Controversial opinions on metal

Elitism as a philosophy is the belief that those who are 'elite', by some given criteria, are those whose thoughts and opinions are deserving of more weight in that they are more knowledgeable and are more conducive to achieving the best result.

Perhaps I need to expand my definition of elitism to incorporate this. However agreeable your point, I believe the title of elite (if it is to be used) should be decided upon and given by others, not self proclaimed. I think I'm just put off by seemingly self-righteous "arbiters", who believe their opinion should be more respected based solely on their own ego. Besides the fact that music is art and art (or the value thereof) is completely subjective, you can compare music to other music qualitatively, but at the end of the day the value or weight you give to the qualities used to compare are still subjective. This is why I don't agree with elitism, because I don't think it makes sense in art or music. In math or science it works because the value of anything scientific is based on whether or not it works, and then by its efficiency. Both are undeniable results.

Sure, maybe people shouldn't be precluded from experimenting for experiment's sake, but that doesn't mean that I want to hear it, nor that I think it was a worthwhile attempt and not a waste of time. Experimentation should be driven by a larger purpose and foundation and reason for its implementation; I would imagine experimentation combined with compositional/ideological meaning has a much higher success rate and signal/noise ratio than unguided experimentation.

I've always tried to make music that is first, enjoyable and different, secondly. Because for me personally, I think music has more value if it is good and different, rather than just good. In all, I suppose I agree that experimenting just for experiment's sake could prove to be a waste, but if it is done second to making enjoyable music or to make the music more enjoyable it should be implemented all the time.
 
I dislike double standards more than anything. Liking Candlemass but proclaiming Dimmu Borgir atrociously operatic and theatrical. Meh, who needs that? Sorry, ObscureInfinity, though I'm almost certain you were half-jesting anyway, since after long debate we had, you used "wat" as a retort to my post about St.Anger being the greatest metal album ever.You know, that charmingly stupid internet bastardization of "what". Phew, you can;t imagine the relief I've felt.
 
I dislike double standards more than anything. Liking Candlemass but proclaiming Dimmu Borgir atrociously operatic and theatrical. Meh, who needs that? Sorry, ObscureInfinity, though I'm almost certain you were half-jesting anyway, since after long debate we had, you used "wat" as a retort to my post about St.Anger being the greatest metal album ever.You know, that charmingly stupid internet bastardization of "what". Phew, you can;t imagine the relief I've felt.

You know a trait that brings praise in one genre doesn't mean it has to in another.

Doom =/= black metal
 
Either way, most people I know who dislike theatrics in music, are not fans of either band. Candlemass are to Black Sabbath what Dimmu Borgir are to, I dunno, Burzum, Mayhem?
 
I think what he is trying to say is that Candlemass and Dimmu Borgir are both similar to each other because they're more bombastic than their progenitors.