Controversial opinions on metal

[waif]

Except record sales ARE an indicator of popularity, but not an indicator of talent

Thought I was on ignore...
My point (and I felt it was pretty fucking clear) was that Motley Crue used to be popular and that was when they sold those records, but that they aren't anywhere near as popular anymore.
The Crue is still probably more popular than DT, but if you compare record sales of their next albums, it might come closer than you think.

yeah, i mean of course they are. motley crue is and always will be way more popular then dream theater.

Probably so.

 

[The Ozzman]

no doubt is way more talented then dream theater

I see what you did there

 

[The Ozzman]

Thought I was on ignore...

You are, but I can view individual posts if I feel like it

 

[Lord Kur]

haha, you have him on ignore? this board must always seem dead to you

 

[The Ozzman]

If by 'dead' you mean 'less spammy' then yes

 

[Lord Kur]

well you may miss it if he happens to ever say something relevant and insightful

 

[waif]

no fear of that.

 

[False Joe]

Tbh i'm rather surprised I'm not on ignore from him yet.

Mind you I might be, and he might just be happening upon a couple of my posts when he gets interested.

 

[Woolie Wool]

OK, now I don't know about that. Opinions are opinions, but I wouldn't quite put Slipknot in the same tier as Meshuggah.

I think they're equally terrible.

 

[General Zaroff]

Whoa, whoa, whoa, Slipknot is nowhere near Meshuggah in terms of quality. I like Iowa, it's alright but no.

 

[Woolie Wool]

I didn't say they were equally good; I said they were equally bad.

 

[Einherjar86]

I actually would call Dream Theater and Symphony X progressive power metal, but several people here have already disagreed with that.

I think you're pretty spot on. I see the similarities with traditional heavy metal, but the trad/heavy metal sound has similarities with power metal too. All the aesthetics of bands like Dream Theater and Symphony X would appeal to a power metal crowd. Granted, this doesn't necessarily designate each band as power metal. But they have more in common with that genre than with others.

 

[Black Friday]

I didn't say they were equally good; I said they were equally bad.

And that's why you're bad.

 

[Woolie Wool]

I think you're pretty spot on. I see the similarities with traditional heavy metal, but the trad/heavy metal sound has similarities with power metal too. All the aesthetics of bands like Dream Theater and Symphony X would appeal to a power metal crowd. Granted, this doesn't necessarily designate each band as power metal. But they have more in common with that genre than with others.

I would call Dream Theater heavy and Symphony X power. Really, thinking of "progressive" in terms of the genre progressing is a misnomer--the genre is named after the "progressive" radio format (which no longer exists) that brought most of the original prog luminaries to fame, and the genre has really been about pretty much the same thing since the early 1970s--very technical, artistic, complicated, and cerebral rock or metal music.

Although I must definitely agree with everyone who says that prog metal is suffering from too many Dream Theater imitators. I love Dream Theater, but there is only one Dream Theater, and I can't stand ripoff bands like Pagan's Mind who refuse to find their own sound. Not to mention that their songwriting is invariably much worse than Dream Theater's.

 

[Mort Divine]

Post-metal is the most logical. It's like post-rock except a fuckload heavier. Why do you have such a problem with it being called post-metal?

The issue I have with that logic is that most of the bands people call post-rock nowadays really are not even post-rock.

Post-rock during the formative years of its existence was simply non-rock music played with rock instruments. This meant bands like Bark Psychosis, Slint, Talk Talk, etc.

Bands like Explosions in the Sky, iLiKETRAiNS, & Sigur Ros really don't create music that is anything removed from rock. These 'post-metal' bands are taking elements of bands who don't even really play post-rock and are getting called for being a heavier form of something that isn't what it really is to begin with.

Post-metal bands play atmospheric sludge 9/10 times - therefore there is no need to call them by anything else.

 

[Vegard Pompey]

Ok.
You're probably right, but there are several gaps in that reasoning.
1. I strongly dispute the 80 million figure, especially since on their last album they mention in the lyrics that they've sold 30 million. You probably should check the sources on that.
2. Motley Crue's heyday was in the 80s, which was when they sold all their albums. They're nowhere near as popular as they once were, and most of their fanbase consists of people who buy their albums because they remember going to Crue concerts 20 years ago. Record sales are not a good measure of popularity; Dream Theater may have more and more enthusiastic fans than crue, although obviously in the prime of their career the Crue were one of the most popular bands on the planet.

I was just using Crüe as an example of a heavy metal band with a large mainstream popularity. If this somehow causes my argument to fail, think of, say, Maiden instead, though I'd rather not since they're almost on par with Dream Theater in my book. Almost.

Although I must definitely agree with everyone who says that prog metal is suffering from too many Dream Theater imitators. I love Dream Theater, but there is only one Dream Theater, and I can't stand ripoff bands like Pagan's Mind who refuse to find their own sound. Not to mention that their songwriting is invariably much worse than Dream Theater's.

I'm hearing a slight, large enough difference between Pagan's Mind and Dream Theater. Must be something wrong with my ears. I do pick up a high-pitched tone from the TV that no one else seems able to hear.
Anyway, every genre suffers from generic bands. I wonder why prog metal, if we are to consider it a separate genre, seems to get more hate than the other metal subgenres? Doesn't seem very fair in my opinion.

 

[Woolie Wool]

Well, yeah, there is a slight difference--Pagan's Mind are absolutely terrible songwriters and have a crappy Geoff Tate clone instead of James LaBrie.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

How are Pagan's Mind terrible songwriters? Can't say I have heard anything by them that would qualify as being poorly constructed or badly made in any way. Sure, they're vanilla power-prog but...terrible?

 

[Woolie Wool]

Pagan's Mind are terrible songwriters because you pretty much forget the songs as soon as they end, and nothing grabs your attention like their idols Dream Theater can do with the abrupt about-faces in "Scarred", the catchy chorus of "Pull Me Under", the whirlwind of riffs that kicks off "In the Presence of Enemies", etc.

They're vanilla. Workmanlike. Drab. Uninteresting. Featureless, soulless, utterly umemorable, and just plain boring. Homogenized processed progressive power metal product.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

OK, well...I disagree. But whatever, fuck arguing that.