Controversial opinions on metal

Uhh ohh! Incoming another controversial opinion on metal! Not only is Reign in blood not the most brutal album of all time it wasn't even the most brutal music at the time of its release.
 
i love your definition of speed metal, same as mine. That is why i have no problem with people tagging/adding "speed metal" to early thrash. But outside of Fistful of Metal(which isnt even a thrash album) none of the other debuts would fall under strictly "speed metal". And SNM def doesn't sound like accelerated Venom to me.

But yeah, Fistful of Metal def has more in common with early Blind Guardian than it does with thrash.
 
Reign in Blood was probably the most brutal metal album in 1986, but yeah, there were demos floating around that were earlier. A lot of people overlook the fact that the most influential bands were also usually the ones most involved in the tape trading scene, for good reason: they had earlier access to the cutting-edge, not having to wait a year or longer for things to get formally pressed.

fwiw I think the songs on Reign in Blood were being demoed at the beginning of 1986 too (although Darkness Descends had been written and bootlegged live in 1985 so yeah).
 
  • Like
Reactions: H.P. Lovecraft
This isn't metal it's hardcore punk or proto-grindcore but I'd say it's certainly more vicious and aggressive than Reign in blood.

 
I should also point out that there is a group of people who would argue this is the most brutal album period. Again though it depends on your definition and yeah it's not metal I know. But it is from 1986.