Controversial opinions on metal

Exodus is not better than (in no particular order):

Early Metallica
Slayer
Megadeth
Coroner
Death Angel
Artillery
Destruction
Devastation
Forbidden
Hexenhaus
Kreator
Sodom
Mandator
Morbid Saint
Nasty Savage
Overkill
Protector
Sacrifice
Testament
Watchtower
Toxik

This is not an exhaustive list and I don't even particular like all these bands. I also didn't list any of the modern thrash bands (like Ares Kingdom, Vector, Mantic Ritual, and others) who are also way better than Exodus, for the obvious reason that this is 2010 not 1984. Exodus is way behind all of them. So no, not among the finest thrash bands by a long shot.
 
Exodus has their campiness and hasn't really changed sound much at all over their career (despite what Dukes-era-haters will say about teh groove or teh core), but as one of the main progenitors of the sound I cut them slack for it. Bonded By Blood and all of the Zetro albums fill my brainless thrashing quota very well, and that's all I need for them to be one of my favorites. Admittedly most other thrash bands in the same vein bore the crap out of me, though.
 
I do like a lot of bands on that list, but Exodus definitely is at least as good as any given band on that list. And you're arguement about modern thrash is invalid because Exodus now also produces modern thrash. You still haven't given me one reason they suck.
 
#1: Lack of progression as a band.
#2: Steady line of equally bad vocalists. Dukes is probably the best they have had.
#3: Sounding forever as just a copy cat of bands who released an album the year before.

Now I will give them that the 2010 album was the first album they released that I thought was decent, but it shouldn;t take nearly 20 years to finally not sound stale. Maybe it's just me, but I always thought their albums sounded like "Hey guys, we r a thrash band too".
 
Dakryn said:
#1: Lack of progression as a band
#2: Steady line of equally bad vocalists. Dukes is probably the best they have had
#3: Sounding forever as just a copy cat of bands who released an album the year before.

Now I will give them that the 2010 album was the first album they released that I thought was decent, but it shouldn;t take nearly 20 years to finally not sound stale. Maybe it's just me, but I always thought their albums sounded like "Hey guys, we r a thrash band too".
Click to expand...

#1 is pretty much undeniable, and I can understand that people would agree with #2 as well (I don't; Baloff and Zetro own my soul). But what do they copycat? That point makes no sense to me as they were doing it before most others were.
 
I'm not sure you know who Exodus are, but they were the original kings of the Bay Area, and definitely not copycats. If Bonded By Blood was released when it was supposed to be released, it might've stayed that way. I'd say they've actually progressed quite a bit. Hell you could even compare BBB to Force of Habit and see a big change. And Motorhead hasnt progressed at all and they're still fucking great. As for the vocalist, Baloff might not be the best singer, but he was a fuckig maniac live. Steve Souza is fucking great, just listen to the Tempo Of The Damned album, and Rob Duke is still pretty good, depite all the shit he gets.
 
HamburgerBoy said:
That point makes no sense to me as they were doing it before most others were.
Click to expand...

But your other big thrash bands had already put at least one album before Exodus or did at the same time. Metallica actually already had two albums out prior to Exodus.

"2nd tier" thrash bands started churning out albums in 86/87 which all generally sound better or more varied than Exodus' rehash of what they put out in 85.

Edit: Motorhead is pretty damn boring imo. Have I seen them live? Nope. Nothing about their recorded material has led me to want to.
 
The reason it was released in '85 is because of record company problems. It was supposed to be released in '84, and most of it was already written before that.
 
Dakryn said:
But your other big thrash bands had already put at least one album before Exodus or did at the same time. Metallica actually already had two albums out prior to Exodus.

"2nd tier" thrash bands started churning out albums in 86/87 which all generally sound better or more varied than Exodus' rehash of what they put out in 85.
Click to expand...

Album release date doesn't mean everything, especially with Exodus where most of Bonded By Blood has been written by the time of Show No Mercy's release, as well as a decent portion of Pleasures of the Flesh in 1985. Metallica had two albums out by then (one of which has two revived Exodus songs from 1982/early 1983) but Exodus at the time doesn't sound much like them.

Pleasures didn't break any new ground, yeah, but neither did the releases of the second-tier bands you listed. Death Angel, Overkill, Protector, and Sacrifice are blatantly obvious examples of unoriginal mid-80's releases.

Dakryn said:
The same thing could be said by plenty of other bands at the time.
Click to expand...

Metallica, yes. Slayer, sort of. Megadeth too. Which others?
 
Exodus could have (and maybe should have) ceased to exist after BBB, but there is no denying that,that particular albums kicks tremendous amounts of ass.
 
They definitely should not have ceasedto exist. Pleasures of the Flesh, Fabulous Disaster, and Tempo of the Damned are all great albums.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ender Rises
  • Locked
Top 10 things you'll never hear on this forum.
Replies
105
Views
2K
General Metal Discussion
no country for old wainds
N
S
  • Locked
Asking 4 opinions
Replies
0
Views
264
General Metal Discussion
slipknot_avatar_666
S
genocide roach
what an atrocity the grammy's are
Replies
32
Views
684
General Metal Discussion
ffanatic
F
Hammer of Might
Stupid comments you've heard about metal??
Replies
28
Views
942
General Metal Discussion
Hammer of Might
H
S
What metal ubergroup had the best return to their roots- Metallica or Megadeth?
Replies
17
Views
562
General Metal Discussion
The Amazer
T
Top Bottom
Back