HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
Pleasure to Kill comes close, but after those two albums they're hardly even worth one listen.
Controversial opinions on metal
- Thread starter The Ozzman
- Start date
Pleasure to Kill comes close, but after those two albums they're hardly even worth one listen.
And he didn't answer my question, you fat cunt.
Your predicted response: "I am only moderately overweight, ad hominem"
Cronopio
Glorious Imperator
Saparmurat_Niyazov
Member
Your overall point here is a good one. These damn kids (assuming my grumpy old metalhead role here) seem more interested in pissing contests than actually developing a sophisticated taste in metal. I know it's not "cool", but Iron Maiden has good albums beyond the Paul Di'Anno era, Slayer's Reign In Blood actually was a good album, and U.S. death metal is not all complete shit.
General Zaroff
Registered Lunatic
Look, I know people are sick of Opeth constantly popping up in this thread, and I am too, but I'll just make one thing clear. I don't care if you say "Opeth are shit" or "Opeth are boring" or "Akerfeldt sounds constipated". Those are opinions that you have the right to, and I'm not going to perpetuate stupid discussion in this thread about Opeth that annoys the hell out of posters if that's the case. But if you're going to come in with blatant fabrications like "Opeth are unoriginal" or "Opeth is just a bunch of re-hashed Rush riffs", I'm going to debate them whether you fucking like it or not.
Thralldom
Winter of My Bliss
Lateralus14 said:
He isn't obligated to answer your question until you answer his. That's how discussions work. Stop trying to distract people from realizing that you can't defend your opinion adequately and explain how alternating Swedeath with increasingly long and pointlessly meandering sections of 1970's prog rock and singer-songwriter music is original.
It's barely listenable, the songwriting is extremely primitive, the musicianship is awful, the production is atrocious, and the music they're playing is basically just Venom stuff with the extremity cranked up a few notches.
You would say that.
Pleasure to Kill comes close, but after those two albums they're hardly even worth one listen.
Waiting for you to answer mine. Opeth are only original in that they're (possibly) the first band to mash up prog rock influences with a doom/death sound and then not bother to write songs.
mutantllama
Active Member
Yeah because Pleasure to Kill is known for it's complex songwriting by extremely talented musicians. I love how primitive it sounds and that's why I enjoy it so much.
You've answered the question for me, although in a little more demeaning way. Yes they were bad songwriters in the beginning, but they were certainly the first to do exactly what you just described. If they were the first to do a style, how is that not original? It doesn't have to be shockingly influential and mindblowing to have originality, you know.
The point is that it's not a "style", so much as a poorly melded fusion of two existing styles. Theoretically, one could make dubstep speed metal, and it would not be "original". Also just as a short aside, hating on Pleasure to Kill or Endless Pain is basically a more verbose way of saying "I have a vagina", just fyi guys.
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
As already stated, that is the appeal of those early albums. And the musicianship or Venom influence or whatever is hardly any worse than what Slayer, Exodus, Sodom, and others started off as. Why listen to a band whose sole appeal is extremity-pushing viciousness when you could just listen to a Testament or Megadeth that actually focused on the tight and melodic side of thrash from the beginning? srsly, I can not comprehend the people that consider Coma of Souls and Agent Orange to be some of the best thrash albums. I mean, Kreator actually did tighten up their sound a lot relative to Sodom, but there's still more polished and shiny and safe-sounding thrash out there. Go listen to some Wrathchild America.
Burzum melded black metal and ambient. Guess they aren't original. Paradise Lost melded death metal and doom metal. Guess they aren't original. And YES I know those bands were more innovative than Opeth and far better songwriters, but I simply can't see how the principle isn't the same.
And also, the way you talk, you're technically implying that you have to create an entire subgenre to be original. I mean Dismember certainly did little more than add melodic flourishes to Nihilist/Carnage, but being the educated metalhead you are, you would certainly call them original. Venom did little more than make Motorhead more primitive, evil, and thrashy, but you would be retarded not to call them original.
I honestly feel like you just insist on calling it unoriginal because the styles don't intertwine so well in Opeth's music.
And also, the way you talk, you're technically implying that you have to create an entire subgenre to be original. I mean Dismember certainly did little more than add melodic flourishes to Nihilist/Carnage, but being the educated metalhead you are, you would certainly call them original. Venom did little more than make Motorhead more primitive, evil, and thrashy, but you would be retarded not to call them original.
I honestly feel like you just insist on calling it unoriginal because the styles don't intertwine so well in Opeth's music.
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
I'm pretty sure he's stated multiple times now that he doesn't believe that Opeth in fact created a specific style at all, hence the lack of cohesive interaction between death metal and 70's progressive rock fails to create nothing new and is instead merely imitation of two different styles at once.
Well if the cohesiveness of the interaction is the single most essential factor in determining whether a new style is born, then I suppose you could be right. I simply always thought "if it sounds new, it is new" or something pedestrian that you'll all surely mock me for.
Saparmurat_Niyazov
Member
This Opeth argument is soooo played out. However, they did pave the way for many bands that have come out in the past few years that meld vintage prog rock with extreme metal. Klabautamann does the same thing Opeth does, except they blend black metal with 70's style prog as opposed to death metal. There are other bands that do similar things, but I can't think of their names off the top of my head.
http://flamingmetalsystems.blogspot.com/2011/08/meshuggah-my-experience.html I've started blogging, but more about this specific post: controversial or truth?
Firstly, this is a metal forum, and no one should need to explain the desire to listen to "extremity-pushing viciousness." Secondly, Extreme Aggression and Coma of Souls are tight as fuck and kick the shit out of anything Testament has done. If you're trying to say that you dislike the more aggressive side of thrash, then just say that, but the fact is that when it comes to the more aggressive side of thrash, Kreator's first couple albums are pretty ace.
For something to be a new style it has to be cohesive enough that describing it as a mix of some other shit is not sufficient.
That accurately describes the two or three songs I've heard.
Touche, sir, I can say I've learned something from this.
HOWEVER, I differentiate "creating a new style" from "being original" and still insist that while they didn't create a new style, I can call Opeth original because they did their own thing and didn't rehash much stuff early on. So we simply have different meanings.
Similar threads
