Page 1 of 2
#1
So what do you think does really make a song stand out as a complex one? Is it the use of techniques such as bends and tapping? Structures? Or just many many riffs glued together? Cuz I'm really interested in listening opinions on this subject, and I've been thinking about it for a long time... I'm listening! ::type
#2
The use of unusual time signatures, unconventional riffs, polyrhythms/polymeters, etc. Of course, most bands don't care much for doing anything original with their complexity or technicality, so whether or not it's good is completely unrelated to how complex or technical it may be.
#3
Quote by madbasslover
Of course, most bands don't care much for doing anything original with their complexity or technicality, so whether or not it's good is completely unrelated to how complex or technical it may be.


See: The Faceless
#4
Well Opeth really stand out as the one of the most original bands of all time. So are Meshuggah; I mean these bands made their own kind of music and music genre, and can't fit anywhere else. And one thing that always bothered me is that when bands use unusual time signatures the phrasing of the song is badly affected. It's like the song stops suddenly and repeats itself, like a computer program or something...
#5
Quote by ingames
Well Opeth really stand out as the one of the most original bands of all time. So are Meshuggah; I mean these bands made their own kind of music and music genre, and can't fit anywhere else. And one thing that always bothered me is that when bands use unusual time signatures the phrasing of the song is badly affected. It's like the song stops suddenly and repeats itself, like a computer program or something...


/yawn, Thats a bad example of technicality.
Quote by BringMeTheCalm
Last night I had a dream that I bought The Mantle on vinyl for $9.99 and it came with a DVD and shirt...

Then I woke up and life sucked.
#6
See: The Faceless

Quote by ChemicalFire
He was too stunned by my fresh truths.

Quote by GodofCheesecake
"And I would've gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you darn kids and your meddling and your breakadowns!"

Quote by Nakedbythecomp
Metal is a sub-genre of metalcore since metalcore is more popular therefore better.
#7
Sweeporz nd blastin
Quote by DrewsGotTheLife
yea man, who ever doesnt like pantera or think they suck doesnt like metal, end of discussion, they changed the freakin world n made history, so don't be sayin they suck, have respect, same goes for machine head n lamb of god cuz their good too
#8
Obviously it's polyphonic...

When instruments are doing more than just following each other, it is "complex"

When the instruments are doing that, but doing some stuff on the same beat, its "technical"

Too hard to describe, and my epic fail at it proves nothing. Nonetheless, there's my two cents.
#9
Quote by lilboisX3
See: The Faceless


I hate The Faceless. Their triggered drums sound like a recording of someone tapping their fingers on the back of the calculator they used to write the guitar riffs.
#10
Quote by madbasslover
I hate The Faceless. Their triggered drums sound like a recording of someone tapping their fingers on the back of the calculator they used to write the guitar riffs.


I agree.
#11
Well, changing type signatures is technical, but it doesn't necessarily sound good. It can though. To me, a very "complex song" is one that can change pace and mood and go in a completely different direction in its instrumentation without sounding forced.

Dunlop 535Q Wah, Ibanez TS-9, EHX LBM
Mesa/Boogie Express 5:25
MXR 6-band EQ, Boss NS-2, Boss PS-5, MXR Phase 90, MXR Carbon Copy

GAS: Micro POG



Quote by Zugunruhe
this was the funniest thing ive seen in the pit for weeks.


^about me
#13
Ehh, I think some people are mistaking original for complex. Complex is basically all that madbasslover said.
#14
I couldn't care less about how "complex" or "technical" something is.

I mean, look at older Mayhem or Hellhammer.

Simple, yet effective.
#15
There's many ways a song can be complex. It can be technically complex, for example Necrophagist, where the riffs themselves are elaborate and demanding. It can be harmonically and melodically complex, like most Jazz, 20th Century Classical and bands like Blotted Science. It can also be structurally complex; long compositions through-composed without much refrence and repetition - take Kayo Dot for example. Or it can be all of these things simultaneously.

People call Necrophagist 'complex', when yes, the riffs and solo's are demanding and fast, yet harmonically they're as basic as a lot of Baroque music (solo-wise, some of their riffs are more chromatic). However a band like Blotted Science has that technical aspect yet harmonically they're a lot more interesting, with abstract modulations and use of modes and non diatonic elements.
#16
necrophagist isnt really that hard to play anymore. Now my mistakes are minimal or going a bit off tempo. I like blotted science btw, but never tried playing any of their songs.
Last edited by technical death at Mar 5, 2009,
#17
What makes a song technical is mostly the precision required to make it sound right. What makes a song complex can be things like odd time signatures and time signature changes, or just the fact that the song is constantly changing (not your traditional verse/chorus/verse/bridge song).
#18
Quote by lilboisX3
See: Behold... The Arctopus

Fixed.
Quote by Cutlass_253
Well, changing type signatures is technical, but it doesn't necessarily sound good. It can though. To me, a very "complex song" is one that can change pace and mood and go in a completely different direction in its instrumentation without sounding forced.

