Boycott the Osbournes

I dug back into the archives and decided my evaluation of newer In Flames as a KoRn clone was off-base. What is misleading is the vocals, which are a carbon copy of KoRn. I don't know why anyone would want to copy Jonathan Davis, but that's exactly what the KoRn singer tries to do. The music, has some heavy nu-metal influences, especially on songs like "The Quiet Place" (the single, so obviously), which do sound like a KoRn song. Some of the more metal music on the album (Soundtrack To Your Escape) is an extremely dumbed down version of the melo-death they used to make. I was comparing some of the songs to KoRn songs, and basically KoRn are chromatically oriented, while In Flames are minor scale oriented. KoRn actually use more interesting harmonies for the ignorant musicians they are.
 
If Kreator is so great, how come not a single metalhead I've met or come across has ever mentioned them to me before?

I've noticed a LOT of y'all are waving the Kreator flag high (heh.. I get to use an avatar for a pun!) but I'm serious when I say I've never heard a Kreator song.

What am I missing out on?

Anyone got mp3's to email to me?
 
Kreator are classic thrash from Germany. I think their story is basically they made five straight smash albums and an EP (Ynvai X's avatar) going from 1985 to 1990. During the nineties they made four albums that introduced other elements into their sound, and I don't think those are too popular with all of the thrash crowd. Now it appears they've come back pretty strong in the new millenium with 'Violent Revolution' and now this year 'Enemy Of God.' They're not as popular in the US probably because they're not from the US, and the US has Slayer, who have completely failed musically for the last decade or so, much to the joy of MTV. I saw Kreator on the Art Of Noise II tour in 2003 (Nile/Kreator, Vader, Amon Amarth, Goatwhore), and they kicked butt, even though I didn't know their music then. They came to Atlanta again this year (Kreator, Vader, Pro-Pain), but I didn't see them.

I have 'Pleasure To Kill,' 'Coma Of Souls,' 'Violent Revolution,' and 'Live Kreation.' Pleasure To Kill is really really fast, aggressive, raw, and pretty brutal for being released in 1986. 'Coma Of Souls' is a more refined sounding thrasher, great riffs. Violent Revolution has some really killer riffs, but I think I prefer the live versions of the songs to the studio versions. I started out with 'Live Kreation,' which is a two disc live album from the Violent Revolution World Tour. Seems like a good place to start to me, you get a review of their whole career, and live versions of the best songs from 'Violent Revolution.' I have the DVD and the CD. They're nice, even though I haven't listened to much thrash in a while.

Is that a decent assessment, Yngvai? :D
 
Barking Pumpkin said:
Kreator are classic thrash from Germany. I think their story is basically they made five straight smash albums and an EP (Ynvai X's avatar) going from 1985 to 1990. During the nineties they made four albums that introduced other elements into their sound, and I don't think those are too popular with the thrash crowd. Now it appears they've come back pretty strong in the new millenium with 'Violent Revolution' and now this year 'Enemy Of God.' They're not as popular in the US probably because they're not from the US, and the US has Slayer, who have completely failed musically for the last decade or so, much to the joy of MTV. I saw Kreator on the Art Of Noise II tour in 2003 (Nile/Kreator, Vader, Amon Amarth, Goatwhore), and they kicked butt, even though I didn't know their music then. They came to Atlanta again this year (Kreator, Vader, Pro-Pain), but I didn't see them.

Is that a decent assessment, Yngvai? :D

Yeah thats a pretty fair assessment. And yeah, usually the only metalheads I run into that know Kreator are the hardcore thrash fans that know just about every thrash band ever. Their new album, Enemy of God, is one of the best metal albums I've ever heard. I actually like it more than their "classic" early material, only because its more refined and more cleanly executed and not just trying to be as brutal as possible.

But yeah if you're a thrash fan, Kreator are a must have band in your CD collection.

By the way, I run into a LOT of metalheads that don't know who Rage, Blind Guardian, or Grave Digger etc are either.
 
AngraRULES said:
Oh yeah, I forgot Mudvayne and Velvet Revolver (though I know for a fact there's people in this board that will bash Mudvayne without even having heard the band... talk about wide minds eh?)

At the Hartford Ozzfest Ozzy was great as well! Whoever says he's a vegetable deserves to be turned into one...

I always hear about how great mudvayne is...can you tell me some good songs..although, if you tell me to check out dig I will tell you to shove the Rusty Cooley 9-string Conklin up your ass! :loco:
 
Barking Pumpkin said:
There is a point to genres. While "good" or "bad" music is completely subjective, genres are an objective way of classifying music.
objective in what sense? :lol: clearly even within this thread many people disagree as to which bands go in which made-up category.
 
