Originally Posted by: hunter1801As far as the "technical metal" comments made earlier, I don't know what you mean by "technical". When I think of that I think progressive, and those bands are not progressive. Symphony X or Dream Theatre are progressive metal bands. A lot of Michael Romeos stuff is insane.

Dragonforce's stuff is WAY overproduced in the studio. They can't actually play that perfectly in real life.

I didnt realize there was another post on this thread...

Technical is definitely a broad term... Peoples idea of technical will be quite different, that was probably the wrong term to use in the first place. Because with the bands I listed, they are way technical! That stuff is insane to try and play. And of course progressive bands can easily be considered technical as well.

There are so many genres of metal out there, its getting ridiculous. From what ive read and listened to, Progressive was initially the term for the fusion of rock and jazz. Such as King Crimson, Camel, Colosseum, etc. Yet later bands that are currently deemed Progressive, dont necessarily sound anything like jazz. It seems like Progressive became an elastic term for a band that shows a certain type of complexity.

A rock band that was doing bizarre time signatures, weird jazz chords that werent associated with rock earlier, using different scales that normally were not associated with rock, not having a standard song format; hundreds of bands will fall under some, if not all, of those qualities and could be deemed Progressive; and at the same time, those bands will sound nothing alike! I mean, Tool is considered progressive for christ sake. Thats a good example of just how thrown around the Progressive term is.