Onder
Active Member
- Apr 10, 2006
- 11,389
- 2,029
- 113
Controversial opinions on metal
- Thread starter The Ozzman
- Start date
SentinelSlain
Suck my joined date.
- Nov 21, 2007
- 10,015
- 151
- 63
divine_torture
leVel
It's just fucking bland. I can understand the whole weird time signature thing. Cynic does it better. The few grooves are mediocre at best, the vocals are no better than any modern day Headbanger's Ball with Jamie Jasta band, there is just nothing about them I like.
TechnicalBarbarity
Poser Disposer
Actually, they are one of the best(if not thee best) death metal bands of all time, and they arguabley were the first.
I dont want to post this shit up again, but their first material was released in 84 ...
.... that's 1984.
dont know why someone always goes out of their way in this thread to try and push that subject.
And on them being overrated, lol, their untouchable discography speaks for itself.
Last edited by a moderator:
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
What is that first song supposed to prove? It's basically trad/power. Their earliest material was obviously still extreme for the time, but the point is that there wasn't a "first". As for the songs that actually contain death/thrash metal riffs...
1983 bitch.
1983 bitch.
Last edited by a moderator:
TechnicalBarbarity
Poser Disposer
yea, just go ahead and post some essential thrash ... sometimes you can be so fucking retarded that it amazes me.
but anyway, i think its pretty stupid always bringing up who was first in any genre. But saying Death isn't one of the first death metal bands is like saying Slayer or Metallica weren't one of the first thrash metal bands ... but hey, the facts must bother some people i guess.
but anyway, i think its pretty stupid always bringing up who was first in any genre. But saying Death isn't one of the first death metal bands is like saying Slayer or Metallica weren't one of the first thrash metal bands ... but hey, the facts must bother some people i guess.
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
I know that you are aware of that Slayer song. My point is that they were doing the early tremolo-picked death/thrash riffage before Death was, and that those Death songs are no more death metal than it.
EffigyForgotten
New Metal Member
EffigyForgotten
New Metal Member
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
What portion of my post are you referring to? If it's the trad/power bit, just listen to that main riff and that triplet cymbal beat that pops up in so many USPM bands (see Iron Maiden's Genghis Khan for the earliest reference I can think of). Take away the silly vocals and you've got yourself a straight-up heavy metal song. If you disagree on the Slayer aspect, you're simply wrong.
Bled & Dead
Member
- Oct 22, 2012
- 148
- 0
- 16
EffigyForgotten
New Metal Member
One riff in a song doesn't make it death metal... And are you actually saying shouted vocals are the same as growling?
matt schrauben
Curse You All Men!
Agree 100000000000000000000%
Death was and is still unreal and one of if not the first death metal band. Sure some other bands may have played somewhat similar riffs before them... whatever. They're largely responsible for death metal as we know it. RIP Chuck!
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
Are you talking about Fight Till Death now? I didn't call it a death metal song. I said it is no less death metal than what Death was doing in 1984. Are you saying that Chuck's vocals in 1984 resemble death growling at all?
King Richard
Hello there
divine_torture
leVel
Is there really another Death debate going on? Please find something better to discuss, newfags.
Agreed.
Agreed.
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
divine_torture
leVel
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
Similar threads
