Controversial opinions on metal

There are probably more strains of thrash metal that want to sound clean, clinical and high-budget though. Comes with the territory because thrash metal has always had a greater chance at financial success and mainstream success compared with death metal and black metal.
 
So Nokturnal Mortum, Weakling, Drudkh, Inquisition, The Ruins of Beverast, and Alcest all have a similar goal with production?

Does thrash production even have a goal outside of certain cliches like scooped guitars, buried bass, high snare and kick drum, etc?
 
Name them, I listen to a lot of thrash, but without going to extremely obscure and/or borderline cases I'm pretty sure you couldn't pick six thrash bands in the genre's entire history as aesthetically diverse as those six black metal bands.
 
I'm not interested in playing that game, that's the point of my last comment.
If you take 6 iconic black metal bands from the old days you're likely to find much more similarity in production than you are if you take 6 iconic thrash metal bands from the old days and compare them.
 
Duh, old-school black metal was usually trad, speed, or thrash metal with a unified aesthetic. A number of contemporary black metal bands still use the old-school raw first-wave sound, but most of branched out basically as a result of Norway opening the gates to virtually anything.
 
Early 90s because most bands were still only just starting to move away from a first-wave sound. There were probably more than 1000 thrash bands from 83-92, and less than 50 black metal bands from that same time period, and a majority of those were literally some kind of extreme thrash metal just with very poor production and Satanic themes.
 
Not sure what that song is supposed to prove, although I have to admit I'm liking it. I've heard their first album but not that one, I'll have to check it out.
 
One song? There's 5 links there.

Then with thrash metal all you have to do is look at any long-standing thrash metal band's discography (Kreator, Sodom, Metallica, Voivod) and see how much they change the production album by album.

Thrash metal doesn't use production as an instrument of atmosphere like black metal bands do but their goals and ideals can often be measured by how professional their production becomes.
 
My bad, the quote thingy only showed the first YouTube video so I assumed it was just some weird formatting thing.

Voivod is a band that has always been more conscious of sound, maybe Metallica too as they are trend-setters that many others copied. Bands like Kreator and Sodom changed production as they had more money and/or decided to adopt to new fashions, but even there it's usually not super-drastic. Albums like Extreme Aggression, Coma of Souls, and Agent Orange aren't out of line with the average Bay Area sound. A Blaze in the Northern Sky, this Marduk album, and Thy Mighty Contract don't sound remotely similar to me.
 
So production differences between Obsessed By Cruelty and Agent Orange aren't "super-drastic" but at the same time those black metal links I posted don't sound "remotely similar" to you? Are you just fucking with me now?
 
A lot of people would argue that Obsessed By Cruelty is a first-wave black metal album. Additionally, many of the early bands will admit that the production was not an intentional aesthetic choice but rather a limitation due to lack of funds and/or recording incompetency.

You're just cherry-picking right now anyways. "See, thrash metal is totally more diverse aesthetically than black metal if you take any album from the former and limit things to a 2 year range for the latter! This totally proves my point!"
 
How am I cherry-picking if I say literally pick any long-standing thrash metal band and compare the production progression/change album to album?

I'm giving you the opportunity to cherry-pick.

But in the end, no, I'm not cherry-picking because I'm speaking generally about both genres. You begun this by cherry-picking a bunch of black metal bands that don't necessarily represent the average black metal band.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Butt
You're missing the point. Thrash metal bands changed sound largely because either they wanted to with more money, or because their label told them to if they wanted to keep that money. An aesthetic-based genre doesn't change sound like that; black metal band X sounds the way they do because they usually care strongly about conveying a certain sound or atmosphere. With very few exceptions (Coroner being one for example; Marky was actually explicitly credited for the aesthetic decisions of the band even though he had the least input musically), thrash metal doesn't show that kind of conscious change, unless money/technology is an issue. If you make it a fair comparison, then you need to look at early black metal bands that faced similar recording circumstances. For example, Deathcrush is raw but arguably still much clearer than a DMDS which is intentionally a little murky (albeit still much less obscure than a Transylvanian Hunger). Bathory's production quality consistently improved through his first four albums. Tom G Warrior was all about glossing things after Hellhammer.
 
Bathory and Celtic Frost left black metal behind at the exact same time they decided to polish their production sound and also we've already established that first wave black metal is very different band to band, in fact you yourself excluded them as potential examples by stating that they are basically evil sounding [insert other genre here].

Essentially what you're arguing is:

Black metal bands using production to create atmosphere = aesthetic choice.

Thrash metal bands using production to improve sound =/= aesthetic choice.

That makes little sense to me, as a cleaner, technically improved sound is still an aesthetic goal.