Dave Burns' The Ghosts of Glam Metal Past now online!

[Some Bastard]

Completely irrelevant and nothing to do with their standing in the mainstream and heavy metal press.

You're the one who brought it up

 

[Armageddon's Child]

The "non-artistic" treatment of these subjects is the only way it can have a chance to work. If the author assents to hating Shadows Fall, perhaps he gains credibility with Fando, but he loses it with anyone who happens to like the band. (...assuming that Fando exaggerates when he claims to not recall what the bands in question sound like.)

The intended audience for a piece like this is NOT the choir that rehearses on this message board. The point of the article is NOT whether those bands are good or not.

The best writer in the universe would not be able to change any of my opinions about the music of Shadows Fall. And while Dave is not that writer, Dave does know that this is true and accordingly turns his pen's eye toward less futile endeavors. It's not a fucking album review.

But wouldn't it be even more effective to both point to the consequences of getting in bed with massive corporations and to point out the 'artistic' tendencies that made these bands attractive to corporations in the first place?

 

[Professor Black]

But wouldn't it be even more effective to both point to the consequences of getting in bed with massive corporations and to point out the 'artistic' tendencies that made these bands attractive to corporations in the first place?

Interesting option, and I tentatively agree, but there's a huge missing link there -- the artistic tendencies appeal to an AUDIENCE, and the size/depth of that AUDIENCE is what appeals to the corporations. I don't think Atlantic records was going out looking for a certain sound. Especially if SF's recent remarks about Atlantic's "hands-off" type approach to repetoire are to be believed, then we can be relatively sure that it wasn't artistic elements or potential that attracted them in the first place.

 

[Fando]

If the author assents to hating Shadows Fall, perhaps he gains credibility with Fando, but he loses it with anyone who happens to like the band.

He already admits in the article that he does not like their music. I'm not expecting him to take a big shit and rant about how awful they are for another 4 pages. What I'm questioning is why he doesn't draw the obvious connections between the actual music and why the bands are able to be such a draw in the first place. It's not just the magic of advertising. And definitely not just about caving into label demands in this case, no matter how further they collapse in on themselves...

The Lamb of God-Motley Crue comparisons are poignant and pretty funny, but again, Lamb of God is just following Pantera, who put out albums of commercialized speed-hardcore metal, that was louder but not necessarily better than what came before, made transparent political tracks from time to time and made corresponding road videos filled with excessive drunken stupidity.

The intended audience for a piece like this is NOT the choir that rehearses on this message board.

I just don't think people who bought into Mastodon and Shadows Fall in the first place are going to detect some drop-off in quality because their sounds are predicated on watered down influences to begin with. More likely, they will be forgotten as the next fad comes along or people will simply "grow out" of it.

 

[Armageddon's Child]

Interesting option, and I tentatively agree, but there's a huge missing link there -- the artistic tendencies appeal to an AUDIENCE, and the size/depth of that AUDIENCE is what appeals to the corporations. I don't think Atlantic records was going out looking for a certain sound. Especially if SF's recent remarks about Atlantic's "hands-off" type approach to repetoire are to be believed, then we can be relatively sure that it wasn't artistic elements or potential that attracted them in the first place.

Audiences are built largely through advertising, and the level of advertising that went into building the large fanbases of these bands isn't cheap. There were massive PR campaigns behind all three bands almost from the word go. That doesn't happen at random, it happens because the labels know they have bands that can be marketed to the mainstream on their hands.

And how did they know? Because the bands in question weren't so far from the mainstream rock of the time, and had built their music around formulas that had been successful before.

 

[Cheiron]

Lamb of God is not half as good as Pantera was. Pantera was a good band through and through. Fuck the idea that they were watered down. Lamb of God is alright, sometimes I begin to like them, but they are not as good as Pantera.

Anyhow, I like Mastodon. I wasn't a huge fan of their work pre-Leviathan (an album that I think is really good). Blood Mountain I didn't like it as much, but it has some great moments.

But yes, there is an important question to ask. Why is Mastodon so big. I've been asking it for a while. And I can't find the answer. They've been on some big tours (equals lots of exposure), they got onto a good label who has promoted them to hell (how else do you think they got on Conan... unless its some other contact, or Conan loves them or something like that).

The basic answer that I think I'm finding is that metalcore has a pretty 'big' following. So does indie. Mastodon has fans from both metalcore and indie rock. Put those together and they have a number of fans. Label saw that, and advertised them heavily, and some fans of neither metalcore nor strict indie fans caught onto them too. They've also taken along some metal fans who aren't big into metalcore.

 

[Armageddon's Child]

The folks at the Lamb of God forum seem to not be able to handle the article...

Lamb Of God * Pure American Metal * Messageboard

 

[Zealotry]

Amazing. It's almost as if bands are being hated on for being successful, and that's it.

