Controversial opinions on metal

If this is true (in bold) - which it is

Then this (in bold) is most certainty inaccurate. Your argument clearly allows for no exceptions, where one was quite obviously pointed out.

I disagree, primarily because Stuck Mojo isn't a metal band. What people call "rap metal" is technically closer to nu metal and/or alternative hard rock music, and has an instrumental style that's quite removed from metal.
 
I think this business that a certain genre "should" employ certain vocals is misleading. There is no pure, pristine, ideal genre form to which we can compare bands to. Saying that power metal "should" have clean vocals is to make the mistake of granting the abstract concept of "power metal" some ideal standard.

It's quite similar to the American Christian who, when told a certain person is Jewish, replies: "That's funny; he doesn't look Jewish", as though there are distinctive material features we can use to identify Jewish people. The inherent qualities of a genre (without getting into the argument of whether or not genres actually exist) are determined by the instrumentality of the music. Vocals are superfluous, material signifiers that don't actually pertain to what style of music is being performed.

That analogy is bizarre and not really applicable to the topic of discussion.

Not necessarily. Why is it that if vocals don't serve a particular purpose, they can't serve any purpose?

What is being argued is simply that generic distinction isn't contingent upon vocal style. Vocals cannot dictate the genre of music being played. That does not mean that they therefore serve no useful purpose; they just don't serve to designate genre.

For instance, vocals still serve to deliver lyrics and provide another melodic interaction with the instruments (neither of which designates genre).

Again addressing what you've said in bold type: would that not make vocals just another instrument? Vocals are considered as such in many musical circles, after all. That being said, the way instruments are played are crucial inasmuch as how a band is categorized. An entire album of Chet Atkins style country-western guitar noodling with shrieked vocals on top would not be considered black metal most people, so why would dissonant, tremolo picked repetitive riffs with Randy Travis twangy vocals be considered black metal? All instruments (and vocals) have to conform (to at least a small degree) to a tried and true formula for the music to fit into a genre, otherwise a new genre is created.

I disagree, primarily because Stuck Mojo isn't a metal band. What people call "rap metal" is technically closer to nu metal and/or alternative hard rock music, and has an instrumental style that's quite removed from metal.

I've said it be for and I'll say it again: bad =/= non-metal. Stuck Mojo is about as awful as metal gets, but they're still metal. They aped Pantera riffs from VDoP and FBD constantly. Like it or not, Pantera was a metal band.
 
I disagree, primarily because Stuck Mojo isn't a metal band. What people call "rap metal" is technically closer to nu metal and/or alternative hard rock music, and has an instrumental style that's quite removed from metal.

My point was that if exceptions exist, your absolute claim has a hole; whether the example was metal or not irrelevant. Surely you dont believe metal as a genre is in itself an exception to the rules of genre classification.

Sure, the vast majority of metal can be classified by instrumentals alone. Though I feel like there is the occasional band that are so on the fence between black and death metal that I usually allow for the cohesiveness of the vocals to sway my decision (more in your face = death; more subdued and atmospheric = black). Just because you may be able to determine the genre without one or two factors of the equation doesnt necessarily make it irrelevant. Death metal has a specific drumming style that differs from black metal, but that doesnt mean the guitar is to be neglected.

There are clearly such things that define death/black/power metal vocals. Bands who use different combinations are unorthodox. If a band has a death metal guitarist, a death metal drummer, a death metal bassist, and a power metal vocalist, they play death metal. The majority of the band plays death metal so why would you classify them as anything else? If I were to describe this band to someone you would say that they are a death metal band with power metal vocals.
 
That analogy is bizarre and not really applicable to the topic of discussion.

The analogy is identifying extraneous aspects of identification. Identifying a Jew by his nose is stereotypical and obscures the true essence of one's "jew-ness." Likewise, using vocals to identify a genre of metal obscures the true essence of what designates that genre.

That being said, the way instruments are played are crucial inasmuch as how a band is categorized. An entire album of Chet Atkins style country-western guitar noodling with shrieked vocals on top would not be considered black metal most people, so why would dissonant, tremolo picked repetitive riffs with Randy Travis twangy vocals be considered black metal?

You're answering my question for me. An album of acoustic bluegrass with shrieking vocals isn't black metal because vocals don't constitute genre. The music being played is bluegrass.

In a black metal band with a vocalist that experiments with southern country vocal styles, the form of music being played is still black metal; the rhythmic and acoustic structures of the song are black metal. This is why Arcturus (on Aspera Hiems Symfonia and La Masquerade Infernale) are black metal.

I've said it be for and I'll say it again: bad =/= non-metal. Stuck Mojo is about as awful as metal gets, but they're still metal. They aped Pantera riffs from VDoP and FBD constantly. Like it or not, Pantera was a metal band.

Copying riffs doesn't make a band metal. The rhythmic structures of rap rock are unique, making it a genre of its own.

Sure, the vast majority of metal can be classified by instrumentals alone. Though I feel like there is the occasional band that are so on the fence between black and death metal that I usually allow for the cohesiveness of the vocals to sway my decision (more in your face = death; more subdued and atmospheric = black). Just because you may be able to determine the genre without one or two factors of the equation doesnt necessarily make it irrelevant. Death metal has a specific drumming style that differs from black metal, but that doesnt mean the guitar is to be neglected.

Right; instead, instrumentals are to be taken altogether. There is something distinct in a certain genre about the way instrumentals interact.

If a band has a death metal guitarist, a death metal drummer, a death metal bassist, and a power metal vocalist, they play death metal. The majority of the band plays death metal so why would you classify them as anything else? If I were to describe this band to someone you would say that they are a death metal band with power metal vocals.

Exactly. Are you aware of the point you're making?
 
Right; instead, instrumentals are to be taken altogether. There is something distinct in a certain genre about the way instrumentals interact.

Did you even read what I wrote? Im saying the vocals are a part of the cohesive whole of the composition and in rare cases may help distinguish the main genre of a band.


Exactly. Are you aware of the point you're making?

What im trying to say is that 3 of the 4 musicians play death metal, so its death metal; but you also cant discount the influence power metal had on said work (yes vocals count as part of the music). In some on the fence examples, the vocals may help differentiate the work towards a particular genre - if the style of the other band members without considering vocals is unclear somehow.
 
Are you 14?

He's right though.

I listened to some Cypress Hill whilst under the influence at a friends place and it still annoyed me. That was supposed to have been the best of the best.

Actually I can't remember if it was rap or hip hop. Oh well.
 
He's right though.

I listened to some Cypress Hill whilst under the influence at a friends place and it still annoyed me. That was supposed to have been the best of the best.

Actually I can't remember if it was rap or hip hop. Oh well.
I used to think it was annoying also but then I started to actually listen to it.
 
No, he just knows that rap is a genre that came around recently this millennium that features men speaking or somewhat shouting about ho's, money, and drugs to a shitty looped beat.

You are not qualified to make a judgment on rap if you think that is all there is to it.




 
Last edited by a moderator:
hey now! The Roots are badass as fuck

the only "rap" I have cared for has been Eminem, Brotha Lynch Hung, Xraided, Dr. Dre...etc

Brotha Lynch and X-Raided are fucking sick!

Lynch will tear up most people on the mic.

but i cant stand any of that roots, or tribe called quest bullshit ... not a fan of most hip hop that comes from the east coast.