Controversial opinions on metal

I need to give Autopsy another shot soon. Everytime I listened to them on record I never was sold, but when I saw em live, they fucking threw it down for sure.

Some bands just can't make the transition from live to wax. Not sure why.
 
I stand by it. Death was more than just "death metal" and I think if they'd been called something different people wouldn't be so adamant in saying that they're THE DEATH METAL BAND. Chuck was an amazing musician and I don't think it's an insult to the guy to say that his project had a lot more going on than the tickboxes that we associate with "death metal".

If you had to come up with a checklist of what makes up death metal, you'd have a list that's maybe half of what Death had to offer. They planted the seeds, obviously, but where other bands distilled it down to its component parts (Deicide, Morbid Angel, Autopsy), Death kept expanding and growing outward. You want a prototypical example of death metal, throw on Legion or Altars of Madness. That's the sound exemplified. Scream Bloody Gore was how it started, but Death wasn't content to go "yep, we got this sound, let's stick with that."

Someone asks "what kinda band was Death?" and if you go "oh they were death metal" you're REALLY selling the band short.

I like this point. Yeah I'd consider Death more like Technical Thrash/Death. There's definitely some thrash influence in there somewhere. And especially later Death can be very technical/progressive.
 
You can be very technical and progressive, and still be death metal.

I definitely wouldnt consider them anything other than a death metal band. "Old school" death metal, Technical death metal, progressive death metal, whatever ... but still death metal. Thrash/death? lol no.
 
Death's riffs, especially in the 90s, are almost too bland to even be relegated to a particular style. They're the kinds of metal riffs you could conceivably find in any genre. You can even find Crimson Glory riffs that sound like Death circa Symbolic or so.
 
I argued many years ago on various boards that Individual Thought Patterns and later Death were indeed technical thrash, and not resembling death metal at all. I got called an idiot, and told that "death metal doesn't all have to sound the same man". I'm glad that people here are reaffirming what I've believed from the start; not that its terribly important, but its refreshing.

fwiw I'm not saying that Running Wild (at least pirate-era) can compete with the evil atmosphere side of black metal, because they obviously cater to a completely different audience. Just the more melodic and merry Viking-themed black metal bands. Overall, it's just such a silly and gimmick-laden genre. It's like when death metal guys jerk off to their favorite "avant-garde" Carbonized or Disharmonic Orchestra albums despite those containing minimal death metal themselves; if they knew how those metal artists were just loosely incorporating other styles into their own little niche, they would hopefully realize that they've fallen for a sham. Enjoying black metal, with the exception of the very small number of purer acts, is basically admitting that you're a sucker for presentation no matter how inadequate the quality or proportions.
Oh damn, you contrarian you.

Again, an idiotic opinion. I firmly believe you argue against black metal solely to appear more enlightened than you actually are.
 
Death's riffs, especially in the 90s, are almost too bland to even be relegated to a particular style.

I sort of agree with that, but again, it's not just the riffs is it? You can't take them apart and study one at a time. Of course partly the reason for Death being called the epitome of death metal is their name and due to the evolution of the genre and 1000 bands that later embodied the typical death metal riff they now aren't the most characteristic. But that's also because the face of death metal has changed and Death was just fucking early.

There's really no point in debating this.

Ham said:
Nah, I can buy the appeal of a Transylvanian Hunger or whatever. I personally don't enjoy the minimal side of BM, but I can understand why someone looking for that could enjoy it. My point is that the appeal behind taking common "epic" metal tropes already established in bands like Manowar, Running Wild, etc and massively stretching them out and applying a few aesthetic signifiers on top makes no sense to me.

You have a point about SOME black metal maybe (it would be the shitty kind), but I still disagree. I think good (2nd wave+) black metal's harmonies are different to those of the epic heavy metal bands that you mention (or any other metal genre). Even if we're talking only about the riffs like you always want to do.

Ham said:
Those could be Summoning riffs or something

I can't listen to them now but dude, Summoning is VERY specific and hardly pure guitar-riff black metal.
 
Crappy? Agreed. Generic? Not so much. They were practically the first real "tech-death" band. I'm not talking about early technically inclined death metal like Death, Suffocation and Atheist ... im talking about the latter "tech-death" sound which we hear more often today, which they pretty much spawned.
 
Obscura is great but Spawn of Possession, Gorod, Brain Drill, Origin, etc are the epitome of shitty shit shit.
 
And why would you think i'm taking it personal? Do i need to add a smiley face next to each of my posts? lol.

Maybe i should have said Tech-death >>> post metal/post black metal/whateverthefuck??

Obscura is great but Spawn of Possession, Gorod, Brain Drill, Origin, etc are the epitome of shitty shit shit.

SoP and Gorod are more like the epitome of awesome tech-death. I wouldn't even throw Brain Drill in there with the other mentioned bands ... they're not even on the same level.
 
They all aren't very good. Tech death is a boring genre in general.

I would rather listen to ALL the worst post-black albums than have to sit through even one Spawn of Possession track. I mean I used to dig the song Scorched... But that was ages ago.