Talk:Adagio (band)

Neo-classical?
I don't think that Adagio classifies as "neo-classical". If you look at the neo-classical metal article, it seems to me that shredding is an essential part of the genre (see Yngwie Malmsteen for example), but this is not what strikes me at all in Adagio. I would rather call it progressive symphonic metal. In fact, this is what you will find in the Encyclopaedia Metallum.

I also gave it a try on google; adagio + "neo classical metal" = 477 results and adagio + "neoclassical metal"= 4,010 results VS. adagio + "symphonic metal" = 24,800 results. Looks like I'm not the only one to think this.

This doesn't mean that no mention should be made of neoclassical influences, but maybe not in the first sentence. If no one objects, I will change this. Please tell me if there's a problem. Iron C hris |  (talk) 20:53, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

You are correct. Since neo-classical metal refers to music of the common practice period and progressive metal uses techniques employed only by modern classical music, these two labels don't go together. Compare the discussion at Talk:Neo-classical metal. Florian Blaschke (talk) 04:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality
In its current state, the article is definitely not neutral, embellishing Forté too much... what little text it has needs to be rewritten and expanded. --Sn0wflake 04:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Notable?
Aside from a couple of Blabbermouth.net news items (possibly from press-releases) and a short Allmusic review, there is little to suggest that this band or any of their albums are notable. Can anyone suggest how they might satisfy WP:BAND?--Michig (talk) 17:15, 19 July 2011 (UTC)