Controversial opinions on metal

[Talos of Atmora]

As for Slayer, I really like Show No Mercy, Hell Awaits, and Reign in Blood but the material after that doesn't really have a lasting effect on me.

 

[Internally Deformed]

You seem to overstate how much thrash and death metal I actually listen to

Well I know you listen to at least 20 dm bands and 20 thrash bands, which literally constitutes scores.

 

[EternalMetal]

It does seem strange to me that someone could dislike Slayer while liking scores of bands that emulate Slayer and probably would never have existed without them, but I get that taste is subjective and whatnot.

I like tons of doom metal bands better than Black Sabbath, so the concept doesnt seem strange at all. Im not surprised that he found the mediocre South of Heaven to be mediocre (even if this opinion is slightly controversial here). Id say more, but it would probably come out like this:

I dislike this idea that just because a band is a pioneer that automatically means they are good or one of the best. A lot of people think that the best bands and albums in metal have to be these renowned classics and that more obscure and lesser known stuff just can't be as good which to me that mentality goes against what metal was all about. I enjoy digging through obscure stuff and discovering hidden gems I can enjoy as much as the classics or often I prefer the hidden gems over the classics.

 

[ProphetofHatred]

How the fuck can someone not like south of heaven? I get it's not their best album but still.

 

[Internally Deformed]

I agree that it isn't necessarily true that the band responsible for creating a style or a genre is better than anyone else at it (Hellhammer for instance). It just so happens, in my experience at least, that they usually are. It isn't a coincidence for me that most of the best thrash albums were written within the first few years of thrash's existence, and likewise for death metal, despite the fact that there are probably far more bands now playing in either of those genres than at the time of their inception.

 

[MrTagoMago]

How the fuck can someone not like south of heaven? I get it's not their best album but still.

I already had this conversation.

 

[ProphetofHatred]

I agree that it isn't necessarily true that the band responsible for creating a style or a genre is better than anyone else at it (Hellhammer for instance). It just so happens, in my experience at least, that they usually are. It isn't a coincidence for me that most of the best thrash albums were written within the first few years of thrash's existence, and likewise for death metal, despite the fact that there are probably far more bands now playing in either of those genres than at the time of their inception.

Immolations close to a world below would like to have a word with you.

 

[Talos of Atmora]

@ProphetofHatred Speaking of bands who annoy the shit out of me, Rings of Saturn is one of them. Actually, a lot of deathcore annoys the crap out of me.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

I agree that it isn't necessarily true that the band responsible for creating a style or a genre is better than anyone else at it (Hellhammer for instance). It just so happens, in my experience at least, that they usually are. It isn't a coincidence for me that most of the best thrash albums were written within the first few years of thrash's existence, and likewise for death metal, despite the fact that there are probably far more bands now playing in either of those genres than at the time of their inception.

I'd expand that to say the first decade. After that point is usually where things really begin to drop off.

 

[Internally Deformed]

Immolations close to a world below would like to have a word with you.

Close to a World Below is in itself pioneering because nothing else really sounds like that. Also it was released by a band that legitimately helped pioneer the OSDM sound with Dawn of Possession.

 

[Internally Deformed]

I'd expand that to say the first decade. After that point is usually where things really begin to drop off.

I've heard '96 agreed upon as the point at which both Black and Death Metal began to drop off, but obviously there are albums/bands that buck that trend.

 

[Talos of Atmora]

I've heard '96 agreed upon as the point at which both Black and Death Metal began to drop off, but obviously there are albums/bands that buck that trend.

I can see that. That being said, after a genre or subgenre starts to lose its "visionary" status and becomes more established, that's simply bound to happen.

 

[Internally Deformed]

I think there's something about the process of actually inventing a style which gives a songwriter a far better understanding of its mechanics than someone who's just heard the style and wants to create something similar. That, or there's just some kind of temporal creative energy field that accompanies a genre's beginnings and fades with time. The latter would explain why so many bands that were once great become almost unrecognisably bad in the space of 20 years or so, whereas filmakers or writers often continue to produce good work for twice that length of time.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

I think it's mostly just money and a feeling of the audiences dwindling. Lots of bands broke up when Roadrunner, Metal Blade, etc started dropping thrash and death metal, and picking up groove and nu metal.

 

[ProphetofHatred]

Close to a World Below is in itself pioneering because nothing else really sounds like that. Also it was released by a band that legitimately helped pioneer the OSDM sound with Dawn of Possession.

Well Failure of Gods is where the CTAWB "sound" really became whole but I didn't really think about that.

 

[Serjeant Grumbles]

I think there's something about the process of actually inventing a style which gives a songwriter a far better understanding of its mechanics than someone who's just heard the style and wants to create something similar. That, or there's just some kind of temporal creative energy field that accompanies a genre's beginnings and fades with time. The latter would explain why so many bands that were once great become almost unrecognisably bad in the space of 20 years or so, whereas filmakers or writers often continue to produce good work for twice that length of time.

I'd say it's simply that pioneering a new style inherently requires more creativity than simply staying within an established genre. Therefore, the progenitors of a genre will naturally occupy the upper echelon in quality.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

If that was true, punk bands of the 70s wouldn't be so shit.

 

[MrTagoMago]

If that was true, punk bands of the 70s wouldn't be so shit.

In the 70s the proto punk and post punk bands were better.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Well yeah Devo and Pere Ubu and stuff were the shizzle, true.

 

[MrTagoMago]

Would it be controversial here to say I think Remain in light is the greatest album of the 80s?