used in the 50s and 60s and many of them used a ton of blues based songs. Guys now still do that, but so many new sounds that haven't been as utilized are being used. Yeah there will be blowback with the current prog scene, but the cream will always rise to the top and stick around.


Also why in the world are you watching Anthony Fantano? That guy is a pretty big hack in my opinion and it's unbelievable how popular he is on youtube. Why do I want to be told what to think or feel about music? throw pitchfork in there too as far as popular things that people rely on that are stupid.

Also, let's talk about Smells like Teen Spirit. There is this thought that there is a big dividing line that once that song came out EVERYTHING else ended. That is simply not true. Hair metal was still pretty popular for a little after that, but in 1991-92 hair metal was on its last legs already. It had run its course and was ripe for the picking. What's more is that when you go back and listen to hair metal it had some really strong acts, but so many of the acts were not good. Yes there was def lepard and motley crue, but there was also bullet boys and tygers of pang tang. Just like now. For every AAL out there, there exists 1000 guys trying to make it on bandcamp.

 

[Herrick]

Cock rock, in my mind, was essentially pop music. It was about the singing and the lyrics. There was guitar solos, but outside of that the songs are pretty simplistic, like pop music always is. Like You Give Love a Bad Name by Bon Jovie.

Progressive metal is usually complex, with tendency for longer songs that change as they go on (progress, if you will). That's a turn off to pop listeners right there. It's organized around the instruments more than "singing the words", which is boring to pop listeners, as they're mostly only concerned with singing the words.

Well said. This is why pop music does not appeal to me for the most part. I do like some 80s Queen because I'm a semi Freddie Mercury fanboy but when the main focus of music is to prop up the singer, then I look elsewhere.

There are exceptions though. I've never been a fan of stuff like James Brown or Big Bang music but at least that stuff seems to have more music in it than pop music from the last few decades. I could listen to old R&B & big band stuff if I had to.

 

[Rachmaninoff]

I don't see much of a connection between Hair "Metal" and modern Prog Metal. The work ethic and outlook on writing music is just too different. Prog Metal bands tend to take their work very seriously.

Hair metal guys took themselves too unseriously; modern prog takes themselves too seriously. These extremes end up being similar to me, both exhibiting Spinal Tap traits.

 

[sakeido]

Prog metal is not the new cock rock. Cock rock bands sold millions of albums, played sold out stadium tours, had lots of girls at their shows, and still get radio airplay to this day. A successful prog metal release sells 2,000 copies, plays small bar shows to audiences of tens of dudes, and hardly even manage to get on satellite radio when the songs are brand new. It isn't even relevant right now. It just plays to an audience that heavily overlaps with people inclined to use online forums (ie. nerds) and as such is totally overrepresented on places like this.

I honestly don't see the point anyone is trying to make. Neither prog nor metal are new, and neither has taken a recent culturally relevant place like any major wave of historically significant music.

Hair metal defined the 80s

 

[Emperor Guillotine]

There's all these subsets of "prog metal" today though. You have this Plini, Sithu Aye, Polyphia, Intervals, Helix Nebula, CHON-type instrumental stuff that to me just all sounds the same, and then you have Meshuggah, SikTh, Protest the Hero etc., which is just good music that has little regard for what's trendy. I'm not really into the first bracket at all, because it's all very homogeneous -- pleasant, but I can't listen to a whole album of diatonic fretboard wanking (honestly, people who call CHON "jazz" are insane).

I realise the first set is all instrumental, but I wouldn't put AAL in there, for example.

^ I second all of this.

I actually was just thinking to myself about what is going to happen to these guys who are scraping a living off of music (specifically the now-booming prog scene which is still fairly niche) once the trend dies down and they are tossed aside by the industry for the next trending thing/sound. Will they adapt? Will they continue to ripoff each other? Or will they settle into obscurity working average day jobs like the rest of us?