I know I sound like a huge asshole, but genres are real. You can definitely be wrong about a band being a genre, as is the person who called Shadows Fall thrash metal. Would you call Kreator power metal? Or Edguy death metal? Would you call John Coltrane classical and Debussey jazz? I can say I think John Zorn is power metal, does that mean Glenn is going to put him in the headliner slot next year? No, it means I would be incorrect.
 
Barking Pumpkin said:
I know I sound like a huge asshole, but genres are real. You can definitely be wrong about a band being a genre, as is the person who called Shadows Fall thrash metal. Would you call Kreator power metal? Or Edguy death metal? Would you call John Coltrane classical and Debussey jazz? I can say I think John Zorn is power metal, does that mean Glenn is going to put him in the headliner slot next year? No, it means I would be incorrect.
who invented genres?
and who defined them?
 
Silent Song said:
who invented genres?
and who defined them?

you know, when it comes to the genre discussion, neither extreme is right IMO (either the "there are no genres, its all just music" or the ultra specific "nono this band plays symphonic ultra black death grind fuzzy bunny metal, not symphonic ultra death black fuzzy grind bunny metal...get it right!").

As humans, we have the desire to put order to things. Thats where genres come in. Its just like putting animals into different species. You wouldn't hear a scientist say something like "guys guys guys...why do these things have to be FROGS? Can't you see they're all just ANIMALS?" He'd be thrown right out.

Genres give us a vague idea of what a band is going to sound like before we hear it, and also it helps us recognize bands or artists we might potentially be interested in before we actually listen to it. As far as I'm concerned you have your power, black, death, and thrash metal as your main metal genres and then offshoots like prog metal, gothic metal, folk metal, etc from there. If you need to come up with some stupid multi-word genre to call a band, then forget it. Chances are, you're just trying to make them more unique than they really are. Ultimately, I feel its the listeners who decide what genre a band is. I think if the band itself is too concerned with playing in a specific genre it winds up stifling them creatively.

The one thing I dislike about genres is when it gets to the point of stereotyping. For example, someone who thinks every powermetal band sounds like rhapsody might never think to give Rage a chance, even though Rage is very very far removed from how Rhapsody sounds.
 
Yngvai X said:
The one thing I dislike about genres is when it gets to the point of stereotyping. For example, someone who thinks every powermetal band sounds like rhapsody might never think to give Rage a chance, even though Rage is very very far removed from how Rhapsody sounds.

My feelings exactly.

I don't think there is anything wrong with genres per se - if it helps a listener find similar bands, all the better. The trap is when people dismiss an entire genre (or subgenre), or vilify a band simply based on "category."
 
Barking Pumpkin said:
What is misleading is the vocals, which are a carbon copy of KoRn.

I still like In Flames - even newer In Flames - but I have to agree with your observation. I wish he'd cut that out because that Jonathan Davis "whine" (for lack of a better description) does nothing for me. Anders was never my favorite death growler, but I certainly liked his death vocals over his clean ones.
 
As difficult as it is to categorize metal these days, there's always the best solution:

This band sounds a bit like these bands.

That's the only way you'll ever really get a new listener to understand what they're getting into. And even then, you can get shocked! Easy examples: Labyrinth's Timeless Crime, Kamelot's The Fourth Legacy, Rage's Unity, Blind Guardian's Nightfall In Middle-earth and Manticora's Hyperion. Those albums each threw me for a complete trip when I first heard them. Even though people explained to me what they would sound like! When we got the ProgPower III sampler and we first heard Cantos, we had no idea what the hell Manticora really was, but we were eager as hee to find out! We read their website and their list of influences (MetallicA, Iced Earth, Slayer, Dream Theater, Satriani...) and said "Wow, that's every good band that we like!" Yet it still wasn't a good enough explanation of what to expect from their whole album. Complete suprise. Satisfying suprise. Pure METAL but so different than what we expected.

I still use the genre method of explaining bands. For example, introducing Into Eternity to a friend before she saw them, I told her they were like a death metal band that blended in some 80's screaming metal, and did it well. Unfortunately, I couldn't relate them to any bands she's familiar with, but that didn't keep her from going apeshit when she saw them! It really depends on the band. What's the best way to describe Edguy? I'd say a young modern version of Iron Maiden with shitloads of double-bass drumming and twice the stage antics.


Allright that's enough of that for now. I'll go get an old Kreator album and this new Kreator album.

Back to topic: Who's read $haron's recent interview with Kerrang! Magazine? The bitch has no idea what respect is anymore. She's completely absorbed by the almighty dollar, and still thinks her children are wonderful. Hooo boy. And she admits the egging was her doing as well. So we no longer have suspicions or finger pointing. She's flat-out admitted to everything now.

Death to $haron!
 
