>cinematic metal
I facepalmed so hard my palm lines are now permanently tattooed to my retinas. Just pick a random epic orchestral OST form a high-profile hollywood drama/action film and have Malmsteen ejaculate all over it. There. Isn't that pretty much ÜBER EPIC MELODIC SYMPHONIC POWER METHUL already? Cinematic?? Pretentious wankers.

Power Metal is entirely enclosed into five albums, released between 1983 and 1988 by just the two musical projects. Everything that came afterwards is the exact same shit again and again, only in an ever increasingly watered down, overtly overproduced way, chock full of faux epic singing about faux epic themes while guitar wankage and critical levels of keyboard cheesiness ensue.

Melodic Symphonic Power Metal? Fuck off. There's a name for that: Wankcore.



...but hey, that's just, like, my opinion, man.

>>2032
You're funny.

But isn't this faux epic singing about faux epic themes while guitar wankage and critical levels of keyboard cheesiness ensue exactly what we expect when listening to Power Metal? I mean if the modern-day Power Metal composers simple perturbate/permutate/entropyate the old masters, why shouldn't we enjoy that too? I know that's exactly the reason why I listen to bands like Rhapsody and Pathfinder.

Cinematic metal - or whatever you want to call it - seems to be Turilli's neoclassical approach to Power Metal. Nothing wrong with that, he's just experimenting.

Have another album cover.

>>2033
a) I'm not saying you shouldn't enjoy it. That was just my feelings towards the genre.

b) A neoclassical approach to Power Metal is hardly experimental, original or even clever.

c) "But isn't this [...] exactly what we expect when listening to Power Metal?" My point was that what passes for Power Metal today is a caricature of what once was. Unlike most metal subgenres, Power Metal stopped evolving five or six years into its existence and just became more and more a parody of itself. That's what I meant by all that.

But anyway.

>>2034
My point is that a music genre, subgenre or simply a band should not have the need to evolve. I've seen a few/a lot of good bands evolve into much worse music than they originally were. A recent example of this is Hammerfall: their last album sounded way more commercial and by consequence somewhat bland and plain. Thank god they are now on hiatus.

But of course, there are also bands that do evolve regardless of whether their evolved style is a global evolution into better/more varied music.

I don't really know where I'm going with this, but in my opinion once a band has established a certain style of music, I expect all of their music to be in that same style. Also, labeling music is hard and should not be taken seriously.