The difference; however, between now and the 80s, and the prior metal crash, is the Internet. It is far easier for bands to get out news about their sound, album, tours, etc., via the Internet, than they ever had before. I think that this is the only area that Dave's article falls short. He fails to discuss what possible differences there could be between the effect that glam was able to have on metal, and what could occur today.
From my 2000 interview with Matt Bachand: said:It looks like Century Media is turning you guys into something of a priority, I guess.
Yeah, theyve been doing a lot of good things for us. Were pretty excited to see where it goes. Obviously weve never been at this level before.
I look at these bios comparing you to Metallica and Slayer
Thats very nerve wracking! When youre comparing the album to Powerslave and then think OK, no pressure! Come on! That makes me very nervous, but they feel that way, so thats good.
From my 2002 interview with then-Century Media publicist Matt Bower: said:How is the decision made to push a band... I remember SHADOWS FALL a couple of years ago. The press release compared them to METALLICA and IRON MAIDEN.
That was my fault. That wasn't the case of the wand being waived over them. We knew we had a good record. Everyone here liked it. From me, the radio guy especially. We loved the record. I personally think I got carried away. I realized it when the band was doing interviews and someone asked them about that, and they said it makes them uncomfortable and puts them in an awkward position! Then I backed off. I didn't want them getting shit for something I said. But I honestly felt it was one of the best debuts of a band I'd heard in a long time. The stuff that I was saying in that press release was from me, from my heart. Our radio guy was doing the same thing. I don't necessarily regret it. I figured people like you would be like, "Whatever, Matt." You know not to pay attention to what publicists say. You're going to make your own opinion. I figured you'll make your opinion. You'll either like it or you won't like it. If you don't like it, I'll call you an idiot but we'll be alright. But when you say stuff like that, the mainstream people take you serious. They're not saying, "This is going to be the second coming of METALLICA!" but they are saying, "OK, if they're saying this, that means they're going to back it up." So they took us seriously. They were in Guitar World, they were in major magazines. That was my way of knowing those people know I was serious. Everyone here knew the record was killer. The band was willing to work. When a band comes to us and says, "We'll do what it takes, get in that van and go across the country and play every show we can," then we're going to do everything we can for the band. That's what SHADOWS FALL was willing to do and that's why we worked hard with them. And another thing with that band, they weren't coming out of nowhere. They had done a record on their own that they had sold 10,000 copies of on their own. It's not like they had no history. They definitely had a strong history. They had the former OVERCAST singer in the band who also had a strong sales history, especially in the Northeast.
On the other hand, I wouldn't soft-peddle the criticism. Mastodon, Lamb of God and Shadows Fall all SUCK.
Mastodon = South of Heaven - nutsack + noodling
Lamb of God = Pantera + noodling
Shadows Fall = Slaughter of the Soul + noodling
I don't think that that is a fair criticism. He didn't talk about these artistically because then the complaint will be, "Oh you just don't like these bands, and that's your only complaint about their success."
Further, the point is that a lot of people -do- like these bands. Which means they got picked up by major labels. And even if they aren't initially interested in changing their music based on any label pressure (pressure comes in various cloak and dagger forms. It isn't always outright and obvious), changes will most likely still occur.
I'm commenting on the author's general way of approaching things and think that part of the reason why so many people like these groups, or find them to be a revelation, is that they might not know what else is out there.
I wish that were true. I've tried to turn people that are into those types of bands into the other stuff that is 'out there.' And it isn't working. I need to talk to them more about why they don't like it. But, I used to think that what you said is true, and right now I no longer can.
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 and I didn't really take away any demos that are worth hearing out of it from the parties involved
Actually I've known them since before there was any hyperbolic press
But you're absolutely right about the genre's history being handled ineptly here