I have a fairly great sounding riff that goes 9/8, 6/8, 9/8, 7/8. And another (with a harmonized melody over it) that goes 6/8, 6/8, 2/4, 6/8, 5/4 that's quite beautiful.
Then there's this band called Slice The Cake...

Bunch of faggots putting random riffs together and calling it "progressive" deathcore.
Stupid name.
Probably picked "for teh lulz"

Mod in UG's Official Gain Whores
Last edited by Shinozoku at Mar 5, 2009,
#19
Suffocation. Riffs basically never repeat in a song. Much better way of being technical than changing tempos and time signatures every other measure for the hell of it.
Quote by dminishedthingy
It didn't seem possible, but apparently Messiah can spam even more now.


Quote by \Powerslave/
I can see it now. "Dark Thrones and Black People".


Quote by \Powerslave/
I pretty much wank something small and sleek.

ololololololol


JOIN THE NEKROGESTAPO!
#20
Interestingly enough, that's just how my riffs come out I think when you just jam around and come up with a technical riff, that's when you get the best stuff that's actually technical and sounds good; but when you try to compose it, then that's when **** starts sounding like... well, ****.
Then there's this band called Slice The Cake...

Bunch of faggots putting random riffs together and calling it "progressive" deathcore.
Stupid name.
Probably picked "for teh lulz"

Mod in UG's Official Gain Whores
#21
The Faceless is a huge joke. They're mainstream garbage that appeals to the less-metal crowd.

If you want to create good tech death, stick to the Diminished and Augmented scales. They tend to have more progressive elements than your standard Pentatonic and whatnot.
#23
Quote by xChristgrindeRx
The Faceless is a huge joke. They're mainstream garbage that appeals to the less-metal crowd.

If you want to create good tech death, stick to the Diminished and Augmented scales. They tend to have more progressive elements than your standard Pentatonic and whatnot.

Do you have any idea of what you are talking about or do you just spew random stuff you think makes sense?
#24
Quote by destroy_techno
Do you have any idea of what you are talking about or do you just spew random stuff you think makes sense?


Do you just flame and bash people randomly because you think you seem smarter by denying everyone's posts with insult, when you have no knowledge of the said topic whatsoever?

If you think Diminished and Augmented scales aren't mainly progressive, you must either:

A) Have no clue what they even are.

B) Be deaf.

or
C) Be a pointless spammer who bashes people like mentioned above to gain respect from the community, and when you're shown up with support on the argued topic, you quit posting to lose notoriety, similar to the many other arrogant idiotic elitists on this forum. Not to name any names (Nebiru).
#25
I'm tired of diminished and augmented scales in metal.
R.I.P. Charles Michael "Evil Chuck" Schuldiner
B. May 13 1967 - D. December 13 2001

Quote by eggsandham2
cuz ppl hate how power metal they are cuz they think its "gay" or w.e, which is immature and dirogitory
#28
I am in a pissy mood, so don't take too much offense.. But first of all, when writing music, don't stick to one scale, that would simply be redundant.

second, diminshed and augmented SCALES?! Nope, diminshed and augmented chords exist, but scales.. you could have an augmented or diminished fith or fourth in a scale, but your desciption of it is wrong..

third, there's no such thing as "progressive" elements in a scale.. See, progressive music is about progression, hence the name, and if you stuck to one scale, it wouldn't be progressive.. I have no clue what you are trying to say with a scle having "progressive elements"
#29
Progressive elements tends to refer to being "out there" and abstract. Progressive, like the actual term's meaning, means to be new, and different. In music, it mostly is known as a musical aspect where the sound is more upbeat, with less conventional musical composition. Playing a scale from root to root obviously won't sound progressive, however by the notes given in the scales, and with the chords as well, it tends to produce a more "abstract" and "out there" sound. Most progressive/technical musicians use those two, from Stravinsky to Paul Gilbert (some of his work), to Sucimez.
#30
Quote by xChristgrindeRx
Mainly used in progressive, is what is meant. I prefer the two scales mostly for that they're more unique, abstract, and less-limited than most.

If that's the case wouldn't it be more progressive to not use them?

Just blew your mind, didn't I?
Quote by dminishedthingy
It didn't seem possible, but apparently Messiah can spam even more now.


Quote by \Powerslave/
I can see it now. "Dark Thrones and Black People".


