Controversial opinions on metal

[Carcassian]

Well, first off, if I listen to the album and can't remember any of it, it's a bad sign. If any of the riffs make me headbang and hit my lamp, it's a good sign. If the lyrics cause squirming pain in my testicles, it's a bad sign. If the vocals make me wanna sing along, it's a good sign. If the guitar sound makes me want to peel my skin off, it's a bad sign. If the solos make me do some Bill & Ted style shit, it's a good sign. If the drum gives me a headache, it's a bad sign. If the drumming makes me start air drumming in an embarrassing fashion, it's a good sign. And so on.

This is the perfect post to read as an antidote to the huge amount of over-intellectualisation of heavy metal that goes on around here.

I think Lemmy said it best when he said, "It's all just fucking rock n' roll, for Gods sake".

Or did he say it best when he said, "If you squeeze my lizard / I'll put my snake on you ?". I forget.

Either way, for me, I either enjoy an album or I don't. No amount of navel gazing, Nietzsche reading or thesaurus raiding will make me feel any different.

 

[The Ozzman]

If it sounds good to you, it's bitchin'. If it sounds bad to you, it's shit.

.

 

[CF87]

I was too late for the Vihris / V5 debate to have any notion of going through the arguments again, but I would like to just touch on something that Vihris said.

I also like Sleep, Electric Wizard and Orange Goblin (particularly the latter two). I wouldn't say that they have a lack of talent (check out much of the OG drumming, for instance), but I think you mean that they don't seem to compose particularly complicated or technical music. That may be the case, but sometimes the most talented metal composer knows that the riff is fucking kind. I don't need no steenkin' polyrhythms while I'm waggling my flares about, hombre.

Orange Goblin are excellent musicians and their drumming(especially on the first two) is the first thing I noticed. Time Travelling Blues and Frequencies From Planet Ten are without a doubt the bands highlights. I think all their albums are solid.

 

[Carcassian]

You heard their latest album, "Healing with Fire" Greys ? Really a great album.

I should be seeing them live on Saturday too, hopefully interviewing them before hand.

Orange Goblin side band: http://www.myspace.com/wwwmyspacecomravenscreed

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Extreme metal isn't for everyone (actually, it isn't for most people). VG just seems to be one of the many that it doesn't click with, but I still find it odd that he thinks the bands lack talent. I'd like to hear him write and play a good death metal or black metal song. I think it's pointless to try to get him into dm/bm, since it's probably not something he could ever learn to enjoy. He should just stick with his AC DC and Led Zeppelin.

I should probably just stop ripping on extreme metal specifically, since I could really say the same about any genre of music, and I sound like an ass targeting a specific set of genres. I just feel that the number of good artists in any particular style of music is always going to be a vast minority - generally the genre's founders plus a few highly innovative later artists. It's not enough for me that they can simply play adequately to the formula. I think a good band has a strong musical identity that either distinguishes them from their genre or noticeably expands it.

Does that sound like a more fair argument to be making?


edit: and for the record, it's not true that I can't 'get into' extreme metal. There are obviously some extreme metal bands that I like. It's just a very small subset of each genre.

 

[Mort Divine]

I find originality to be right fuckin' overrated to a degree.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Fair enough. But it's a pretty widely-used standard for judging a band as good or bad.

 

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

No it isn't. How so? If anything I'd say more bands fail at trying to be (blatantly/ostentatiously) original than not.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Hence the number of good bands being vastly outnumbered by the mediocre/bad ones.

But anyway, I'm just saying, I think it's a good standard. I don't need to waste my time listening to the majority of mediocre sound-alikes out there when a little research will get me enough original bands to last me forever.

What kind of standard(s) would you endorse, were you to pick any?

 

[waif]

I think you missed the point...

I kinda got the point (IAWTP = I agree with this post)(unless it actually means I am wanting (to) touch penis).

This is the perfect post to read as an antidote to the huge amount of over-intellectualisation of heavy metal that goes on around here.

I think Lemmy said it best when he said, "It's all just fucking rock n' roll, for Gods sake".

Or did he say it best when he said, "If you squeeze my lizard / I'll put my snake on you ?". I forget.

Either way, for me, I either enjoy an album or I don't. No amount of navel gazing, Nietzsche reading or thesaurus raiding will make me feel any different.

It was the second one.

And yeah...I have a confession to make. I was chillin' in my room doing my hw with no music on, and my brother was playing guitar hero in the other room, and he was playing that Foo Fighters song Monkey Wrench. And I started liking it. And you know? I don't feel ashamed...if it's good, it's good.

