Borderline Metal?

Hell Patrol

Member
Nov 20, 2010
348
0
16
Down Under
... So I'm wondering: Where exactly does the border between classic heavy metal and hard rock lie? It's a question I've been meaning to ask for a while. I've heard a few metal bands that sound more like hard rock and vice versa. Alternativley, what bands do you think are commonly placed in the wrong genre? Sorry if a thread like this has already been started somewhere on the forum, my search-fu is weak at this time. And I'm not trying to start a flame war, I seriously want to know.
 
Like anything else, it's a definitions game. How does one define metal? It all depends how you define the term and what parameters you set out.

Perfect example: To some Rush isn't metal, to others they are. They have distorted guitars, a high pitched singer, virtuoso musicianship, so why would some not consider them metal? Are they just not downtuned enough? Satanic enough? Certainly much of their music is fast enough. Metallica weren't very Satanic, and yet they're almost undisputedly metal.

...Anyway, just some food for thought.
 
It's the same idea as Roger Ebert saying Video Games aren't art, for example. It all depends on how you define art.

Same thing goes for heavy metal. If you're going to debate whether something does or does not fit into a certain category, you've got to very specifically set the characteristics of said category.
 
I agree with Brandon it's a very personal thing the tagging game. I grew with the notion that bands like Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, Thin Lizzy were hard rock acts, while Iron Maiden, Saxon, Judas Priest (specially after 1980) were metal. Today it's even muddier.