Quote by \Powerslave/
I pretty much wank something small and sleek.

ololololololol


JOIN THE NEKROGESTAPO!
#31
Personally, I feel a song is complex if the instruments themselves get the message across along with the vocals. Screaming vocals along with really fast, hard to play guitar riffs may be good or amazing but i don't think its necessarily complex. For an example look at Through the Fire and Flames, (you don't have to like Dragonforce its just an example) Yeah, its really fast, but its essentially the same notes again and again.

In my opinion Stairway to Heaven is a perfect example of a complex song. It was original, one could argue its the first rock ballad, and it has an amazing solo, consistently in almost every top 10 solo list. The guitar at the beginning keeps you captivated along with Robert's almost eerie voice, then as the song progresses the guitar changes.

Maybe I'm way off but that's just my opinion. ingames you said you've been thinking about it along time, what do you think?
#32
Paul Gilbert is hardly prog, neither is Suicmez, and if it's already been used, it's not really new anymore is it? The octatonic scale, if that's what you are reffering to has been used to death in jazz already, using it now is hardly thinking outside the box which progressive music is about.. Also, progressive music is not about tonality, but mostly about song structure and variation.. A progessive band could use a major scale if they wanted to, doesn't make it less progressive
Last edited by destroy_techno at Mar 5, 2009,
#33


1) As said, Paul Gilbert has done tons of progressive work, in which he uses the aug/dim scales.

2) Tech Death is indeed progressive. If you think not, I don't know what the hell you consider tech death.

3) Octatonic is Augmented. It's not as much about using the scales as it is KNOWING HOW to use the scale. Like said, running the Aug/Dim scales up and down the fretboard won't show results, but with the way the scales are designed (with half steps and such), it's very possible to create more of that abstract sound.

4) Yes, a progressive band could, but as said, many major scales are more limiting, and if you stick to the scale within the song, you will notice it's limitations.
#34
But it is more progressive to not focus on scales much at all, is it not? Scales lock you in to "what this is supposed to sound like", not "what I want it to sound like", which is what progressive music is all about. Most of the time, when I write music, I'm not thinking very much about what scales I'm playing. I just play what sounds interesting to me. So it's okay if scales are virtually ignored, or changed frequently.
Uhh...
Hmm...
A sig...
#35
The term "complex" is usually used to describe something that is just complicated, can be in any way.

"Progressive" music is generally rhythmically complex. Paul Gilbert isn't really very progressive.
#36
Well, that does make sense, however, scales aren't meant to be played from root to root in progressive styles, as said earlier. With such scales mentioned, you're much more versatile as to your creations, while still adding that prog element, being that the two have a large array of notes, which can be played in multiple keys, on multiple frets, in multiple standards.
#37
I don't get your definition of progressive. See tech death is.. technical death metal.. Jazz isn't progressive, it's jazz.. anyway, the easist way to create the sound you want, is by not picking a scale to begin with. but thinking solely in intervals.. Writing riffs by sticking to a scale is redundant IMO. Now, the major scale is a 7 tone scale, whereas the aug/dim are eight tone scales, so you wont be very limited, and from the major scale you can play all the modes which gives you a lot of possibilities.
Last edited by destroy_techno at Mar 5, 2009,
#38
^Progressive is an Adjective, metal and Jazz are nouns. Nouns follow Adjectives.
Quote by MetalMessiah665
If that's the case wouldn't it be more progressive to not use them?

Just blew your mind, didn't I?

that made me s****** and wake up my cat

edit: wtf lol snigger
Been in Japan since August, no fucking money left!
Last edited by GaijinFoot at Mar 5, 2009,
#39
Quote by destroy_techno
I am in a pissy mood, so don't take too much offense.. But first of all, when writing music, don't stick to one scale, that would simply be redundant.

second, diminshed and augmented SCALES?! Nope, diminshed and augmented chords exist, but scales.. you could have an augmented or diminished fith or fourth in a scale, but your desciption of it is wrong..

third, there's no such thing as "progressive" elements in a scale.. See, progressive music is about progression, hence the name, and if you stuck to one scale, it wouldn't be progressive.. I have no clue what you are trying to say with a scle having "progressive elements"


I'm fairly certain half-whole dim and whole-half dim are diminished scales, but I don't know if the other guy was talking about those.
#40
Progressive music, by definition, is music that tends to challenge the musical skill and knowledge of all the musicians in the band; music that is not very repetitive, or if it is then it has a LOT of riffs per song to keep things interesting.

At least, that's my definition (influenced somewhat by John Petrucci's def of it)
Then there's this band called Slice The Cake...

Bunch of faggots putting random riffs together and calling it "progressive" deathcore.
Stupid name.
Probably picked "for teh lulz"

Mod in UG's Official Gain Whores
Page 1 of 2