 

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

Uh, if they sound good to me, I like them?

 

[waif]

But anyway, I'm just saying, I think it's a good standard. I don't need to waste my time listening to the majority of mediocre sound-alikes out there when a little research will get me enough original bands to last me forever.

But then there's the awesome bands that are sound-alikes. Like, say, In Flames, Dark Tranquility, and At The Gates. The early releases by all three sound fairly similar (although have some distinct and important differences), but also all kick fucking ass. A lot of awesome death metal sounds kinda generic. Ditto for a lot of good thrash. Does that make it suck?
Meanwhile, bands are trying new stuff and failing at it. I would argue that for every original band, someone's come along and done what they did better.

Uh, if they sound good to me, I like them?

Good call.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Uh, if they sound good to me, I like them?

Fine. But isn't there something to that whole idea of appreciating 'classic' bands you don't particularly care for?

 

[Mort Divine]

But then there's the awesome bands that are sound-alikes. Like, say, In Flames, Dark Tranquility, and At The Gates. The early releases by all three sound fairly similar (although have some distinct and important differences), but also all kick fucking ass. A lot of awesome death metal sounds kinda generic. Ditto for a lot of good thrash. Does that make it suck?
Meanwhile, bands are trying new stuff and failing at it. I would argue that for every original band, someone's come along and done what they did better.

Good call.

What? Maybe DT and IF but certainly not early AtG.

Anyways, great execution > originality.

 

[waif]

If they inspired bands you like, they are worthy of respect.

What? Maybe DT and IF but certainly not early AtG.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

But then there's the awesome bands that are sound-alikes. Like, say, In Flames, Dark Tranquility, and At The Gates. The early releases by all three sound fairly similar (although have some distinct and important differences), but also all kick fucking ass. A lot of awesome death metal sounds kinda generic. Ditto for a lot of good thrash. Does that make it suck?

Well, there are always other standards to use. Catchiness is a popular one. But as far as the less catchy genres of metal go, there's kind of a wall between those who enjoy the style for the style's sake, and those who don't. So it makes it really hard for anyone who's not a fan of the style itself to really evaluate the music. And, of course, anyone who's not a fan of the style will be tempted to label it utter shite (i.e. like I have a habit of doing), while the fans are left without a way of convincing the critics otherwise.

Meanwhile, bands are trying new stuff and failing at it. I would argue that for every original band, someone's come along and done what they did better.

Yes - hence the phenomenon of many bands getting labeled "founders" of a genre when all they really did was take someone else's original ideas and make them not suck. There's still some merit in that.

 

[DarkBliss]

WAIF: Yes, that's true.
But what I think what he means is that there's a mass worshipping of extreme metal classics going on in GMD and he doesn't unnderstand what makes many of those albums classic, because he comes from a different musical background.
You see, a lot of extreme metal bands that get promoted here, are dubbed innovative mainly because they released their debuts during the formative years of BM/DM. (the late 80s and the early 90s). That doesn't in itself make each and one of them unique.Some of them are pretty damn bland, actually. In fact, I'm pretty sure that if a lot of those classics that now have a cult following were released in the 00's, even with the same aesthetic, not many would have probably paid them much atention.
I'm not sure, maybe I feel this way because I'm falling out of love with many of these albums and now see them as they simply are:
as with all music, many may have become dated and unexciting , others still remain interesting, because there's just something about them, which sets them apart from the rest.

But it's the same thing in all genres I think . For instance, John Coltrane, as widely influential and inspirational as he was to many jazz musicians, I, personally don't find anything interesting in his music(based only on the album A Love Supreme that I've heard, but it is considered by many as his masterpiece and an international classic).Ho hum

 

[waif]

Hm. Yeah, in that case I agree. There is too much worship of extreme metal classics. I try to maintain a balance in what I buy between classic and highly respected albums and lesser known stuff.

 

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

I barely ever buy classics but it's really just a personal thing...I tend to pay more attention to contemporary bands (though recently I've been getting into the old obscure gems) because I have much more relation to the context they exist in.

Also, I should note that there is a big difference between appreciating old classic bands and listening to them a lot.

 

[Zephyrus]

edit: and for the record, it's not true that I can't 'get into' extreme metal. There are obviously some extreme metal bands that I like. It's just a very small subset of each genre.

I don't see how hard it can be for you to jump from Dimmu Borgir to Emperor and Limbonic Art. And once you like those bands, you'll eventually come to appreciate standard Black Metal, and from there you can crank up the technicality and Death Metal will start appealing to you.

In other words, get In the Nightside Eclipse and In Abhorrence Dementia.