Nevermind the fact that Mastodon sounds no more 'commercial' than they did back when they were still playing tiny clubs to audiences of 25 people.

Nevermind the fact that when they first emerged, there really wasn't a single band that sounded quite like they did.

Nevermind the fact that a band has no control over the level of hype they generate.

Let's crucify them just for making money with their music, and reaping the benefits of their success.

 

[erekose]

Amazing. It's almost as if bands are being hated on for being successful, and that's it.

Nevermind the fact that Mastodon sounds no more 'commercial' than they did back when they were still playing tiny clubs to audiences of 25 people.

Nevermind the fact that when they first emerged, there really wasn't a single band that sounded quite like they did.

Nevermind the fact that a band has no control over the level of hype they generate.

Let's crucify them just for making money with their music, and reaping the benefits of their success.

Basically, I agree

 

[Cheiron]

Amazing. It's almost as if bands are being hated on for being successful, and that's it.

Nevermind the fact that Mastodon sounds no more 'commercial' than they did back when they were still playing tiny clubs to audiences of 25 people.

Nevermind the fact that when they first emerged, there really wasn't a single band that sounded quite like they did.

Nevermind the fact that a band has no control over the level of hype they generate.

Let's crucify them just for making money with their music, and reaping the benefits of their success.

I don't think you read it. If you did. Dave clearly stated that Mastodon has not changed their sound. He stated though, that he predicts that they will change.

 

[Zealotry]

He can make all the predictions he wants. Until there's some evidence, this is nothing more than a witch hunt.

And FYI, Mastodon HAS changed their sound. They're more eclectic than ever now. By no means more commercial, though.

I also take issue with the cherry-picking of quotes about a band's inspirations. I mean, Blind Guardian had Beach Boys covers as a mainstay of their live set not too long ago.

 

[Armageddon's Child]

Amazing. It's almost as if bands are being hated on for being successful, and that's it.

Bands that aren't acceptable to the mainstream don't reach the level of success that Mastodon, Lamb of God and Shadow's Fall have. And given that mainstream music is for fags and retards, that's a real problem...

Nevermind the fact that Mastodon sounds no more 'commercial' than they did back when they were still playing tiny clubs to audiences of 25 people.

And when was the last time that happened? Their high school battle of the bands?

Nevermind the fact that when they first emerged, there really wasn't a single band that sounded quite like they did.

That's because most people didn't really think that whales and dumbed down Slayer riffs were a natural fit.

Nevermind the fact that a band has no control over the level of hype they generate.

Sure they do. It's not like someone else was sitting in and doing those interviews with mainstream rags and MTV for them.

Let's crucify them just for making money with their music, and reaping the benefits of their success.

How about we just crucify them for being a shitty band that appeals mostly to teenagers and queers.

 

[Zealotry]

YOu couldn't possibly be more boring or less worthy of attention, Clarkie. Fuck off. I'd rather debate someone who doesn't stoop to the lowest common denominator.

[P.S.: Enjoy your ... what is it now... 5th ban from this forum]

 

[Jim LotFP]

Amazing. It's almost as if bands are being hated on for being successful, and that's it.

I think people are missing a bit of the context of the article.

Here's how I read it:

The success of the bands really has not a lot to do with what the bands themselves are doing. It's other things happening around them, and somehow it's just these bands that happen to have been picked as the figureheads of the new movement. How and/or why I don't think is the point of the article. Just showing some of the machinations that go into making this sort of thing happen.

Where it gets sinister to me is putting this article up next to the previous articles Dave has written... metal is made popular by the tastemakers and brandbuilders, and it can be made unpopular by the same people when its time is up. Having really nothing to do with anything other than business cycles.

I don't think entire boom/bust cycle is healthy in any way, and I don't have any respect for those that enable it.

 

[Zealotry]

So why should these bands reject success, just because it's part of a boom/bust cycle? There are bands that have been able to survive such cycles in the past. I think Mastodon [for instance] has the artistic credibility to be one such band.

Who cares what the 'tastemakers' think? It all boils down to what is good music and what isn't.

 

[Jim LotFP]

So why should these bands reject success, just because it's part of a boom/bust cycle? There are bands that have been able to survive such cycles in the past. I think Mastodon [for instance] has the artistic credibility to be one such band.

We could probably have an interesting debate if we looked at metal bands on major labels in, say, 1990, and then took a look at what was going on with them in 1993. My initial thought is that it wouldn't look pretty.

There is the argument about "yeah, look how rich the underground was at the time though!", but I think developments on the ocean floor would have happened whether the surface was stormy or calm.

Who cares what the 'tastemakers' think? It all boils down to what is good music and what isn't.

I think many good musicians will do things differently if there is an available path to "success".