Yngvai X said:
The one thing I dislike about genres is when it gets to the point of stereotyping. For example, someone who thinks every powermetal band sounds like rhapsody might never think to give Rage a chance, even though Rage is very very far removed from how Rhapsody sounds.
the point im trying to make to pumpkin, but it seems to have been lost. i won't waste my time
 
Barking Pumpkin said:
I know I sound like a huge asshole, but genres are real. You can definitely be wrong about a band being a genre, as is the person who called Shadows Fall thrash metal. Would you call Kreator power metal? Or Edguy death metal? Would you call John Coltrane classical and Debussey jazz? I can say I think John Zorn is power metal, does that mean Glenn is going to put him in the headliner slot next year? No, it means I would be incorrect.

I agree with you that genres are real and necessary... to a point. Metal itself is a genre of Rock, which is a genre of Popular Music. Hell, PhD's have been earned by people who spend their lives studying and classifying the genres of Classical Music. It's a lot easier to describe a genre than to compare a band's sound to another when dealing with someone who hasn't heard any of the bands you'd refer to in comparison. It's just a matter of how specific someone thinks they need to be in their need to subcatagorize, but it does get ridiculous after a point. We literally have 'genres' that include only a handful or even just one band. Hollywood Soundtrack Metal for example.

And Silent Song has a point about sticking bands in certain genres, and then debating whether or not a band fits in the catagory. Some bands, actually many bands, don't neatly fall into genres. For example, you could take songs off of any Stratovarius album, who are widely considered Power, and make a compilation that would be considered purely Progressive. I'd contend that 1/3 of what Strat does is Progressive, and others may counter that Strat is pure Power Metal. So you can say someone's wrong for putting a band in a genre you disagree with, but as Silent Song said, "That's completely subjective." In the case of Shadows Fall you say they're Metalcore. I say they're Thrash. The Encyclopaedia Metallum lists them in these genres: Melodic death/thrash/metalcore. All the reviewers below agree with me, and no doubt you could find as many that agree with you. So you either have to concur that Shadows Fall are a cross over, or shouldn't be put into a genre, or you can make up a whole new genre for them.

The Metal-Observer
If you want Thrash Metal you got it! Currently whipping up a storm just about everywhere SHADOWS FALL are old school Metal pumped full of METALLICA, SLAYER and TESTAMENT rifferage combined with a technical edge that just blows most Metal bands out of the water these days. Shit, they've even got guitar solos in there!
http://www.metal-observer.com/articles.php?lid=1&sid=1&id=1562

Metal-Rules.com
I've heard people complain that these guys are hardcore. Well I don't know about their past releases, but this one is definitely NOT...

...It is a fine example of a mixture of styles such as thrash and death metal with more melodic elements. Shadow's Fall are definitely a band to keep your eyes, and ears, on.
http://www.metal-rules.com/review/v...ost_by=&rating=&month=&letter=S&year=&pos=134


Martin Popoff for HardRadio's HardReviews:
Perhaps as a thrown gauntlet to Metallica, Shadows Fall open with a few very quiet acoustic licks before blasting into their locked-up and celebrated thrash madness...
http://www.hardradio.com/reviews/reviews081304.php3

Sea Of Tranquility
Massachusetts' Shadows Fall have been toiling around the thrash scene for a few years now, with each release becoming more polished than the one previous, and The War Within is no exception. Brutally heavy, yet melodic thrash metal with just enough complexity to perhaps appease the prog-metal fan,Shadows Fall are like a modern day equivalent to 80's Metallica, Exodus, or Testament, as they roll out their chugging guitar riffs, dual lead harmonies, gruff and clean aggressive vocals, and a tight rhythm section that bludgeons your skull with intensity.
http://www.seaoftranquility.org/reviews.php?op=showcontent&id=1677

Maximum Metal
These guys are quickly honing their thrash chops and the rest of the songs on the CD showcase that easily. For a young band they have an old thrash feel about them all around, especially after their last album came out.
http://www.maximummetal.com/reviews/revresults.asp?ID=sfall_ww&idBand=380
 
Shit I Osbournes know nothing about what real metal is. Black Sabbath was only good to me with Ronnie James Dio Anyway! Ozzfest has been a joke for years and will always be a joke no matter what bands they get! Only bands that ever played ozzfest (past and present) worth seeing are Slayer, Motorhead, Judas Priest, and Iron Maiden. I say we need like Judas Priest or Maiden to put together their own touring fest with actual metal bands and not these lame mallcore/nu metal bands !! I give Mustaine credit for putting together Gigan with Dream Theater, Nevermore, and Symphony X but then again I don't like Mustaine's view on what he thinks of satanic/anti christian metal bands. Then again he is a born again christian so whatever. Anyways fuck Sharon!