Tool, Prog or Metal?

Propyro · Post by **Propyro** » Sat Sep 06, 2003 6:52 pm

Ok i was just thinking, i was in a cd store a while ago, and i saw tool sitting in the hard/metalsection, and i started thinking of what metal meant to me. My typical definition if metal goes somewhere along the lines of a loud wall of guitar that drowns out everything but the singer and the double bass drums. Tool is not one of those groups, i strated thinking if prehaps they fit more into the progressive genres and i think they do, but my deffinition of prog is somewhat vauge ... as far as i know prog is generaly "weird", yet good music with people who actualy know how to use their instruments.

Just wondering what you guys think. and yes, i know my deffinition of metal is some what vauge as well, but it suffices for m, and is not neccesarily a bad thing.

/|\

kthulhu · Post by **kthulhu** » Sat Sep 06, 2003 7:14 pm

Metal seriously varies. There's the unintelligible heaviness of death metal, the dark gothic tones of black metal, and the fast wailing and high speed of heavy and thrash metal - and that list doesn't cover all the various types of metal.

That said, I'd consider Tool to be progressive hard rock.

Propyro · Post by **Propyro** » Sat Sep 06, 2003 7:26 pm

kthulhu wrote:Metal seriously varies. There's the unintelligible heaviness of death metal, the dark gothic tones of black metal, and the fast wailing and high speed of heavy and thrash metal - and that list doesn't cover all the various types of metal.

That said, I'd consider Tool to be progressive hard rock.

yes i know metal varies a lot, but i'm going by the generic blanket deffinition ... which is quite poor mind you ... but it sort of works ... ok fuck it, i;m generalizing and that never works.

but i agree with your classifacation of Tool ... i didn't feel like making up a new genre name since theres already enough of them.

/|\

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Sun Sep 07, 2003 10:17 am

I call tool prog-metal.

I haven't heard too much of it yet, but this is my understanding.
Prog-metal isn't really a genre so much as a classification for the odd ones out. If it sounds metal enough, yet too bizzare or complex to go into the classical metal genres, it goes into the prog-metal heap.

So, it's prog-metal in the same sense that the current King Crimson is prog-metal, while in reality the music of both is in genres of their own.

Sorry, had to stick my favorite band in the example again...

nailz · Post by **nailz** » Mon Sep 08, 2003 11:27 pm

There are definitely ways to classify prog metal... the most difinitive characteristic for it is "bad". heh. Either way, Tool is definitely NOT metal. I wouldn't really even consider them Progressive anything. I guess if you wanted to stretch it, it could be a mix of Progressive-Nu-Metal, even though, they don't really fit into the Nu-Metal catagory.

But calling them Prog Metal would be completely wrong. Prog Power goer's would shed blood of countless people if Tool was invited, which they wouldn't be, cause they're not prog.

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 10:59 am

mm???

Then why was King Crimson successfully sharing stage with Tool?

If there's a single band that is truly both Prog AND Metal, that's KC.

Like I said, prog is not a genre of music nor any classification other than "the odd ones out, with complex influences". There is no definition that describes prog. There's no real identifying characteristics (although things like classical/world music influences combined with complex meters and unusual scales are generally a clue), and BAD is not a characteristic.

However, knowing your attitude to what you consider 'prog', I'll humbly step out again... believe what you want.

PS. Tool is vaguely either prog or metal, but it is still a bit of both, so you could still validly consider it Prog-metal...

nailz · Post by **nailz** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 3:38 pm

Tool is not metal. I think if you claim them to be metal on any real metal board, you're going to get laughed at by everyone and flamed by more than half the people.

King Crimson is definitely prog, but definitely NOT metal. I don't know where you're pulling this shit out from, but maybe you need to really redefine your definiton of metal.

I think you'd probably get your ass kicked at a real metal show.

kthulhu · Post by **kthulhu** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 4:49 pm

Hey hey hey, put the dicks away. This is a discussion, not a measuring contest.

That said, has anyone considered my definition of them as progressive hard rock?

Dirk_Temporo · Post by **Dirk_Temporo** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 7:46 pm

Tool is definitely in the "other" category. Along with Cake.

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 7:55 pm

Hard rock - I don't like the definition. I think it's a little to broad and devoid of actual stylistic attributes. I guess that's because I'm one of the people who actually believes that rock is just a foil that you can stick anything to.

King Crimson is definitely prog, but definitely NOT metal.

Well, this is a tricky thing. KC is prog rock, but it's also prog-jazz-rock, prog-pop-rock AND prog-metal, just at different times. Try things like Red, Dinosaur, or new stuff like Level 5 or Facts of Life and then tell me it's not metal

The current group clearly calls themselves 'nuovo metal'

But hmm, anyways, what are we measuring again? Amount of my King Crimson plugs or degree of dislike Nailz has towards progmetal?

Forget it. I just seem to get defensive when prog comes under some sort of questioning or attack. After all, my favorite band is the world's first (and best

) prog-rock and -metal band. Although I don't have an incredible amount of interest in other prog per se, it just seems to tickle me whenever the word isn't used they way I'd like it to be.