 

[Armageddon's Child]

YOu couldn't possibly be more boring or less worthy of attention, Clarkie. Fuck off. I'd rather debate someone who doesn't stoop to the lowest common denominator.

Personally, I'd rather debate someone who isn't the lowest common denominator. But since you refuse to shut the fuck up, I'm left with little choice.

[P.S.: Enjoy your ... what is it now... 5th ban from this forum]

Whoops! Looks like you couldn't make it stick. Maybe you should go back to flinging poo at the enclosure walls, monkey boy!

 

[Cheiron]

Since its related::

For the Grammy's::

Best Metal Performance:

LAMB OF GOD - "Redneck"

MASTODON - "Colony Of Birchmen"

MINISTRY - "Lies, Lies, Lies"

SLAYER - "Eyes Of The Insane"

STONE SOUR - "30/30-150"



----

After listening to Blood Mountain again. I think that this is a really good album. To me it has some strong 80s just pure heavy metal elements, that 'rock out' stage of heavy metal. The non-glam stage. I do think that these guys write some interesting sounding songs. And no I'm not propping them just because they are local to Atlanta.

By the way. Last time these guys did a really small show was over the summer. They played a pretty much unannounced show at the Unicorn or whatever its called. They did this mostly for their local fans, and because their tour with Slayer was delayed.

 

[DBB]

Dave may disagree, we haven't heard from him yet

Everybody seems to be getting along just fine without me.

The difference; however, between now and the 80s, and the prior metal crash, is the Internet.

I will admit that this a “wild card” of sorts and it will in all likelihood lessen the blow that is coming on down the line, but what I find interesting at this point are how things even at this level are being narrowed and constricted in certain channels that are part of the corporate and commercial music industry edifice.

It is a general and neutral thing at this point and I really don’t have anywhere substantive to go with it at the current point but I think that it is not 5,000 miles off the mark to say that the “Internet” is being replaced with MySpace as far as it goes for a lot of new bands out there. That is certainly the end goal of the News Corporation.

It is somewhat of a neutral site now in the larger scheme of things, and a free implement without any strings attached to be used by bands, but plugged-in people who write for technological webzines that are way beyond my ken when it comes to these matters were openly stating that one of the primary reasons Rupert Murdoch purchased MySpace was to create a challenger to iTunes. And the MySpace music store is currently in development and all that hardware where bands post songs for free may not be free in the future and a lot of bands are just going to entirely skip releasing anything and be selling it through Murdoch’s company music store to people paying money that MySpace will be siphoning off and doing lord knows what with.

Like I said, I don’t have anywhere to go with this and haven’t really gone at it in a systematic fashion, so can’t comment on it at length, but it is something to be aware of.

more consumptive (read: simplistic) brand of metal that appeals to more people because it is less challenging and ordinary. It's a valid thing to look into, no matter what some idiot fanboy may cry back.

As has already been said, assessing the artistic validity of these bands is tangential to the article and not really something I care to engage in when I am writing in this mode. I could write up the most eloquent and effusive explanation of why these bands don’t appeal to me, should not appeal to others, and why they are appealing to so many people--and I will not have changed one person’s mind about the sound of a particular band. To say that something is simple therefore it is popular is also not something which holds true—especially in metal. There are scads of bands out there playing a simple musical style or sound that have no hope in hell or chance to become popular for a whole host of reasons (lyrics, imagery, musically etc.).

People are going to walk in with whatever baggage they have on that front and walk out with it no matter what critical points I have to make. I just hope that they have something else in their suitcase to think about as they head off for wherever they are going.

I don't know about the print zine but the website suffers from not getting the word out on bands that are worthy or integral besides the occasional review/interview. The thread where people were complaining about complaining about demos was a prime example

You need to subscribe and read the next issue.

Third, like he isn't already seen as a grumpy old man after the hipster piece?

True. But some would not put it quite that mildly.

I made a conscious effort to be as temperate, even-handed and “objective” here as possible so that accounts for some of the points related to this statement, but it was probably a wasted effort for the most part.

Speaking of which…

Amazing. It's almost as if bands are being hated on for being successful, and that's it.

If that is what you walked away with, then I just need to stop typing under this quote right about…….now.

The intended audience for a piece like this is NOT the choir that rehearses on this message board.

Exactly.

 

[DBB]

The folks at the Lamb of God forum seem to not be able to handle the article...

Lamb Of God * Pure American Metal * Messageboard

After reading through that thread, it would seem that most of the people probably didn't bother to read it since you decided to use it as an opportunity to do little proselytizing for ANUS.

I know you cannot help yourself, so it is pointless to even discuss this matter.

But if anyone happens to stumble upon the article over there and then stumble through this thread and took a little time to look around it would be patently obvious that I have serious and fundamental disagreements with the ANUS outlook.

Just wanted to make that clear.